China's SCS Strategy Thread

[tidalwave]

Let's predict what's China encore given US continue to do its FON.

I predict a big new island will be formed from the series of islands of tree and north islands.
It will have large dock to host alot of surface combatant ships and submarines.

In other words, Paracel will become a full blown permanent naval base with Hainan hosting SU35, J20, and carrier group.

I think that should be about it.

Man-made islands end up being huge habitats hosting about 100K Chinese civilians,

China and US ends up stalemate and lifes go on.

And we all come back one day here and have a chuckle.

 

[Air Force Brat]

US should care more where the "real suffering" is.
That's at middle east where people are dying horribly on a daily basis.

Plenty of suffering to go around Bub, and China prolly should be a little more circumspect, not saying the US is perfect, but we're not arming up sandbars around the Gulf of Mexico. That bizness is pretty uncool?? it does have the neighbors upset, and rightfully so.

 

[supercat]

What U.S. did or will do in the Gulf of Mexico is not really relevant here. The relevant point is that China's neighbors, such as Philippines and Vietnam, have been doing the same thing for a long time. Yet we rarely hear a word about their actions in the Western mainstream media. As for the situation in MENA, hundreds thousands people have died, and millions displaced, because of either failed intervention or failed policies by the U.S. and a few countries from the EU.

 

[AssassinsMace]

Let's predict what's China encore given US continue to do its FON.

I predict a big new island will be formed from the series of islands of tree and north islands.
It will have large dock to host alot of surface combatant ships and submarines.

In other words, Paracel will become a full blown permanent naval base with Hainan hosting SU35, J20, and carrier group.

I think that should be about it.

Man-made islands end up being huge habitats hosting about 100K Chinese civilians,

China and US ends up stalemate and lifes go on.

And we all come back one day here and have a chuckle.

It's probably going to be a landing of a military transport on one of the newly built islands. They probably don't have the facilities to land fighters yet on those.

 

[Equation]

Plenty of suffering to go around Bub, and China prolly should be a little more circumspect, not saying the US is perfect, but we're not arming up sandbars around the Gulf of Mexico. That bizness is pretty uncool?? it does have the neighbors upset, and rightfully so.

But the US do go around and support of Regime change all over the Middle East and North Africa though. Lots of innocent people die from that than any of China's island building so far, right bub?

 

[weig2000]

I wasn't sure which thread I should put this piece of news: does it belong to the 054A thread or this thread? The way Reuters characterizes it this commissioning of the Xiangtan frigate is almost further evidence of China's provocative militarization of SCS.

If this pattern of framing any Chinese military activities continues, I'm afraid pretty soon we'll see media reporting that "Satellite images (tipped by xxx) show China is making provocative military moves by deploying heavy artillery on Hainan Island amid tension in SCS."

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

BEIJING (Reuters) - China commissioned a domestically produced missile frigate this week, the official People's Liberation Army Daily reported on Thursday, as Beijing works to expand and modernize its navy.

The announcement came only two days after a senior U.S. military official said China was "clearly militarizing" the South China Sea. The United States is worried by China's military buildup to assert dominance in the region.

The People's Liberation Daily said the frigate, with a displacement of more than 4,000 tonnes, has powerful long-range surveillance and anti-aircraft capabilities.

Ships of that kind can be used alone or along with other naval forces to attack enemy surface ships, the report said.

The frigate, called the Xiangtan, is one of 22 vessels of its class in service, according to state media reports.

Beijing has invested billions developing its homegrown weapons industry to support its growing maritime ambitions in the South China Sea and the Indian Ocean.

China claims most of the South China Sea, through which more than $5 trillion in global trade passes every year. Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei, the Philippines and Taiwan have rival claims.

Beijing has also cast an eye towards foreign markets for its comparatively low-cost technology. Its total military budget in 2015 was 886.9 billion yuan ($141.45 billion), up 10 percent from a year earlier.

(Reporting By Megha Rajagopalan; Editing by Paul Tait)

 

[joshuatree]

China claims most of the South China Sea, through which more than $5 trillion in global trade passes every year. Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei, the Philippines and Taiwan have rival claims.

Still hoping there's a breakdown out there somewhere of that $5 trillion being constantly mentioned, how much of it is with China?

 

[AndrewS]

@Brumby

Yes, if you think about it, China's actions in the SCS should end up as a overall net positive for the world. I measure this by the end result which will be apparent in a few years which includes

1. The additional infrastructure for civilian use. eg. lighthouses to prevent shipwrecks, airborne surveillance which would have prevented/solved cases like the Malaysian Airlines mystery, eventually joint anti-piracy patrols/facilities etc

2. China will be more secure in investing in infrastructure development and maritime commerce, as it will have greater security that its trillions in investments and trade will be protected. Chinese funding/construction/ownership of infrastructure development could address much of the developing world's needs and boost their efforts to eliminate poverty. This far outweighs the benefits that Filipino fishermen derive.

Hence a net positive for the world.

===

FON is ambiguous enough that there are different interpretations of UNCLOS. In my view, I think China should take the long-view, because it is likely that China will end up with the world's largest navy, and therefore military FON through EEZs is ultimately in China's interest.

===

But we can see that at the nation-state level, the US disregards the same international laws that it champions as lawful rule. It's just rank hypocrisy like every other country in the world.

===
Let's look at some countries that are neutral or support China in the SCS.

Russia - they don't have any interest in the SCS, but they do find it very useful as it distracts the US from their quasi-conflict with Russia.

Central Asia - They're landlocked countries that really don't care what happens in the SCS and they're part of the land-based silk road route which terminates at ports in the Pakistan ports. China securing the sea-based Silk-road route to these ports is in their interests.

Africa - They're part of the sea based silk road, and count China as their largest trading partner. China securing the sea-based Silk-road route to these ports is in their interests

The same calculation applies to other countries like Cambodia, Thailand, etc. They do not have any territorial disputes with China and know that the Chinese military will always keep the commercial trade routes open.

Flag follows trade, as the British Empire once put it

 

[AndrewS]

Well, I think I'm done with the red team view for now.

So let's look at the blue team perspective.

What does the US want, but more importantly what can it realistically get?

The USA wants to retain the status quo of economic and military primacy in the waters of the Western Pacific next to the Chinese coast, and for China is accept this situation.

But if the China economy and military grow much bigger than the USA, then why should China accept this?

China already has escalation dominance in virtually every economic/military scenario (short of war) in the region AND is the one that wants to change the status quo, which has its good points but also its bad points.

And if there is one thing that the Chinese neocons and US neocons both agree on, it is that a full-scale war would be a disaster for both parties.

So let's look at freedom navigation and how it fits into this.

The US wants to use military freedom of navigation to intimidate China, but that is simply not going to work, because China has escalation dominance.

But remember that commercial freedom of navigation is in the interests of the US and China.

China is already the world's largest economy in terms of actual output, largest trading nation, and largest net foreign investor. Chinese companies want access to foreign markets, but at the moment, the Chinese domestic market is still somewhat hostile to foreign companies. But as China moves up the technology ladder, Chinese multi-nationals will know that they can compete and expand globally.

Therefore China's long-term interest is to foster a liberal trade and investment order, which the US also idealises.

So as time goes on, the interests of China and the US - converge on freedom of navigation, a liberal trade and investment order, and the status of artificial islands. We can already see that the Chinese foreign ministry is deliberately vague on the SCS so as to keep its options open.

So does the US conducting and then publicising FON operations against China actually help?

No, because it simply means China has to acknowledge the situation and escalate. If they had to be conducted, it would be better to do it the way the Australians have done it without any publicity at all. It makes the same point, but doesn't goad China into an overt response.

And remember that the legal situation is that messed up and complicated, that most people don't understand what is actually happening anyway.

But if the principle of FON is actually about what territory or EEZ is acceptable, then in the interests of fairness, the US should also be conducting FON operations against Japan like in Okinotorishima and in other countries and then publicising these.

And of course, it would help if the US actually re-entered UNCLOS after storming out in anger last time.

 

[Blackstone]

Still hoping there's a breakdown out there somewhere of that $5 trillion being constantly mentioned, how much of it is with China?

The last article I read a few weeks ago said about 80% of SCS trade are imports or exports of China. That's why the very thought Beijing would impede SCS trade is ridiculous.