South China Sea Strategies for other nations (Not China)

Blackstone said:

What "rule of law" do you mean? If it's laws constraining government officials from arbitrary actions, then that philosophy has been central to China for thousands of years. To wit, in China officials must govern justly and for the betterment of the governed, or risk losing their stations. That's what "Mandate of Heaven" is all about; if officials, kings, and emperors governed unjustly, then they could lose the mandate of heaven and therefore their right to rule.

As for the West, rule of law isn't all it seems. For example, in the US, the law is what nine unelected, unaccountable judges in black robes say it is. They are nominated to their august positions by the President and confirmed by the Senate, not for their judicial knowledge, experience, and temperament, but their philosophical and political leanings. So, what do you say that is, "rule of law," or "rule by lawyers?"

Click to expand...

“Using ‘rule of law’ is profoundly misleading, and I think intentionally misleading,” says John Delury, a China historian at Yonsei University.

The root of the problem is that Chinese phrases often lack prepositions, notes David Moser, academic director at the CET Beijing Chinese language program and author of a

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

on the difficulty of learning Mandarin. In the case of 法治, that phenomenon has led to two similar but distinct translations in Chinese-English dictionaries: “rule of law” and “rule by law.”

“The lexicographers seem not be aware of any distinction, and either ‘of’ or ‘by’ seemed appropriate to them,” Mr. Moser says.

While the two phrases may seem like a flip-of-the-coin for dual-language dictionary editors, they actually have very different connotations, scholars say. “Rule of law,” under which the power of political leaders is constrained by laws and regulations, is generally considered a subset of “rule by law,” says Victor Mair, a professor of Chinese language at the University of Pennsylvania.

“’Rule of law’ implies fairness and predictable application,” he says. “’Rule by law’ would include, for example, rule under Hitler’s Nuremberg Laws (Nürnberger Gesetze), which were neither fair nor predictably applied.”

It’s an important distinction in China, where courts, police and prosecutors are controlled by the Communist Party and where the constitution — which guarantees freedom of speech and religion, among other liberties – has been shunted aside when it conflicts with party interests.

The phrase 法治 was coined in the 2nd or 3rd century B.C. by the founders of the Legalist school of political thinkers who were rivals to the Confucians, Yonsei University’s Mr. Delury notes.

“Legalists said we should have an authoritarian, if not despotic system, where everyone has to obey draconian laws and where people are motivated by reward and punishment,” he says. That’s in contrast to Confucians, who believed society should be governed by a virtuous elite.

Chinese dynasties have traditionally featured a mixture of those two ideas – rule by man and rule by law — all the way up until the present day, Mr. Delury says, but the notion that the ruling elite should themselves be restrained by laws has never been seriously considered. For that reason, he suggests a more appropriate translation for 法治 might be “law and order.”

Click to expand...

Brumby said:

The distinction between "rule of law" and "rule buy law" requires explanation. At its most basic level, the former is an objective rule set at the pointy end of the hierarchy. The concept of "Rule by law" is that it is merely a rule set subservient to a higher governing body. Since the latter is "subject to", any application, meaning, enforcement and interpretation is also subject to that body. A WSJ article was written on it. The relevant content I have reproduced for you..

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

Brumby said:

You are now making very specific accusations. Decent thing that you now actually need to do is to present evidence to back up your claims.

Click to expand...

SAN DIEGO -- The commander of the

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

's Pacific Fleet warned Thursday that more information was needed to determine a course of action following reports that China had deployed HQ-9 surface-to-air missiles to a disputed island in the South China Sea.

Those

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

on the territorially disputed Woody Island, part of the Paracel island chain, were corroborated with satellite imagery depicting missile launchers.

"My response would be, 'OK, let's be thoughtful about this,' " Adm. Scott Swift said Thursday at the AFCEA West Conference in San Diego, adding that the move needed to be viewed in context with the island's history.

Swift's remarks came a day after Secretary of State John Kerry condemned the reported move as a sign of "increased militarization" and promised to have a "very serious" conversation with Chinese authorities about the alleged missile deployment. Chinese President Xi Jingping promised not to militarize the South China Sea in a Rose Garden meeting with President Barack Obama, Kerry noted.

In fact, Swift said, this is at least the third time that Woody Island has housed HQ-9 missiles; twice previously, China has sent missiles to the island for exercises.

"So that context is important. This isn't exactly something that's new," he said.

During one of those exercises, Swift said, the Chinese actually employed the weapons system, using an HQ-9 missile to shoot down a drone.

"So there's an end-to-end test that the system is operational and it works," he said.

But unlike previous missile deployments to Woody Island, this one had no association with an exercise, Swift said.

"So the real question is, 'What's the intent? How long is it going to be there? Is this a permanent forward deployment of this weapons system or not?' " he said. "So it's a series of questions that we need to generate and ask ourselves."

It's not clear yet how the U.S. plans to respond to the latest apparent power move in the hotly contested South China Sea.

Kerry promised Wednesday he would have more to say publicly about the apparent missile deployment in coming days.

"My hope is China will realize it's important to resolve the jurisdictional issues in the South China Sea not through unilateral action, not through force, not through militarization," Kerry said, "but through diplomacy and by working with other countries and claimants to try to resolve these differences."

Click to expand...

When unveiling the Pentagon’s fiscal 2017 budget request, Secretary of Defense Ash Carter highlighted the challenge presented by China as one of “our most stressing competitors.”

“We're making all these investments that you see in our defense budget that are specifically oriented toward checking the development of the Chinese military,” Carter said Feb 2.

Two weeks later, China has now set up a pair of HQ-9 air defense systems on Woody Island, part of the Paracels chain of islands in the South China Sea. The move is the latest in a series of Chinese actions to assert dominance in the region, including rapid growth of a series of artificial platforms in the Spratley Islands, territory claimed by five other neighbors, including nearby Vietnam.

The weapons' placement also comes after the US has conducted a series of “freedom of navigation” exercises near the Spratleys, which officials have said explicitly are being done to prove to China that the territory remains in international waters.

Ben FitzGerald of the Center for a New American Security agrees that the HQ-9s by themselves “won’t impede” American capabilities in the region, but adds that the deployment “confirms the Pentagon’s concerns that this is an emerging concept that will be replicated throughout the region, which would impose significant operational challenges on US Forces.”

China’s actions “certainly support the rationale” that the Pentagon is right to focus on the Anti-Access/Area-Denial (A2/AD) challenge, FitzGerald added.

The Pentagon’s fiscal 2017 request included around $3 billion in A2/AD technology development as part of the third offset strategy championed by Carter and Deputy Secretary of Defense Bob Work. It also features a heavy focus on taking existing munitions, such as the Tomahawk weapon, and adding new capabilities.

Such technologies would be key in defeating systems such as the HQ-9 in the event of a direct conflict, with US forces either needing to launch weapons while staying out of the roughly 125 mile radius of the system’s missiles or relying on stealthy planes such as the F-35 joint strike fighter to penetrate the protected airspace.

While that range is not devastating to American capabilities, the deployment of the system, along with its “advanced radar capabilities for targeting, again support the Pentagon’s narrative of challenges associated with competitors possessing precision weapons,” FitzGerald noted.

Robert Martinage, a former undersecretary of the Navy now with the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, says the weapon placement is not a game-changer in and of itself, but “it could be the canary in the coalmine, a harbinger of what’s to come.”

If China expands its deployment of advanced defenses, Martinage said, it would have “significant operational implications” for the US and its allies. In peacetime, it could lead to China painting US planes with radar, increasing the risk of an incident; in a combat situation, it would put nearby assets at direct risk.

It also includes political impacts, Martinage added, noting it is “just another step in [China’s] game.”

“Little incremental provocations ... ultimately lead to where they want to go, which is asserting their sovereignty over most of the South China Sea,” he said. “The question is, What do we do about it? I think we continue to do the freedom of movement navigations. But beyond that there’s not a whole lot we can do. It’s a little of a fait accompli, and the question is what’s next.”

Click to expand...

Jura said:

according to DefenseNews
China's HQ-9 Missile Placement Underlines Pentagon Focus on A2/AD

source:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

Robert Martinage, a former undersecretary of the Navy now with the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, says the weapon placement is not a game-changer in and of itself, but “it could be the canary in the coalmine, a harbinger of what’s to come.”

Click to expand...

World | Mon Feb 22, 2016 1:35am EST
U.S. urges wider challenge to China's claims in South China Sea
SYDNEY

Australia and other countries should follow the U.S. lead and conduct "freedom-of-navigation" naval operations within 12 nautical miles of contested islands in the South China Sea, a senior U.S. naval officer was reported as saying on Monday.

Vice Admiral Joseph Aucoin, the commander of the U.S. Navy's Seventh Fleet, is in Australia for high-level talks with defense leaders and has discussed growing concerns over Beijing's military expansion in the disputed region, the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) reported.

China claims most of the South China Sea, through which more than $5 trillion in global trade passes every year and which is believed to have huge deposits of oil and gas. Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei, the Philippines and Taiwan have rival claims.

Beijing has been angered by air and sea patrols the United States has conducted near islands China claims. Those have included one by two B-52 strategic bombers in November and by a U.S. Navy destroyer that sailed within 12 nautical miles of Triton Island in the Paracels group last month.

Aucoin told reporters it would be "valuable" if Australia and others sent warships to conduct similar operations within 12 nautical miles of disputed territories.

"What we're trying to ensure is that all countries, no matter size or strength, can pursue their interests based on the law of the sea and not have that endangered by some of these actions," Aucoin said, according to the ABC.

"It's up to those countries, but I think it's in our best interests to make sure that those sea lines remain open, I'll leave it at that," he said.

Tensions between China and its neighbors have risen further since Taiwanese and U.S. officials said last week Beijing had placed surface-to-air missiles on Woody Island, part of the Paracels archipelago it controls.

Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull last week urged claimants to refrain from island-building and militarization in the South China Sea.

(Reporting by James Regan; Editing by Paul Tait)

Click to expand...