South China Sea and China (2011-2017)

[AdamG]

As good a thread as any for this observation, on public perceptions and how the Chinese entertainment industry views themselves and their enemies: in WOLF WARRIOR, the Good Guys are no longer Mao's valiant warriors but are all about the high tech and the bad guys are Caucasian former SEALs.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uqCNF5XttZg

[AdamG]

China is preparing for a potential military clash with the United States, according to an article on the Chinese army's website.
"The possibility of war increases" as tensions around North Korea and the South China Sea heat up, Liu Guoshun, a member of the national defense mobilization unit of China's Central Military Commission, wrote on Jan. 20—the same day as President Donald Trump's inauguration.
"'A war within the president's term', 'war breaking out tonight' are not just slogans, but the reality," Liu said in the Chinese commentary piece.

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/01/29/us-ch...cial-says.html

[AdamG]

U.S. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis on Saturday played down any need for major U.S. military moves in the South China Sea to contend with China's assertive behavior, even as he sharply criticized Beijing for "shredding the trust of nations in the region."
"At this time, we do not see any need for dramatic military moves at all," Mattis told a news conference in Tokyo, stressing that the focus should be on diplomacy.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-us...-idUSKBN15J061

Meanwhile, the Guardian's cup is half-full

China has accused the US of putting the stability of the Asia-Pacific at risk after Donald Trump’s defence secretary said Washington would come to Japan’s defence in the event of a conflict with Beijing over the disputed Senkaku islands.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...?CMP=edit_2221

[Azor]

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/01/29/us-ch...cial-says.html

Yawn. The Chinese have had plenty of time and space to resolve the following issues without any external pressure:

15 years to renounce using military force against Taiwan
10-15 years to disarm North Korea, removing nuclear weapons from the peninsula
10-15 years to resolve territorial disputes with Japan and the Philippines diplomatically and without the use of coercion or force

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-us...-idUSKBN15J061

Mattis is quite correct. However, the forces in theater should be prepared for war as China will probably strike first, hard and fast. Establishing Allied A2/AD zones in the First and Second Island Chains while under fire will be important, and the USMC can play an important role in establishing land-based components of those zones.

Meanwhile, the Guardian's cup is half-full

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...?CMP=edit_2221

It's plain wrong.

The United States has explicitly stated for decades that the Diaoyou/Senkakus are under Japan's administration (despite the trilateral dispute), and therefore are covered by American defense commitments to Japan.

[AdamG]

Japan plans to dispatch its largest warship on a three-month tour through the South China Sea beginning in May, three sources said, in its biggest show of naval force in the region since World War Two.
China claims almost all the disputed waters and its growing military presence has fueled concern in Japan and the West, with the United States holding regular air and naval patrols to ensure freedom of navigation.
The Izumo helicopter carrier, commissioned only two years ago, will make stops in Singapore, Indonesia, the Philippines and Sri Lanka before joining the Malabar joint naval exercise with Indian and U.S. naval vessels in the Indian Ocean in July.

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN16K0UP

[AdamG]

China is developing the unique ultra-low altitude anti-ship unmanned vehicle. Details have emerged of new Chinese unmanned ground effect vehicle that would attack enemy surface ships.

The new ultra-low altitude anti-ship unmanned system can fly as low as 50 cm above the sea, can reach a maximum altitude of 3,000 km, along with an endurance of 1.5 hours – depending on the flight profile. The maximum take-off weight (MTOW) is 3000 kilograms and can carry a 1000 kg load.

http://defence-blog.com/news/china-d...ed-system.html

[AdamG]

Two Chinese Sukhoi Su-30 jets have conducted an "unprofessional" intercept of a US aircraft, the US military said.
One of the Chinese jets came as close as 150ft (45m) to the US WC-135 plane and flew upside down above it, according to US officials cited by CNN.
The US says the plane was on a mission to detect radiation in international airspace over the East China Sea.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-39971267

[Azor]

Reuters: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-so...-idUSKCN18F1DJ

Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte said on Friday Chinese counterpart China Xi Jinping had warned him there would be war if Manila tried to enforce an arbitration ruling and drill for oil in a disputed part of the South China Sea.

In remarks that could infuriate China, Duterte hit back at domestic critics who said he has gone soft on Beijing by refusing to push it to comply with an award last year by the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague, which ruled largely in favor of the Philippines.

Duterte said he discussed it with Xi when the two met in Beijing on Monday, and got a firm, but friendly warning.

"We intend to drill oil there, if it's yours, well, that's your view, but my view is, I can drill the oil, if there is some inside the bowels of the earth because it is ours," Duterte said in a speech, recalling his conversation with Xi.

"His response to me, 'we're friends, we don't want to quarrel with you, we want to maintain the presence of warm relationship, but if you force the issue, we'll go to war."

Duterte has long expressed his admiration for Xi and said he would raise the arbitration ruling with him eventually, but needed first to strengthen relations between the two countries, which the Philippines is hoping will yield billions of dollars in Chinese loans and infrastructure investments.

The Hague award clarifies Philippine sovereign rights in its 200-mile Exclusive Economic Zone to access offshore oil and gas fields, including the Reed Bank, 85 nautical miles off its coast.

It also invalidated China's nine-dash line claim on its maps denoting sovereignty over most of the South China Sea.

Duterte has a reputation for his candid, at times incendiary, remarks and his office typically backpeddles on his behalf and blames the media for distorting his most controversial comments.

Duterte recalled the same story about his discussion with Xi on oil exploration in a recorded television show aired moments after the speech.

He said Xi told him "do not touch it".

He said Xi had promised that the arbitration ruling would be discussed in future, but not now.

Duterte said China did not want to bring up the arbitral ruling at a time when other claimant countries, like Vietnam, might also decide to file cases against it at the arbitration tribunal.

It was not the first time the firebrand leader has publicly discussed the content of private meetings with other world leaders.

His remarks came the same day that China and the Philippines held their first session in a two-way consultation process on the South China Sea.

They exchanged views on "the importance of appropriately handling concerns, incidents and disputes involving the South China Sea", the Chinese Foreign Ministry said in a statement that gave few details.

Well, at least the discussion is more honest than the absurd references to "freedom of navigation" or "ancient maps". China wants control over and access to the energy resources of the South and East China Seas. It wants to reduce dependence upon the Middle East and is looking down the road when energy prices might rise significantly and make these undersea deposits both economic and essential.

[Azor]

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-39971267

So much for the Trump-Xi deal. The rejection of North Korean coal was a bit of theater and true "fake news", and Xi seems more interested in the increased U.S. presence than Kim's slow progress toward a credible deterrent.