By Qiao Liang and Wang Xiangsui
This is an amazing book. Written in 1999 by two Colonels, in the PLA, it has amazing depth. What it is basically is a hard, intellectual look at how to take apart the United States' power, without getting your head blown off.
Or... like Sun Tzu (Art Of War) brought up to the modern age.
One of the things that struck me about it is how thorough, and accurate their research, and conclusions are about the US, and the west in general. They've done extensive research on the "lineage" of our political thinking, clear back to Plato & Socrates, without "romancing" about it.
And at the same time, it shows how damned little we know about the Chinese. Starting with how incredibly thorough they are.
This is a huge book. I haven't finished reading it myself. I did the HTML mark-up for this copy. There is a table of contents down the right side, to make it easy to come and go, reading a chapter here and there, when the mood suits.
here's some samples:
From the intro:* Fred's note to the editor's note: Not so. I managed to snag a copy of the complete book.
[FBIS Editor's Note: The following selections *are taken from "Unrestricted Warfare," a book published in China in February 1999 which proposes tactics for developing countries, in particular China, to compensate for their military inferiority vis-à-vis the United States during a high-tech war. The selections include the table of contents, preface, afterword, and biographical information about the authors printed on the cover. The book was written by two PLA senior colonels from the younger generation of Chinese military officers and was published by the PLA Literature and Arts Publishing House in Beijing, suggesting that its release was endorsed by at least some elements of the PLA leadership.
From near the end:
At the time of the emergence of the early nation states, the births of most of them were assisted by blood-and-iron warfare. In the same way, during the transition of nation states to globalization, there is no way to avoid collisions between enormous interest blocs. What is different is that the means that we have today to untie the "Gordian Knot"  are not merely swords, and because of this we no longer have to be like our ancestors who invariably saw resolution by armed force as the last court of appeals. Any of the political, economic, or diplomatic means now has sufficient strength to supplant military means. However, mankind has no reason at all to be gratified by this, because what we have done is nothing more than substitute bloodless warfare for bloody warfare as much as possible.
This, then, is globalization. This is warfare in the age of globalization. Although it is but one aspect, it is a startling one. When the soldiers standing at the crossroads of the centuries are faced with this aspect, perhaps each of them should ask himself, what can we still do? If those such as Morris, bin Laden, and Soros can be considered soldiers in the wars of tomorrow, then who isn't a soldier? If the likes of Powell, Schwartzkopf, Dayan, and Sharon can be considered politicians in uniform, then who isn't a politician? This is the conundrum that globalization and warfare in the age of globalization has left for the soldiers.
Anyway, I thought since the thing in the S. China Sea is on-going, it might be something to paw through.