South China Sea Strategies for other nations (Not China)
- Thread starter PanAsian
- Start date
Seems pretty clear that Japan and the US would like significant access (and permanent basing) at Cam Ranh Bay, the most strategic port, IMO, on the SCS.
In contrast to the Philippines, the Vietnamese are a lot more skillful in dealing with China; they'll likely hold off on letting the US and Japan gain significant access to Cam Ranh Bay for as long as possible, but I believe that they'll eventually relent.
In contrast to the Philippines, the Vietnamese are a lot more skillful in dealing with China; they'll likely hold off on letting the US and Japan gain significant access to Cam Ranh Bay for as long as possible, but I believe that they'll eventually relent.
ATSUSHI TOMIYAMA, Nikkei staff writer
Japanese destroyers make a call at Cam Ranh Bay in Vietnam on April 12.
HANOI -- On April 12, two Japanese destroyers sailed into Cam Ranh Bay in southern Vietnam. It was the first time a Japanese Self-Defense Force vessel had ever appeared in the bay, a strategically important point only about 550km from the contested Spratly and Paracel island chains in the South China Sea. For Vietnam, the visit posed something of a dilemma. On one hand, it served as a warning to China, which has been building a military base in the controversial waters. On the other, it had the potential to raise the ire of its massive neighbor, with which it has deep economic and political ties.
So Hanoi chose to play it down the middle. It ensured that when the two vessels -- the Ariake and Setogiri -- pulled into the bay, they were not accompanied by the Oyashio training submarine, which had accompanied the boats when they called at Subic Bay in the Philippines on April 3.
Vietnam was almost certainly keen to get a firsthand glimpse of the advanced technology the Japanese sub packs. Nevertheless, it chose not to let it in because "submarines are what China is most sensitive about, and Vietnam did not want to stir up Beijing," a Japanese government official said. As a countermeasure against China, Vietnam has been boosting its fleet of submarines since last year, deploying six Russian-made Kilo-class subs at its base in Cam Ranh Bay. China, for its part, is believed to have more than 70 submarines.
A Japanese commander gives a press conference aboard a Maritime Self-Defense Force vessel in Cam Ranh Bay on April 12.
Initial plans called for having a Japanese Maritime Self-Defense Force commander give a press conference on land after docking in the bay. However, a last-minute change had the officer address the press aboard an MSDF vessel, apparently so that the conference was not technically held in Vietnam.
Despite the historic occasion, the highest-ranking official sent from the Vietnamese navy to welcome the vessels was of colonel class. That was probably part of Hanoi's diplomatic chess game.
A compromise
Cam Ranh Bay holds great strategic importance to Vietnam. It was leased to the Soviet Union -- and then Russia -- from 1979 to 2002, during which time the country operated a military port there. Vietnam considers the bay its most important line of defense in the South China Sea. Former President Truong Tan Sang once said the bay would never be used for joint military cooperation with any nation, and that has remained the case. But in the face of China's expanding presence in the South China Sea, including the creation of artificial islands in the Spratlys and missile deployment in the Paracel chain, Vietnam is now being forced to rethink that policy.
The Cam Ranh International Port partially opened on March 8, paving the way for an MSDF visit. The port is shared by the military and the private sector and is ostensibly open to military vessels of any country. In late March, when Chinese Defense Minister Chang Wanquan visited the country, Vietnam's Lt. Gen. Nguyen Chi Vinh said Chinese naval vessels are welcome in the bay.
Though the port may no longer have the air of military exclusivity it once had, Vietnam still decides who's allowed in. That haziness regarding its operation may work in Vietnam's favor: It wants to keep China's surge in check but it does not want to be seen as tilting toward specific countries such as Japan or the U.S.
Moreover, the MSDF vessels were supposed to be the first to arrive at the new port. But in mid-March, a Singaporean naval vessel made a surprise call, changing its destination from the port of Da Nang. That "relegation" was seen as throwing China a bone.
Vietnam and China are bound closely together. China is Vietnam's largest trade partner, accounting for about 20% of its trade value. They also jointly carry out training for high-ranking Communist Party officials. The neighbors have overcome armed conflicts, such as the Sino-Vietnamese War of 1979 and the Johnson South Reef skirmish of 1988.
But with China's growing assertiveness in the South China Sea provoking a strong backlash from the international community, Vietnam can no longer sit on the fence. That likely means distancing itself further from China.
By contrast, Hanoi's ties with Tokyo and Washington are strengthening. And if the Trans-Pacific Partnership free trade pact takes effect, those bonds will only grow stronger. In October 2014, the U.S. partially lifted a ban on arms exports to Vietnam that had been in place for some 40 years -- since the Vietnam War -- to allow maritime weapons into the country. If the U.S. fully scraps the embargo, it would reduce Vietnam's heavy reliance on Russian arms imports and potentially make the Southeast Asian country more dependent on the U.S. defense industry.
As Vietnam marks the 30th anniversary of the introduction of its Doi Moi economic liberalization policy this year, it will no doubt also be reconsidering its position in the international community.
Yes, the US and Japan would like permanent basing to Cam Ranh Bay, but is this in Vietnam's interest to have this sort of military alliance?
Since WW2, China has already demonstrated that it will go to war if Korea/Vietnam forge an overt military alliance with outside powers like France or the USA, which reach China's borders. We saw the same thing with US on Imperial Germany and Mexico, along with the USSR in Cuba and elsewhere in Latin America under the aegis of the Monroe Doctrine.
And the danger is that Vietnam becomes too dependent on the USA, and the ruling Communist party ends up being regime-changed. But if the Vietnamese Communist Party is in power, will the US go to war with China to keep the VCP in power? Remember this is the same VCP that humiliated the US during the Vietnam war, so somehow I doubt it.
Plus TPP doesn't change the fact that Vietnam shares a land border with China, which means the entire Chinese economy is right next door.
Since WW2, China has already demonstrated that it will go to war if Korea/Vietnam forge an overt military alliance with outside powers like France or the USA, which reach China's borders. We saw the same thing with US on Imperial Germany and Mexico, along with the USSR in Cuba and elsewhere in Latin America under the aegis of the Monroe Doctrine.
And the danger is that Vietnam becomes too dependent on the USA, and the ruling Communist party ends up being regime-changed. But if the Vietnamese Communist Party is in power, will the US go to war with China to keep the VCP in power? Remember this is the same VCP that humiliated the US during the Vietnam war, so somehow I doubt it.
Plus TPP doesn't change the fact that Vietnam shares a land border with China, which means the entire Chinese economy is right next door.
solarz
Brigadier
The problem with US and Japan trying to recruit Vietnam is that China simply has a lot more to offer, both in terms of carrots and in terms of sticks.
Technology and politics may change, but geography doesn't.
Equation
Lieutenant General
Yeah right, an article written by a Japanese to be trusted, in which he over rates the importance of TPP and "rising relationship" between Hanoi and Washington and Japan. Bottom line, neither the US or Japan would want to die for Vietnam over some SCS disputes. Their citizens simply wouldn't support that. Heck even Japanese citizens doesn't want to get involve with assisting the US by sending their troops over in the Middle East with or without a treaty.
plawolf
Lieutenant General
This seems to be the new and preferred strategy for China in the Spratelys - if you try to play hardball or 'clever' games rather than enter into bilateral negotiations in good faith, China will build an island on your doorstep to stake its claim and dispense with negotiations full stop.
It's a canny strategy as there is no real, direct counter without using deadly force on unarmed Chinese civilian ships. Doing that will open the door wide open for the PLAN to curb-stomp whoever was daft enough to do such a thing with almost zero consequences, neatly bypassing the information war chock hold the west has on what stories from the SCS are reported and how its done. Even the spin masters at the western press cannot make black into white, as much as they try in this case by trying their best to paint China as the instigator, when actual factual evidence shows blindingly clearly that its always others who were first to instigate and initiate a flare up, and Chinese actions are direct responses to those unreported moves made by others.
It's a canny strategy as there is no real, direct counter without using deadly force on unarmed Chinese civilian ships. Doing that will open the door wide open for the PLAN to curb-stomp whoever was daft enough to do such a thing with almost zero consequences, neatly bypassing the information war chock hold the west has on what stories from the SCS are reported and how its done. Even the spin masters at the western press cannot make black into white, as much as they try in this case by trying their best to paint China as the instigator, when actual factual evidence shows blindingly clearly that its always others who were first to instigate and initiate a flare up, and Chinese actions are direct responses to those unreported moves made by others.
Well, here is an interesting proposal.
How to Get Tough with China
Sure, the US could do everything there, but I expect the end result would be a new cold war between the US and China, whilst most of the world would want to avoid being drawn into any camp, and maintain good relations with both China and the USA
Direct consequences would be a large scale military buildup by China from its current modest spending level of 2% of GDP. So over the next 10 years, China would use its significantly larger economy to outspend the US military.
Plus a significant boost to domestic Chinese R&D spending to replace any and all US technology imports. Along with a definite end to the liberal trade and investment order around the globe as well.
How to Get Tough with China
Sure, the US could do everything there, but I expect the end result would be a new cold war between the US and China, whilst most of the world would want to avoid being drawn into any camp, and maintain good relations with both China and the USA
Direct consequences would be a large scale military buildup by China from its current modest spending level of 2% of GDP. So over the next 10 years, China would use its significantly larger economy to outspend the US military.
Plus a significant boost to domestic Chinese R&D spending to replace any and all US technology imports. Along with a definite end to the liberal trade and investment order around the globe as well.
One of the coauthors of this article is Grant Newsham, a Senior Research Fellow at the Japan Forum for Strategic Studies. Grant Newsham is a retired US Marine Colonel.
What's the Japan Forum for Strategic Studies? It's an organization with deep links to the controversial, nationalist mayor of Osaka, Tōru Hashimoto.
Here's a quote from the Japan Forum for Strategic Studies:
Here's what they have to say about Pearl Harbor and the US
It's amazing that a former officer in the US millitary is willing to work for an organization with such views.
As I've shown in a previous post, the Sasakawa Peace Foundation, with links to Shinzo Abe and his grandfather, hires Dennis Blair, a former US admiral and Director of National Intelligence, to front their anti-Chinese propaganda machine in the US. Similarly, the Japan Forum for Strategic Studies, with links to Toru Hashimoto, hires Grant Newsham, a former US Marine Colonel, to do the same. There's clearly an established MO here.
It looks like Japan is certainly putting a lot of effort, through multiple channels, to back lobbyists and journalists in the US to pump out anti-Chinese rhetoric.
Last edited: