China is not yet a superpower, and won’t be for several years.
If China isn’t a superpower, that means the US is the only superpower. They’re certainly more powerful than Russia. Other than in number of nuclear weapons and their space programs (and China has almost caught up there), China has Russia beat in every other category. Especially in integration with the world economy. Other than hydrocarbons, if Russian manufacturing all disappeared, the rest of the world wouldn’t even notice. With China, there would be huge problems in the rest of the world. Once you consider importance of their respective economies to the global economy, it’s not even a contest. China has Russia beat.
China is certainly a superpower, albeit a regional one. And they have been for several years. Hell, their navy is actually larger both in terms of numbers and tonnage to the US Navy. They certainly can’t project power the way the US can, but then the Soviets couldn’t do that either during the cold war, and they were a superpower. China’s economy is also second only to the US…and in some terms is actually stronger (at least on paper, and if you believe the CCPs numbers, which, even they don’t seem to all the time).
Also if the US faces an enduring Russian threat in Europe than it has to divide its forces. Which means that the Chinese Navy only directly has to face a smaller fraction of the USN.
Their Navy will probably have several supercarrier and amphibious groups by the end of this decade.
Their biggest problem IMO will be personnel, such a massive expansion will cause training problem.
Russia has a blue-water navy (albeit a decrepit one); China does not. Russia has enough submarines, ICBMs, and nuclear weapons to post a credible threat to the entire world; China does not. Therefore, Russia is a superpower (albeit a creaking, decrepit one), and China is not.
A “regional superpower” is an oxymoron. The definition of a regional power is that it is the predominant power in its region, and thereby it has outsized influence over its neighbors. It can attack any of its neighbors, and probably with a reasonable chance of success, but its neighbors would have a very low chance of success if they attacked it. China is a regional power. So is Israel. On the other hand, the definition of a superpower is that it has a GLOBAL military reach. Russia has the military might to attack literally any other country in the world (not invade; but attack–there’s a difference). China does not.
China has ICBMs. Not a huge number of them, but how many do you really need to be able to “attack literally any other country in the world”?
You ignored two out of my three points. How convenient.
No missile in existence has global range. You have to MOVE the missile by putting it on a ship or submarine in order to bring the entire globe within range.
Here is a coverage map of China’s longest-range missile. Do you by any chance notice anything?
It can strike any nation that could possibly be a threat during the operational lifetime of the missile system.
I did not realize their current missiles were that sub-orbital. Of course, they do have an active space program so can obviously make missiles with any range if they desire.
Anyways, I think you’re hanging your hat on some pretty narrow semantic points. China is more of a superpower than Russia. Russia’s creaky old navy doesn’t wield as much global influence as China’s economy.
Wait, does the blue area mean the places that Chinese missiles can go? That’s everywhere but South America and Antarctica. That’s global enough to be called a super-power. I doubt that it matters if they can’t reach South America.
It matters to us here 
I guess the cockroaches are going to have to battle it out with llamas for world dominance.
I see some Homo Sapiens living here too…
Israel isn’t the number 2 economy in the world, able to project economic power globally.
Depends on which definition you are using. I get ‘a powerful and influential nation, especially a nuclear power that dominates its allies or client states in an international power bloc.’ China dominates its allies and client states, is a nuclear power, and has a very strong (on paper at least) military. I mean, you can parse this all day, but if your definition of a superpower is to be able to do what the US can do, then no body…ever…has been a superpower but us. And that’s just not reality.
Sorry, but where are you getting this? First, Russia does not have a military to attack any country on the planet except through nukes. Having that capability alone has never made one a superpower. You might want to be keeping up on current events in China as well, where they are in the process of deploying over 100 new silos for their new ballistic missile system.
But nukes don’t make a superpower. It’s a combination of economic power, influence and soft power, conventional military strength, and international political power. In some of those, China is arguably the strongest nation on the planet right now. There are whole sectors of the UN which are dominated by China and its clients. As I pointed out, by numbers and tonnage, they have the largest navy. By production of new equipment they are second only to the US…they far outstrip Russia in the production of modern weapons system, though how good they really are is debatable.
You can parse this as you like, redefine things to suit your needs, but you are simply wrong if you don’t think China is a superpower and has been for some time now. This doesn’t mean they have parity with the US…or, in sheer nuclear capability Russia…but overall, they are definitely operating on a world level. And, as for nukes, while that has never been a focus for China, they have started to focus on it in the last 2 years and I have no doubt that while they won’t ever have (or probably want) the 1000’s and 1000’s of ballistic missiles the US and Russia has, what they do have will be capable of hitting whatever they want to be hit around the world. It’s not like they don’t have the ability…they simply haven’t decided to focus on doing it because it wasn’t a priority for them. Unlike their navy or amphibious assault capabilities.
That I can see. I would certainly like to be in a place where nobody else’s nukes can get me.
But I wonder if China has much if any reason to be interested in South America. Is there much there that would be of interest (especially military interest) to China? Natural resources? Opportunities for economic investment? Strategic places to get military bases at America’s doorstep (like Russia tried in Cuba, 1963)? Is there any reason China would want to militarily threaten South America?
Getting back to the OP - does Putin have the military resources to move into the Baltic countries, given what’s happening in Ukraine?
Leave India out of it, will ya. Besides - have you looked at the economy or general state of Pakistan ? India wouldn’t want to touch that with a 10 ft pole.
Jokes aside - Most Indians I know, want nothing to do with Pakistan. Most just want Pakistan to leave India alone and move on.
No, not if you mean concurrently with what he’s doing in Ukraine. And it’s not like he could hide it either. Look at how much the west saw through what he was doing in Ukraine, and how long it took him to not only build up the forces but the logistics. He’d also have to take into account that as soon as he started he’d be getting NATO air strikes hitting him, as well as whatever forces we have deployed into the Baltic states, as well as neighboring countries. If he’s having this sort of issue in Ukraine, he’d pretty much have to be thinking it would be double or triple what he’d be getting wrt NATO hammering him and his columns while he’s taking the Baltics. His air force would also be taking a lot more losses, as he’d have no choice…he’d have to be using it extensively. In the teeth of NATO air defenses and fighters.
I don’t see how he could do any of that right now. Certainly not without NATO watching and noting exactly what he was doing. By the time he actually could move enough into their jump off points and have the logistics in place NATO should have sufficient warning to basically make it impossible. And Russia simply doesn’t have the force to do Ukraine and the Baltics at the same time. That level of force just doesn’t exist for the Russians.
They buy practically all our (considerable) soy harvest I understand.
Even after the invasion is “over,” assuming Russia is victorious from here on out in a relatively quick and painless manner, I don’t see any way, given the current political and economic climate, that it would be in a good position to move on to the Baltics for possibly years.