PLAN Anti-Piracy Deployments

Re: Somali pirates and Chinese navy

joshuatree said:

Where? Uh, well this very thread is a good place to start, off the coast of Somalia for one. Relying on other navies to protect your own merchant fleet is iffy at best.

Isn't China also farming and mining in Africa? What if the scenario turns hostile? The gov't may be cooperative but does that necessarily reflect the local population?

Looking back in history, how did Spain and England become powerhouses of their time? With their navy.

Click to expand...

1. The naval taskforce sent to the coast of Somalia is part of an international cooperation. The chinese navy ships are there to protect merchant vessels of *any* nationality. It is a gesture that carries more symbolic weight than military.

2. If the local population of an African nation turns hostile, then China relies on the local government to keep security. Can you imagine the message it would send if China sent in it's own military? It's basically saying, "We don't trust in your ability to govern your own people." That isn't exactly conducive to equal partnership.

Something that a lot of western analysts fail to understand is that China wants equal cooperation, not colonialism. Look at what happened to England and Spain in the end?

Re: Somali pirates and Chinese navy

So, any updates on the ship that was hijacked 2 months ago? The name was De Xin Hai I believe... It seems that the Chinese media has decided to go silent on this issue after a week, I'm suspecting some sort of ransom deal to be made (or has already been made). The popular stance from the Chinese netizens seems to be a rescue mission carried out by the Naval task force, which the government is probably reluctant to use due to the risks involved.

Re: Somali pirates and Chinese navy

solarz said:

1.
Something that a lot of western analysts fail to understand is that China wants equal cooperation, not colonialism. Look at what happened to England and Spain in the end?

Click to expand...

ff
Sometimes when dealing with China, what you want is not what you get, eg look at some of the recent complaints made against China by some African countries.

Re: Somali pirates and Chinese navy

solarz said:

1. The naval taskforce sent to the coast of Somalia is part of an international cooperation. The chinese navy ships are there to protect merchant vessels of *any* nationality. It is a gesture that carries more symbolic weight than military.

2. If the local population of an African nation turns hostile, then China relies on the local government to keep security. Can you imagine the message it would send if China sent in it's own military? It's basically saying, "We don't trust in your ability to govern your own people." That isn't exactly conducive to equal partnership.

Something that a lot of western analysts fail to understand is that China wants equal cooperation, not colonialism. Look at what happened to England and Spain in the end?

Click to expand...

Sure, there is international cooperation with the piracy patrols but how does that translate to not needing a bigger blue water navy? If anything, the tempo of that level of cooperation, if it ever increases - PLAN being part of CTF-151, would mean a need for a even bigger blue water navy.

I think you're viewing this from only one angle. Say violence erupts, what bad message is China sending or any other nation for that matter if their navy was dispatched to help with the evacuation of their citizens?

At the end of the day, PLAN isn't rapidly expanding a fleet of carriers, just several frigates.

Re: Somali pirates and Chinese navy

joshuatree said:

Sure, there is international cooperation with the piracy patrols but how does that translate to not needing a bigger blue water navy? If anything, the tempo of that level of cooperation, if it ever increases - PLAN being part of CTF-151, would mean a need for a even bigger blue water navy.

I think you're viewing this from only one angle. Say violence erupts, what bad message is China sending or any other nation for that matter if their navy was dispatched to help with the evacuation of their citizens?

At the end of the day, PLAN isn't rapidly expanding a fleet of carriers, just several frigates.

Click to expand...

Hmmm... what? China doesn't need carriers to patrol for pirates off Somalia, and isn't carriers the whole foundation of a blue water navy?

If violence erupts somewhere, you still don't need a carrier to evacuate your citizens.

So in what way would a blue water navy benefit China's economy?

Re: Somali pirates and Chinese navy

solarz said:

Hmmm... what? China doesn't need carriers to patrol for pirates off Somalia, and isn't carriers the whole foundation of a blue water navy?

If violence erupts somewhere, you still don't need a carrier to evacuate your citizens.

So in what way would a blue water navy benefit China's economy?

Click to expand...

What indeed. No where have I said China needs carriers to conduct anti-piracy patrols. Nor have I ever claimed carriers are the foundation of a blue water navy. Are you saying navies prior to the invention of carriers were not blue water navies?

To pull back from your sidetracking, China would need a blue water navy such as a fleet of frigates to sustain long range anti-piracy patrols or to assist in evacuation of citizens in hotspots.

Your question of how a blue water navy benefit's China's economy is a repeat. Post 521 already answered that.

Re: Somali pirates and Chinese navy

joshuatree said:

What indeed. No where have I said China needs carriers to conduct anti-piracy patrols. Nor have I ever claimed carriers are the foundation of a blue water navy. Are you saying navies prior to the invention of carriers were not blue water navies?

To pull back from your sidetracking, China would need a blue water navy such as a fleet of frigates to sustain long range anti-piracy patrols or to assist in evacuation of citizens in hotspots.

Your question of how a blue water navy benefit's China's economy is a repeat. Post 521 already answered that.

Click to expand...

wikipedia said:

As there is no clear definition of a blue-water navy, the status is disputed. Usually it is considered to be strongly linked to the maintenance of aircraft carriers capable of operating in the oceans. "In the early 80s there was a bitter and very public battle fought over whether or not to replace Australia's last aircraft carrier, HMAS Melbourne. Senior navy personnel warned without a carrier, Australia would be vulnerable to all types of threat. One ex-Chief of Navy went so far as to claim that Australia "would no longer have a blue-water navy (one capable of operating away from friendly coasts)."

Click to expand...

Also, you didn't answer anything. You came up with some scenarios, which I have rebutted.

Indeed, it would be utterly laughable to argue that China needs to spend billions of dollars so that its navy can conduct anti-piracy patrols and evacuate its citizens from hostile nations.

Re: Somali pirates and Chinese navy

Actually, all the theories on evacuation of citizens, protection of trade routes, blah, blah, blah, are all reasons... all excuses.

China needed the carriers, her many escorts and stuff like that as power projections. She is no longer going to be contented at protecting her own country by risking war in her own land, the old theory of using land in exchange for time are gone. She need power projection and first strike capability... like US, China needed pre-emptive strike capability on hostile nations.

Therefore she need a blue water navies. Not that she would always launch attacks on weaker countries that do not do what she wanted them to, but also to ensure that others will not dare risk an attack on her shores.

Re: Somali pirates and Chinese navy

solarz said:

Also, you didn't answer anything. You came up with some scenarios, which I have rebutted.

Indeed, it would be utterly laughable to argue that China needs to spend billions of dollars so that its navy can conduct anti-piracy patrols and evacuate its citizens from hostile nations.

Click to expand...

I've already addressed your rebuttals. All you did after that was sidetrack to discussing about carriers which I never mentioned prior to your interjection. My original post was in response to what's the need to rush and build a fleet of 054As. Infact, I specifically said PLAN's not trying to rush to build a fleet of carriers which would have far different implications.

It would be far more laughable should any of those scenarios play out and China be helpless to do anything about it with her own forces. This for a country that's being predicted to become the largest economy in the near future?

Re: Somali pirates and Chinese navy

rhino123 said:

Actually, all the theories on evacuation of citizens, protection of trade routes, blah, blah, blah, are all reasons... all excuses.

China needed the carriers, her many escorts and stuff like that as power projections. She is no longer going to be contented at protecting her own country by risking war in her own land, the old theory of using land in exchange for time are gone. She need power projection and first strike capability... like US, China needed pre-emptive strike capability on hostile nations.

Therefore she need a blue water navies. Not that she would always launch attacks on weaker countries that do not do what she wanted them to, but also to ensure that others will not dare risk an attack on her shores.

Click to expand...

Yes, military deterrence would be an important reason for developing a blue water navy. I don't challenge that. I challenge the assertion (by most western analysts, in fact) that China needs a blue water navy for economic reasons, whether it is to maintain its current economic momentum, or to expand its economic sphere of influence.

joshuatree said:

I've already addressed your rebuttals. All you did after that was sidetrack to discussing about carriers which I never mentioned prior to your interjection. My original post was in response to what's the need to rush and build a fleet of 054As. Infact, I specifically said PLAN's not trying to rush to build a fleet of carriers which would have far different implications.

Click to expand...

I just showed you evidence that when people say "blue water navy", they usually mean carriers. If you think blue water navy doesn't require carriers, that's fine, but it still doesn't change my assertion that China doesn't need to spend billions of dollars to achieve naval power projection for economic reasons.

joshuatree said:

It would be far more laughable should any of those scenarios play out and China be helpless to do anything about it with her own forces. This for a country that's being predicted to become the largest economy in the near future?

Click to expand...

Hmmm... really? Was China unable to participate in Somalian coastal patrols? It doesn't look like China is currently "helpless" in that regard, so where's the need for further expansion?

As for "evacuating citizens", are you honestly telling me with a straight face that this can only be achieved by a blue-water navy?