Good article, but it's author makes an understandable but fundamental error or paramount importance - he assumes that America could easily win any conflict with China, presumably at minimal to modest cost.
That assumption is rapidly becoming less and less realistic in an increase number of scenarios and locations.
He also seemed to have been in for the the last few years, because America has already tried exactly what he and his buddy was debating about, when Hillary jetted in and sabotaged China's planned historic agreement with the other claimants on the issue by giving official cover and unofficial encouragement for the other claimants to go on a land grabbing frenzy in the SCS.
The Vietnamese were particularly aggressive and prolific in their island grabs, but America turned a complete blind eye to that and only made statements condemning Chinese reactions to those land grabs.
The main reason Hillbama chose the SCS as the location to create a major flashpoint was twofold.
Firstly, it is a vital shipping lane, for China. An inconvenient fact is diligently censored by the western 'free' press.
Secondly, at the time of the Hillbama moves, China only had a few token holdings that were more liability than asset in a real serious conflict, and its primary bases were so far away that Chinese forces operating from them would not have any meaningful home field advantage.
Thus the SCS was the ideal place to enforce a naval blocked to try and cut China's sea lanes of communications with minimal military risk.
Unlike the Indian Ocean or Malacca Strait, through which international shipping for most of world flows (thereby creating a near unmanageable logistical and intelligent burden to figure out which ships are bound for China), the lion share of shipping in the SCS are heading to or from China.
Shipping to and from Japan, South Korea and Taiwan can go the slightly longer route around the Philippines and Indonesia to avoid the SCS (shipping trying to sneak to China via this route would be very easy to spot). Thus leaving all shipping in certain parts of the SCS exclusively for China, and this making it possible to surgically intercept and/or interdict those ships without breaking world wide free trade.
That, and not the resources as the western media have been instructed to endlessly repeat, is the fundamental reason why China declared the SCS a core national interest.
The problem with that strategy was that America was completely and utterly caught cold by China's engineering capabilities and political will to create vast man-made islands pretty much literally out of the blue.
Those islands have now fundamentally changed the balance of military power in the region, which is why the US has now backed right off the whole venture - with those islands in play, not only has the costs of any American military adventurism in the SCS increased exponentially, the very outcome of any military clash between China and the US in the SCS is now very much balanced in China's favour.
The US has no military bases in the SCS and surrounding region worth mentioning in a clash against China. Without the islands, they USN would hold the overwhelming advantage with its carriers, subs and major surface combatants against the PLAN and PLAAF elements running on fumes by the time they get to the engagement area.
Before, sinking a few key ships, like the Liaoning and a few 054C/Ds would pretty much have neutralised China's ability to effectively resist an US naval blockade in the region.
However, with those islands, the US would need significant boots on the ground to be able to operate with any measure of safety in the SCS in a conflict scenario. That will only guarantee massive US combat casualties, with the outcome of any such attempted landings very much in doubt.
Unfortunately, despite all the pretty speeches and talk of high ideals, the only thing the American government really respects and accepts is raw power.
The US is dropping the SCS issue, with only a few token face-saving FONOPs for show now because China took away its military advantage in that region, plain and simple.
China, unlike America or Russia, doesn't bluff. When it makes a stand, it does so on the twin pillars of political will and raw capabilities.
As such, it would be a colossal mistake for the US to try and call China's bluff in the SCS when China isn't bluffing or playing around.
China isn't looking for a conflict with America, and would indeed actively try to avoid a direct military clash. However, that does not mean China will be afraid of, or shy away from giving a good slap if America goes out of its way to try to corner China by offering up a cheek for China to spank.
