South China Sea and China (2011-2017)

[Ray]

Politicians speak in platitudes, in the US, in China, and in most other places. Speeches rarely warrant much attention until you see how - or if - they are translated into actions.

How droll.

Generalisation and rubbishing everything seems to be your signature whenever stumped!

International interaction or actions don't happen overnight just because some people think that it is otherwise a Punch and Judy show.

Eg OBL dead or alive the US President had promised. Now, how many years ago was that?

And how many years did it take to do so after painstaking work by all concerned including the US Administration?

Of course, those who see everything that does not give instant result and to their satisfaction as platitudes and waffle, and in the interim, would be quick to rubbish all and be pleased as Punch with the line that it is all blubbering and drivel.

One has to understand that Statecraft is not Instant Coffee!

It is a very tiresome and even thankless process.

But then one has to be a part such a process to realise the heartbreaks and agony that goes into the same.

I wonder if people have noticed how those who are running a Country grey so fast.

The USGS estimates (2010) that discovered and undiscovered oil reserves in all of Southeast Asia, only a fraction of which are within the SCS, are 21.6bbl:

http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2010/3015/pdf/FS10-3015.pdf

Proven reserves in Libya alone are over 76bbl, more than 3 times as much. Iraq's are 112bbl, though they are now claiming new exploration has raised that much higher. The GCC overall has 469bbl of proven reserves. Weigh that up against 21.6bbl including undiscovered reserves, much of which is not within the contested area, and tell me where the "gold mine" is, and where the naval resources are likely to go if oil is a concern.

Gas reserves in the SCS appear to be a bit larger, but the US doesn't exactly need more gas, being in the midst of a glut that's driven prices so low that producers are shutting wells down.

The line of argument that policies or action of a Govt/Nation is solely confined to the current situation is amazing!

National Intelligence Estimates (NIEs) are the IC's most authoritative written judgments on national security issues. NIEs usually provide information on the likely course of future events and highlight the implications for U.S. policymakers.

The keyword is FUTURE!

Why is the US extracting oil and gas from Shale?

I believe the production cost of a barrel of shale oil was US$95 per barrel. The economics is dependent on the price of oil (Standard).

The US industry suffered losses during the last major investment into oil shale in the early 1980s, when a subsequent collapse in the oil price left the projects uneconomical.

So the requirement of oil and gas never is less!

Has the US offered anyone protection? If so, who? As referenced above, are the supposed "spoils" even worth all that much?

Would it mean that it is the belief that the US Navy is roaming the Pacific just because it has nothing worthwhile to do and requires to burn up fuel so that there is a shortage of gas and the prices skyrocket in the international market?

As of 2011, I believe the US Pacific Fleet consists of the Third and Seventh Fleets, Naval Air Force, Pacific; Commander, Naval Surface Forces Pacific; Naval Submarine Force, Pacific.

Here is the Task for the Pacific Command from the horses mouth. Nothing could be more authentic, even though you feel that everything other than what you feel is meaningless prattle.

STATEMENT OF
ADMIRAL ROBERT F. WILLARD, U.S. NAVY
COMMANDER, U.S. PACIFIC COMMAND
BEFORE THE SENATE ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE
ON U.S. PACIFIC COMMAND POSTURE
28 FEBRUARY 2012

Seven major security challenges confront the U.S. across this region, which encompasses half of the earth’s surface, including:

 Defense of the homeland, U.S. territories and compact states in the
Pacific.

 The need to continuously manage and optimize U.S. alliances and
strengthen regional partnerships, in particular, advancing the relationship
with India.

 The threat posed by the DPRK’s nuclear aspirations, proliferation,
provocations, and potential to cause regional instability.

 China’s military modernization – in particular its active development of
capabilities in the cyber and space domains - and the questions all these
emerging military capabilities raise among China’s neighbors about its
current and long-term intentions

 Three nuclear armed states, including Russia, China, and India, and North Korea’s nuclear aspirations, together with the threat of WMD proliferation

 Numerous transnational threats, ranging from proliferation, trafficking of
narcotics and persons, and piracy, to persistent natural and manmade
disasters

 Challenges to freedom of access to, and security within, maritime and air domains, and space and cyberspace, by both state and non-state actors.

http://armed- services.senate.gov/statemnt/2012/02%20February/Willard%2002-28-12.pdf

Should I say more?

Or is the good Admiral also pandering to pious and meaningless platitudes?