China's SCS Strategy Thread

[Blackstone]

RAND's study is just that, an academic white paper for discussion and debates. If readers take anything from the study, it should be there are many opportunities and pitfalls in the next few decades that must be carefully managed by leaders with foresight, because the two great powers could hurt each other in so many different ways. Details of how many ships, aircrafts, and bases could be destroyed isn't as important as such events can happen if leaders in both camps don't get their act together.

In the SCS, it's clear there's not a whole lot US can do to force China out of its holdings. It's also clear China can't stop US FONOPs. So, it makes a lot of sense to work out compromises both sides can accept. To me, addressing a few hot button issues can improve conditions for everyone almost overnight, and they include;

• US- state clearly and unequivocally CCP is legit and while US like to see democratic governance, it understands that's for the Chinese to create and manage for themselves. Until then, US accepts the CCP and will stop undermining its legitimacy, by words and by deeds.
• US- reduce actions to sustain its hegemony that China strongly objects to
• US- accept China as a joint and equal partner in managing Asian affairs
• US- include China and support one-Asia economic development with TPP, RCEP, OBOR, et al
• US- accommodate China's interests in IMF, World Bank, and Asia Dev. Bank as a full partner
• China- embrace strong US presence in Asia
• China- reduce regional concerns with its increasingly powerful military by accepting their "hedge" with US security forces
• China- invite US as full and equal partner in RCEP and OBOR
• China- accept Japan as great power and support normalizing the country militarily
• China- unilaterally forgive 1895-1945 and stop bringing it up in public ways. Educate the young is necessary, but as information and history only. Trust the Japanese people themselves to deal with the rights and wrongs of their historical actions; good people will do the right thing if left to their own conscience. It's time to stop the hate/hurt and move on
• China- support Japan (and India) as permanent members of UNSC

It'll be hard to do some or even most of the above, but the alternative can lead to really dark places. We owe future generations to at least try.

 

[supercat]

My 2 cents on some countries that called China to respect the kangaroo court decision:-
- Australia - ignored a ruling that favored East Timor,
- Japan - ignored the ruling on whale fishing.
- U.S. - ignored many rulings that were not in its favor.

At the end of the day, every country looks after its interests and it will ignore unfavorable rulings if it can.

In the case of Nicaragua vs U.S., the judgement against the U.S. was issued by the ICJ (International Court of Justice), a court of law, and an UN agency. Unlike an arbitration case, you cannot opt out of a lawsuit. Therefore, also the U.S. refused to participate in the legal proceedings, the judgement was still legally binding for the U.S. This is totally different from the South China Sea (SCS) arbitration case, where China opted out of the arbitration clause of the UNCLOS under article 298 as early as in 2006. Yet the U.S. has the audacity to claim that the ruling by the PCA, a fee-for-service, for profit organization which has nothing to do with the UN, is legally binding for China.

Note that the fact that the Philippines did not sue China on a court of law is a sure sign that China's claims do not violate any international law.

 

[Blackstone]

In the case of Nicaragua vs U.S., the judgement against the U.S. was issued by the ICJ (International Court of Justice), a court of law, and an UN agency. Unlike an arbitration case, you cannot opt out of a lawsuit. Therefore, also the U.S. refused to participate in the legal proceedings, the judgement was still legally binding for the U.S. This is totally different from the South China Sea (SCS) arbitration case, where China opted out of the arbitration clause of the UNCLOS under article 298 as early as in 2006. Yet the U.S. has the audacity to claim the ruling by the PCA, a fee-for-service, for profit organization which has nothing to do with the UN, is legally binding for China.

Note that the fact that the Philippines did not sue China on a court of law is a sure sign that China's claims do not violate any international law.

Such actions are explainable as "great power prerogative." That's why the whole "rule-based international order" argument was doomed from the start, and resulted in only 6 nations joining US official statement for China to observe international rules and obey PCA ruling.

 

[Insignius]

• US- state clearly and unequivocally CCP is legit and while US like to see democratic governance, it understands that's for the Chinese to create and manage for themselves. Until then, US accepts the CCP and will stop undermining its legitimacy, by words and by deeds.
• US- reduce actions to sustain its hegemony that China strongly objects to
• US- accept China as a joint and equal partner in managing Asian affairs
• US- include China and support one-Asia economic development with TPP, RCEP, OBOR, et al
• US- accommodate China's interests in IMF, World Bank, and Asia Dev. Bank as a full partner
• China- embrace strong US presence in Asia
• China- reduce regional concerns with its increasingly powerful military by accepting their "hedge" with US security forces
• China- invite US as full and equal partner in RCEP and OBOR
• China- accept Japan as great power and support normalizing the country militarily
• China- unilaterally forgive 1895-1945 and stop bringing it up in public ways. Educate the young is necessary, but as information and history only. Trust the Japanese people themselves to deal with the rights and wrongs of their historical actions; good people will do the right thing if left to their own conscience. It's time to stop the hate/hurt and move on
• China- support Japan (and India) as permanent members of UNSC

So, you basically say that all the US has to do is to accept the PRC's right to exist as a normal and sovereign country according to the really really ancient rules of international law set since the Peace of Westphalia 1648, while in exchange China has to embrace US military containment, tolerating that japanese revisionists twist their attempted genocide of the Chinese people into some heroic tale of containing communism or something, and even supporting decidely anti-Chinese countries into positions of power from where they can further their interest into undermining Chinese interests?

Wow. That's some Feudalist-like stuff here. Kinda like: "Hand me your livestock, give me your wife to rape and sell me your children and their eventual off-spring into slavery, and in exchange I will acknowledge your right to exist and I will refrain from trying to kill you in words and deeds".

That the US has maintained a quasi-feudal global system (with regional lieutenants/vassals as their faithful executioners that carry out their will and keep challengers at bay) is well known. But this sort of "I-let-you-live-and-you-give-me-everything-in-exchange-and-be-grateful-for-my-mercy"-kinda thing shows that far too obviously.

Even though it is just your opinion, I fear that this sort of "mercy" is indeed the upper limit of understanding that China and the US can ever achieve, especially when one side is ruled by foaming NeoCon crusaders who love to sentence entire nations to misery and death on basis of their different political system.

 

[Blackstone]

So, you basically say that all the US has to do is to accept the PRC's right to exist as a normal and sovereign country according to the really really ancient rules of international law set since the Peace of Westphalia 1648, while in exchange China has to embrace US military containment, tolerating that japanese revisionists twist their attempted genocide of the Chinese people into some heroic tale of containing communism or something, and even supporting decidely anti-Chinese countries into positions of power from where they can further their interest into undermining Chinese interests?

Wow. That's some Feudalist-like stuff here. Kinda like: "Hand me your livestock, give me your wife to rape and sell me your children and their eventual off-spring into slavery, and in exchange I will acknowledge your right to exist and I will refrain from trying to kill you in words and deeds".

That the US has maintained a quasi-feudal global system (with regional lieutenants/vassals as their faithful executioners that carry out their will and keep challengers at bay) is well known. But this sort of "I-let-you-live-and-you-give-me-everything-in-exchange-and-be-grateful-for-my-mercy"-kinda thing shows that far too obviously.

Even though it is just your opinion, I fear that this sort of "mercy" is indeed the upper limit of understanding that China and the US can ever achieve, especially when one side is ruled by foaming NeoCon crusaders who love to sentence entire nations to misery and death on basis of their different political system.

There's absolutely no reason to argue with such a thought process, so we'll just have to agree to disagree.

 

[Ultra]

RAND's study is just that, an academic white paper for discussion and debates. If readers take anything from the study, it should be there are many opportunities and pitfalls in the next few decades that must be carefully managed by leaders with foresight, because the two great powers could hurt each other in so many different ways. Details of how many ships, aircrafts, and bases could be destroyed isn't as important as such events can happen if leaders in both camps don't get their act together.

In the SCS, it's clear there's not a whole lot US can do to force China out of its holdings. It's also clear China can't stop US FONOPs. So, it makes a lot of sense to work out compromises both sides can accept. To me, addressing a few hot button issues can improve conditions for everyone almost overnight, and they include;

• US- state clearly and unequivocally CCP is legit and while US like to see democratic governance, it understands that's for the Chinese to create and manage for themselves. Until then, US accepts the CCP and will stop undermining its legitimacy, by words and by deeds.
• US- reduce actions to sustain its hegemony that China strongly objects to
• US- accept China as a joint and equal partner in managing Asian affairs
• US- include China and support one-Asia economic development with TPP, RCEP, OBOR, et al
• US- accommodate China's interests in IMF, World Bank, and Asia Dev. Bank as a full partner
• China- embrace strong US presence in Asia
• China- reduce regional concerns with its increasingly powerful military by accepting their "hedge" with US security forces
• China- invite US as full and equal partner in RCEP and OBOR
• China- accept Japan as great power and support normalizing the country militarily
• China- unilaterally forgive 1895-1945 and stop bringing it up in public ways. Educate the young is necessary, but as information and history only. Trust the Japanese people themselves to deal with the rights and wrongs of their historical actions; good people will do the right thing if left to their own conscience. It's time to stop the hate/hurt and move on
• China- support Japan (and India) as permanent members of UNSC

It'll be hard to do some or even most of the above, but the alternative can lead to really dark places. We owe future generations to at least try.

That's all great and the RIGHT thing to do, but the other side like US and Japan will NEVER do the right thing. US and Japan will NEVER reciprocate on equal term. Instead, they will exploit it.

USA is like the mafia don, fearful of anyone challenge their dominance regardless if it is right or wrong. It doesn't matter. ANYONE or everyone will have to submit to USA. Watch the Sopranos or the Godfather, it is how US operate its foreign affairs.

China can do the right thing, but it won't change a single thing - USA will just exploit China's willingness to cooperate. China will end up wose than the Russians back in 90s if they do.

 

[Ultra]

@lucretius



In a prolonged conflict, China loses if the battle realm is confined to Air and Sea.

But in a land conflict in Korea, yes, the worse case is a quagmire and war of attrition eg. the US runs out of soldiers first. Hence the US-China war ends up as a draw instead of a loss.

But the best case in a Korean land conflict is that China wins and captures an entire US army division.

South Korea becomes an unfortunate casualty, which is why I advocate that South Korea needs to terminate the US alliance and remove all US troops, before any such scenario occurs.

South Korean will never terminate its alliance with US, even if they will eventually be the victim of it. The more I see the more I am convinced the international relation is like a prison excercise yard. There is no right or wrong, just who has the power. US is the leader of a gang in Cell Block A occupying this corner of the jail courtyard, South Korea is its underling under its protection. China is the new up-and-coming gang boss from Cell Block C occupying the other corner of the courtyard. US doesn't like China one bit because it is challenging its dominance in jail. So US has setup a bunch of its underlings ready to "shiv" China any chance it gets, Of course China ain't no pushover either it has his own stash of shivs. South Korea may want to switch side but he knows if he switch side he will get shiv from USA's buddies and there is no guarantee China will protect South Korea if it switch side. South Korea may even become alone without affiliation and that's dangerous in a prison. So South Korea will do what he has to - stick with the US even if he doesn't like it.


And this is what happen if you don't submit to USA.

And that's the sad state of the world we live in.

We are in the 21st century, but we still treat each other like the prisoners in a prison courtyard. Nothing has change in the past few thousand years of history, except we learnt to make better shiv.

 

[tidalwave]

one thing RAND report ignored is China might change its stance and became interventionists and use proxy warfares instead. Instead of directly fighting a nasty war with US, China could join hand with iran, isis, or whoever can undermine US interests.
Before the all out war with US, China can send out bunch low yield atomic bombs and let isis or al quaeda get hold of the them and let them do whatever they want.

Basically, "Let the Genie Out of The Bottle", so to speak. That would most likely to happen before that all out war with US.

It's kind of lame, US hardliners know China is non-hardcore right now, and constantly sending out message in media trying to intimidate China and make its behave certain way.

This Rand Report is one of those attempted. Using the all-out war as a threat to intimidate.
Like I said, China still have an Ace card, "Let the Genie out of the Bottle" that would totally ruin western controlled world for good.

 

[Blackstone]

That's all great and the RIGHT thing to do, but the other side like US and Japan will NEVER do the right thing. US and Japan will NEVER reciprocate on equal term. Instead, they will exploit it.

USA is like the mafia don, fearful of anyone challenge their dominance regardless if it is right or wrong. It doesn't matter. ANYONE or everyone will have to submit to USA. Watch the Sopranos or the Godfather, it is how US operate its foreign affairs.

China can do the right thing, but it won't change a single thing - USA will just exploit China's willingness to cooperate. China will end up wose than the Russians back in 90s if they do.

There's no kumbaya solution, so only real world, interest-based ideas have any chance of working. So, if the end point is peaceful accommodations for the four great powers in Asia-Pacific region, including South Asia, then US, China, Japan, and India must work it out. Under that scenario we know four things;

1. US wouldn't agree to anything that doesn't include strong presence in the region
2. China wouldn't accept anything that doesn't give it equal say in the region
3. Japan wouldn't want any deal that leaves them hanging in the air
4. India is an ascending power and would carve out a slice of the pie for itself, unless invited to the leadership club

 

[dingyibvs]

There's absolutely no reason to argue with such a thought process, so we'll just have to agree to disagree.

I don't see why you two's views need to be contradictory. Your view is of what can realistically be achieved in the near future, his view is of what China aspires to achieve eventually (i.e. ending the American feudal hegemony).

As long as you realize that what you propose will only be acceptable to China as an interim solution, and as long as he understands that what he wishes to achieve is unrealistic in the current environment, both can be the correct view.