China's SCS Strategy Thread

[lcloo]

"The Watch, an open source X account,

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

of the two Maritime Security Administration ships alongside several China Coast Guard cutters at Scarborough. Beijing has bolstered its presence at the maritime feature following a collision between its military and security forces in August. Since then, Chinese, Philippine and American forces have swarmed the shoal."

That X account has a mistake. MSA is Maritime Safety Administration, not Maritime Security Administration. I don't know the error was intended or otherwise, but the word "Security" is much more aggresive than "Safety".

CCG is maritime equivalent of PAP, while MSA is more like martime version of civilian/traffic police and that of municipal/city hall administrative and enforcement agency.

Presence of MSA could posssibily be due to the new designation of the place as marine reserve in September this year, which would place it under the administration of MSA.

 

[GulfLander]

Singapore President asked China to "Abandon path to self sufficiency"?

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1981142977012781462

 

[Heliox]

Singapore President asked China to "Abandon path to self sufficiency"?

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1981142977012781462

Does anyone happen to know which speech the quote "abandon path to self-sufficiency" is lifted from?

One of the reservations I have with online discussions, especially on social media, is that some click-bait headline or point is made and everyone takes off as if the assertion is even true to start with.

The picture in the tweet was taken at the IMF headquarters in Washington, Oct 15, 2025.
The transcript of the speech made by the President of Singapore, at that event, can be found

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

At no point in the speech, unless my search failed me, is the quoted text "abandon path to self-sufficiency" found. I'm honestly curious where that came from.

wrt The President's speech at the IMF event on 15 Oct, I had a quick read through the official transcript and cherry picked the below that I feel counters the "quoted" text of the tweet.

"One can never be naive about the risks of interdependence. Interdependence will have to be actively managed by both sides to prevent the weaponisation of key technologies or materials."

Broadly speaking, his speech is one of international cooperation and mutually beneficial economic relations - which I'm sure is something the real Rest of the World would love to take and which we all know, the one party largely responsible for f-ing it up is the US (and vassals).

While the speech may be idealistic, given the actions of the players in recent events, it is nonetheless not quite as dramatic as tweet implies, which is the figurehead of a insignificant small red dot trying to lecture China on what it should be doing.

 

[vincent]

Does anyone happen to know which speech the quote "abandon path to self-sufficiency" is lifted from?

One of the reservations I have with online discussions, especially on social media, is that some click-bait headline or point is made and everyone takes off as if the assertion is even true to start with.

The picture in the tweet was taken at the IMF headquarters in Washington, Oct 15, 2025.
The transcript of the speech made by the President of Singapore, at that event, can be found

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

At no point in the speech, unless my search failed me, is the quoted text "abandon path to self-sufficiency" found. I'm honestly curious where that came from.

It is whether China advances while maintaining interdependence with the US, Europe, and other major technology players, or advances through a strategy of self-reliance.

It is either interdependence or self-reliance. No in between.

Singapore has been quite cocky lately, like calling Chinese civil war “invasion” and wants to deter it.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

No one has a good answer, but we should not allow a move away from the status quo that is done in a non-peaceful manner, and that would include deterring invasion, deterring any aggressive moves, but it would also include deterring unilateral moves toward independence.

 

[Heliox]

It is either interdependence or self-reliance. No in between.

Singapore has been quite cocky lately, like calling Chinese civil war “invasion” and wants to deter it.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Whether one views another to be speaking out of turn, is a subjective matter of opinion.

Promulgating falsehoods or creating fictional narratives is objectively just lying.

We can all agree/disagree on a hot take without resorting to faking news to do so?

 

[vincent]

Whether one views another to be speaking out of turn, is a subjective matter of opinion.

Promulgating falsehoods or creating fictional narratives is objectively just lying.

We can all agree/disagree on a hot take without resorting to faking news to do so?

I’m not the author of the tweet.

 

[burritocannon]

i agree that we all should take individual responsibility for verifying that information is faithfully conveyed. anyone can make a mistake, but that shouldn't be a license for us to repeat them.

 

[AndrewS]

Does anyone happen to know which speech the quote "abandon path to self-sufficiency" is lifted from?

One of the reservations I have with online discussions, especially on social media, is that some click-bait headline or point is made and everyone takes off as if the assertion is even true to start with.

The picture in the tweet was taken at the IMF headquarters in Washington, Oct 15, 2025.
The transcript of the speech made by the President of Singapore, at that event, can be found

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

At no point in the speech, unless my search failed me, is the quoted text "abandon path to self-sufficiency" found. I'm honestly curious where that came from.

wrt The President's speech at the IMF event on 15 Oct, I had a quick read through the official transcript and cherry picked the below that I feel counters the "quoted" text of the tweet.

"One can never be naive about the risks of interdependence. Interdependence will have to be actively managed by both sides to prevent the weaponisation of key technologies or materials."

Broadly speaking, his speech is one of international cooperation and mutually beneficial economic relations - which I'm sure is something the real Rest of the World would love to take and which we all know, the one party largely responsible for f-ing it up is the US (and vassals).

While the speech may be idealistic, given the actions of the players in recent events, it is nonetheless not quite as dramatic as tweet implies, which is the figurehead of a insignificant small red dot trying to lecture China on what it should be doing.

Recent FT interview with the Singapore PM, saying it may take a decade for a new order to emerge.

That begs the question, how does he see the world in 10 year's time?

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[DeltaGreen]

In my personal view, China’s restrictions on rare earths actually reflect a deeper shift: China is no longer as naive as it once was and now sees the West broadly as a competitor rather than a partner.

In the past, West have tried measures that caused little or no pain to themselves while doing much greater damage to China. Whether China successfully defended against those measures or not, the result was still reactive and costly. China, for its part, did not use comparable tools because it still harbored illusions about the West.

China is gradually realizing that passive tolerance is pointless. The reason it has been treated as a competitor rather than an outright enemy is not because the United States is benevolent, but because the U.S. cannot afford the costs of treating China as an enemy.

Given that, China should make those costs more apparent: take the initiative and use measures that inflict relatively small harm on itself but cause disproportionately greater harm to the other side.

 

[Heliox]

i agree that we all should take individual responsibility for verifying that information is faithfully conveyed. anyone can make a mistake, but that shouldn't be a license for us to repeat them.

Aye. People posting trash links without a summary of why it was posted. People posting bad faith articles and then everyone else jumping on the bandwagon with no one verifying primary source. Mods already having it tough in other threads trying to stop this practice - wondering why people can be so ready to police groomayn stayndards but not posting standards.

I’m not the author of the tweet.

That you are not.

But you replied and appeared to double down on the the tweet so I replied you out of convenience.

Recent FT interview with the Singapore PM, saying it may take a decade for a new order to emerge.

That begs the question, how does he see the world in 10 year's time?

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Why does anyone care what the little Red Dot think? The vast majority of Singaporeans definitely don't.

The Western bloc likes to make Singapore significant, thinking that it will be the goat that leads ASEAN down the western path but to be honest, the rest of ASEAN also doesn't care what Singapore has to say. Take for instance the sanction against Russia for the Ukraine SMO - SG took the lead, nobody followed

We all know SG dances to the tune of the US while trying to not. It is harder now than in LKY time given how the economy is tied to the western financial system and it's defence equipment is largely US sourced. Breaking away from those chains will take a seismic shift and many many years of careful maneuvering.

Meantime, just ignore SG like the rest of ASEAN does.