China's SCS Strategy Thread

Brumby

Major
Beijing Offers to Negotiate in South China Sea Dispute

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


BEIJING—China sought to refocus a dispute over the South China Sea on sovereignty over land, rather than historic rights to surrounding waters, after an unfavorable ruling by an international tribunal.

In a detailed response to the verdict in a landmark case brought by the Philippines, China’s cabinet issued a policy paper describing all land features in the area as its “inherent territory” and accusing Manila of illegally occupying some of them.

China Vice Foreign Minister Liu Zhenmin, who introduced the paper, also stepped up a barrage of official Chinese invective against the tribunal, accusing its five arbitrators of being biased, ignorant of Asian culture, and working for the Philippine government.

But Mr. Liu added that China remained committed to negotiations with the new Philippine president, Rodrigo Duterte, and other governments with competing claims.

Beijing’s pairing of harsh rhetoric with offers of talks suggested that while still determined not to comply with the ruling and sensitive to the demands of a nationalistic public, it was wary of escalating a dispute that has already driven some of its neighbors to forge closer defense ties with the U.S.

There was no immediate response to China’s statements Wednesday from Manila or the Permanent Court of Arbitration. The court's tribunal on Tuesday rejected China’s claim to waters within a nine-dash line that Beijing depicts on maps as extending almost to Malaysian Borneo, and to exclusive economic rights around the Spratly Islands.

China has vowed not to comply with the ruling.

However, there were some signs in the new policy paper that China was seeking to clarify its legal claims, possibly to lay the ground for negotiations with the Philippines and other governments.

“The good news is that China is moving towards clarification and reduction of ambiguity,” said Yanmei Xie, senior China analyst at the International Crisis Group. “The bad news is that clarification could also bring calcification of China’s position.”

The policy paper spelled out that China claimed sovereignty over all of the Spratlys, the Paracel Islands and two other clusters of islands, rocks and reefs in the South China Sea.

Those claims are broadly compatible with the treaty on which the tribunal was based—the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea, or Unclos—as it doesn’t determine sovereignty over land, only rights in surrounding waters.

“[President]
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
seems to be doubling down on the island sovereignty claim,” said Andrew Chubb, an expert on China’s maritime disputes at the University of Western Australia. “By emphasizing that they are not backing down on sovereignty, it gives them some cover to quietly back away from some of the other implied claims” that would have been incompatible with Unclos.
Still, vague language in the policy paper raised fresh questions about China’s claims.

The paper made no mention of the nine-dash line but said all “the South China Sea islands” China claims have maritime rights allowed by Unclos—including 12-nautical-mile territorial seas and an exclusive economic zone.

However, it defined “the South China Sea islands” as including uninhabited reefs and rocks that don’t qualify for an EEZ under Unclos. It was also unclear whether that meant China claims one all-encompassing EEZ, which would be hard to justify under Unclos.

“In addition, China has historic rights in the South China Sea,” the paper added, without defining those rights. Unclos allows countries to claim “traditional fishing rights” in others’ territorial waters.
It seems to be a repackaging of the claims by removing the nine dash line reference. In marketing terms, the product hasn't changed just the packaging.
 

Blackstone

Brigadier
Why would China give up 9DL? China pursued the 9DL not because it was founded on some reasoning, it was simply by fiat.
If China's aim is to establish its own version of the Monroe Doctrine, then it needs to economically, militarily and politically dominate the SCS, physical ownership of the water outside 0.5/3/12 mi isn't necessary. Also, the 9DL isn't legit under any scheme, not even cherry-picked ones, because no nation has ever claimed vast swath of ocean as sovereign territory. Ergo, China is better off pretending to be magnanimous and make a public show of ditching 9DL to "reduce tension."

It isn't a matter of need but what China thinks it can get away with. If I was China, I would get on with it immediately. Based on Obama's track record, nothing will happen from the US side other than his usual teleprompter speech.
I agree with your statement, and China is indeed getting on with it by consolidating what it has already. No need to initiate provocative actions.

Common Stoney you are the big power take no prisoner believer. Big power just do what they like - damn the rest of the world. If they protest give them some nukes for breakfast - that seems to be the story line in the past 24 hours.
I believe nations great and small pursue their own interests above other nations, and great powers do it with gusto. That's the real world we live in, and I call them as I see them. However, it doesn't mean my personal believe is Bismark-type realpolitik. It isn't.

As for great powers pursuing their national interests, lighter footprints to get the job done is better than "nukes for breakfest," for no better reasons than economy of force and smaller messes to clean up.
 

Zetageist

Junior Member
I have never heard of this argument. Is this true?

Beijing gave up South China Sea rights after signing UN treaty, Chuck Hagel says

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


China, however, said its historic rights predated the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and were not at odds with the provisions of the treaty , to which both countries were signatories.

But the East Asian giant relinquished those rights when it signed the UNCLOS, former U.S. Secretary of Defense,
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
said.

"(It) explicitly states in that treaty and when you sign that treaty, you would and do relinquish all previous historical rights to any contested territory. So China essentially put itself in this position to be part of whatever the international tribunal comes down with," Hagel told CNBC's "
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
".
 
according to BreakingDefense.com:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

After
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
in the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, Beijing reacted with its characteristically
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
. The official Chinese perspective inverts Washington’s worldview so thoroughly it can be hard for Americans to understand: International rules are rigged, US military presence is destabilizing, China rightfully owns the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
and is being generous to let its lesser neighbors use it at all.

When China’s ambassador to the US,
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, says benignly that “we are not trying to take back the islands and reefs that have been illegally occupied by others,” he’s referring to almost everything claimed by every other country in the region.

Amb. Cui laid out Beijing’s point of view beautifully yesterday afternoon, speaking (in English) just hours after the UN ruling in an unscheduled appearance at a
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
. We asked some leading experts to help us parse his remarks.

“This case was initiated not out of good will or good faith,” Cui said of the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
appeal to the UN tribunal. “it is a clear attempt to use a legal instrument for political purposes.” What’s more, Cui said, the Philippines’ legal case was cynically coordinated with America’s “so-called pivoting to Asia,” which manifested in “
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, strategic bombers,
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
and many others…. This is an outright manifestation of ‘might is right.’”

There’s an obvious irony here. From Washington’s perspective, it’s China and Russia that practice “lawfare,” using international bodies to delay or obfuscate while their military forces seize objectives in “
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
” operations short of war, be it a disputed reef in the South China Sea or the entire Crimean Peninsula.

“Others are accusing China of a ‘might makes right’ approach,” said CSIS China scholar
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
. “The Chinese consistently portray themselves as being generous and restrained, always willing to lend a hand to their tiny neighbors. It’s hard to believe they really see it that way. Let’s recall Yang Jiechi in 2010 telling the ARF (ASEAN Regional Forum) that ‘we are the big country, and you are all small countries.’”

Yet when the US Navy steams into view, the Chinese feel like a “small country” themselves.

The Fundamental Paradox

There’s
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
at the heart of modern Chinese nationalism that outside observers have to understand.

On the one hand, Chinese patriots remember millennia in which the “Middle Kingdom” dominated East Asia, with neighboring nations from Korea to Vietnam paying tribute or at least lip service to the Emperor. Even in 1949, when it was struggling to protect its own capital from Mao’s advancing Communists, the Chinese Nationalist government of Chiang Kai-shek issued a map with the now-infamous “Nine-Dash Line” claiming virtually all the South China Sea. It’s this history that Amb. Cui invokes when he declares “China has long-standing sovereignty of the islands and reefs in the South China Sea, and this sovereignty had never been challenged until the late 1970s.”

On the other hand, the Chinese also remember the bitter “Century of Humiliation” which started with the Opium War, when the Royal Navy forced China, at gunpoint, to import a lethally addictive drug. Western powers extracted all kinds of concessions using superior military power and flimsy legal pretexts. The experience which didn’t predispose modern China to trust either a UN tribunal or the US Navy.

“Such an assembly of aircraft carriers, airplanes, sophisticated weapons could pose a real threat to the freedom of navigation of commercial and civilian vessels,” said Cui. “Such a concentration of firepower, anywhere in the word, would be a source of concern.”

“The Chinese bear acute and deeply felt memories…of the humiliation and weakness suffered at the hands of invasive Western powers,” said
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
of the Center for Strategic & Budgetary Assessments. “British (and later Western) sea power fundamentally changed China, and not for the better.”

America came late to the intervention party, but US Marines joined the multinational march on Peking in 1900. In 1950 General Douglas MacArthur led an American army north towards the Yalu and advocated an invasion of Communist China, one beginning with atomic bombs. Even without nukes, American firepower killed an estimated quarter-million Chinese “volunteers” in Korea. As late as 1996, American warships sailed between mainland China and Taiwan when Beijing tried to intimidate what it considered a wayward province.

Scarred by such unpleasant encounters with US and European forces, said Haynes, “the Chinese are loath to admit that Western sea power has historically enabled the growth and stability of the global economy by ensuring the free-flow of the 95 percent of the world’s trade” — free trade which has enabled China’s rapid rise.

Stability, Chinese Style

In Beijing’s eyes, US forces that enter Chinese-claimed airspace or waters to demonstrate “
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
” are dangerous aggression. “Intensified military activities so close to Chinese islands and reefs, or even entering the waters, the neighboring waters of the islands and reefs, these activities certainly have the risk of leading to some conflict,” said Cui.

But any US military presence is automatically suspect. For Southeast Asian countries that welcome the Americans, Cui warned, “please go to countries like Iraq, Libya, and Syria, and ask the people there” what US intervention has brought: “Be careful what you wish, you might actually get it.”

“Tensions started to rise about five or six years ago, about the same time when you began to hear about the so-called pivoting to Asia,” Cui said ominiously. “Such an exercise of so called pivoting have not brought us a more stabilized Asia… It has made conflict and dispute such a prominent issue on the regional agenda.”

Until the US showed up, China and its Southeast Asian neighbors got along as “a community of common destiny,” Cui argued. (
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, which fought several wars and skirmishes with China since 1973, might disagree). Only in the 1970s was Chinese suzerainty “challenged,” Cui said, and even then the disputes were manageable and regional relationships friendly until a few years ago, when the US pivot began.

China’s island-building is not to blame, Cui insisted. “Some might put the blame on China, on China’s recent reclamation activities, but the fact is, China is the last country to do so.”

It is true that other countries reclaimed small areas of land before China did, Glaser said, but China did it much faster and on a vastly larger scale
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
for adding very few new forces to those that have been in the Pacific since the end of the Korean War.

“The only reason tensions may not have been rising before (the pivot) that is China was bullying and coercing its neighbors in the region without much pushback,” said CSBA’s
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
. “When the U.S. made clear its intent to stay focused on the region, China intensified its efforts in response and its neighbors began to feel more confident in opposing Chinese pressure.”

...

... etc. (size-limit reached); goes on in the source:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

tidalwave

Senior Member
Registered Member
Yo solarz! Here's latest
Randy Forbes, Anders Corr calling out to enforce the rules on China. First its economic sanction, then direct military actions to take out PLAN in subi and mischievous!
Since you don't like nuke upgrade, you don't like collaboration with ISIS
Then how you gonna defend that??
 
USNI News:
Experts Say China’s Path After South China Sea Ruling Unclear
China has made clear that it refuses to accept an international arbitration panel’s ruling against its territorial claims in the South China Sea, but whether that stance leads to increased military tensions between Beijing and the United States or opens the door for broader negotiations is an open question.

Vice Adm. Yoji Koda, a retired commander-in-chief of Japan’s Self-Defense Fleet, said in answer to a question that Tuesday’s
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
of the Law of the Sea, presents Washington and Tokyo with a “fait accompli.”

Militarily, he told an audience at the Center for the Strategic and International Studies, a Washington, D.C., think-tank, if Beijing goes ahead with building up Scarborough Shoal, it “could be a game changer.”

What he was referring to at the Wednesday event was the creation of a triangle of military facilities on artificial islands allowing China to project power to its claimed “nine-dash line,” from its coastal mainland.

“I’m not saying go to war today,” but “you have to be prepared.”

The panel has no enforcement powers.

Julia Xue, senior fellow in the international law program at the Royal Institute of International Affairs, viewed the ruling and China’s reaction as “temporarily increasing tensions”
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, but it also “causes states to think forward.” She mentioned the statement by China’s foreign ministry saying it was open to negotiations,
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
.

China’s view of itself as a maritime power, which began in the 1970s and accelerated over the past five to six years, has been “a seascape change” for its leadership’s thinking about its role in the world. At the same time as it became a rising maritime nation, Beijing has also expanded its economic ties inland with the building of a “new Silk Road” to the West and the creation of an investment bank for Asian nations, she said.

“We have to sit down and discuss” the issues that the ruling raises, Xue said, a process that is “embedded in Asian culture.”

Brian Andrews, principal in the Asia Group, said, there is a misconception that “the United States views [the South China sea dispute] as a zero-sum game. The U.S. is up; China is down.” There is a history of negotiations between the two countries over a number of economic and diplomatic concerns, as well as between other countries in the region over divisive issues. Among the regional talks he cited were: Philippines and Vietnam over territory and mineral exploration and Japan and Korea over “comfort women”—women taken forcibly into prostitution during World War II.

Looking at the United States’ rebalancing to the Asia-Pacific, Koda said it has “not [been] successful in the short term.” As treaty partners, Tokyo and Washington “need to develop new tactics,” particularly in light of the ruling coming from the Hague.

“The U.S. presence is a stabilizing element in the region, from the Indian ocean to the Pacific. The South China Sea sits in the middle” of that area.

Elina Noor, director for foreign policy and security studies at Malaysia’s Institute of Strategic and International Studies, said for the coastal countries in Southeast Asia, particularly, there are questions of sovereignty and territorial integrity when it comes to the South China Sea. “There are also resources” from fisheries to energy that countries such as hers rely on. She added that for Malaysia those waters also divide the country into two parts—the mainland and a large section of Borneo, an island, three hours away from the capital Kuala Lampur.

The East China Sea, although still tense in Japan and China’s long-running dispute over the Senkaku Islands, which Tokyo occupies, is stable, Koda said. He attributed relative quiet to the strong Japanese coast guard presence, being backed up by the Maritime Self-Defense Force and the U.S. Pacific Fleet if need be.

The situation in that potential flashpoint should be “fairly stable for the foreseeable future” of five to seven years.
source:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
sorry if I'm late here, anyway China Says It Could Declare Air Zone over South China Sea
China warned other countries Wednesday against threatening its security in the South China Sea after an international tribunal handed the Philippines a victory by
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
.

Vice Foreign Minister Liu Zhenmin said Beijing could declare an air defense identification zone over the waters if it felt threatened, a move that would sharply escalate tensions. But Beijing also extended an olive branch to the new Philippine government, saying the Southeast Asian nation would benefit from cooperating with China.

The Philippines, under a U.N. treaty governing the seas, had sought arbitration in 2013 on several issues related to its long-running territorial disputes with China. In its ruling Tuesday, the tribunal found China's far-reaching claims to the South China Sea had no legal basis and that Beijing had violated the Philippines' maritime rights by building up artificial islands and disrupting fishing and oil exploration.

While introducing a policy paper in response to the ruling, Liu said the islands in the South China Sea were China's "inherent territory" and blamed the Philippines for stirring up trouble.

"If our security is being threatened, of course we have the right to demarcate a zone. This would depend on our overall assessment," Liu said in a briefing. "We hope that other countries will not take this opportunity to threaten China and work with China to protect the peace and stability of the South China Sea, and not let it become the origin of a war."

In 2013, China set up an air defense identification zone over disputed islands in the East China Sea, requiring all aircraft entering the area to notify Chinese authorities or be subjected to "emergency military measures" if they disobey orders from Beijing. The U.S. and others refuse to recognize the zone.

While blaming the previous Philippine government for complicating the dispute by seeking arbitration, Liu said China remains committed to negotiations with the Philippines and noted new Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte's positive remarks on the issue.

"After the storm of this arbitration has passed, and the sky has cleared, we hope this day (of negotiations) will come quickly, but whether it can come, we still have to wait," Liu said, adding that China believed that cooperation would also bring Filipinos "tangible benefits."

Duterte has not directly responded to China's overtures. He is navigating a tightrope in which he wants to revive relations with Beijing while being seen as defending the major victory the country has won through arbitration.

Former Philippine President Benigno Aquino III, who initiated the case, said the ruling brought clarity that "now establishes better conditions that enable countries to engage each other, bearing in mind their duties and rights within a context that espouses equality and amity."

Cooperation, however, would remain elusive if conflicts over claims persist, he said.

Six regional governments have overlapping claims in the South China Sea, waters that are rich in fishing stocks and potential energy resources and where an estimated $5 trillion in global trade passes each year.

Beijing says vast areas of the South China Sea have been Chinese territory since ancient times and demarcated its modern claims with the so-called nine-dash line, a map that was submitted under the U.N. treaty. The tribunal said any historical resource rights were wiped out if they were incompatible with exclusive economic zones established under the treaty, which both countries have signed.
source is Military.com:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
Top