China's SCS Strategy Thread

[Tsavo Lion]

And how is it gonna change the actual situation?

Whatever happens in & around the SCS, my point is that PRC claims there have as much historical basis as Norway would have on Greenland & Newfoundland since the Vikings landed & lived there or Italy on certain inlands in the Caribbean Sea & NE coast of N. America since Columbus & Cabot were Italians. That's why the court in Hague rejected China's claims & stated that they have no historical & legal basis.

But to suggest that the U.S. and the rest of the European colonial powers have more claims in South East Asia, in the South China Sea to be exact is even more hilarious.

I haven't seen anywhere that such claims were announced by them; however, they did announce their support of several other SE Asian claimants on the SCS shores that r a lot closer to those islands & reefs than the nearest Chinese coast, & whose EEZs include them.
By the same logic, IMO Argentina has/should have more rights to the Falklands than the UK, & India should never been given the Nicobars in the Andaman Sea.

 

[Hendrik_2000]

Whatever happens in & around the SCS, my point is that PRC claims there have as much historical basis as Norway would have on Greenland & Newfoundland since the Vikings landed & lived there or Italy on certain inlands in the Caribbean Sea & NE coast of N. America since Columbus & Cabot were Italians. That's why the court in Hague rejected China's claims & stated that they have no historical & legal basis.

I haven't seen anywhere that such claims were announced by them; however, they did announce their support of several other SE Asian claimants on the SCS shores that r a lot closer to those islands & reefs than the nearest Chinese coast, & whose EEZs include them.
By the same logic, IMO Argentina has/should have more rights to the Falklands than the UK, & India should never been given the Nicobars in the Andaman Sea.

Correction it is not a court or even affiliated with UN It is just arbitration service paid for by the Philippine government as such it has no weight whatsoever. China historical navigation guide does include SCS as their marker and it was traditional fishing ground for Chinese fisherman out of Hainan and Fujian province . It has nothing to do with Cheng He. None of those reef exist before so demanding that they are inhabited is BS. But Natuna one of the larger island now in Indonesia was populated by Chinese fisherman They even sent delegation to Beijing asking China to annex Natuna So yes SCS is traditional Chinese fishing ground. The bogus arbitration court ruling manned and paid for Phillipine and US is worth as toilet paper. China is right just ignored it ! MIGHT MAKE RIGHT!

 

[Tsavo Lion]

Any arbitration service charges legal fees- if China decided to use it, she would have to pay them as well.
Even if Chinese fished in the area for centuries, so did the locals who formed their own states there, even before the Ming Dynasty. The Japanese also fished around the Kurils, Sakhalin & Kamchatka, but they lost that privilege as a result of WWII. The Basque fishermen from Spain/France & Pomor fishermen from N. Russia had their fishing grounds off Canada & Svalbard respectively- do Spain/France & RF have any rights to claim all those waters &/ islands?

This is evidenced by the thousands of ceramic findings from China, Vietnam, Thailand and Europe as well as several other findings. ..
So, it is only natural that a country like China is currently making historical claims for the Natuna Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). However, the decision is clear, international law in UNCLOS 1982 and the decision of the United Nations arbitration court regarding the claims of countries in the South China Sea that sovereign Indonesia as the owner of the EEZ in Natuna waters.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[ansy1968]

Whatever happens in & around the SCS, my point is that PRC claims there have as much historical basis as Norway would have on Greenland & Newfoundland since the Vikings landed & lived there or Italy on certain inlands in the Caribbean Sea & NE coast of N. America since Columbus & Cabot were Italians. That's why the court in Hague rejected China's claims & stated that they have no historical & legal basis.

I haven't seen anywhere that such claims were announced by them; however, they did announce their support of several other SE Asian claimants on the SCS shores that r a lot closer to those islands & reefs than the nearest Chinese coast, & whose EEZs include them.
By the same logic, IMO Argentina has/should have more rights to the Falklands than the UK, & India should never been given the Nicobars in the Andaman Sea.

@Tsavo Lion the 9 Dash line and the second Island Chain is China Monroe doctrine, the artificial island in the SCS and the eventual Taiwan reunification either peaceful nor violent is part and parcel of that doctrine. SK maybe amiable BUT Japan will not thus the creation of QUAD and here as China rose in prominence the Japanese may eventually will. The reason is so obvious because she is Asian after all.

The SCS situation is over with China having Escalatory Dominance, while the goal in The Second Island Chain may take until 2030 even without Taiwan as the Fleet expansion gather pace. With the current situation of China and Russia Understanding and the creation of a New Fairer World order, Washington DC is struggling with the weight of commitments that the vassals are starting to make contingency plan especially IF you're not part of the Anglo Saxon family.

And in this new world order, Nation boundaries will change as the old one created by Western Powers will be discarded, of those Nations I see countries like Malaysia and India balkanized ,Jordan to become Palestinian , Ukraine, Belarus and eventually Georgia assimilate with Russia thru an Eurasia Economic Union together with China BRI.

 

[ansy1968]

Any arbitration service charges legal fees- if China decided to use it, she would have to pay them as well.
Even if Chinese fished in the area for centuries, so did the locals who formed their own states there, even before the Ming Dynasty. The Japanese also fished around the Kurils, Sakhalin & Kamchatka, but they lost that privilege as a result of WWII. The Basque fishermen from Spain/France & Pomor fishermen from N. Russia had their fishing grounds off Canada & Svalbard respectively- do Spain/France & RF have any rights to claim all those waters &/ islands?

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

@Tsavo Lion Arbitration is valid IF two parties agree to participate, IF not then it's a Kangaroo Court.

 

[Jingle Bells]

I'm eager to read a post refuting this:​

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

On this matter, Might does make right, some times.

Not that its main point is to gain territory or control, but rather a poking at the Empire USA that "maintains the order of Pax Americana". If it becomes apparent to the world that these voice are all bark and no action, that they can scream until their throat hurts and Big Daddy USA is doing nothing but hands in pocket, looking away and whistling, then it will be the beginning of the end of Pax Americana.

 

[yungho]

I'm eager to read a post refuting this:​

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

blah blah blah

Chiang Ka Shek drew the 11-dash line, surrounding countries should be thankful the communists changed it to 9

 

[Tsavo Lion]

SK maybe amiable BUT Japan will not thus the creation of QUAD and here as China rose in prominence the Japanese may eventually will. The reason is so obvious because she is Asian after all.

Japan is as Asian as the UK is European. Both were invaded from the mainland centuries ago but retained their unique identity while adopting many things from others. Japan is now part of the Western world & will remain in it for the foreseeable future.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Chiang Ka Shek drew the 11-dash line, surrounding countries should be thankful the communists changed it to 9

don't bet on it! By the same token, China should be thankful to Russia for not taking all of Manchuria & N. Korea. The bottom line is, China wants to dominate the SCS just like the US dominates the Caribbean Sea.
IMO, China could benefit more by turning inward to develop her vast interior to make it more suitable to life- she has enough manpower & trade surplus to do that.
In contrast, Australia is 80% desert, has just 24M population, & could improve her economy by allowing more immigration &/ setting up her own colonies/overseas territories. However, her location & alliances allows her to maintain the status quo as a de-facto US protectorate.

 

[yungho]

Japan is as Asian as the UK is European. Both were invaded from the mainland centuries ago but retained their unique identity while adopting many things from others. Japan is now part of the Western world & will remain in it for the foreseeable future.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

don't bet on it! By the same token, China should be thankful to Russia for not taking all of Manchuria & N. Korea. The bottom line is, China wants to dominate the SCS just like the US dominates the Caribbean Sea.
IMO, China could benefit more by turning inward to develop her vast interior to make it more suitable to life- she has enough manpower & trade surplus to do that.
In contrast, Australia is 80% desert, has just 24M population, & could improve her economy by allowing more immigration &/ setting up her own colonies/overseas territories. However, her location & alliances allows her to maintain the status quo as a de-facto US protectorate.

Frankly China is lucky to have its current borders after the chaos of late 19th and early 20th century. I highly doubt Russia was ever in the position to ever 'take' Manchuria, regardless of who won the Civil War. The main regrettable piece is Russia blocking Northern China access to the Sea of Japan, which imo should be revisited in the long-term.

I agree with developing the interior, but interior development and settling SCS disputes are not mutually exclusive.

 

[Tsavo Lion]

Frankly China is lucky to have its current borders after the chaos of late 19th and early 20th century. I highly doubt Russia was ever in the position to ever 'take' Manchuria, regardless of who won the Civil War.

at least USSR/Russia could still keep the railroad bisecting it, esp. after taking it from the Kwantung Army; also she agreed to give the Southern, now Inner Mongolia to PRC; the Outer Mongolia was a de-facto 16th Soviet republic.

The main regrettable piece is Russia blocking Northern China access to the Sea of Japan, which imo should be revisited in the long-term.

Russia would then lose her border with Korea, not to mention endangering ice free Vladivostok.

I agree with developing the interior, but interior development and settling SCS disputes are not mutually exclusive.

if the S. Chinese interior provinces got more developed, China would get better access to SE Asia, making her SLOCs in the SCS less vulnerable. The same way Cuba didn't threaten Panama Canal as much, as the USA had access to the Caribbean Sea via Mexico & C. America during the Cold War.