China's SCS Strategy Thread

[taxiya]

What's happening in the SCS is part of a struggle between US/allies to maintain American primacy as basis of the Asian security order, and China's aim to change it. In other words, great power geopolitics have returned from 1989 with gusto, and currently focused in the Asian maritime periphery. One could demonstrate US policy towards China shifted from cooperative to competitive in Bush43's administration, and from competitive to proto-adversarial in Obama's administration. The proof is Bush said on national TV that China was a "competitor," and Obama said US dealings in Asia was about who leads the region. If we take US leaders at face value, then US policy evolved from cooperative to hedging, then containment, and now we have encirclement.

Rational people must see the world as it really is and not how they want it to be, right or wrong has no bearing on that effort. From that perspective, the evidence is overwhelming US has indeed taken sides, and it will do whatever in its power to contain and even encircle China. On the other hand, China will do whatever is in its power to break containment or encirclement and rearrange the Asian security order.

all true. I think you and Equation share the same assessment that "US is taking side". What he emphasized was, according to my own assessment, that China is making the "US taking side" laud and clear in a diplomatic front, China is trying to take away the US previously claimed "not taking side" position, so to put US in a position of "not meaning what one is saying" (in other words lying). That is a diplomatic maneuver, not contradicting anything you said. Diplomacy is of words, it has no material bearing, but still countries play it extensively in the whole human history because everyone want to justify their actions, so it does have some bearings.

 

[SamuraiBlue]

Theoretically entitled to what? The 9-dash line is just reference marks on some maps, nothing more. It has no legal bearing, nor has China ever claimed it did.

Well if that was true then the PRC coast guards would need to enforce things to prevent these thing from happening.

Malaysia says 100 China boats intrude into its waters

KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia — About 100 China-registered boats have been detected encroaching into Malaysian waters near the Luconia Shoals in the South China Sea, a Malaysian minister said.

Shahidan Kassim, a minister in charge of national security, said the government has dispatched the Malaysian Maritime Enforcement Agency and the navy to the area to monitor the situation...... to read more

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

That is a long way from any PRC claimed rock that is for sure.

 

[dingyibvs]

I disagree. China doesn't want the U.S. to take sides, and has made every effort to advance it's claims without drawing the Americans in. The longer the Americans stay fixated on the ME and Russia, the better it is for the Chinese.

 

[AndrewS]

The USA can't help but stay fixated on the Middle East and Russia.

The majority of people in the USA are descended from Europeans, so have much more of a cultural affinity with the region. So they actually know something about the place, and care more about what happens there between Europe/Russia.

And the Middle East holds greater US attention because it is the origin and nexus of Christianity/Islam/Judaism. So the conflicts between Christianity/Judaism and Islam matter, as the US is very religious Christian nation and also supports Israel.

Yet both of these situations are intractable geopolitical conflicts that have and will last for decades more.

So the average American knows very little about Asia - which seems very alien and different.

In comparison, China has neither of these fixations and is happy concentrating on Asia.

 

[taxiya]

I disagree. China doesn't want the U.S. to take sides, and has made every effort to advance it's claims without drawing the Americans in. The longer the Americans stay fixated on the ME and Russia, the better it is for the Chinese.

That depends on time. When in the past (up till the time of "pivot") US was and is (still?) taking an ambiguous position, China did/does want to remind US to remain so. But once China realizes that US is demonstrating abandoning that ambiguity, China will be forced to call the bluff. It is not that China want US to take side, it is not up to China. When US is clearly taking side without saying it laud, it is better for China to strip that last thin veil and force US to show her cards. In Chinese it is "打开天窗说亮话，捅破窗户纸", something like "say the word as its real meaning straight to the face." It may not be happening right now, but I see it is happening.

 

[Blackstone]

Well if that was true then the PRC coast guards would need to enforce things to prevent these thing from happening.



That is a long way from any PRC claimed rock that is for sure.

The Malaysian article failed to mention what exact international law(s) the Chinese ships broke. EEZs by definition are not territorial waters, so foreign ships can legally be there. And there's the tricky question of who actually owns the EEZ. I'm sympathetic to Malaysian claims that it owns the EEZ in question, but right or wrong, the area is still in dispute.

 

[Janiz]

The Malaysian article failed to mention what exact international law(s) the Chinese ships broke. EEZs by definition are not territorial waters, so foreign ships can legally be there.

Indeed you can navigate through those waters but anything aside from that is illegal if not acknowledged by the country which admistrates the EEZ. They don't have to break any international laws - they breake the laws of a given country and that country can do whatever it takes to stop it.

 

[Blackstone]

Indeed you can navigate through those waters but anything aside from that is illegal if not acknowledged by the country which admistrates the EEZ. They don't have to break any international laws - they breake the laws of a given country and that country can do whatever it takes to stop it.

Giving what country notice? Who owns the disputed waters? Until that is resolved through whatever mutually acceptable means, there isn't a phone number to call for notice.

 

[Janiz]

Oh, sorry I frogot thare's no such thing as EEZ's in the South China Sea since PRC came back to the 9 dash line idea recently which touches the EEZ of every country there...

 

[Blackstone]

Oh, sorry I frogot thare's no such thing as EEZ's in the South China Sea since PRC came back to the 9 dash line idea recently which touches the EEZ of every country there...

Janiz, if the discussion is over personal preferences, then no evidence is needed and clarify from personal preferences isn't an issue. But, if we're having reasonable discussions and debates over the incredibly complex SCS sovereignty claims (and the benefits they confer on eventual owner), then they must be based on evidence from facts. So, what do current facts say? They say nations are in dispute, and until mutually agreeable mechanisms are employed for resolution, no one can truly say who is breaking international laws. Them are the facts.