Friday, December 5, 2025

BREAKING: China Launches NAVAL Blockade U.S. Fleet Stand Down Order?| ai...

Posted by at No comments:

Thursday, December 4, 2025

GAME OVER? China’s Unstoppable Move Nightmares the Pentagon | John Mears...

Posted by at No comments:

Why USA won't fight China for dominance in Asis.

 

Sam Roggeveen — Why the US Won’t Fight China for Dominance (and What It Means for Australia)

8.37K subscribers
7,863 views Apr 3, 2025 Joe Walker Podcast
This episode is the sixth instalment of my Australian policy series, recorded live in Sydney on February 26, 2025. I speak with Sam Roggeveen—Director of the Lowy Institute’s International Security Program, and a former senior analyst at the Office of National Assessments—about why the United States won’t fight China for dominance in Asia, and what that means for an Australia long reliant on American protection. We explore the limits of America’s resolve in Asia, why an alliance with Indonesia should be the top priority of Australian statecraft, whether new technologies like drones are reversing the long-held advantage of the defender, the possibility that Australia might one day acquire nuclear weapons, and how Sam’s “echidna strategy” could let us defend ourselves from a major Asian power without substantially boosting defence spending. SUBSCRIBE TO THE PODCAST ►    / @josephnoelwalker   LISTEN ON: SPOTIFY: https://open.spotify.com/episode/20I1... APPLE PODCASTS: https://podcasts.apple.com/au/podcast... TRANSCRIPT: WEBSITE: https://josephnoelwalker.com/sam-rogg... FOLLOW ME ON: TWITTER:   / josephnwalker   TIMESTAMPS (00:00:00) - Introduction and the US-China context. (00:02:32) - Sam’s background in intelligence and why classified data has diminishing returns. (00:11:18) - The strongest reason for America possibly fighting China for dominance in Asia. (00:15:04) - Why today’s US cultural/intellectual climate lacks the old Cold War resolve. (00:17:07) - The “long in-between” vs. Hugh White’s full US withdrawal scenario. (00:25:08) - Would the echidna force structure differ if the US fully withdraws or merely shares power with China? (00:27:07) - Echidna strategy: operational sense vs. strategic sense. (00:30:14) - Would the US ask us to hunt China’s SSBNs if we had nuclear attack subs? (00:32:54) - Is the era of 'defensive dominance' over, and do drones favor offense or defense? (00:37:47) - How many submarines for an echidna posture—and are subs overrated? (00:41:20) - Indonesia’s potential great-power rise and forging an alliance with Jakarta. (00:44:34) - Contradiction: Could an echidna stance really help Indonesia militarily? (00:48:57) - Once Indonesia is the world’s 4th-largest economy, does it act like a great power? (00:51:08) - Beyond Aussie politics, what’s the main obstacle to an alliance with Indonesia? (00:53:55) - How long is our window to build an alliance with Indonesia before it’s too late? (00:56:40) - Should Australia go nuclear? (01:13:17) - If “fear of abandonment” shaped us, what new narrative should we adopt? (01:15:58) - Audience Q&A: cyberwarfare, Taiwan, sea routes, and more.
27 episodes
Joe Walker Podcast
Joseph Noel Walker

Follow along using the transcript.

Joseph Noel Walker

8.37K subscribers

104 Comments

Eng Lam Yeo
Add a comment...
Excellent discussion. Nice to see so many young people in the audience.
3
So the Americans calculate that China won't be able to easily invade Taiwan, but somehow it might invade Australia? Please. China has always been a land power, not a naval one. It has never had interests outside of its natural borders and even during imperial times when surrounding countries were seen as vassal states meant that China gave them gifts and had to offer military support to them in times of need. They will definitely throw weight around, just like the USA, but it is not a military threat to Australia.
33
Had a blast chatting with Sam. He's super knowledgeable, raises counterarguments to his own points, and engages sincerely with every question. Enjoy!
9
So interesting, ty
2
Kevin Rudd’s mother started him as a kid to be interested in China, which he continued throughout his life, becoming fluent in order to read Chinese government documents, as well as being Australian prime minister, time with Asia Society in New York, and now Australia’s ambassador to China. His book is About Avoiding War with China.
Probably the best one of these live recordings, Sam seems to be such a good thinker. His use of conservative political philosophy to make the case against higher defence spending in the book is so intellectually refreshing, to the point it made me wonder what our discourse could look like if more people were as independent as he.
8
Great episode!
2
This became more interesting when he stopped talking about his office layout
1
China, being a great power as you admitted, has been saving Australia economically for two decades.
21
Great interview. A book review said Sam Roggeveen's 'The Echidna Strategy' is a great direction for the future of Australia's role in the Indo-Pacific and its international relationships. Having read the book I heartily agree.
I see China as a responsible adult, I see the US as a dangerous out of control rogue criminal state that holds to no treaty and submits to no international law, it supports genocide in gaza for Pete's sakes.
4
A cycle is about to begin. For strategic reasons, Australia will spend a large amount of money on defense, reducing investment in public welfare. To maintain its current standard of living, Australia will have to increase its trade dependence on China, the future world's largest economy, further tying its prosperity to China’s. Just like in that movie scene, Australia must strengthen its military power to secure its trade routes with its largest trading partner - China😆
15
Other than border disputes with Japan, India, some ASEAN nations & ofc Taiwan. China probably doesn't have expansionist aims. But it definitely has aims of hegemony over the Indo-Pacific.
2
Listening in from a Taiwanese perspective—really insightful discussion for understanding an Australian worldview. One thing that stood out was the underlying message: “The world would rather lose 10 years of tech progress and even some talent than risk WW3 with China.” That’s a chilling but telling sentiment. With that in mind, China can probably count on little resistance from the South Pacific if it moves to blockade Taiwan. That really just leaves Japan, which has been the only country to clearly state that Taiwan’s fate directly impacts its own security. Looking back at Japan’s WW2 invasion routes, and considering China’s recent naval activity off Australia’s east coast, it’s hard not to wonder—what would a “neutral” Australia face if China controls Taiwan and uses it as a launchpad to dominate shipping lanes to Australia’s top trading partners (China, Japan, and South Korea)? And if Taiwan falls without any real pushback from the U.S., what message does that send to America’s allies in Asia? Western Europe avoided WW3 with the USSR thanks to the U.S. nuclear umbrella and NATO. The Indo-Pacific lacks that unity. Taiwan, often overlooked, actually fields 97 naval vessels, 430 combat aircraft, and over 1,200 anti-ship missiles—far more than Australia. If Taiwan joins forces with Japan, South Korea, India, Australia, and the U.S. Seventh Fleet, that’s 560 allied ships vs. China’s 370. A real deterrent—like an Asian NATO—might be the only way to make Beijing think twice. Both World Wars escalated because aggressors thought they could win fast without real resistance. If strong alliances had been in place before Hitler hit Poland, he might’ve backed off. We’re making the same mistake with Taiwan—treating it like an isolated issue.
3
Sam is right about SK and Japan(and TW) with nukes. with US in decline, china would likely prefer US to stay in those countries, or at least dominate them militarily, technoligically, and economically, because USA keeps them weak on purpose. See things like plaza accord, the recent chip acts, etc. USA is canabalizing them economically and technologically, but also keeping them weak militarily. US sabotaged TW nuclear program back in the day, USA wrote Japans constitution so they cant get any offensive missiles or any real weapons that isnt' reliant on USA. And usa will not let them develop anything that will allow them to become a great power on USA and Chinas level. So USA is doing china a favor. USA knows japan cant be trusted and will never allow them to become militarily powerful enough to compete with USA, and thus never be able to compete with China miltiarily as USAs only peer, and soon to be superior in the coming years and decades. So why not have USA do chinas dirty work for them with all the blowback that will occur? If anything Japan and SK will be begging china to liberate them in the future, and china can just wait until then. Same with TW. China doesnt need to do anything except make sure it can defend itself, and play the moral long game and just keep developing normally without making any enemies while usa keeps hanging itself out to dry by overthrowing, invading, bombing, couping, meddling in others democracies and governments and systems, etc etc. USA will also do that to us if we ever become a threat, but we are too small population wise to ever challenge usa like japan could, and sk to a lesser extent(although if they reunify with NK, that would be a boost). China is also fine with korea being divided and weak i guess, which is why china hasnt helped NK more than the bare minumum so they dont collapse. I mean isnt NK supposed to be chinas one and only treaty ally? and yet china only keeps them at the bare subsistence level. Actions speak louder than words. Allies mean nothing, both for china or usa. Theres only interests. So as an aussie, we need to get nukes and just be content in our part of the world. No ones going to invade us, after we get nukes we can be really independent and not subservient vassal state to USA and little brother to UK anymore and actually grow a pair and become a republic like Keating etc have spoken about in the past. That will allow us to improve relations with China, which is where our bread is buttered instead of making them our enemies and letting usa canabalize us just like they have done with all their other so called "allies" in the past and are doing currently even more in the new trump era.
2
So if the Americans wouldn't risk the destruction of one or more of their cities to defend South Korea, what makes you think they'd risk it for Australia? Doesn't that outlook mean that our "nuclear umbrella" is illusory, and does that in fact strengthen the case for an independent Australian nuclear weapons program, as it does for a South Korean one?
2
Lol!. Why would Indonesia allied with Australia which has history being hostile to Indonesia. Right now, Indoensia is much more aligned with China joining BRI, BRICS+ and other Chinese led institutions. Lol.
2
dreams & realities are 2 very different things.
The reason Australians have warmed to the idea of procuring nuclear weapons is because we are losing faith in the long term reliability of the US as our defense guarantor.
2
I don't understand this narrative that China is suddenly going to invade everyone. China and India were the major power for the largest part of history and yet they did not go around building ships and inavding lands on the other side of the planet. For example China has never invaded Indonesia for the entirity of it's history while they traded with each other for thousands of years. Now let's turn to Europe and we know Europe has always been in war throughout it's history. This view that if China becomes powerful they will invade us is entirely a European thing because that is how Europe behaved when they were in power. British, French, Romans, Greeks, Portuguese, Spanish, Dutch, they all went invading each others then when they were done, they went around invading every continents. China is not Europe, try to see the world from different lens. You people are seeing it from European or Anglo Saxon lens. You look at your own behaviour and history and assume everyone behaves that way. China has a history of 5000 years, US is less than 250 years old. Australia is 124 years old country. Let that sink in. China as a country is far more matured than US and Australia. They have done incredible job of uplifting their economy and power. They have learned from their history of being stomped on by the western powers, they don't want to bear another 100 years of humiliation. I don't see anything wrong in it. In the last 100 years US have invaded at least a dozen countries, waged unprovoked wars, bombed and killed millions of innocent people. And Australia is their ally. What does that tell about Australia?! Think about it.
6
It is so strange to hear Australia, by and large a small nation in terms of population and military, actively thinking about fighting and provoking china. I'm not saying china is that strong, after all, as china hasn't had any wars for decades and is culturally and historically deemed to be weak by the West. But there lies the problem, china has done nothing to show any military aggression other than to defend its own claimed boarders, and it has never provoked Australia. It just seems that Australians are just looking for a reason to provoke and fight. Be careful of what you wish for.
11
One day you will get those subs lmao
You lot worry about what china will do but nobody askswhat are the yanks going to do ? Think thevyanks will attack china probably through proxys the USA can't do it themselves so we will be part of the proxy mob
1
Americans dont have the stomach for an actual war or conflict where they need to tighten the belt and become a lean mean economic machine that can be targeted and work as one cohesive unit. Every time i go to the us it shocks me how people live, very fat, lazy and sedintary lives that rely on convenience and on the road of least resistance. They are very debauched and uncontrolled in their living(i dont mean sexually) and marshalling that into a leam and efficient war machine is not going to be easy. The usa of the 50's, 60's and preceding decades is long gone. Good luck to them though, itll be interesting to see how this plays out.
To be an enemy of America 🇺🇸 can be dangerous to be a friend can be fatal. (The late Henry Kissinger)
CRAP. Stupidity rules Join ASEAN & be neutral whats so hard to grasp !!!!
2
Ludicrous, China has no interest in fighting either Korea or Japan, it has no significant territorial dispute. China just want what was historically Chinese, including Taiwan and the S. China Sea.
4
Bots and Trolls galore. lmao.
I'm in the Keating camp. China is not a treat to Australia
The US will definitely stay in the Indo-Pacific to contain China. Obama was already talking about the pivot to Asia in 2011. Even if it means pulling American forces out of Europe, the US will shift it's military to East Asia. Asia is set to become the wealthiest region of the world, 50% of global GDP will be in Asia, especially concentrated in East and South Asia. America cannot allow a rival superpower to dominate the richest region of the world. The Rise of China means, America no longer has the luxury to intervene everywhere all at once. America has to increase it's military presence in East Asia, to bottle up the Chinese navy in the 1st and 2nd Island Chain. If China's threats are close to home, they will not have the freedom to roam into the Western hemisphere. East Asia will become the center of the world, Europe is the periphery, and the Persian Gulf is important because China relies on their oil exports.
1. While I understand Sam's arguments against Australia building nuclear deterrence capabilities (that we might provoke China or Indonesia), it is also important to understand that the window of opportunity to execute such a decision is shrinking. If the restrainers/neo-isolationists prevail in US, and the super-powers divide the world in their spheres of influence, China won’t sit passively as Australia builds such a deterrence (Blackmail till we acquiesce and attack if we refuse). 2. The geographical benefits of distance, while undeniable, are not a substitute for defence and offence capabilities. For centuries, the Himalayas separated China and India and acted as a natural barrier. The Indians relied on these mountains and Tibet as the buffer zone, but both proved in-effective in 1962 Sino Indian war. 3. Finally, a defensive strategy, in my view just buys you time to build up an offensive strategy. I haven't read the book, so saying this with some reservations, but The Echidna strategy while relevant and incredibly important, is probably half the answer.
2
China is not not adversary. Why? An adversary would have invaded much of continental asia by now like the usa did or russia did or germany and italy did. China invading australia is not a concern. In terms of probsbility theres a higher chance of usa invading australia. Also if australia wants to build great relations with its proximal geographic neighbors then it must must open the doors and pathway to immigration for them especially indonesia. Right now australia overwhelmingly lets in people by the hundreds of thousands each year from countries thousands of miles away not even in australias proximal region. That needs to end and policy advisors need to do this asap. Strong relations with your near geographic neighbors is the greatest priority of all. I suggest focusing on putting all the effort into getting india nationals thousands of miles away on Indonesia instead. Its the best policy to australias stability and strength. People to people contact and cultural assimilation... But in terms of china invading australia theres next to 0 percent chance of that. Thats just not how the chinese think and operate. Even the middle east gulf nationa are begging them behind the scenes to be far more involved militarily in the middle east and the chinese said no thanks. We are not into that kind of foreign military involvements.
7
China and Australia have a completely complementary trade relationship, and Australia enjoys a relatively large trade surplus. So why on earth would China pose a threat to Australia? Discussing the so-called "China threat" is absolutely meaningless. Due to the fact that Australia is an ally of the United States, it has always been collaborating with the US in strategically encircling China, which is a foolish act.
Yes Australia should wake up and learn to play the resource rich middle power game. Obtain military defence sovereignty, end assumptions of any form of American security blanket, ditch nuclear subs, double size of airforce, obtain new diesel subs at fixed price. Invest hugely in defence industrial and munitions production, create detailed plans to utilise all civilian resources in time of crisis, greatly increase our engagement with Asean. Apply real conditions and tangible benefits from any US bases and facilities on our soil... Make the US pay and not with vague promises.
4
China and North Korea will never allow Japan and South Korea to acquire nuclear weapons. China will take military action before this scenario is presented to China.
Everybody wants the US to go to nuclear war. America says hell no.
If American want to fight China or Russia Military the war will be in Washington or Beijing or Moscow no more other part of country.😎 The war in Ukraine was actually a politicised by American and led to proxy war.And EU fall into trap😂
The Jewish military turned out to be true (inss israel),,,, Soviet (Russia now), western countries, Japan and even South Korean without Jews are "empty"... Only China Solo players ...
2
This guy is a joker. He has no idea what submarines are for. They are an ambush weapon and a one time use weapon. There is no time to redeploy them in a modern war. They have no situation awareness once the war begins. Today's missile forces and bombardment capabilities will end wars in days. A submarine is just sitting in a tiny spot with a preset course of action for a very specific situation that may or may not come up. If it doesn't come up in a few weeks the submarine surfaces to find that the entire war is over and the above ocean landscape has already completely changed. You can camp a certain area if you like but others could just leap frog those areas and bomb you to bits from ultra high altitude or even from space.
4
The guest sounds like he smoked 2 packs a day for 20 years. 8:30 The problem is there is too much bad information. Bad information is resulting in bad decisions in America. In my observation,Australian new media is in lock step with American media. There is an ideological bias and even racist bias in reporting about China. This results in grave miscalculation on many issues, from technology, to trade tariffs and military. Before one analyze the solution, we have to agree on the premises. But the host did not challenge any of these premises on the important issues. Very disappointing. You could start with Lowy Institute's Asia power report and go through each item and figure out which one of them is accurate. 13:20 Is America is a wealthier country now than 1970's? Then why so many problems with American economy, from debt to manufacturing, and not to mention problems with its societal and economic divide? My interactions with Australians, especially people that are older and in positions of power, is they have a distain towards their Indonesian neighbors. My sense is Australians look down on Indonesias with disgust and distrust. Why is that? How would Australia develop an alliance with a neighbor it dispises?
2
I had a feeling this video was sponsored by Big Eucalyptus! Long-form strategic discussion is merely another way to get us hooked on their "essential" oil. Like giant, articulate koalas. /s
This shows clearly why Australia cannot understand how and why Indonesia & South East Asia thinks and behavior. Sam is intelligent and knowledgeable however thinks like colonial power & history rather than Asian that has always lived with various superpowers from India, China, Arab & lastly Western colonial powers. So with the Asian background and history, Indonesia would think very differently, and following Asian (Sun Tze - Art of War) The greatest victory is to win without fighting a war or battles. You would be considered as "failure, or lost" when a war started... this approach is very different from the warring western history and mindset.
1)According to Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), the US spends " more on defense than the next nine countries combined". The 9 countries of China, Russia, India, Saudi Arabia, UK, Germany, Ukraine, France, Japan. Yet these 2 kangaroos try to make it out as if the US defense spending is declining and China's spending is EXPANDING. 😱 Is this to frighten the audience, as well as, to influence the audience against China?? Typical kangaroos. 2) Rather amusing to listen to these paranoid kangaroos. They work themselves up to such paranoia, so focus on their skin color being different to their neighbours, and that their neighbours want to attack them! Would it not be better to be friendly to all the neighbours and stop insisting on sticking with the colonial gang?? 3) What an echo chamber.
Better off Australia do not want U.S military protection. U.S protection is destroy turn your country into ruin like they did to Vietnam, middle east , Ukraine and many countries U.S military step foot on.
1
The most likely thing is that AUKUS fails completely, because the USA don't invest enough into shipmaking to make the subs for Australia. You can't actually have subs, then you can't have a sub alliance :P. The US gov. is basically just taking Australia's money and port and going to give nothing in return. It might demand commitments from Australia, but it'd not commit from this side. AUKUS will then just fall apart leaving Australia humiliated.
Top is selected, so you'll see featured comments
Posted by at No comments:
Subscribe to: Comments (Atom)