China's SCS Strategy Thread

[joshuatree]

Tell me how is the US involved in all of this?
PRC could have resolved it peacefully under the court of law but PRC did otherwise and now is calling the US that disrupts peace?
That is the oxymoron.

The US is taking sides because its actions on its own would be one thing. But when you start conducting these actions with one claimant and not all, you are basically choosing sides. Actions speak louder than words.

Now if the next time the US does a joint patrol with Taiwan, or Vietnam, or China, or Malaysia; then we can say the US is not taking sides again.

It's hypocritical for folks here to accuse China of unilaterally making sovereign claims and conducting a military build up when history has shown other claimants have done the same. Physical build up in the Spratlys was conducted first by other claimants. It's the same finger pointing and oxymoron that you lament the other side of.

 

[SamuraiBlue]

Please provide your source in international law where it is stated that those are the only ways to establish a dispute.

It's not international law it's common sense.
No one is going to accept an unilateral claim now after Japan had filed sovereignty of the territory 100 years ago in which no one challenged the claim at that point.
If PRC wants to open a dialog concerning those islands it will need to be under a third party moderation.
Or like those stupid analogies people seems to like;

A man found a gold coin on the streets. He takes it to the police stating that he found it on the streets. After six month there was no claim of ownership so the police deemed the man who found it as his. Fast forward 10 years after the man gained ownership a person comes to claim the gold coin is his and says he wants it back. The man said under law the ownership had been moved to himself since no one claimed it 10 years ago after a 6 month waiting period at the proper authorities. The man tells the person who is claiming if you really want to make claim then take it to court in which the man is more then willing to clear his good name in which the person making the claim says no I don't want to go to court just give it back since I am saying it is mine.

The man tells the person to take a hike since he cannot understand or accept that kind of one sided story. Other people hears about the incident but brushes it aside saying the person making claim is nuts and accepts the man who found it as the legitimate owner who followed protocols.

See no dispute in this story just an arrogant person's one sided claim it is his without any respect to law or protocol to prove his story under third party moderation.

 

[Insignius]

Nice selective memory you have here.

Let me remind you that there was indeed someone who cried out when "the man" (The french colonial power) found that gold coin: The entire Chinese nation at that time in 1933 cried out in desperation, that was sadly overshadowed by the brutality of the Japanese takeover of Manchuria in 1931, and hence not heard by anyone on purpose. But history has not forgotten, even if you did.

So, your "man" claims ownership of that gold coin because the police reported noone to challenge his claim for years? Well, if it wasnt for the JAPANESE INVADERS brutally stepping their boots on the Chinese people's throats while continuing to literally vivisect them limb for limb for the following eight plus years, "that man" sure would have met a challenge to his impertinent claim of 'terra nullis' immediately, a law that imperialists like your country, among others, used to invent to legitimize their land-grabs.

Read this article:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Islands stir up all sorts of passions. Introducing South China Sea territorial disputes to its readers, one Chinese periodical sets forth enthusiastically about how the dazzling white sands of the Spratlys are paired with gorgeous shells, an abundance of exotic and beautiful fish, and pieces of bright coral “red as a young girl’s rouge make-up.” Another publication alters a photograph of one of the larger maritime features by covering it with a set of pasted-on Chinese flagpoles, with the caption: “Lovable national flag! What day, what hour, can you be inserted into the Nine Southern Islands?!“

What’s most remarkable about these undoubtedly arousing discussions of national territory is their date. Both pieces (and many others like them) were published in Republic of China media in 1933, and the foreign invaders mentioned in each are not any of the powers currently contesting Chinese territorial claims, but rather the (then) aggressively expansionist French Empire.

At the time, French seizure of the southern islands was grouped together in patriotic discourse with the Japanese takeover of Manchuria in 1931, and other territorial encroachments by foreign powers with colonial aspirations. Collectively, these losses of what was perceived as Chinese territorial sovereignty, and the lackluster opposition of China’s rulers, were referred to as 国耻—“national humiliation.”

Today, both political successors to China’s then-government maintain territorial claims over the South China Sea that are based most closely on maps (including clear predecessors of the famous “nine-dash line”) that were first broadly disseminated in these 1920s and ‘30s nationalist protests against French and Japanese attempts to colonize the Spratly and Paracel island chains. There is, in fact, great continuity throughout the legal argumentsand popular passions implicated in the dispute, stretching from this period of colonial pressure through the present day. Western powers’ failures to acknowledge and take seriously these continuities may seriously hamper efforts to deescalate regional tensions.

Colonial Legal Structures

Imagine yourself in the middle of the South China Sea at any point in the early 20th century before World War II. It was quite a cosmopolitan place even then. You could travel in any direction and end up in a different country: Head west to French Indochina, south to British Malaya or Dutch Indonesia, east to the American-annexed Philippines, southwest to British Singapore, northeast to Japanese-controlled Taiwan, or, finally, north to China (perhaps passing through British-controlled Hong Kong).

Save Thailand, and a Japan that had rapidly joined the ranks of colonizing Western powers (having declared its intention to “leave Asia,” or datsu-a 脱亜), China was in effect the only Asian state left as an independent polity. This status was, however, extremely precarious. Western states, and then Japan, had long enjoyed extraterritorial rights and control over “leased” territories, and had long justified their conquest of much of the world with a set of legal arguments that were originally crafted precisely to allow the maximum extension of European sovereignty.

The principle of “terra nullius”—or unclaimed land open to be taken by whichever Western power “discovered” it—was the basic concept which allowed conquest of vast swathes of the Americas, Africa, and parts of Asia (and was invoked by both France and Japan in disregarding Chinese claims to control of the South China Sea island chains). This legal principle was theoretically universal: whoever discovered unused territory could lay claim to it. But in practice, it led to highly particular effects. Only European “discoveries” counted, and prior “native” uses to or claims over thus-discovered territories were generally disregarded.

The principle of the “free sea” operated in a similar manner. Indeed, the concept was first presented in its modern form by the great jurist Hugo Grotius precisely to justify the activities of the Dutch East India company (VOC) as it sought to end the Portuguese monopoly over trade in Asia. Grotius’

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

powerful companies like the VOC, or anyone else who could reasonably claim to represent a European sovereign, to wage “private war” against whomever interfered with their commercial activities—be they other Europeans or locals who mistakenly thought they had the right not to trade away their land and resources (or to ban foreign imports such as opium).

By the 1930s, China was used to these and other neutral-sounding arguments being deployed in ways that led to denials of its status as an equal Westphalian sovereign power. The French and Japanese attempts to conquer the South China Sea were seen as one more such case; Chinese claims of frequenting and exerting control over these island chains for centuries were not only rejected, they were not even granted the opportunity to have a legal or diplomatic hearing. This led to voluble calls among Chinese nationalists to “take back sovereignty” over the region, and those calls have never stopped. Today’s arguments on both sides of the Strait, right or wrong, are rooted in that decolonizing movement.

The very fact that the West and Japan to this day are committing every crime to uphold this sort of international order that was based on their past robbery and murder, and that is constructed to legitimize their continued possessions of their stolen goods, is the very reason why China needs to grow stronger to one day overturn this entire rotten system.

You can call that revanchist rhetorics. Fine by me. In fact, revenge for China alone isnt enough. It should be revenge for all the third world that was trampled by "that man who conveniently found a gold coin and never happened to hear anyone complaining about it" (because he fricking murdered everyone and anyone who would complain). Your claim of moral superiority absolutely holds no water when viewed from the historical context. You are merely trying to legitimize the continued practice of kicking away the ladder.

 

[SamuraiBlue]

Not over Senkaku they didn't and 1933 it's still 30 years over due.

 

[confusion]

US officials think that Fan Changlong visited Fiery Cross Reef.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

China’s top military officer led a high-level delegation on a visit to a cluster of Chinese-built artificial islands in the disputed South China Sea in recent days, underlining the strategic importance of the structures at the center of a standoff between Beijing and Washington.

The visit by Gen. Fan Changlong, vice chairman of China’s Central Military Commission, was first reported by The Wall Street Journal and confirmed later on Friday by China’s Defense Ministry.

It appears to be the highest-level official Chinese visit to the islands, whose construction over the last two years has raised concern in the U.S. and Asia that Beijing might use them to enforce its sweeping maritime claims around one of the world’s busiest shipping routes.

Confirmation of Gen. Fan’s trip came as U.S. Defense Secretary Ash Carter visited an American aircraft carrier transiting the South China Sea on Friday following a visit to the Philippines—a U.S. treaty ally whose maritime claims overlap with China’s in those waters.

The Chinese Defense Ministry issued a statement on its official microblog saying that Gen. Fan recently led senior military and civilian officials on a visit to the islands in the Spratlys archipelago, which China calls the Nansha, to inspect work and greet military personnel and construction workers there.

The statement said the work included weather stations, marine-research facilities and five lighthouses, four of which were operational. It didn’t say when exactly the visit took place or whether Gen. Fan had departed. The Pentagon declined to comment.

U.S. officials had said earlier that they believed Gen. Fan flew at the end of last week to an island built on reclaimed land around Fiery Cross Reef in the Spratlys. The U.S. officials wouldn’t say how they had concluded the general had visited. The U.S. conducts surveillance of the Pacific region in a variety of ways.

It was unclear how long Gen. Fan stayed on Fiery Cross Reef, which is also claimed by the Philippines, Vietnam and Taiwan, or whether he was still in the area, the U.S. officials said.

The visit coincided with a tour of Asia by Mr. Carter, who scrubbed a planned stop in Beijing amid rising tensions over the South China Sea, although U.S. officials said the trip was postponed due to scheduling issues. Mr. Carter would likely have met Gen. Fan in Beijing had the visit gone ahead.

...

Zhu Feng, a security expert at China’s Nanjing University, said he hadn’t been aware of Gen. Fan’s visit but that such a trip would likely be designed to show support for Chinese personnel working in the Spratlys.

“It’s also a way that China is trying to show the U.S. and the Philippines we’re not easily backing off,” he said.

U.S. officials said there have been a series of flights to and from Fiery Cross since Friday. The planes are consistent with the kind that a senior Chinese official would use, including an Airbus 319 and a Bombardier Canadair Regional Jet, or CRJ.

Planes landed and departed last Friday and then again on Sunday, according to U.S. officials. The two officials said they had concluded Gen. Fan was the visitor and that it was possible he was still in the archipelago, although his exact movements were unclear.

 

[Yvrch]

One very good reason US would seriously think twice before starting a shooting war with China in SCS or ECS. Or slapping a sanction on China.
Fed's broad dollar index.

 

[SouthernSky]

One very good reason US would seriously think twice before starting a shooting war with China in SCS or ECS. Or slapping a sanction on China.
Fed's broad dollar index.

View attachment 26768

I doubt that it will surpass the other very good reasons for not starting a shooting match.

 

[solarz]

It's not international law it's common sense.
No one is going to accept an unilateral claim now after Japan had filed sovereignty of the territory 100 years ago in which no one challenged the claim at that point.
If PRC wants to open a dialog concerning those islands it will need to be under a third party moderation.

Sorry to inform you, but your "common sense" doesn't hold any weight in international law. In other words, just because you or Japan wish it so, does not actually make it so.

By refusing to even acknowledge that there is a dispute over the Diaoyu Islands, Japan shows how little faith it has in an international court.

 

[ahojunk]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Website reveals future warship deployment to Philippines’ Scarborough Shoal
BY:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

April 13, 2016 5:00 am

China’s plan for a new military buildup on a disputed island near the Philippines shows the future deployment of Chinese warships close to where U.S. naval forces will be stationed in the future.

Details of the militarization plan for Scarborough Shoal in the Spratly Islands were obtained by U.S. intelligence agencies over the last several months, according to defense officials.

The plans were confirmed last month when a website for Chinese military enthusiasts posted a detailed dredging plan for Scarborough Shoal, including a runway, power systems, residences, and harbor capable of supporting Chinese navy warships.

The shoal is located about 150 miles from the Philippines’ coast. It is claimed by Manila but has been under Beijing’s control since 2012.

Disclosure of the buildup plan for the shoal is the latest element of a dispute that has pitted the United States and regional states against China.

China is engaged in what U.S. government officials have said is a gradual attempt to take over the entire South China Sea. The Pentagon has said the takeover threatens $5.3 trillion annually in international trade that passes through what are legally international waters but that China asserts are its sovereign territory.

:

The plan to develop and militarize Scarborough Shoal, however, has set off alarm bells in both the Pentagon and State Department because of the area’s proximity to the Philippines, a U.S. treaty ally that recently agreed to enhance defense cooperation in the face of Chinese aggression.

Secretary of State John Kerry in February raised the issue of Chinese activities on Scarborough Shoal during a meeting with Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi in Washington. According to a source familiar with the meeting, Wang told Kerry that Chinese expansion of Scarborough Shoal would take place.

In public remarks after the meeting Kerry urged China not to take unilateral actions in the sea.

Last month, Chief of Naval Operations Adm. John Richardson voiced concerns about expanded Chinese activities on Scarborough Shoal. “I think we see some surface ship activity and those sorts of things, survey type of activity, going on,” Richardson told Reuters. “That’s an area of concern … a next possible area of reclamation.”

President Obama also raised China’s aggressive South China Sea activities during a meeting last week with Chinese leader Xi Jinping. A White House spokesman would not say if Scarborough Shoal was discussed. A statement on the meeting said only that Obama urged Xi to address regional differences peacefully and that the United States would uphold freedom of navigation and overflight.

Defense officials said the disclosure of the development plan that appeared on a Chinese military enthusiast website in March are bolstering worries.

China is calling the construction project for Scarborough Shoal its plan for Huangyan—“Yellow Rock”—Island, where a settlement will be set up.

The shoal is located about 168 miles from Subic Bay in the Philippines, where U.S. warships will be regularly deployed in the future as part of the enhanced defense agreement recently concluded between Washington and Manila.

The website included satellite photographs purportedly based on a construction bid proposed by the “Huangyan Island Township,” a municipality created under what China claims is its regional authority on Sansha Island, located near China’s Hainan Island.

A graphic with one photo outlined the development plan, with three Chinese guided-missile frigates at a wharf at the southern opening of the shoal.



Other features include an airport and runway at the northern end, an electrical plan, a water treatment plant, a residential building, a hotel, and a “travel holiday” area.

:

One official, however, said there is specific intelligence indicating China has clear plans to build an island out of the shoal and place military forces on it.

:

Retired Navy Capt. Jim Fanell, a former Pacific Fleet intelligence chief, said he has been closely watching Scarborough Shoal since April 2012, when China took control of the area after a standoff with the Philippines.

Fanell said China appears to be weighing its next move in a larger strategy of “tightening the noose” over the entire South China Sea.

“Heretofore, they’ve been satisfied with reclaiming and building on the seven existing outposts that they’ve had in the Spratly Islands and at Woody Island, but have not moved out to try and take ‘new’ territory within the South China Sea,” Fanell said.

“That surely will change as China’s ‘maritime sovereignty campaign’ is not just the seven existing Spratly Island outposts and Woody, but is in fact the entire content of the Nine-Dash Line,” he added, referring to the vague territorial claim by China that covers most of the sea.

China’s plans to build up Scarborough Shoal also could be a response to an international court ruling anticipated later this month or early next month that is expected to rule in favor of Manila’s claims to the Spratlys.

China may also be moving quickly to build up Scarborough Shoal over concerns the next U.S. president will be tougher on Chinese maritime expansion.

“So, in order to get ahead of this potential confrontation, they will move this year to slice off the next piece of salami—the uninhabited shoals like at Scarborough,” Fanell said.

Scarborough was used by the U.S. Navy as a bombing target in the early 1980s, something that could complicate the Chinese development plan.

However, China has controlled the shoal since June 2012 and maintains coast guard ships nearby at most times.

“It would take literally very little effort for China to come in with the same resources and tools that they used at the seven reclaimed islands in the Spratly Islands, and do the same kind of dredging and work to build an ‘island’” at the shoal, Fanell said.

:

A military base on Scarborough Shoal would permit China to dominate northern access to the sea and is just over 120 miles west of Subic Bay, where the Navy will soon deploy additional forces to bolster defenses in the region.

Scarborough could be used to deploy combat aircraft, warships, anti-aircraft missiles, and anti-ship missiles.

:

 

[Janiz]

By refusing to even acknowledge that there is a dispute over the Diaoyu Islands, Japan shows how little faith it has in an international court.

I doubt Chinese side ever considered taking that to ICJ because most likely they would lose a case. Only fanboys in Chinese mainland talked about that in the Internet and it takes two sides to go to ICJ. China never proposed such peaceful solution. Japan tried that with Korea over Takeshima but South Koreans never accepted that as they would obviously lose in the court case with all the documents.