PLAN Anti-Piracy Deployments

Re: Somali pirates and Chinese navy

Violet Oboe said:

Don't tell me what's off topic here! The entire region between AfPak, the Gulf and the Bab Al Mandeb is one strategic entity and al-Qaeda and their associates are on the ground in every corner there. No doubt many of the so called ´pirates´ have also some allegiance to extensive sunni terrorist networks eventually supporting bin Ladin.

Besides, you brought up the topic of ´asymmetric warfare´, implying that PLAN's small and limited detachment would not be able to deal adequately with that kind of challenge.

Click to expand...

Fine, so I suppose as long as we are talking about asymmetric warfare in the Gulf of Aden AND Afghanistan lets go whole hog. Let's see, there was a that thing about people fighting against the Chinese in a "mountainous" area a couple years ago that brought plenty of attention. But let's not talk about these issues, because I am not here to name call or inflame. Get over petty nationalism, it's old, it's ugly, and it's classless.

Re: Somali pirates and Chinese navy

Agreed, no talk about ´police operations´on home territory.

Re: Somali pirates and Chinese navy

Violet Oboe said:

Agreed, no talk about ´police operations´on home territory.

Click to expand...

I shall accept you left handed comment as all inclusive regardless. Shall we now please return to the topic of Chinese military tactics regarding Somali pirates or do we need more time for nationalistic chest thumping?

Reading the recent constructive posts, there seems to be an undercurrent among the posters that all future attacks on Chinese shipping is acceptable and that China shall simply allow an infinite number of ships and citizens to be hijacked, kidnapped, held hostage, threatened, and extorted in order to not offend any African clients China has been cultivating.

That is ridiculous. One of the main reasons for existence of the modern Chinese Navy as stated by the leadership is the "Sea Transportation Protection Campaign". Well, I see a lot of Campaigning and not a lot of Protecting as far as the De Xin Hai is concerned. If China does not protect her shipping, then the pirates will see China as a soft target and continue to plunder the commerce.

Re: Somali pirates and Chinese navy

hyalitemarine said:

If China does not protect her shipping, then the pirates will see China as a soft target and continue to plunder the commerce.

Click to expand...

The Pirates changed tactics after feeling the squeeze of escorts, so the Chinese as well as the other navys will have to change tactics as well. For the Chinese it might mean having to increase the size of the escort numbers. However unlike you I do not see Chinese will let their maritime shipping being seen as easy plunder.

Its more than likely theyll secure the release of the current hostages through negotiation, and organise a 'payback' later.

Re: Somali pirates and Chinese navy

hyalitemarine said:

Strange that this thread seems to have died out days ago, I wonder why that is?

Click to expand...

I wonder why that shouldn't be?

hyalitemarine said:

So what happened? The Chinese navy froze, that's what. Absolutely no action was taken and the pirates were allowed to take command of the situation.

Click to expand...

Care to provide some proofs on both statements?

hyalitemarine said:

Are Chinese naval captains capable of on the spot, high risk, initiative and decision making in real world situations? Apparently no.

Click to expand...

Apparently you are wrong, as there were plenty of encounters with pirates during escort missions that require Chinese naval captains to be capable of on the spot, high risk, initiative decision making.

hyalitemarine said:

Whatever the reason for Chinese inaction the fact remains that the Chinese Navy has been humiliated by Third World pirates of all things. I stand by the world "humiliation" due to the fact that all mention of the hijacking is not to be found on the China Daily website for the last few days since the cargo ship reached the pirate lair.

Click to expand...

If your word "humiliation" has a negative connotation, then following your logic, western press ceased reporting on that particular cargo ship would constitute as a humiliation on the West as well?

If "humiliation" is your word for the success of Chinese escort missions -- success in the sense that the pirates had no choice but forced to attack a Chinese ship some 1000 nm away from the fleet in a completely different region of water, then so be it.

hyalitemarine said:

China has the money to build a world class navy. China is currently putting to sea world class navy vessels. But the inability of the Chinese task force to deal with simple pirates speaks volumes about the lack of on the spot skill needed when effective force is necessary.

Click to expand...

First of all, as I have mentioned earlier, there were plenty of encounters with pirates during escort missions. The Chinese fleet in the Gulf of Aden had to, in many occasions, ward off pirates that attempted (coordinate) attacks on the ships that were being escorted. The fact that the task force successfully dealt with pirates in more than one instances contradict your assertion that the task force is unable to deal with simple pirates.

Secondly, in regard to the most recent attack which took place some 1000 nm away from the task force, the pirates that boarded the ship had not, and has yet been dealt with. However, this has absolutely no correlation on the command ability of Chinese naval commanders in anyway. If you assert the otherwise, then please provide the necessary proofs to show the existence of such correlation.

hyalitemarine said:

The failure of China's first modern naval task force is an important lesson not only to the leadership in China, but it also revealed an Achilles Heel for all the world's powers to take note of.

Click to expand...

Finally, I should reiterate the success of Chinese naval task force in the Gulf of Aden. Specifically, the effectiveness of the escort missions which has forced the pirates to stage attacks far away from the location of the task force.

Re: Somali pirates and Chinese navy

hyalitemarine said:

Incidentally, I know exactly where the firm is located in Phoenix, Arizona that is responsible for this site.

Click to expand...

And this pertains to any part of the discussion how? Are you making an implied threat against the forum and website?

Re: Somali pirates and Chinese navy

hyalitemarine said:

Chinese vessels actually have TWO commanders, one commander is military, the other commander is political. Guess which commander has greater clout? Ever see the Tom Clancy movie "The Hunt for Red October"? That movie, although Hollywood, does give us an idea of how crippling political commanders can be when quick responses are required.

Click to expand...

No it doesn't. As you have pointed out, it was a movie -- a fiction. It was not a documentary on Soviet navy nor was it a documentary on the Chinese navy.

hyalitemarine said:

I personally doubt China's task force in the Gulf of Aden was anything more than a Dog & Pony show. In fact, I am actually impressed that the Chinese Navy has been able to stay on station so long without putting into port for personnel and repairs.

Click to expand...

It is perfectly okay for you to personally have doubts on the ability of Chinese task force in the Gulf of Aden. Honestly, I do not care. However, when you are making statements as if they are facts, then I like to start seeing some evidences.

hyalitemarine said:

I stand by the facts. Fact, the De Xin Hai was about 700 miles off the east coast of Somalia and 350 miles northeast of the Seychelles. That position means it was approximately 700 miles from the Chinese naval vessels which were in the Gulf of Aden area. That is definitely NOT "thousands" of miles away. Furthermore, since the distance the freighter had to travel to the pirate liar was a co-equal distance to the Chinese warships, one would logically assume that the modern Chinese Navy ships possessed enough speed to intercept a fully laden coal freighter before it reached shore.

Click to expand...

My bold. Nice try dropping it out.

And you are wrong in that it is definitely some 1000 nm away from the task force:


Draw a line from the ship to the closest point on the shore -- that would what be meant by 700 nm from the eastern coast of Somalia. A line from the ship to the mouth of the gulf is actually longer than this distance, and the Chinese task force was further in the gulf performing escort duties at the time.

If you disagree, then prove how the distance between the ship and the closest point on the shore is co-equal distance with the distance between the ship and the Chinese task force.

hyalitemarine said:

Maersk Alabama hijacking...That's how you take care of business.:nono:

Click to expand...

And what does this has to do with the latest hijacking of a Chinese vessel? Maersk Alabama was within reach of multiple US naval vessels, the pirates were stranded on a life boat, totally exhausted, their numbers can be counted with one hand, and they have to rely on food and water from US vessels. Furthermore, the US Navy didn't have to board the ship to free the crew -- the crew freed themselves. It is in no way close to being similar to the current situation of the Chinese vessel.

Re: Somali pirates and Chinese navy

hyalitemarine said:

No, actually my source was the 2007 US Navy report referenced here in this forum. It states the commanders' roles pretty clearly. And as far as the Tom Clancy reference, I said it was Hollywood AND I shall reference whatever works I see fit. It is not up to you and it is not up to me to command what others may think and say. Stay on topic and re-frame from personal attacks.

Click to expand...

The Chinese Communist forces have always had this two-commander system, dating back to 1930's. It didn't affect their effectiveness in ANY war they had been in, including WWII, Chinese civil war, Korean war, Indian border conflict, etc. In fact, one BIG impression of the PLA by their enemies is their flexibility and their ability to adapt. Even in Mao's own writing, he advocated the ability to change and adapt is an invaluable attribute of a soldier/officer.

Yes, China's political system is rigid, but thousands of years of Chinese history, especially military history, has taught them to be pragmatic on the battlefield. There have been many examples of ridiculing commanders who strictly followed rules and lost the battle. In fact, there has been an old saying: a general on the battlefield does not even have to obey the orders directly from the Emperor. Bear in mind that this was back in the day when disobeying orders from the Emperor was punished by death of your entire family.

Re: Somali pirates and Chinese navy

hyalitemarine said:

Incidentally pla101prc, I have reported you to the administrators for violation of the forum rules, namely personal attacks involving name calling. Incidentally, I know exactly where the firm is located in Phoenix, Arizona that is responsible for this site. I encourage free speech, but not when name calling and nationalistic taunts come to play.

Click to expand...

keep that stuff to yourself,i am not interested in knowing who is takin this way too personally. i do not recant my statements.

back to the discussion. i think i have said somewhere earlier in this thread that force cannot be an adequate solution to the pirate issue. i think the hostage situation of De Xin Hai proves my statement. every state has their own reasons to be there, China in particular was out of the need to expand influences and assertiveness abroad. but as you can see, when you secure gulf of aden, pirates simply move elsewhere and attack other routes. the ship in question was not even travelling on the route that is covered by the international operation. so if you genuinely want to solve the pirate issue, military is not the sufficient answer, as is the case proven with blood in afghanistan, iraq and vietnam.

Re: Somali pirates and Chinese navy

Engineer said:

Draw a line from the ship to the closest point on the shore -- that would what be meant by 700 nm from the eastern coast of Somalia. A line from the ship to the mouth of the gulf is actually longer than this distance, and the Chinese task force was further in the gulf performing escort duties at the time.

If you disagree, then prove how the distance between the ship and the closest point on the shore is co-equal distance with the distance between the ship and the Chinese task force.


And what does this has to do with the latest hijacking of a Chinese vessel? Maersk Alabama was within reach of multiple US naval vessels, the pirates were stranded on a life boat, totally exhausted, their numbers can be counted with one hand, and they have to rely on food and water from US vessels. Furthermore, the US Navy didn't have to board the ship to free the crew -- the crew freed themselves. It is in no way close to being similar to the current situation of the Chinese vessel.

Click to expand...

good point there, the supply ship was at gathering point A, which was at the mouth of the gulf. the other two frigates werent together either. one was at about midpoint of the gulf and the other was all the way in

i heard for the American case they drew the lifeboat to about 30m away from the navy ship under the pretense of negotiation, just to let the sniper have a good shot at the hostage takers. pretty good move, but the case at hand is a completely different situation.