China's SCS Strategy Thread

Blitzo

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
SamuraiBlue said:
Here you are;

Click to expand...

Okay, but I think my point still stands in regards to the current story Wang Yi's statement regarding missile deployments. That is, there is nothing to suggest that he's claimed that there are no missiles on the islands. If anything his statement appeared to tacitly acknowledge the presence of the missiles there.

It would also be useful for you to quote my previous post if you are replying to it so I can see the notification.
 
J

joshuatree

Captain
Brumby said:
A diplomatic note still doesn't abrogate my two points on this issue. At best it is a promissory note to a future contingent event.
Click to expand...

I was only concerned about the note being described as a handwritten one when it is actually an official diplomatic note. The points you make have been argued to death here before, I don't think another round of that is needed as both sides of this argument will remain committed to their views.
 
Jeff Head

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
Assassin and Samurai...leave off with the Sino-Japanese food fight.

Assassin, you seem to be goading it. No need for that.

DO NOT RESPOND TO THIS MODERATION.
 
Brumby

Brumby

Major
joshuatree said:
I was only concerned about the note being described as a handwritten one when it is actually an official diplomatic note. The points you make have been argued to death here before, I don't think another round of that is needed as both sides of this argument will remain committed to their views.
Click to expand...
I don't have an issue of leaving it to rest in peace until this zombie note gets resurrected.
 
Jura The idiot

Jura The idiot

General
What’s on Woody? (clipped out from the article I quote down below)
woody_hq9.png

I'm new to all this :)
Yesterday at 3:46 PM
Jura said:
I noticed analogous text in today's official Russian article
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

which identifies the missiles as
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

and says they've been on
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Click to expand...
related, from the other side:
Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Defends South China Sea Anti-Air Missile Deployment, PACOM CO Harris Expresses Concern
China’s foreign minster Wang Yi defended the People’s Liberation Army deployment of 32 anti-air missiles to a disputed South China Sea Island saying Beijing was well within its rights to send out the batteries.

Wang told reporters in Beijing on Thursday the recent deployment of the HQ-9 missiles on Woody Island was “consistent with the right to self-preservation and self-protection that China is entitled to under international law, so there should be no question about that,” following a meeting with Australian foreign minister Julie Bishop on South China Sea issues.

Wang instead played up the “positive role” of its developments in the region and added “we believe this is an attempt by certain Western media to create news stories.”

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
— in the Paracel island chain off Vietnam — on Tuesday.
Speaking with reporters in Tokyo on Thursday,
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
the presence of the missiles on the island “could be an indication of militarization of the South China Sea in ways that the president of China, that [Chinese] President Xi [Jinping] said he would not do.”

Pentagon officials repeated the U.S. universal call for South China Sea disputes to be resolved diplomatically.

“The United Sates continues to call on all claimants to halt land reclamation, construction and militarization of features in the South China Sea,” read a late Tuesday statement provided to USNI News from the Department of Defense.

Senate Armed Services Committee chair Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) issued a statement critical of the missile placement on Woody Island on Thursday.

“China’s actions in the South China Sea this week demonstrate Beijing’s continued desire to resort to militarization and coercion to achieve its maritime sovereignty goals and President Xi Jinping’s cavalier disregard for his public commitments to the United States,” read the statement.
“Despite making claims months ago that China had halted its unprecedented reclamation and would not militarize features in the South China Sea, we now have a growing set of examples of the emptiness of Beijing’s words.”

The satellite imagery published by Fox News shows the launchers and radar systems consistent with the HQ-9 mobile AAW launchers. The missiles – based on the Russian S-300PMU (NATO reporting name SA-10B Grumble) – have a range of about 120 miles and can travel at Mach 4.2

“The vehicles that are assessed to be erected launchers in the image are consistent with other Google Earth images of a production facility outside of Beijing,” naval analyst and retired U.S. Navy Capt. Chris Carlson told USNI News on Tuesday.
“It does indeed look like two firing batteries of four launchers each for the 100-km-range HQ-9 were moved to Woody Island within the past couple of weeks.”

The deployment of the HQ-9s follow a November deployment of People’s Liberation Army Air Force (PLAAF) Shenyang J-11 fighters to Woody and growing concerns that military movement in the South China Sea may back up a planned future air defense identification zone (ADIZ) over the region or other restrictions to movement.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, China declared an ADIZ over the East China Sea a move contested by the U.S. and its neighbors. Shortly after, the PLA moved fighters to newly built airstrips in the East China Sea to enforce the ADIZ restrictions.

If China were to do the same in the South China Sea – where territorial claims and sovereignty are heavily disputed – Beijing would be in violation of international law.

While it’s not a violation of international law to place defense systems on a country’s territory – albeit contested — using those weapons as an “implicit threat” to international territory is inconsistent with international law, ,” James Kraska, professor in the Stockton Center for the Study of International Law at the Naval War College, told USNI News on Thursday.
“If China use [the missiles] to enforce an air defense identification zone or enforce other restrictions on international aviation is unlawful.”

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
by a U.S. guided missile destroyer that came within 12 nautical miles of Triton Island in the Paracels and a week after a new report indicated China was expanding military installations in the island chain.
Click to expand...
source:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
T

tidalwave

Senior Member
Registered Member
Brumby said:
You are conveniently avoiding two key points in your comments. North Vietnam cannot give away what it does not own at that time because it was under the jurisdiction of South Vietnam. Secondly, that supposedly note was never ratified by Vietnam when it was unified as a country. In other words ceding of territory is not on the back of some hand written note. In international law that has to be by way of some treaty. Please show me that treaty.
Click to expand...


Where's South Vietnam now? If it wants it back then come out and claim it.
Vietnam is not democratic country, it doesn't need the people to vote or consent, the communist party 's action alone suffice. It's an authoritorian state. It's as good as treaty. The Vietnamese communists don't need to answer to its people.

Your logic doesn't stand You saying China cannot get paracel because South Vietnam occupied it at that time.
You might as well say North Vietcongs can't have Saigon because South Vietnam was one occupied it at that time. LOL

The only chance you have is have another government overthrow the current communist party ion vietnam and then say whatever the communists did doesn't count. But by now it's weak logic now becuase generation of Chinese natives being raised in Paracel.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top