China's SCS Strategy Thread

taxiya

Brigadier
Registered Member
@solarz



I disagree on that.

Just look at how the Japan-US relationship has changed from WW2 to today, albeit Japan was outright *conquered* by the USA.
without going into details, I just want to point out a big difference between the Japan-US relationship and Sino-Japan relationship. The first is less than 200 years, one major conflict, outcome is decisive. The other is a repetition of many times over more than 1000 years. One can not make a judgement from one event, but one can be pretty safe to make a judgement from many repeated patterns.

If the negative experience is so long lasting, the mark it makes will last long, it will take much longer time to rebuild the trust. Just human natural.

I think the Japan-US relationship is more comparable to Sino-Russo relationship, except the who dominate whom part. China and Russia had some unpleasant conflicts in the past 200 years, from a personal perspective (seeing nation as individual), that is like a one time thing.

Besides, I think you missed one point, Japan's own aspiration. Looking back to the history again, unlike any other countries in the region, Japan has never really entered the Sino-sphere like others. Japan see herself as equivalent to China, not a junior member in a China centric system. It was like that for most of the history, why would Japan suddenly change her mind and join a China-led system? Contrary to "China being x times stronger than Japan will make Japan willing to join a China circle", we have seen multiple times in the past that Japan refuse or even went to a fight to resist being incorporated into a Sino-centric system (not justifying that system) when China was 10 times stronger than Japan, Tang-Japan war in 660s, Yuan-Japan wars in 1274 and 1281 and Ming-Japan wars in 1590s. All these wars were fought when China was many times stronger and bigger in every aspects. All of these wars were about who is the overlord (mandate of heaven to rule the known world) which China assumed but Japan challenged.

My thought agrees more to Solarz that the best China can do is to keep a watchful eye on Japan, keep a good distance to Japan. In other words, a practical, pragmatic, polite, distant neighborhood except maybe economy. Also an alliance always have a target even not being stated, who will be the target of a Sino-Japan alliance? U.S.? Pragmatically I'd rather try not to make U.S. feel uneasy, I'd also trust U.S. more due to the fact of comparably better (or less bad) experience, she may be annoying every now and then, but she never went nuts to do something like the idiom says "snake swallowing elephant".
 

tidalwave

Senior Member
Registered Member
after warship near diaoyutai, another chinese ship , a spy ship infiltrated into Japanese water. Part of the strategy to put pressure on East China Sea
Japan says it spotted a Chinese reconnaissance ship sailing through its territorial waters on Wednesday at around 3:30 am local time.

The Japan Times reports that the vessel was seen near Kuchinoerabu Island at the edge of the East China Sea, and authorities say it is China’s second naval infiltration since World War II.
 

taxiya

Brigadier
Registered Member
after warship near diaoyutai, another chinese ship , a spy ship infiltrated into Japanese water. Part of the strategy to put pressure on East China Sea
That is a good strategy, "围魏救赵", encircle Wei kingdom to save the Zhao kingdom.

It is also sending a clear message, "I suggest none of us doing such things, you insist doing it, now I will abandon my restraint and do the same thing to you". An Chinese idiom "你既然做了初一,就别怪我做十五。", "Since you did it on the first (day), then don't cry when I do it on the fifteenth (day)".

It is interesting to note that the incident happened a day ago, and we haven't heard anything from U.S. yet whose ship was followed by the Chinese ship through the Japanese water. I guess there is nothing U.S. will and can say, after all this is the same "Freedom of Navigation" that was Championed by U.S. all this time.
 

AndrewS

Brigadier
Registered Member
Without going into details, I just want to point out a big difference between the Japan-US relationship and Sino-Japan relationship. The first is less than 200 years, one major conflict, outcome is decisive. The other is a repetition of many times over more than 1000 years. One can not make a judgement from one event, but one can be pretty safe to make a judgement from many repeated patterns.

If the negative experience is so long lasting, the mark it makes will last long, it will take much longer time to rebuild the trust. Just human natural.

I think the Japan-US relationship is more comparable to Sino-Russo relationship, except the who dominate whom part. China and Russia had some unpleasant conflicts in the past 200 years, from a personal perspective (seeing nation as individual), that is like a one time thing.

Besides, I think you missed one point, Japan's own aspiration. Looking back to the history again, unlike any other countries in the region, Japan has never really entered the Sino-sphere like others. Japan see herself as equivalent to China, not a junior member in a China centric system. It was like that for most of the history, why would Japan suddenly change her mind and join a China-led system? Contrary to "China being x times stronger than Japan will make Japan willing to join a China circle", we have seen multiple times in the past that Japan refuse or even went to a fight to resist being incorporated into a Sino-centric system (not justifying that system) when China was 10 times stronger than Japan, Tang-Japan war in 660s, Yuan-Japan wars in 1274 and 1281 and Ming-Japan wars in 1590s. All these wars were fought when China was many times stronger and bigger in every aspects. All of these wars were about who is the overlord (mandate of heaven to rule the known world) which China assumed but Japan challenged.

My thought agrees more to Solarz that the best China can do is to keep a watchful eye on Japan, keep a good distance to Japan. In other words, a practical, pragmatic, polite, distant neighborhood except maybe economy. Also an alliance always have a target even not being stated, who will be the target of a Sino-Japan alliance? U.S.? Pragmatically I'd rather try not to make U.S. feel uneasy, I'd also trust U.S. more due to the fact of comparably better (or less bad) experience, she may be annoying every now and then, but she never went nuts to do something like the idiom says "snake swallowing elephant".

Japan's aspiration and self-view is that they are *special* and they are the most advanced country in Asia. Yet if China fulfills it's potential, that belief will come into stark contrast with reality.

And yes, over past history, Japan has tried to challenge China at various points, but normally been defeated and then in the aftermath acknowledged some form of Chinese suzerainty which then becomes the norm for a few centuries.

And China was willing to let Japan exist without being brought fully into the system, because Japan by itself didn't pose a threat or challenge to China, whilst demonstrating sufficient acknowledgment of the Chinese Emperor.

But the big differences today are that Japan is allied with an outside power, plus Shanghai is 1000km from the Japanese Home Islands. That used to be days in a boat, but is now only a 1hour flight for a fighter jet or cruise missile.

===

From an economic perspective, we can also see that since 2010, China and Japan have been steadily reducing trade and investment ties with each other. But whereas China companies can turn to domestic sources or non-Japanese alternatives - Japanese companies don't have any alternative to the Chinese market which accounts for one-third to one-half of global growth (depending on how you measure it and over what time period)

It also means Japanese companies face fiercer competition in SE Asia, India etc from companies that are able to leverage off the scale of China's demand and also production/R&D.

This is one of the main differences from the old days when economic wealth was based around local agriculture which was dependent on the farming population. Now it is about having hi-tech industries with the revenue to fund large R&D budgets, and these industries do face competition from other countries and can go bankrupt.

===

In the short to medium term, I would agree with you and Solarz that there's not much that China can do and to just keep Japanese relations civil enough.

But if China grows large enough in the distant future, I can see Japan being faced with the prospect of China steadily eroding the strength/size/wealth of the Japanese economy (simply as a result of declining Japan-China trade and investment ties due to bad relations) and also having a sufficiently large military to implement a military blockade of Japan if need be. These would be a very big stick and carrot that China could wield.

Also, note that one can have an economic alliance without a military one. From a Chinese point of view, that would still work as well.
 
Last edited:

Brumby

Major
This is good news for the region, and without interference from external parties...

--------
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

2016-06-15 08:17 | China Daily | Editor: Wang Fan

China and ASEAN members issue call for maritime practical cooperation

Top diplomats from China and the 10 ASEAN countries agreed on Tuesday that the South China Sea issue should be handled properly, reaffirming the need to "jointly ensure peace and stability" in the area.

The 11 countries also called for "maritime practical cooperation" and for early completion of the Code of Conduct in the South China Sea.

The China-ASEAN Special Foreign Ministers Meeting in Yuxi, Yunnan province, was the first of its kind in three years.

Briefing reporters after the meeting, Foreign Minister Wang Yi said the region "should not become another place of turbulence" as the world has already witnessed considerable chaos.

Wang said the closed-door meeting, which was first proposed by members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, was timely, significant and involved strategic communication.

He added that it had achieved its expected goals. China is committed to future meetings to build trust and dispel misunderstandings, he added.

On the sidelines of the convention, Wang embarked on a whirlwind series of meetings with his counterparts from ASEAN countries.

Vietnamese Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Pham Binh Minh told Wang on Monday that his country is ready to tackle maritime differences properly based on the consensus of the party leaders of China and Vietnam.

Wang said, "Both sides (China and ASEAN) should tackle differences properly and jointly safeguard regional peace and stability. They should cherish the hard-won peaceful and stable situation in this region."

Singaporean Foreign Minister Vivian Balakrishnan, who co-chaired the meeting with Wang on Tuesday, said it demonstrates that "ASEAN and China are even able to discuss difficult issues … frankly, constructively and openly".

Ruan Zongze, vice-president of the China Institute of International Studies, said the meeting shows that most ASEAN members will not be "hijacked" by the South China Sea issue and related problems.

China has played a proactive role in boosting integration and development within the ASEAN Community, and such a role has won support from the ASEAN members, Ruan said.

Wei Ling, a professor of Asian studies at China Foreign Affairs University, said China has provided firm support to ASEAN continuously, with this year marking the 25th anniversary of the China-ASEAN dialogue.

"The strategic mutual trust and cooperation between China and ASEAN is a cornerstone of the region's peace and development," Wei said.

What joint stance is this article talking about? What we have seen from news report is some form of official statement released and then retracted with no joint official statement released other then by some individual countries. The co-chair from Singapore flew home and did not even bother to turn up for the post conference news session.
 

Brumby

Major
Beijing’s Claims of South China Sea Support May Not Hold Water. China says 60 countries back stance on international tribunal; Only 8 have publicly stated support

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


BEIJING—The landlocked African kingdom of Lesotho doesn’t have an obvious stake in the South China Sea, but it is among some 60 countries that China says stand behind it as it faces potential censure by an international tribunal over its territorial claims there.

The sudden involvement of Lesotho and other small nations far from Asia is the product of
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
in the final countdown to a ruling in The Hague, which could come this month, on a case brought against China by the Philippines.

The response has been less enthusiastic than China suggests, however: Only eight countries have publicly stated their support for its right to
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
.

They are Afghanistan, Gambia, Kenya, Niger, Sudan, Togo, Vanuatu and Lesotho, according to public statements reviewed separately by The Wall Street Journal and the Center for Strategic and International Studies, or CSIS, in Washington.

Five countries on China’s list have outright denied backing Beijing, including two members of the European Union.

OJ-AL152_CSUPPO_9U_20160616232123.jpg
ENLARGE
For a country that has
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
for “internationalizing” the dispute, the drive suggests growing concern in Beijing that the ruling, which can only be enforced through international pressure, could leave it isolated.

The mixed results also show the limits of China’s clout, even among nations hungry for its money.

“This looks more like a coalition of the equivocal, or the simply unaware,” said Euan Graham, an expert on the South China Sea at the Lowy Institute in Sydney.

China says it doesn’t acknowledge the tribunal’s jurisdiction and won’t abide by the ruling on the case brought by the Philippines—one of five governments whose claims in the South China Sea overlap with Beijing’s.

The U.S. and its allies—including the Group of Seven nations—have closed ranks in the past month to urge Beijing to respect the verdict, with U.S. Defense Secretary Ash Carter warning that
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


China has responded by accusing the U.S. of “hegemony,” denouncing the tribunal in editorials in local and foreign media, and publicly thanking dozens of nations it says are backing Beijing.

It hasn’t published an official list, but the Foreign Ministry put the total at more than 40 nations last month and state media put it at almost 60 this week.

“Compared to seven or eight countries, this number speaks volumes,” Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Lu Kang said Tuesday.

He blamed countries outside the region for broadening the dispute.
“That’s why some countries that care about us and are friendly to us want to understand the real situation,” said Mr. Lu. “After understanding the merits of the issue, they decided to take a stand and uphold justice.”

The eight nations that explicitly back China have all echoed its arguments that Beijing has the right to choose its own method of dispute resolution, according to their public statements.

One, the West African nation of Gambia, has gone as far as to endorse Beijing’s sovereignty claims after switching diplomatic ties to China from Taiwan in March.
China also says many Arab states expressed their support in a “Doha Declaration” at a meeting in Qatar last month. But that declaration hasn’t been made public and neither Qatari nor Chinese officials were able to provide a copy.

One Chinese official said it was still being translated.

Russia, the only major power on China’s list, agrees the dispute shouldn’t be internationalized, but hasn’t explicitly backed Beijing on the tribunal—a position that reflects its close defense ties with Vietnam, one of China’s rivals in the South China Sea.

Greg Poling of the CSIS Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative said many countries appeared to have chosen not to publicly contradict China. “Ultimately, China’s ability to spin a compelling counternarrative and get other nations to buy into it will determine how much pressure it faces,” he said.
China’s Foreign Ministry didn’t respond to a request for comment on the countries that have yet to echo Chinese statements or that deny backing Beijing.

They include Poland, a member of the EU, which as a bloc has backed the arbitration process.

Polish officials were taken aback in April when Beijing suddenly issued a statement that hadn’t been approved by both sides following a meeting between their foreign ministers.

It said Poland supported China’s policy of resolving the dispute “through dialogues and consultations,” making no mention of arbitration.
The statement “did not accurately reflect Poland’s position on the issue of the South China Sea, which has been communicated to the Chinese side,” Poland’s Foreign Ministry said. “That position remains unchanged and is in line with the entire EU’s policies.”

Slovenia, another EU member, and the Balkan state of Bosnia and Herzegovina, also denied official Chinese statements that they backed Beijing on the arbitration.

Most surprising, perhaps, is that China has had trouble winning the support of some smaller nations to which it provides large amounts of aid and investment.

In April, Fiji denied a Chinese official media report that it stood by Beijing on the South China Sea. And when China announced in April an “important consensus” with Laos, Cambodia and Brunei on the South China Sea, those three countries stayed mum. Officials from Laos and Brunei didn’t respond to requests for comment. A Cambodian government spokesman denied his country had reached an agreement with China. “We haven’t changed our position,” he said.
 

siegecrossbow

General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


应越南国防部请求,中国海军于17日派出四艘舰艇前往北部湾海域,协助搜救失事的越南一架空军飞机和一架海警飞机,以及机组人员。目前相关搜救工作正在进行中。

背景资料:

据路透社14日报道,越南一架俄罗斯制苏-30战机当天上午在南海上空失踪。战机从越南清化省寿春机场起飞进行海上训练,在义安省上空和雷达失去联络。战机上有两名富有经验的飞行员。越南军方称,已组织各方力量寻找,失踪原因尚不清楚。

据越通社报道,6月15日早上5时许,河静省一艘渔船已发现并成功营救苏-30战机上的阮友强少校。6月16日12时30分,越南人民军防空-空军军种旗下918团CaSa-212飞机(编号为8983)在越南海防市白龙尾海域搜寻6月14日失踪的苏-30MK2歼击机飞行员陈光凯上校时失踪,机上载有9人。CaSa-212飞机失踪后,越南国防部已立即开展搜寻行动。目前,海警力量和各救援力量已找到CaSa-212飞机的一些残片和物品。
应越南要求,中国派出4艘军舰搜救越失事飞机|搜救|中国军队_凤凰财

To summarize, China sent four naval warships to assist Vietnam's search and rescue efforts for the Su-30 and CaSa-212 pilots and crew.
 

taxiya

Brigadier
Registered Member
Appreciate your reply, since it is beginning to carry away from SCS matter, please allow me to make a final nagging before I shut up. :p I agree with the rest of your reply without saying except the following TWO points.

Japan's aspiration and self-view is that they are *special* and they are the most advanced country in Asia. Yet if China fulfills it's potential, that belief will come into stark contrast with reality.
...

Not really disagreeing, but to clarify that it was not always true, the changing point was late 1800.

Japan for most of her history see herself as a heir of sinic culture, not special but one of many before late 1800s. This is clearly shown by her adoption of the Chinese concept of Hua (华) and Yi (夷). While Chinese, Korean and Japanese are regarded as Hua in Japan, the others are Yi.

Being special is something newly created after Japan's Meiji reformation in the late 1800s. The reformation was focused on westernization (脱亚入欧/leave Asia and enter Europe). It was to emulate the European Colonial powers. It was the success of the reformation and the subsequent defeat of Qing (China) and Russia that made Japan to view herself as special, the only morden power from outside of Europe, the only non-European morden power, not ordinary Asian, not an European either.

The aspiration was always there from day one irrespective of self view (special or not), it was the aspiration of receiving the mandate of heaven (rule the world) in the Chinese way, it changed to rule the world in the Western model.

...
And China was willing to let Japan exist without being brought fully into the system, because Japan by itself didn't pose a threat or challenge to China, whilst demonstrating sufficient acknowledgment of the Chinese Emperor.
...
I'd rather say that China was not so motivated to bring in Japan fully. After all, China's past approach was always passive. It is something like "If you recognize my siniorship, you will get the benefit of trading and security, If you don't, then stay away, but I am not interested in you". It was more of a carrot only policy than conquest because the surrounding countries have nothing to offer that China don't already have. When China did force some neighbors into the system, the people on the Mongolian steps to name a few, it was only because they posted a security threat in the first place, the nomad raid. While Japan did not post such threat for most of her history except those wars I mentioned before, but they are very short and less harmful than all others.

On the contrary Japan did not demonstrate any acknowledgement of the overlordship or siniorship of Chinese Emperor. Japan's head of state was changed from King (ヤマト大王/大君) to Emperor (tennō) between 539AD and 673AD. That was the first major Sino-Japan interaction during the Tang dynasty. It is after the defeat of Japan by Tang. It perfectly demonstrated the aspiration of being equal to Tang China, and that aspiration lasts till today.

...
Also, note that one can have an economic alliance without a military one. From a Chinese point of view, that would still work as well.
...
That is a good point. And I see it with a rather high chance in the near future. It was actually on its way (China, Korea and Japan FTA) before the turn of event (ECS dispute) in 2010.
 

AndrewS

Brigadier
Registered Member
An FTA is not the same as an economic alliance.

An economic alliance between China and Japan would be a strategic thing - which is incompatible with Japan with having a strategic military alliance with the USA.



===


Let's look to the economic effects of Japan resisting Chinese influence and clinging to the US alliance, and take the automobile industry as an example because it is a critical part of the Japanese economy and for Japan's exports..

In the aftermath of the Senkaku/Diaoyu disputes, Japanese auto companies have and are suffering in the Chinese market.

Furthermore, the automobile industry is facing 3 disruptive technologies at the same time now (electric cars + driverless cars + connected cars)

It is generally acknowledged that China will lead the way in these car technologies. Amongst the reasons are:

1. The sheer size of the Chinese car market which is larger than USA+Japan combined.
2. In the face of China's horrendous road safety, greater political will to make driverless cars legal as they are more efficient and reduce accidents.
3. In the face of China's pollution problems, greater government support in terms of subsidies for clean cars which will also help to foster a domestic car industry that can expand globally
4. The structure of Chinese cities which are densely populated with few parking spaces which are expensive.
5. China's companies which have proven that they are already world-class eg. Didi in taxis, Baidu in AI and Maps, BYD in lithium automotive batteries, etc

If Japanese auto companies are cut out of the Chinese market, it is Chinese companies along with Hyundai/Volkswagen/GM/etc that will benefit and squeeze out Japanese car companies as they use their China base to expand globally and take car sales from those Japanese companies.

So the Chinese, American, European and Korean car companies would most certainly be pleased to see their Japanese competitors depart from the Chinese market.

And the other thing to note is that driverless cars could result in car sales crashing as it becomes way cheaper and more convenient to order a taxi than own a car. I see estimates of car sales reducing by 3x if this happens, so we could see Japan's car industry shrink drastically.

From a strategic perspective, this reduction of Japan's industry/wealth will make it less able to able to resist or challenge China in the ECS and SCS.

It's a good example of China's economy exerting soft power, as this sort of analysis applies to most industries/countries in the world, to a lesser or greater degree.

We see the USA do the same sort of thing (access to its economy and control of the USD) to attract or punish places like Cuba/Iran/Burma/etc.
 

antiterror13

Brigadier
This is extremely good news for both countries ... helping each other
#China deploys ships to help Vietnam find missing coastguard plane#
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


the news is from Reuters, so I would expect samuraiblue would believe it :eek:
 
Top