China's SCS Strategy Thread

[Blackstone]

It also violate international law of the sea, namely UNCLOS assuring safe passage through EEZ which PRC is a signatory of. Sorry but you really do not get it do you.

Ok, back to being unfriendly. You're either too thick to understand, or too mule-headed to acknowledge China hasn't violated UNCLOS by insisting on a different definition of what constitutes innocent passage for foreign military. The issue is still open to debate, and reasonable people can (and do) disagree. China is in the minority view, to be sure, but definitely not unreasonable, because UNCLOS isn't clear on what exactly innocent passage means.

 

[Jeff Head]

Samurai, Blackstone does "get it." He is just pointing out that China is not necessarily going to dance to the tune of what others call the "norm," particularly since they have opted out of certain clauses which allow them to claim historical precedents to their liking and to their interest.

Balckstone, Free Passage and Innocent Passage are not necessarily the same. The fact is, passage through the SCS and the SLOCs there are critical to numerous nation's interests including the US...and including China.

As I said earlier, short of a stupendous blunder and miscalculation on one side or the other, I expect in the end that the Chinese will fulfill their desires to strengthen their presence and influence in the SCS with their new islands and the improvements they make on them. I do not think the US can stop it, and it would be one of those foolish blunders and miscalculations for them to try to do so using force.

I also expect that the right of free passage through those waters is going to be realized and punctuated by the US. I do not think the PRC can stop it, and it would also be one of those foolish blunders and miscalculations for them to try to do that using force.

 

[Zetageist]

Actually, Scarborough Shoal itself is above high tide and is entitled to its own 12 NM territorial sea. So a state could legally reclaim on top of it without violating the EEZ of the Philippines. Infact, the Philippine govt classified Scarborough Shoal under UNCLOS as a Regime of Islands which in my opinion indicated their intent. Rather than simply classifying Scarborough as a feature within the EEZ from the Philippine mainland, calling it as a ROI enables Scarborough to be eligible for its own EEZ, (Article 121 is a little vague on the issue of ability to generate economic activity to qualify for an EEZ). This will further extend the reach of Filipino EEZ out west. So it amounts to nothing but another claimant trying to maximize their claims. The part that wasn't anticipated was the 2012 standoff and contention of the shoal. But the Philippines can't backtrack on filing Scarborough as ROI with the UN so its lawyers with the present case are merely asking to overlook the 12 NM around Scarborough and not resolve sovereignty of it because that would make their UNCLOS case overstep UNCLOS's jurisdiction and risk it being thrown out.

So to go back to the issue of Chinese reclamation, if they did at Scarborough, it would be legal but the issue would be contention of who has sovereignty.

And of the features that have been reclaimed, some actually do have rocks above high tide so some actually should be entitled to 12 NM. This is something the US has to carefully identify first if they opt for action of crossing the 12 NM mark. Because even if the US does not recognize Chinese sovereignty of those features, it would mean it is still someone's 12 NM territorial sea that they've violated and it's already contentious that they haven't ratified UNCLOS but wants to enforce it.

According to recent reports, China Coast Guard Haijing 1123 patrol boat has been anchored at the Luconia Shoals closer to Malaysian coast. The shoals lie 100 kilometres (62 mi) off the

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

coast of

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

, southwest of the southernmost members of the Spratly Islands. At low tides, Luconia Shoals is more than 10 meters above water, 170 m long x 20 m wide. During high tides, it is still 2-3 m above water, 60 m long x 10-20 m wide. So regardless of sovereignty or whoever reclaims it, it is entitled to 12 nm of territorial sea according to UNCLOS. Near Luconia Shoals are Malaysian oil rigs, so the Haijing 1123 patrol boat had been involved in a "confrontation" with Malaysian maritime vessels near the Qiongtai Jiao — or Luconia Breakers — of the Luconia Shoals.

The Haijing 1123 patrol boat of the China Coast Guard.

 

[Ultra]

The difference is that this is still pretty much the first round with China, while they have already gone the distance the Russia. It is therefore a very different game.

I still struggle to see the point of the US Strategy in this, as I cannot see what they hope to achieve.
If the USN sail past any of these Islands, they will simply create an incident, to which the PRC will simply issue a Demarche and a vocal protest in the UN.
If the USN repeatedly sails past they will create a number of incidents, each with a corresponding demarche and protest.
All I see this achieving is giving the PRC a "paper trail" that it can use to justify any stronger action further down the line.
I also question whether or not such action would solidify any kind of international support behind the US. International diplomacy dislikes precedents as they occur outside of the comfort zone of established protocol. Some nations may support such action from the US, but many others may well prefer the precedent set by the PRC as it would help facilitate claims of their own and will not welcome anything that would challenge that position.

Finally of course, if the USN does more than simply sail by, then they will have declared war on the PRC and would of course entail all that which would be the natural consequence.

I think US is just "testing" China's response. The US will just keep pushing and bullying and see how far they can go until China push back, and when China finally push back and push back HARD, it will send a shockwave to US adminstration, which will then have to weigh how much the american lives are worth over islands which US has absolutely no claims on. I am pretty sure any US administration (current or future one) will fall on the side of backing down, getting another black eye for something they shouldn't even meddle in in the first place.

 

[Zetageist]

Sorry, I forgot to mention that China Coast Guard Haijing 1123 patrol boat has been anchored at the Luconia Shoals for 2 years. More photos:

Haijing 1123 patrol boat had been involved in a "confrontation" with Malaysian maritime vessels near the Qiongtai Jiao (琼台礁 or 瓊台礁) — or Luconia Breakers — of the Luconia Shoals.

Qiongtai Jiao (琼台礁 or 瓊台礁) — or Luconia Breakers (December 13, 2014)

Qiongtai Jiao (琼台礁 or 瓊台礁) — or Luconia Breakers (February 12, 2015)

 

[Zetageist]

Qiongtai Jiao (琼台礁 or 瓊台礁) — or Luconia Breakers

Luconia Breakers

Luconia Breakers

Luconia Breakers

Luconia Breakers - Chinese National Geographics photo

 

[plawolf]

The door sways both ways you know.
If military navigation is somehow limited within another nation's EEZ then PRC's passage through the Okinawa archipelago will also be limited making the containment theory self fulfilling.

Either you don't know what you are talking about or is deliberately distorting the facts.

China has never once complained about or tried to limit the transit of foreign military vessels in its EEZ. What it takes exception to are foreign military vessels parking themselves just on the very edge of its 12NM territorial waters outside sensitive military facilities and conduction blatant spying operations.

It also does not like foreign military ships getting very close to their ships during drills and exercises to the point of causing disruptions to the exercises themselves within China's own EEZ.

Under what China considers 'innocent' passage, its ships would violate nothing if all they are doing is transiting through waters within the EEZ of Japanese held islands.

 

[Zetageist]

Luconia Breakers (Feb. 12, 2015) - China Coast Guard Haijing 1123 patrol boat is marked by a small circle

China Coast Guard Haijing 1123 patrol boat

China Coast Guard Haijing 1123 patrol boat (June 2, 2015)

Luconia Breakers (June 2, 2015)

Luconia Breakers (June 2, 2015) - The palm tree is planted by a Chinese fisherman

 

[PanAsian]

I find it interesting the different apprach US used in dealing with China and Russia. US felt they can bully China into submission using military show of force, flying aircrafts over the disputed territory even though US is not a claimant, and readying for massive military escalation by moving more of its force to the pacific and building more bases in allied countries.

On the other hand, dealing with Russia is purely economic sanction, and HARSH WORDS. LOL!
eg.
US considering harder stance on Russia, report says

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

"Officials within the Pentagon reportedly have begun using harsher military terms such as deterrence instead of reassurance, the newspaper reports."

Yeh, harsher words will work!


Why the difference?

One aspect of the answer is Russia is relatively weak economically and China is relatively weak militarily, so the US will focus on the arena which is most advantageous to itself in dealing with each respective country. Not that the US won't turn the pressure up in multiple arenas, such as pushing the TPP without China, or pushing NATO expansion, missile shield deployments, military aid to countries hostile to Russia etc.

 

[SamuraiBlue]

Either you don't know what you are talking about or is deliberately distorting the facts.

China has never once complained about or tried to limit the transit of foreign military vessels in its EEZ. What it takes exception to are foreign military vessels parking themselves just on the very edge of its 12NM territorial waters outside sensitive military facilities and conduction blatant spying operations.

It also does not like foreign military ships getting very close to their ships during drills and exercises to the point of causing disruptions to the exercises themselves within China's own EEZ.

Under what China considers 'innocent' passage, its ships would violate nothing if all they are doing is transiting through waters within the EEZ of Japanese held islands.

No I understand exactly what I am talking about.

The things that are not written as violation within UNCLOS is everything that is allowed and don't ever talk about what other nations can or can't do within other nation's EEZ. If I recall PRC was caught spying during an international war game that even PLAN was invited to participate.

By the way the difference between innocent passage and safe passage is which flag assures the other rights.

The nation that claims and administer the EEZ is responsible in providing safety during passage, innocent passage is where the flag ship is responsible in refraining from violating the host nation's privacy such as trying to chart the ocean without authorization.