South China Sea and China (2011-2017)

[carl]

Big nations intruding on the fishing grounds of smaller ones isn't exactly unheard of in other places... I believe the Somalis have complained about the same thong, and I suppose you've heard of the cod wars.

A qualitative difference I think. Iceland won the Cod Wars and the Brits didn't claim sovereignty over the waters involved. I don't believe the Chinese are merely after enhanced fishing rights.

Many people want to minimize this but continuous provocative actions on the the high seas by a murderous police state are a cause for worry.

[Backwards Observer]

A qualitative difference I think. Iceland won the Cod Wars and the Brits didn't claim sovereignty over the waters involved. I don't believe the Chinese are merely after enhanced fishing rights.

Many people want to minimize this but continuous provocative actions on the the high seas by a murderous police state are a cause for worry.

Carl, you describe China as a murderous police state whose provocative behaviour should not be minimized. Fair enough. Yet you also repeatedly characterize the Phillipine-American War, in which roughly 200,000 Filipino civilians were killed, as a succesful model of counter-insurgency and nation building applicable even today. Fascinating.

CASUALTIES, February 4, 1899 - July 4, 1902:

Filipinos : 20,000 soldiers killed in action; 200,000 civilians died

Americans : 4,390 dead (1,053 killed in action; 3,337 other deaths)

http://philippineamericanwar.webs.com/

Also, there seems to be a new film out about that splendid little war:

AMIGO, the 17th feature film from Academy Award-nominated writer-director John Sayles, stars legendary Filipino actor Joel Torre as Rafael, a village mayor caught in the murderous crossfire of the Philippine-American War.

When U.S. troops occupy his village, Rafael comes under pressure from a tough-as-nails officer (Chris Cooper) to help the Americans in their hunt for Filipino guerilla fighters. But Rafael’s brother (Ronnie Lazaro) is the head of the local guerillas, and considers anyone who cooperates with the Americans to be a traitor. Rafael quickly finds himself forced to make the impossible, potentially deadly decisions faced by ordinary civilians in an occupied country.

A powerful drama of friendship, betrayal, romance and heartbreaking violence, AMIGO is a page torn from the untold history of the Philippines, and a mirror of today’s unresolvable conflicts.

http://www3.amigomovie.com/

[carl]

Carl, you describe China as a murderous police state whose provocative behaviour should not be minimized. Fair enough. Yet you also repeatedly characterize the Phillipine-American War, in which roughly 200,000 Filipino civilians were killed, as a succesful model of counter-insurgency and nation building applicable even today. Fascinating.

And to think I got that little bit of psychoanalysis gratis, no charge at all! Who says SWJ isn't worth it?

[Backwards Observer]

And to think I got that little bit of psychoanalysis gratis, no charge at all! Who says SWJ isn't worth it?

Spoken like a true gentleman.

Hidden depths in South China Sea tensions
By Roberto Tofani

Disputes over the South China Sea must be conducted and solved peacefully. This sentence summarizes most statements released by government officials after bilateral or multilateral meetings on the issue, but also highlights the absence of a real political will and the continuing unpredictability and instability in the region.

Disputes related to sovereignty about land and jurisdiction over maritime areas show that tensions can only increase in the months ahead; or at least until a new and more binding Code of Conduct (COC) on the South China Sea is agreed upon by China and the 10-member Association of Southeast Asia Nations (ASEAN). Lastly, the claim to be looking for a "peaceful solution", as expressed by the parties, has not prevented a new arms race in the region.

Hidden depths in South China Sea tensions - Asia Times Online - April 13, 2012.

[Dayuhan]

I don't believe the Chinese are merely after enhanced fishing rights.

Possibly not, hard to know what those inscrutable orientals are really after. Considering, though, that to my knowledge Chinese fishermen have been arrested for illegal intrusion and fishing in Palau, Japan, South Korea, the Philippines, Vietnam, and Indonesia (possibly others, I don't really keep a careful tally) it's hard to discount the possibility that in any given instance they may simply be after fish. For all the (mostly speculative) talk of oil and gas, fish may well be the most important resource the S China Sea has may well prove to be fish. Doesn't take huge investment or exploration, either, you just go in and take it. Once the Chinese have stripped the coral from Scarborough Shoal and left it as barren as their own offshore waters, I doubt they'll have much interest in it.

Many people want to minimize this but continuous provocative actions on the the high seas by a murderous police state are a cause for worry.

Worry isn't inherently irrational, but when people take it to extremes it can provoke inappropriate actions that can have unintended consequences.

[carl]

Dayuhan:

Perhaps. But when you look at the Chinese sea activity in total, there is cause for concern. If it were just aggressive fishing, that would be one thing. If it were just bullying at sea on a regular basis against a number of countries, that is one more slightly more worrisome thing. If it were only a great large buildup of subs and aircraft carriers and other ships...so they like to spend money on toys. If the DF-21 missiles were being developed to prevent us from blockading China like we have so many times since the end of WWII...no we haven't blockaded them at all. If the Chinese weren't behind the most massive intelligence operation in the history of the world directed at both military and civilian targets...

The trouble is all of these things exist at once and are being done at the direction of a regime that is directly descended from that of one of the greatest mass killers in world history. This worries me.

[Bill Moore]

Dayuhan,

You're right, when I just want to go fishing on someone else's property I just call the U.S. Navy to escort me and challenge the rightful landlord if they harass me for fishing in their waters. I told the world that the whole sea is mine, why would anyone make a big deal out of that. Sovreignty is so over rated, why should they care if I'm taking their resources?

Natural resources include food, water and energy, all needed for survival, so I'm not sure what the "just fishing" comment is meant to imply? Read between the lines on this, the Chinese are sending a message that the U.S. can't protect them. Send fishing ships to provoke, have the Navy in close proximity to challenge any nation that dares enforce claims to thier territorial waters. Do this in multiple countries with little public comment and just let the people form their own perceptions.

Not suggesting it will work, but their behavior is nothing short of provocative, and repeated incidents point to an intentional strategy.

[Dayuhan]

Perhaps. But when you look at the Chinese sea activity in total, there is cause for concern. If it were just aggressive fishing, that would be one thing. If it were just bullying at sea on a regular basis against a number of countries, that is one more slightly more worrisome thing. If it were only a great large buildup of subs and aircraft carriers and other ships...so they like to spend money on toys. If the DF-21 missiles were being developed to prevent us from blockading China like we have so many times since the end of WWII...no we haven't blockaded them at all.

Surely you appreciate the irony implicit in an American fretting over anyone else's accumulation of subs, aircraft carriers, ships, missiles, etc. Of course it's quite ok if we accumulate those things because we never ever throw our weight around and attack people... oh, wait.

What is it, exactly that you fear they will do?

The trouble is all of these things exist at once and are being done at the direction of a regime that is directly descended from that of one of the greatest mass killers in world history. This worries me.

Our ancestors didn't do so badly either. If the propensity for large scale violence is an inherited trait, the human race is in deep $#!t.

Natural resources include food, water and energy, all needed for survival, so I'm not sure what the "just fishing" comment is meant to imply?

Meant to imply that pushing their way into disputed fishing grounds (or fishing grounds where no claim exists, as in Palau) isn't necessarily a prelude to invading anyone, closing the SCS to non-Chinese shipping, or anything else. It's not necessarily part of a grand strategy. People pushing into fishing grounds claimed by others is nothing terribly new, in the SCS or in a lot of other places. That doesn't mean it isn't a problem, it just suggests that we might not want to overreact.

Read between the lines on this, the Chinese are sending a message that the U.S. can't protect them. Send fishing ships to provoke, have the Navy in close proximity to challenge any nation that dares enforce claims to thier territorial waters. Do this in multiple countries with little public comment and just let the people form their own perceptions.

Not suggesting it will work, but their behavior is nothing short of provocative, and repeated incidents point to an intentional strategy.

The ships in proximity weren't actually Navy, but that's a minor distinction. Yes, they're throwing their weight around, but it's not some sort of cataclysmic shift or new development requiring a new strategy or some hasty or dramatic action. I'm not sure the message directly involves the US either. If the Chinese want to encourage the Philippines to cut some new military equipment deals with the US or set up more frequent shipping rotations through Subic, they're doing the right thing.

[Ray]

Talking of innocent fishing, I am reminded of the Russian trawlers during the Cold War era.

Trawlers basically are for fishing!

The Russian, I take it, were 'just fishing'!

The issue indeed was fishing that the Russians were interested in, but fishing for what is the question!

[Ray]

Dayuhan,

You're right, when I just want to go fishing on someone else's property I just call the U.S. Navy to escort me and challenge the rightful landlord if they harass me for fishing in their waters. I told the world that the whole sea is mine, why would anyone make a big deal out of that. Sovreignty is so over rated, why should they care if I'm taking their resources?

Natural resources include food, water and energy, all needed for survival, so I'm not sure what the "just fishing" comment is meant to imply? Read between the lines on this, the Chinese are sending a message that the U.S. can't protect them. Send fishing ships to provoke, have the Navy in close proximity to challenge any nation that dares enforce claims to thier territorial waters. Do this in multiple countries with little public comment and just let the people form their own perceptions.

Not suggesting it will work, but their behavior is nothing short of provocative, and repeated incidents point to an intentional strategy.

This appears more plausible than 'just fishing'!

[Backwards Observer]

Not suggesting it will work, but their behavior is nothing short of provocative, and repeated incidents point to an intentional strategy.

An "intentional strategy", you say. Well, that's something you don't see every day.

Bill Moore, how would you interpret this intentional strategy? A precursor to "Operation Choverlord"? And remember, (being in) love means never having to say you're sorry.

[carl]

Surely you appreciate the irony implicit in an American fretting over anyone else's accumulation of subs, aircraft carriers, ships, missiles, etc. Of course it's quite ok if we accumulate those things because we never ever throw our weight around and attack people... oh, wait.

What is it, exactly that you fear they will do?

That is the predictable PC answer. "Oh yeah! Well what about us?" But our navel levels generally go up and down in relation to some threat or other. It went up a lot after Dec 1941 and went down hugely after 1945 and then has been up and down since. We have used it to throw our weight around as you say, most spectacularly in waters right close to where you are. The thing we use those naval forces for more than any other is keeping the seas open for free trade and we tend to build up when states whose free trade has not been threatened, say Red China, start to build up navies for purposes that aren't defensive, since there is no extant threat. Makes us a bit suspicious. We don't always do that. Sometimes we fool ourselves into thinking nothing serious is happening, like now.

And as I already mentioned above, it isn't just the accumulation of more fighting ships; it is the accumulation of more fighting ships combined with all the other things I mentioned above.

I fear they will take over the South China Sea, effectively turning it into Chinese territorial waters, thence cowing Vietnam, the PI, Malaysia, Thailand etc into becoming tropical Finlands. After that I fear the consequences, since the killer elites that run China don't impress me as being primarily motivated by the golden rule.

Our ancestors didn't do so badly either. If the propensity for large scale violence is an inherited trait, the human race is in deep $#!t.

Oh no Sir. You are very wrong. When it comes to mass murder and infliction of human suffering on a massive scale, the only people and political culture that come close to Mao and Chicoms are Stalin and the Russian communists.

Your quote is another variation of the "Oh yeah!" argument.

[Backwards Observer]

But our navel levels generally go up and down in relation to some threat or other.

Q. What do you call a hula hoop with a nail in it?

A. A navel destroyer.

Carl, so you are now once again facing one of the greatest evils mankind has ever known. Some may claim that a nation suffering from intellectual and economic impoverishment, riven by a deep and abiding cultural and ideological divide, and eschewing all but the slightest hint of self-knowledge is unwittingly putting itself at an unfortunate disadvantage. Does the overwhelming military advantage you possess leave war as the only recourse?

[Ray]

And as I already mentioned above, it isn't just the accumulation of more fighting ships; it is the accumulation of more fighting ships combined with all the other things I mentioned above.

I fear they will take over the South China Sea, effectively turning it into Chinese territorial waters, thence cowing Vietnam, the PI, Malaysia, Thailand etc into becoming tropical Finlands. After that I fear the consequences, since the killer elites that run China don't impress me as being primarily motivated by the golden rule.

It is quite surprising that the Communists, be it the Russians or the Chinese, who have always professed the Theory of Peaceful Coexistence, is now on a different path altogether.

China has always spoken of all to apply the Bandung Spirit (1955) that can be summarised as a call for a peaceful coexistence among the nations, for the liberation from the hegemony of any superpower and for building solidarities towards the weak and those being weakened by the world order of the day.


One is astonished how the cat has jumped!

Could it be that China used it as a smokescreen to disarm the neighbours and parts of the world into complacency at that time. And then during the phase where they aimed to be a challenge to the US, disarmed the US and West with platitudes and piety of Peaceful Rise, and now that it can challenge the US to some extent, the US being preoccupied with its economy and other 'wars', China is showing its true colours?

Well, you have to give it to them that they are real clever even if slim customers!

[Ray]

Does the overwhelming military advantage you possess leave war as the only recourse?

I don't think the US would want a war.

It may do the same as China is doing - 'battleship diplomacy'/ gunboat diplomacy.

[Backwards Observer]

Could it be that the continued provocations in the South China Sea, an arena in which China can barely hope to hold its own against the USN and USAF juggernaut, are in themselves a smokescreen veiling the continuing and long-term economic penetration of Africa and South America?

Why would China intentionally provoke an arms race fuelled regional realignment against themselves? To mollify PLA hardliners who feel it is their sacred (or whatever communists worship) duty to ensure the present and future security of the motherland?

What will the military response be should China start to make overtures for infrastructure development in Mexico? Don't ask me, I only work here.

[Backwards Observer]

I don't think the US would want a war.

It may do the same as China is doing - 'battleship diplomacy'/ gunboat diplomacy.

Yes, nobody "wants" a war. They just sorta happen when everyone starts pointing heat at each other.

One real danger in the region is the frequency of natural disasters. Ironically, the USN probably has the best capabilities to respond to these, limited as they may be in relation to the size of the calamities. Unfortunately, humans seem to prefer the little games they play with each other. We'll see where it gets them in the long run.

[Ray]

Could it be that the continued provocations in the South China Sea, an arena in which China can barely hope to hold its own against the USN and USAF juggernaut, are in themselves a smokescreen veiling the continuing and long-term economic penetration of Africa and South America?

How would the continued provocations in the South China Sea constitute a continuing and long-term economic penetration of Africa and South America?

Why would China intentionally provoke an arms race fuelled regional realignment against themselves? To mollify PLA hardliners who feel it is their sacred (or whatever communists worship) duty to ensure the present and future security of the motherland?

That is the million dollar one!

What will the military response be should China start to make overtures for infrastructure development in Mexico? Don't ask me, I only work here.

Nothing!

Unless they bring in military and strategic considerations.

But, are you suggesting that the South China Sea is the sole preserve of China?

[Ray]

Yes, nobody "wants" a war. They just sorta happen when everyone starts pointing heat at each other.

That is true.

It cannot happen in a vacuum, can it?

One could say that China ‘peacefully’ in total consonance of the Bandung spirit of ‘Peaceful Coexistence’ claimed the whole South China Sea as theirs!

It is the others who are not ready to peacefully coexist.

One does have a point!

One real danger in the region is the frequency of natural disasters. Ironically, the USN probably has the best capabilities to respond to these, limited as they may be in relation to the size of the calamities. Unfortunately, humans seem to prefer the little games they play with each other. We'll see where it gets them in the long run.

Well if one feels that the US is positioning itself in the Pacific Region because it can save all from natural disasters, then possibly that is why it is doing so!

[Backwards Observer]

How would the continued provocations in the South China Sea constitute a continuing and long-term economic penetration of Africa and South America?



That is the million dollar one!



Nothing!

Unless they bring in military and strategic considerations.

It almost occurs to me to wonder why you left out some of the words in the quote directly beneath the quote you quoted, but I'm sure that any proffered explanation would only further serve to reinforce your point.

As far as the rest of it, clearly there's nothing to worry about then in that respect, I stand corrected.

Ray, although it is difficult to respond to your posts, I do enjoy reading them. They remind me of the Indian movies they use to show on Malaysian TV. Very melodramatic and full of extended and exuberant song and dance numbers. Movies that loved life!