If what you're looking for is to avoid fallout from US politics, then its chief geopolitical rival seems like one of the worst options tbh. If you want an AES state, I'd consider Vietnam, or better yet Laos since everyone forgets it exists.
Well, that's kind of the point of why they're well situated now. They've been invaded by basically everyone and nobody wants to do it again, and they've been diplomatically isolated in the past so they've kept a focus on self-sufficiency while maintaining decent enough relations with everyone.
As Civ 4 taught me, "It is from their foes, not their friends, that cities learn the lesson of building high walls."
I think you're neglecting the damage that could be done by (another) bombing campaign. Yeah it wasn't enough to win the war the first time and it probably wouldn't a second time, but it certainly made life hell and caused a lot of problems that has taken Vietnam a long time to even begin to recover from. It's definitely enough of a risk that it'd take more than some military equipment to get Vietnam to pick a side, because it wouldn't change anything about their strategic position.
If the US is going to war with China in this scenario then we're way past the point of anyone caring what's a bad look.
Vietnam is doing alright with native naval production, but lacks heavy armor manufacturing, and it will be a long, long time before Russia is exporting tanks again in any significant numbers.
Same problem in most of SE Asia. They became dependent on the USSR for so long they hobbled their native industries when the USSR collapsed. Most tanks in Vietnam were made before the end of the Vietnam war.
Modern armor is a big carrot and both the US and China can easily pick up where Russia/USSR left off.
What exactly is the use case for a Vietnamese tank? I cannot imagine any situation in which having modern tanks makes any difference whatsoever in Vietnam's geopolitical situation, unless they're concerned about like, Cambodia or something. Obviously they will never compete with the US or China in terms of manufacturing and in any war where that matters they'd be steamrolled regardless of how modern their armor is. Which might have something to do with why they're so far behind in the first place.
Maintaining relations with both sides is way more strategically important than modern armor, it's not remotely close.
Way cheaper to maintain a single modern platform. Vietnam's current tanks range from 1950's relics to a few dozen modern T-90s. Logistically it is a nightmare to maintain. Vietnam has like ten different tank systems at the moment, and maybe 5% could engage a modern MBT like a T-72. Vietnam's lack of modern armor production means if free tanks are being handed out they will likely take them. Same with planes.
If the US and China go to war all of SE Asia will be picking sides. That is why we are seeing the largest increase in naval power in the region since WWII. The Taiwanese strait and the three major SE Asian straits are where half of the world's shipping from/for China goes through. In a hot war China has to either ally with SE Asia or take islands from Vietnam, Malaysia, etc to guarantee access to oil from the Middle East. Without that, China would be stuck in the same place that Japan was during WWII.
I'm not asking about logistics I'm asking about purpose. If Vietnam had modern tanks, do you think they could stand up to China or the US in an open confrontation? If they had more modern aircraft, do you think they could seriously challenge US air superiority? Because I don't.
Vietnam has two defensive avenues. The first is asymetric warfare using similar tactics to what they did in the past, where tanks and aircraft are not a major part of their strategy because they don't have the resources to maintain them, and you can't drive them into a tunnel anyway. The second is their naval power, where a smaller force can still cause problems for a larger one because it can be very mobile and the enemy can't be everywhere at once.
Tanks and aircraft are big expensive targets that require intact supply lines, and they're not super useful from the standpoint of asymetric warfare. Vietnam's existing defensive options are thorny enough that there's a good chance that they can negotiate their way out of a war, and maintaining neutrality would absolutely be in their best interests and would be the route they try to pursue.
Absolutely no country in SE Asia would able to stand up to either the US or China, but having those modern tanks makes an invasion from China or the US less likely, and since everyone in SE Asia will be forced to pick sides in a shooting war over Taiwan Vietnam isn't going to leave free military hardware on the table.
The chance of any major power launching a land invasion in SE Asia is very small. Relatively resource poor countries besides some offshore oil/gas. There would be no point.
I really just don't see tanks being at all a consideration if a major power sets its eyes on Vietnam. The deterrents are, like you say, the lack of resources, and like I say, guerrilla warfare and naval harassment. There will never be a situation where anybody's sitting in a war room and going like, "I dunno about invading Vietnam, they just got some new tanks." Agree to disagree I guess because this doesn't seem to be going anywhere.
Better to look at some place like India. India is too far away to get pulled into a war with China over Taiwan.
Escape the effects of encroaching fascism by moving to a place with equally bad manifestations of fascism is... a take.
Like yeah Indian fascism is not likely to target the average white guy but is "im okay with fascism as long as it doesnt target me" a good stance to promote?
If what you're looking for is to avoid fallout from US politics, then its chief geopolitical rival seems like one of the worst options tbh. If you want an AES state, I'd consider Vietnam, or better yet Laos since everyone forgets it exists.
"If you want to avoid the consequences of US foreign policy move to Vietnam or Laos" would've been such a funny statement a few decades ago lol.
Well, that's kind of the point of why they're well situated now. They've been invaded by basically everyone and nobody wants to do it again, and they've been diplomatically isolated in the past so they've kept a focus on self-sufficiency while maintaining decent enough relations with everyone.
As Civ 4 taught me, "It is from their foes, not their friends, that cities learn the lesson of building high walls."
If the United States' Cold War with China turns hot, Vietnam will be 50/50 on whether it would side with the US or China.
Vietnam's maritime interests are incompatible with China's, and Vietnam is absolutely pissed at China for all the dams on the Mekong river.
Better to look at some place like India. India is too far away to get pulled into a war with China over Taiwan.
deleted by creator
Lot to gain if China or the US are offering up modern armor or planes. Vietnam is 20 years behind the curve at least.
During the Cold War the US and the USSR gave away billions in defense equipment to gain allies in the Global South.
deleted by creator
Doubtful China or the US would launch a land invasion of SE Asia again, but crazier things have happened.
China doesn't have the deep strike capability to neutralize armor without getting owned by AA, and the US bombing Vietnam would be a very bad look.
I think you're neglecting the damage that could be done by (another) bombing campaign. Yeah it wasn't enough to win the war the first time and it probably wouldn't a second time, but it certainly made life hell and caused a lot of problems that has taken Vietnam a long time to even begin to recover from. It's definitely enough of a risk that it'd take more than some military equipment to get Vietnam to pick a side, because it wouldn't change anything about their strategic position.
If the US is going to war with China in this scenario then we're way past the point of anyone caring what's a bad look.
Vietnam is doing alright with native naval production, but lacks heavy armor manufacturing, and it will be a long, long time before Russia is exporting tanks again in any significant numbers.
Same problem in most of SE Asia. They became dependent on the USSR for so long they hobbled their native industries when the USSR collapsed. Most tanks in Vietnam were made before the end of the Vietnam war.
Modern armor is a big carrot and both the US and China can easily pick up where Russia/USSR left off.
What exactly is the use case for a Vietnamese tank? I cannot imagine any situation in which having modern tanks makes any difference whatsoever in Vietnam's geopolitical situation, unless they're concerned about like, Cambodia or something. Obviously they will never compete with the US or China in terms of manufacturing and in any war where that matters they'd be steamrolled regardless of how modern their armor is. Which might have something to do with why they're so far behind in the first place.
Maintaining relations with both sides is way more strategically important than modern armor, it's not remotely close.
Way cheaper to maintain a single modern platform. Vietnam's current tanks range from 1950's relics to a few dozen modern T-90s. Logistically it is a nightmare to maintain. Vietnam has like ten different tank systems at the moment, and maybe 5% could engage a modern MBT like a T-72. Vietnam's lack of modern armor production means if free tanks are being handed out they will likely take them. Same with planes.
If the US and China go to war all of SE Asia will be picking sides. That is why we are seeing the largest increase in naval power in the region since WWII. The Taiwanese strait and the three major SE Asian straits are where half of the world's shipping from/for China goes through. In a hot war China has to either ally with SE Asia or take islands from Vietnam, Malaysia, etc to guarantee access to oil from the Middle East. Without that, China would be stuck in the same place that Japan was during WWII.
I'm not asking about logistics I'm asking about purpose. If Vietnam had modern tanks, do you think they could stand up to China or the US in an open confrontation? If they had more modern aircraft, do you think they could seriously challenge US air superiority? Because I don't.
Vietnam has two defensive avenues. The first is asymetric warfare using similar tactics to what they did in the past, where tanks and aircraft are not a major part of their strategy because they don't have the resources to maintain them, and you can't drive them into a tunnel anyway. The second is their naval power, where a smaller force can still cause problems for a larger one because it can be very mobile and the enemy can't be everywhere at once.
Tanks and aircraft are big expensive targets that require intact supply lines, and they're not super useful from the standpoint of asymetric warfare. Vietnam's existing defensive options are thorny enough that there's a good chance that they can negotiate their way out of a war, and maintaining neutrality would absolutely be in their best interests and would be the route they try to pursue.
Absolutely no country in SE Asia would able to stand up to either the US or China, but having those modern tanks makes an invasion from China or the US less likely, and since everyone in SE Asia will be forced to pick sides in a shooting war over Taiwan Vietnam isn't going to leave free military hardware on the table.
The chance of any major power launching a land invasion in SE Asia is very small. Relatively resource poor countries besides some offshore oil/gas. There would be no point.
I really just don't see tanks being at all a consideration if a major power sets its eyes on Vietnam. The deterrents are, like you say, the lack of resources, and like I say, guerrilla warfare and naval harassment. There will never be a situation where anybody's sitting in a war room and going like, "I dunno about invading Vietnam, they just got some new tanks." Agree to disagree I guess because this doesn't seem to be going anywhere.
Escape the effects of encroaching fascism by moving to a place with equally bad manifestations of fascism is... a take.
Like yeah Indian fascism is not likely to target the average white guy but is "im okay with fascism as long as it doesnt target me" a good stance to promote?
India has border skirmishes with China already, but yeah, Vietnam and Laos have reasons to be wary of China .
Those border skirmishes will never engulf the entire country though.
Bangalore and most of Southern India is like half of the price of Vietnam and Laos for a similar city.
Weather sucks half of the year though.
deleted by creator