The future of US policy in the South China Sea.

[woden]

A BBC world backgrounder discusses the issue:

India and the world.: BBC South China Sea Backgrounder. (http://indiangeopolitics.blogspot.com/2009/07/bbc-south-china-sea-backgrounder.html)

A recent article in the Financial Times relates how China has urged the US once again to stay away from its EEZ:

FT.com / Asia-Pacific - China urges US to end coast surveillance (http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/13335cca-9329-11de-b146-00144feabdc0.html)

Will the South China Sea become a Chinese lake? Are China's claims regarding its EEZ legally defendable? Is the future of US policy in the region destined to become, as Iskander Rehman claims, " a subtle balancing act, in-between public displays of resolve and private efforts to re-establish dialogue, and in-between professed claims of neutrality and rather more circumspect efforts to strengthen Southeast Asian unity in the face of Chinese expansionism." ?
Or will the United States have to adopt a firmer approach? How will countries such as Singapore and Vietnam react to Chinese assertiveness?

[turin]

Are China's claims regarding its EEZ legally defendable?

No, they are not. So much was established already when the incident involving USS Impeccable took place. The very definition of the EEZ means that matters other than marine resource exploitation, such as surveillance operations, are not affected.

Basically China is crying like a little child that wants to protect its assets and that is worried about its capabilities of hiding them on its own terms. Their latest theatrics are irrelevant and should be treated as such (ie: ignoring them). They should try to learn the rules others are playing by for the last sixty years instead of trying to make up new ones that only serve their own purpose.

Now if the US try to appease China on this issue, this would be a serious diplomatic mistake from my point of view, because it would reassure the latter to make further demands in the future and considering the region concerned there is certainly no lack of interest as far as Beijing is concerned. The thing is that the Chinese will back up, if they face resolve on issues like this where they have no legal basis. But if they sense a weakness, they will exploit it.

Beyond this specific issue I would think that China is very far away from turning the South China Sea into a "chinese lake". There are simply to many different regional powers involved, all with their own interests, so if China is not very careful about their behavior, they might very well turn the whole region against them, which is the last thing they want while trying to create an image of a benevolent emerging superpower.

[hyalitemarine]

Yes, they are. Personally, I may not agree with China's unilaterally expanded definition of what a EEZ is, but that does not change the fact of what "legally defensible" means. As is the nature of this website's focus, legality, in the end, depends upon weapons for enforcement. Once a law ceases to be enforced, that law ceases to exist.

China has decided that not only do the resources of the South China Sea belong to them, but that the South China Sea in it's entirety is, in fact, the territorial waters of China. Therefore China will continue to seize & fortify islands (from Vietnam, Philippines, etc) , arrest & detain non-Chinese vessels it can easily overpower (foreign fishing fleets), & harass, damage, or destroy assets it cannot easily overpower (US surveillance aircraft & naval vessels).

Chinese annexation of the South China Sea is a fait accompli. Foreign powers are unwilling to challenge China's claim directly. The only reason non-Chinese presence is tolerated is due to a lack of resources on China's part to enforce their sovereignty. However, China's ability to patrol & defend the South China Sea is increasing exponentially. With-in 10 years, China should have the military force to credibly deny even US battle groups from the area.

China has no reason what-so-ever to back down from her claim of the entire South China Sea. The internal Chinese economy guarantees continued military expansion regardless of exports. Foreign powers have no credible means, neither diplomatic, economic, nor militarily, to coerce China into a position that China does not want to be in. It is a new era.

[bren122]

China's economy is overwhelmingly devoted to export markets and thus very reliant on overseas trade. it's current economic prosperity in the face of the GFC is due to an expansion of its infrastructure projects rather than an attempt to increase domestic demand. China has no interest in creating substantive changes in its class structures as an increasing middle- class will create political difficulties for the communist party. it should be noted that both China and India, at their current rates of growth, would require in excess of 100 years each to overtake the US economy.
China's claims to the South China Sea are legally indefensible for their claim overlaps the EEZ of other nations- however it is correct that the law only has effect where it is enforced. whilst any clash can be expected to stop well short of war, there will be an inceasing number of clashes in this area until there is a settlement.
whilst China would currently have the ability to overcome an individual US carrier any US intervention would likely take the form of at least three carriers in at least two separate battlegroups, plus F-15s and F-22s (with refuelling) out of Okinawa (and probably the Phillipines; maybe Taiwan). their combined numbers and technological superiority would mean that they can basically go where they want to. current Chinese doctrine is still tied into regimental and squadron controls with little in the way of individual initiative; a solid hit by US aircraft on the first one or two waves of an attack (bombers supported by fighters) would make a big hole in the capabilities of the PLA-AF.

[brian00]

I think that china's claim is quite greedy, I think they should be able to claim some of it as an EEZ for example around hainan island. After all there are countries such as UK, US and France who claim EEZ's up to 200 miles from their lands, even around their small islands in the ocean with no population,

However for china to claim all of the south china sea as their own is unreasonable, vietnam, malaysia and phillipines should have an equal EEZ's and the water beyond 200 miles should be international

If not then the idea of 'one rule for and us and another rule for them' comes to mind

[hyalitemarine]

To quote: '"China's economy is overwhelmingly devoted to export markets and thus very reliant on overseas trade. it's current economic prosperity in the face of the GFC is due to an expansion of its infrastructure projects rather than an attempt to increase domestic demand."

The preceding statement is understandable given current public perceptions based not only in relatively recent history, but upon observation of many consumer goods throughout the world bearing the "made in China" stamp. However, an examination of statistics should provide ample evidence of China's domestic market graduating to First World status, if not in domestic percentage, then surely in sheer domestic numbers.

For instance, cell phone usage, 300million domestic users in 2004, 500 million users in 2007, almost 800 million users by the end of 2011. Domestic automobile production, in 1999 sales were 1.2 million units, in 2003 sales were 4.44 million, in 2007 sales were 8.88 million. This year auto sales are projected to be 13 million units, surpassing car sales in the US of only 11 million sales. Only 3 years from now, annual sales will surpass 20 million units. These cars are for domestic use, not for export. Imagine all the supporting industries; steel, rubber, glass, electronics that contribute to making a car.

Here are other modern statistics measured in GDP, Gross Domestic Product. In 2006, US GDP was about 13.2 trillion in US dollars and China was about 2.7 trillion in US dollars. In 2008 US GDP = 14.3 trillion & China GDP = 4.4 trillion. Even though Chinese exports FELL by about 25% in 2008 due to the world economic crisis, the Chinese economy still grew, this is proof of domestic demand not only growing faster than declining export markets but that domestic markets are now LARGER than export markets. Estimated GDP for 2009 in the US is 11.6 trillion (shrinking). Estimated GDP for China this year is 7.1 trillion (almost geometric growth). These statistics are available almost anywhere online.

"China has no interest in creating substantive changes in its class structures as an increasing middle- class will create political difficulties for the communist party. it should be noted that both China and India, at their current rates of growth, would require in excess of 100 years each to overtake the US economy."

Sorry, but as I have indicated, statistical fact proves otherwise. Chinese GDP will be greater than US GDP in less than 3 years. Most information regarding China's economy is outdated if it is more than eight years old. Most people are surprised and shocked when they access current data on China's growth.

[hyalitemarine]

All of the background info I stated previously on China's economy was to prove that China has ample resources to hold onto and tighten control of the South China Sea. China needs the South China Sea for two main reasons. One, China would like a sea buffer to protect the mainland from naval and air threats. Two, the South China Sea has large petroleum reserves China requires for domestic consumption.

The US cannot take control away from China in the South China Sea for many reasons. Reason number 1 is that the US has no desire to do so. If supposing the US attempted, they would not have the support of Japan or Taiwan. Japan would see no sense at all in risking a war with China and would deny the US use of its facilities anywhere on Japan including Japanese Okinawa. Taiwan would deny US use of its facilities for the same reason.

Any attempt by the US to take Chinese control of the South China Sea would escalate to a nuclear standoff quickly. The only reasonable military action the US can conceivable employ against China in the South China Sea would be to fight a proxy war. The US could arm and advise Vietnam, Malaysia, the Philippines, etc and hope for the best, but those nations would be defeated easily by sheer numbers and technology from China.

The ease of the annexation of the South China Sea by China should serve as a warning to all neighboring countries in the rejoin that empire building is afoot. Nations should now likewise annex and militarily enforce the boarders of their EEZs or risk losing them to occupation and takeover.

[kmoo]

All of the background info I stated previously on China's economy was to prove that China has ample resources to hold onto and tighten control of the South China Sea. China needs the South China Sea for two main reasons. One, China would like a sea buffer to protect the mainland from naval and air threats. Two, the South China Sea has large petroleum reserves China requires for domestic consumption.

The US cannot take control away from China in the South China Sea for many reasons. Reason number 1 is that the US has no desire to do so. If supposing the US attempted, they would not have the support of Japan or Taiwan. Japan would see no sense at all in risking a war with China and would deny the US use of its facilities anywhere on Japan including Japanese Okinawa. Taiwan would deny US use of its facilities for the same reason.

Any attempt by the US to take Chinese control of the South China Sea would escalate to a nuclear standoff quickly. The only reasonable military action the US can conceivable employ against China in the South China Sea would be to fight a proxy war. The US could arm and advise Vietnam, Malaysia, the Philippines, etc and hope for the best, but those nations would be defeated easily by sheer numbers and technology from China.

The ease of the annexation of the South China Sea by China should serve as a warning to all neighboring countries in the rejoin that empire building is afoot. Nations should now likewise annex and militarily enforce the boarders of their EEZs or risk losing them to occupation and takeover.

Huge assumption that no nations would intervene in China's attempt to control the sea. That would be sealing off freedom of trade through those waters. If anything, the U.S. and all other European nations would begin to arm Vietnam to counterbalance Chinese influence provided Vietnam showed to those countries that it would not threaten passage of trade. Having better relationships and less hostility, it's reasonable to assume Vietnam would receive opportunities for powerful arms to ward off China. Other Southeast Asian countries would not help Vietnam fight against China since, realistically, they are not strong enough to do anything. China would not be able to maintain control of the East Sea but would be able to project in calm conditions if they used a significant amount of their resources.

In the near future, ~15-20 years, when there is more freedom of speech in Vietnam, the China friendly government will be unable to suppress calls for action against Chinese theft of territory. Chinese incursions may be met with violent reactions. Civilian ships may start arming themselves to resist Chinese ships. The Vietnamese Navy and Airforce will grow enormous. There will be many casualties for China and Vietnam, but in the end China will lose control of all their islands in the Paracels and Spratlys.

China's open hostility will have signaled significant Western support of Vietnam and China's defeat.

[Marc 1]

Yes, they are. Personally, I may not agree with China's unilaterally expanded definition of what a EEZ is, but that does not change the fact of what "legally defensible" means. As is the nature of this website's focus, legality, in the end, depends upon weapons for enforcement. Once a law ceases to be enforced, that law ceases to exist.

China has decided that not only do the resources of the South China Sea belong to them, but that the South China Sea in it's entirety is, in fact, the territorial waters of China. Therefore China will continue to seize & fortify islands (from Vietnam, Philippines, etc) , arrest & detain non-Chinese vessels it can easily overpower (foreign fishing fleets), & harass, damage, or destroy assets it cannot easily overpower (US surveillance aircraft & naval vessels).

Chinese annexation of the South China Sea is a fait accompli. Foreign powers are unwilling to challenge China's claim directly. The only reason non-Chinese presence is tolerated is due to a lack of resources on China's part to enforce their sovereignty. However, China's ability to patrol & defend the South China Sea is increasing exponentially. With-in 10 years, China should have the military force to credibly deny even US battle groups from the area.

China has no reason what-so-ever to back down from her claim of the entire South China Sea. The internal Chinese economy guarantees continued military expansion regardless of exports. Foreign powers have no credible means, neither diplomatic, economic, nor militarily, to coerce China into a position that China does not want to be in. It is a new era.

Interesting opinion. Your contention seems to be that if a nation has sufficient military power then it has defact rights over whichever piece of territory it wishes to.

The original question was "Are China's claims over its EEZ legally defensible"

[exported_kiwi]

My opinion is that NO, Chinas claims are not legally defensible being that other countries also have interests in the South China sea (SCS). I hear tell of Vietnam buying some Kilo SSKs and some SU33s to beef up her defenses in this area. Living in China, it's interesting to note what Chinese people think of this. Most I've spoken to do regard the SCS as a Chinese lake but they fail to take into account those other nations which also have maritime borders/interests in that area. The Chinese people are very proud of their progress over the last 30 or so years and rightly so, but this has bred an arrogance and rampant nationalism which borders on xenophobia here. People here "crow" about their ability (soon) to deploy ASBM which can target USN CVBGs and their subs, both SSK and SSNs which will "wipe out " the USN before it can get within striking range. It's a useless argument, and I've tried, to point out that in conflict, the first thing to go will be Chinas satellite targetting systems. It's equally useless to point out that it's going to be extremely difficult, if not impossible, to target a CVBG moving at 30 knots in a vast area of ocean. I've tried to point out that once the C3I systems of China are wiped out, next will be the SEAD role of the USAF and USN. Once these are degraded, the SCS and indeed, the Chinese coastline is US controlled airspace and once this is acheived, the PLA-AF will be hard pressed to deal with roving US air strikes. I'd even hazard a guess that Taiwan would join in as would Japan. This is a whole new ballgame and China. IMO, just ain't in it yet, and this, from someone who's lived in China for 5 years. Just don't hit Guangzhou please, a lot of good folks from foreign lands live there as do I and my lady.

[stoker]

My opinion is that NO, Chinas claims are not legally defensible being that other countries also have interests in the South China sea (SCS). I hear tell of Vietnam buying some Kilo SSKs and some SU33s to beef up her defenses in this area. Living in China, it's interesting to note what Chinese people think of this. Most I've spoken to do regard the SCS as a Chinese lake but they fail to take into account those other nations which also have maritime borders/interests in that area. The Chinese people are very proud of their progress over the last 30 or so years and rightly so, but this has bred an arrogance and rampant nationalism which borders on xenophobia here. People here "crow" about their ability (soon) to deploy ASBM which can target USN CVBGs and their subs, both SSK and SSNs which will "wipe out " the USN before it can get within striking range. It's a useless argument, and I've tried, to point out that in conflict, the first thing to go will be Chinas satellite targetting systems. It's equally useless to point out that it's going to be extremely difficult, if not impossible, to target a CVBG moving at 30 knots in a vast area of ocean. I've tried to point out that once the C3I systems of China are wiped out, next will be the SEAD role of the USAF and USN. Once these are degraded, the SCS and indeed, the Chinese coastline is US controlled airspace and once this is acheived, the PLA-AF will be hard pressed to deal with roving US air strikes. I'd even hazard a guess that Taiwan would join in as would Japan. This is a whole new ballgame and China. IMO, just ain't in it yet, and this, from someone who's lived in China for 5 years. Just don't hit Guangzhou please, a lot of good folks from foreign lands live there as do I and my lady.

I think it was Napolean Bonaparte who warned the World to beware of the Chinese dragon awakening?

But the Chinese's economy is totally dependance on its massive imports/exports markets has also given it a massive 'glass jaw'.

If China decides to take on the USA in a 'pissing contest' over the South China EEZ, all the USA needs do is to mine its ports.

Mines can be laid 24/7 by aircraft , ships and submarines.

Chine does not have the anti-mine naval infrastructor to locate and clear all these mine fields, plus the US can very easly eliminate any mine clearance assets..

China would fall over like a pack of cards very quickly.

China is to pragmatic to openly taken on the US, they have been around for millenium, they had the Kingdom of the Middle Earth going when our ancestors were covered in furs and living in caves, they will take one little bite at a time, even if it takes them 50 years to get what they started for.

[Spetsznaz]

China needs to watch it. They Cant afford to continue [ Mode Edit. Text deleted. You can find other ways of expressing yourself without having to use this language ] other parts of asia, [ Mode Edit. Text deleted. You can find other ways of expressing yourself without having to use this language

Can you please read the Forum Rules before posting any further comments

Rather than rack up your post numbers please make the effort to recognise what we expect of all posters when they participate ]

[exported_kiwi]

China needs to watch it. They Cant afford to continue pissing off other parts of asia, and acting like bullies.

The thing is that your average Chinese person doesn't see it as bullying, they see it as taking back what is rightfully theirs, even if those claims go back a few thousand years. I have a Chinese girlfriend and subjects such as this are now taboo in our home as she's about as nationalistic as the rest of the ordinary Chinese folks out there. Nope folks, come hell or highwater, Chinese people, on the whole want to claim this area, and most of Asia as far, as I can tell, as theirs....period! This is the Chinese mindset and once entrenched, it's virtually impossible to dislodge this idea. Even reasoning and logic doesn't work. Me, I've learned to shut up now when asked such questions by my many Chinese friends here.

[Spetsznaz]

China needs to take care of Taiwan, before advancing on to the rest of Asia. Not only that but they have too keep in mind that trying to gain back "whats theirs" make them sound like a crying kid for candy. If china starts to piss of the rest of Asia, then the US will HAVE to come to the help to fight china, and Russia takes china's side and kaboom WW3 baby!

[Marc 1]

China needs to take care of Taiwan, before advancing on to the rest of Asia. Not only that but they have too keep in mind that trying to gain back "whats theirs" make them sound like a crying kid for candy. If china starts to piss of the rest of Asia, then the US will HAVE to come to the help to fight china, and Russia takes china's side and kaboom WW3 baby!

Working on the assumption that the Russians would back China eh? Why? There have been Sino-soviet wars fought in the past, the Russians are cheesed off because the Chinese have been stealing intellectual property (they copy whay they damn well wish, then sell it overseas into the same markets that the russians are trying to penetrate). I don't think its a 'given' that the Russians would back the Chinese.

[Spetsznaz]

Working on the assumption that the Russians would back China eh? Why? There have been Sino-soviet wars fought in the past, the Russians are cheesed off because the Chinese have been stealing intellectual property (they copy whay they damn well wish, then sell it overseas into the same markets that the russians are trying to penetrate). I don't think its a 'given' that the Russians would back the Chinese.

I guess your right, And right now Russia is spreading there tentacles into India. But Still nationalistic movement of china against s Asia, spells serious overseas conflict, there being the possibility of Some countries having Nuclear weapons, and China is a communist Country so who knows:ar15

[Ananda]

well, well..like many discussion thread in the internet that I have seen so far...when talking on China there will be some people that will/has over estimate what the China capabilities..

For one thning no matter how hight the potential on China GDP in the next decade will be...No matter how extraordinary her economic growth has been...China still a developing country with a lot of poverty still to be tackle...
The communist regime holding on to the power will be very much related to their ability to provide that wealth to the masses. Like any other otoriterian regimes..they survivability will much depend on the ability on continue feeding their people well.

People in developing countries with that kind of regime will (in majority at least) gave benefit to follow as long as their basic fullfilment was satisfied. What happen in Indonesia with Soeharto kind be seen as example.
It's not Democratic People Power that topple Soeharto. It's an Economic crisis/melt down. For more than 30 years people follow Soeharto regime because the regime provide good economic growth and relative good basic need distributions to the people, thus no matter how the educated and the elite segments complaint on..this otoraterian and somewhat brutal regime stays on (until they can't offered the economic miracle anymore).

China communist regime certaintly now that, thus they will pump the huge majority of their wealth to tacle economics and bassic needs distributions to their people. Remember China's not only Shanghai, Beijing and Guangzhou...

In sense it will limit the growth of their military power as such that it can't really overwhellmed other oppositions or combine oppositions in Asia at will. China military possition will never reached overall superiority to their neighbours like the Imperial Japan had during the 1930's and early 1940's.

Japan, South Korea and Taiwan air and naval capabilities had tied down much of what China had. Considering what's left on Southern Fleet..then what SEA had is not really bellow what the Southern Fleet can offered.
In sense the SEA contries had only relaistically think of China Southern Fleet. I hope nobody will expect that Japan, South Korea and Taiwan will do nothing if China decided to chooke their life line wich called South China sea ???

[Spetsznaz]

If China goes to war with ANY country we can expect overseas conflict to spark up and a start of a global war

[dragonfire]

Interesting

Because in todays news reports in India there have been realisations that China has over a period of 20-25 years made a large incursions and conversion of land from being Indian to Chinese. They have crossed the LOAC (Line Of Actual Control) and taken over land by "inches" and that over a couple of decades has become large tracts

-

India has lost 'substantial' land to China: Official report

NEW DELHI: The area along Line of Actual Control with China has "shrunk" over a period of time and India has lost "substantial" amount of land in the last two decades, says an official report.

At a recent meeting held in Leh which was attended by officials from the Jammu and Kashmir government, Ministry of Home Affairs and Army, it was agreed that there was difference in the maps of various agencies and that there was lack of proper mapping of the area.

The meeting was chaired by Commissioner (Leh) A K Sahu and attended among others by Brigadier General Staff of 14 Corps Brig Sarat Chand and Colonel Inderjit Singh.

While the absence of proper map was agreed upon, the meeting all the same felt, "however, it is clear and be accepted that we are withdrawing from LAC and our area has shrunk over a period of time."

"Though this process if very slow but we have lost substantial amount of land in 20-25 years," it was said at the meeting held last month.

According to the minutes of the meeting, it was also identified that "there is a lack of institutional memory in various agencies as well as clear policy on this issue which in long run has resulted in loss of territory by the India in favour of China."

The meeting was called to ensure proper protection to nomads who move with their cattle to Dokbug area of Nyoma sector during the winter months every year. In December 2008, Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA) had damaged their tents and threatened them to vacate the land.

"They (Chinese) have threatened the nomadic people who had been using Dokbug area (in Ladakh sector) area for grazing since decades long, in a way to snatch our land in inches. A Chinese proverb is famous in the world - better do in inches than in yards," a report filed by former Sub Divisional Magistrate (Nyoma) Tsering Norboo had said.

Full Story - India has lost 'substantial' land to China: Official report - India - The Times of India (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/India-has-lost-substantial-land-to-China-Official-report/articleshow/5430564.cms)

[exported_kiwi]

China needs to take care of Taiwan, before advancing on to the rest of Asia. Not only that but they have too keep in mind that trying to gain back "whats theirs" make them sound like a crying kid for candy. If china starts to piss of the rest of Asia, then the US will HAVE to come to the help to fight china, and Russia takes china's side and kaboom WW3 baby!

A cry baby is exactly what China appears to be, from my POV, living here anyway. They scream bloody murder when bad things happen to China and Chinese folks but chuckle with glee when it happens to the "west". Over here, it's very much an "us and them" situation.
ON TOPIC; China doesn't seem to realise that as her role on the world stage grows, so too, do her international responsibilities, which includes the SCS because of the international boundaries in that area. BTW, did you know that China "won" the Korean war and also that little "fracas" with Vietnam in 1979? Like all things to do with the SCS, China wins hands down according to folks here and with 1.3 billion folks, all of the same mind, they're going to be kinda hard to beat. Funny thing is, they're indoctrinated with this stuff here, schools are very regimented from an early age and when ALL kids are around 14, they undergo rudimentary military training. Each school has it's military uniformed cadre's and this is the mindset here. Trust me, I know. I've taught in schools all over China for over 5 years now and my missus is Chinese. There's going to be a reckoning one day and if I see it coming, I'm heading back to NZ with my missus, kicking and screaming if I have to.
As for Taiwan, right now in Chinafolks are kicking and screaming about the sale of PAC3's to the island. They tend to forget that China is aiming approx 1500 missiles at Taiwan, or maybe they just don't know...this one is beyond me and I don't dare to get into it. My missus said she'd pick up the meat cleaver to attack or defend the "motherland", so do most others I know....how can you argue with a mindset like that.....even when it comes to the SCS.
As far as the US is concerned, well, I guess they're just going to do what they think serves their interests, allies or not.

[Spetsznaz]

A cry baby is exactly what China appears to be, from my POV, living here anyway. They scream bloody murder when bad things happen to China and Chinese folks but chuckle with glee when it happens to the "west". Over here, it's very much an "us and them" situation.
ON TOPIC; China doesn't seem to realise that as her role on the world stage grows, so too, do her international responsibilities, which includes the SCS because of the international boundaries in that area. BTW, did you know that China "won" the Korean war and also that little "fracas" with Vietnam in 1979? Like all things to do with the SCS, China wins hands down according to folks here and with 1.3 billion folks, all of the same mind, they're going to be kinda hard to beat. Funny thing is, they're indoctrinated with this stuff here, schools are very regimented from an early age and when ALL kids are around 14, they undergo rudimentary military training. Each school has it's military uniformed cadre's and this is the mindset here. Trust me, I know. I've taught in schools all over China for over 5 years now and my missus is Chinese. There's going to be a reckoning one day and if I see it coming, I'm heading back to NZ with my missus, kicking and screaming if I have to.
As for Taiwan, right now in Chinafolks are kicking and screaming about the sale of PAC3's to the island. They tend to forget that China is aiming approx 1500 missiles at Taiwan, or maybe they just don't know...this one is beyond me and I don't dare to get into it. My missus said she'd pick up the meat cleaver to attack or defend the "motherland", so do most others I know....how can you argue with a mindset like that.....even when it comes to the SCS.
As far as the US is concerned, well, I guess they're just going to do what they think serves their interests, allies or not.

Let me throw in a little fun fact about China and Taiwan.

The ONLY reason that china doesn't scale a mass Invasion on Taiwan, is that they know that Taiwan has Nuclear Weapons, and they will not hesitate to use them on China, being because Taiwan is like 'the skinny kid in a fight' Taiwan has Nukes and will unleash them all into China, and then China might get Taiwan back, however they will have serious civilian casualties, not only that back many democratic nations well step up to help Taiwan, so there goes NATO to the rescue, In the end China WILL BE SEEN AS THE BAD GUY, which is why they dont want to invade Taiwan.:nono

[Ananda]

If China goes to war with ANY country we can expect overseas conflict to spark up and a start of a global war

Yes it can. And I think the Communist regimes know that. For that China's also trying their best to attract allies or at least symphetiser from the rest of the world but especially their surounding neighbourhood.

No matter what bravado China has shown on South China Sea, they know that their main problem now lies with Taiwan. Any hostile movement in South China Sea by the chinese..will definetely lose any friend they trying so had to get on South East Asia. Again China are surounded by powerfull neighbours..Rusia, Japan, South Korea and India. China probably can take on one of them one by one (at least in paper)..but definetely not all of them...

With that kind of neigbours around...can anybody realistically think China will dare to take South China Sea by Force..???

China will have huge problem if they dare to Invade Taiwan..and the bet's are off for China if She dare to Invade South China Sea...With Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan still around and the strong possibility it will allienated the combine of SEA countries...that something that China will have to think hard ...with or without US factor around.

BTW: Chinese nuclear..it will not make much factor...perhaps many people don't realize that Japan can build their nuclear arsenal AT WILL if they choose to do that. If US nuclear umbrella gone..Japan will have no problem to match Chinese nuclear within few years. South Korea and Taiwan has enough technology to build their own arsenal also within couple of years, if they're force to do that.
Even (according to SIPRI) country like Indonesia who already mastered the fuel enrichement technology (even only for research)..theoritically can build and reach weapons grade within five years...if we want (and off course if the US let us..:D).

What i'm getting at..If the US umbrella or influenced being reduced...then the rest of China neighbours will make adjustments to counter that.
Many comment about US reduced influeced in Asia seems think that China can do at will if the US gone or much reduced...and seems neglected the fact that China many neighbour can perfectly countered China on their own if they need to. Perhaps not by them selves but certeintly on combined force.

No matter how big now inter Asian trade with China but one think for sure..most of China neighbour willing to trade with China..but always keep deep suspiscions on her...in sense CHINA DO NOT HAVE STRONG ALLIES...with the MAJORITY of the neighbours in East Asia and SEA.

[Spetsznaz]

Yes it can. And I think the Communist regimes know that. For that China's also trying their best to attract allies or at least symphetiser from the rest of the world but especially their surounding neighbourhood.

No matter what bravado China has shown on South China Sea, they know that their main problem now lies with Taiwan. Any hostile movement in South China Sea by the chinese..will definetely lose any friend they trying so had to get on South East Asia. Again China are surounded by powerfull neighbours..Rusia, Japan, South Korea and India. China probably can take on one of them one by one (at least in paper)..but definetely not all of them...

With that kind of neigbours around...can anybody realistically think China will dare to take South China Sea by Force..???

China will have huge problem if they dare to Invade Taiwan..and the bet's are off for China if She dare to Invade South China Sea...With Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan still around and the strong possibility it will allienated the combine of SEA countries...that something that China will have to think hard ...with or without US factor around.

BTW: Chinese nuclear..it will not make much factor...perhaps many people don't realize that Japan can build their nuclear arsenal AT WILL if they choose to do that. If US nuclear umbrella gone..Japan will have no problem to match Chinese nuclear within few years. South Korea and Taiwan has enough technology to build their own arsenal also within couple of years, if they're force to do that.
Even (according to SIPRI) country like Indonesia who already mastered the fuel enrichement technology (even only for research)..theoritically can build and reach weapons grade within five years...if we want (and off course if the US let us..:D).

What i'm getting at..If the US umbrella or influenced being reduced...then the rest of China neighbours will make adjustments to counter that.
Many comment about US reduced influeced in Asia seems think that China can do at will if the US gone or much reduced...and seems neglected the fact that China many neighbour can perfectly countered China on their own if they need to. Perhaps not by them selves but certeintly on combined force.

No matter how big now inter Asian trade with China but one think for sure..most of China neighbour willing to trade with China..but always keep deep suspiscions on her...in sense CHINA DO NOT HAVE STRONG ALLIES...with the MAJORITY of the neighbours in East Asia and SEA.

I think the point you made about the smaller Asian Country's being able to construct a Nuclear arsenal at there will is a very important point. All though the US has a lot of control, from who can or who cant build nuclear weapons is true, if at any point the China posses a serious risk to country's around her, then the construction of Nuclear weapons and there use will be properly justified.

[Ananda]

I think the point you made about the smaller Asian Country's being able to construct a Nuclear arsenal at there will is a very important point. All though the US has a lot of control, from who can or who cant build nuclear weapons is true, if at any point the China posses a serious risk to country's around her, then the construction of Nuclear weapons and there use will be properly justified.

That off course 'as long as' the US Nuclear umbrella's gone or can't be expected anymore. What the point that I want to convey 's conventionally the Chinese military can't overwhellmed their neighbours at will as many Chinese Fan Boys think.
While their Nuclear arsenal also not a guarantee either for supremacies..since their East Asian neighbours can also build their own nuclear arsenal (and for Japan..AT WILL) if the US decide to fade away from the region.

South China Sea's too much important for many Asian countries, that they will NOT LET China to use that as her OWN POND. What I'm point out that, if China descided to do that..even if US has gone away...the rest of East Asia, and even SEA countries can still take care China if she decided to do funny thing with South China Sea..
Make no mistake, One by one..perhaps the rest of Neigbourhood will be no match for China...but by grabing South China Sea, China will faced the combined might of her neighbours(in sense if China do that..than majority of her neighbour will not be friendly with her)...And with India, and Russia also factors..China will not dare to allieniated the majority of her East and SEA neighbours...

[Spetsznaz]

That off course 'as long as' the US Nuclear umbrella's gone or can't be expected anymore. What the point that I want to convey 's conventionally the Chinese military can't overwhellmed their neighbours at will as many Chinese Fan Boys think.
While their Nuclear arsenal also not a guarantee either for supremacies..since their East Asian neighbours can also build their own nuclear arsenal (and for Japan..AT WILL) if the US decide to fade away from the region.

South China Sea's too much important for many Asian countries, that they will NOT LET China to use that as her OWN POND. What I'm point out that, if China descided to do that..even if US has gone away...the rest of East Asia, and even SEA countries can still take care China if she decided to do funny thing with South China Sea..
Make no mistake, One by one..perhaps the rest of Neigbourhood will be no match for China...but by grabing South China Sea, China will faced the combined might of her neighbours(in sense if China do that..than majority of her neighbour will not be friendly with her)...And with India, and Russia also factors..China will not dare to allieniated the majority of her East and SEA neighbours...

What do you mean when you say

"(in sense if China do that..than majority of her neighbour will not be friendly with her)...And with India, and Russia also factors..":confused:

People tend to think that if China decides to scale up a war, then Russia will be at China's Aid
When in reality, Russia will Support China only to a certain degree, and it will have a fee.

[Ananda]

What do you mean when you say

"(in sense if China do that..than majority of her neighbour will not be friendly with her)...And with India, and Russia also factors..":confused:

People tend to think that if China decides to scale up a war, then Russia will be at China's Aid
When in reality, Russia will Support China only to a certain degree, and it will have a fee.

Opposite from that...at it stands now..if China goes to war..the only allies she can get probbally got only North Korea..trying to score with the South..

If she's invade South China Sea..than she will facing very strong probbality of allienated the rest of SEAsia nations and bring Japan, South Korea and Taiwan to the conflicts.
India and Russia will be the factor since they will tied down perhaps half of China's forces on guarding her frontiers with India and Russia...
Whether Russia and India will follow any conflict in South China Sea..that's remains much debatable...however strong possibilities that if those two join in..it will not be on China's benefits..

This off course base on scenario's that US and her allies have decide to have nothing to do with any Asian Conflicts..

That's what I meant from perevious posts..that China actually does not have strong Allies with her neighbours..with exeptions of North Korea (and in some extent the Myanmar)..
The rest of the neighbourhood like the rest of the world will be very keen to have trading relationship with China..but will be in opposite sides if China decided to flex it's military muscles to the neighbourhood.

And China knows that...
That's why whatever the bravado that comming from China on South China Sea..the possibilities on using her military musccles is very remote...China knows that her Economic musscles provide better opportunity and much safer ones from her military ones..
If China wants to do something with her claims on South China Sea..the most probblle was that she will chose using Economic coercions/hard incentives than military ones.

Again with the kind of Neighbour like Russia, India, South Korea, Japan, and Taiwan surround her...China's military musscles regardless what Western Media and China's Fan Boys think..only BARRELLY ENOUGH to defend her own teritory and (if she can make everyone else staying out) pressuring Taiwan..

[justone]

, and I've tried, to point out that in conflict, the first thing to go will be Chinas satellite targetting systems. It's equally useless to point out that it's going to be extremely difficult, if not impossible, to target a CVBG moving at 30 knots in a vast area of ocean. I've tried to point out that once the C3I systems of China are wiped out, next will be the SEAD role of the USAF and USN. Once these are degraded, the SCS and indeed, the Chinese coastline is US controlled airspace and once this is acheived, the PLA-AF will be hard pressed to deal with roving US air strikes. I'd even hazard a guess that Taiwan would join in as would Japan. This is a whole new ballgame and China. IMO, just ain't in it yet, and this, from someone who's lived in China for 5 years. Just don't hit Guangzhou please, a lot of good folks from foreign lands live there as do I and my lady.[/QUOTE]

Also remember there going to be alot US aircrafts being shot out the sky before the US achieve control of airspace. The US will achieve control of coastline with a high price. The chinese can maintain there jets so they will up and fighting.

[aaaditya]

i believe that in the event of a sino-us or sino-indian war ,india and usa will gang up on china,as both india and usa have commohn interests and a common threat.russia will remain neutral ,due to its economic and political compulsions.

[Kilo 2-3]

Right now, I don't think China has the expeditionary capability to attempt to establish and maintain a substantial military presence in the South China Sea. Until China has more carriers and subs, any move on their part into the region would be premature.

Also, any efforts to move into the region would probably be met with US resistance. China seeking to spread its PacRim presence is a threat to US interests and influence in the region.

US policy to Chinese expansion would probably focus on an increase in regional US naval presence as a means of "walking softly and carrying a big stick."

The thing is though, the US is walking on glass as it deals with China. The trade defeciet and the fact that China holds significant portions of US debt gives the PRC a significant bargaining chip as it deals with the US. The US certianly won't throw the region to the wolves and give the Chinese Navy free run of the seas to impose its will as it sees fit, but it might be a bit more lenient towards the PRC than it otherwise would.

I don't think Japan or Taiwan would seek to get involved though. Taiwan is is a vulnerable position as is, and attacking China might give the PRC an excuse to launch a full-scale inavsion, an invasion Taiwan can probably propel with US help, but certainly not an inviting prospect. And Japan seems to be geared more towards home defense rather than on agressive, offensive military actions.

My read on these two nations could be wrong though. Asian politics are convoluted and not always as they seem.

[Ananda]

I don't think Japan or Taiwan would seek to get involved though. Taiwan is is a vulnerable position as is, and attacking China might give the PRC an excuse to launch a full-scale inavsion, an invasion Taiwan can probably propel with US help, but certainly not an inviting prospect. And Japan seems to be geared more towards home defense rather than on agressive, offensive military actions.

My read on these two nations could be wrong though. Asian politics are convoluted and not always as they seem.

True..true..if the US Umbrella still there.
However the bet's are off if this umbrella's gone. One thing for sure, no China's neighbours willing to stand still if China's decided to Invade South China Sea and make it her own pond. If US still there, then they will rally behind the US regardless what they feel of the US.

If US's gone from Asia, then they will formed 'an Unholly Alliances' against China..simply because they fear and suspiscions of China.

[dragonfire]

i believe that in the event of a sino-us or sino-indian war ,india and usa will gang up on china,as both india and usa have commohn interests and a common threat.russia will remain neutral ,due to its economic and political compulsions.

I dont think so.

Depending on the reason why the war started. I sincerely doubt US will join India in the event of a Sino-Indian war. The reason - the 2 plus trillion dollar reserves China has. Why do you think POTUS Obama went to China - one word - economy. Economic state of the US of A. Similarly what motivation does India have to join the US in the event of a sino-us war. India still hasnt joined the US in Afghanistan, India had more reasons for deploying troops there. India is still a vibrant democracy. Singular consensus doesnt come without outstanding motivation. That said I am sure both US and India will cooperate / support secretly (which obviously will become news :)) in case of either events

[dragonfire]

Right now, I don't think China has the expeditionary capability to attempt to establish and maintain a substantial military presence in the South China Sea. Until China has more carriers and subs, any move on their part into the region would be premature.

.

Carriers aside i believe PLAN already operates its subs in this region.

[Pathfinder-X]

During the Cold War, the Soviets often sent "fishing trawlers" to Alaska, sitting just 13 nautical miles off the coast. Technically they had not broken any international laws, since territorial water is defined as 12 nmi off your coast. Yes we all know the Americans were spying on China, but they had NOT violated their sovereign waters. EEZ is not the same as territorial water.

Will similar incidents continue to occur in the future? IMO, it's not a question of if, but when. As Chinese military power continues to grow, Americans will want to snoop around to see what they're dealing with. Besides, it's not like China is innocent of the spy game either.

If Chinese influence in Asia continues to grow and military power increases, I could see China having a dominant position in South China Sea. As far as turning the place into "China Lake", I don't see it happening at all. First, India will be watching the other side of Malacca Strait like a hawk. ASEAN countries are generally skeptical at China, favoring closer relationship with United States instead. Finally, problems such as Taiwan and territorial water dispute with Japan will keep the Chinese bogged down.

[STURM]

ASEAN countries are generally skeptical at China, favoring closer relationship with United States instead. Finally, problems such as Taiwan and territorial water dispute with Japan will keep the Chinese bogged down.

Though most ASEAN countries have close diplomatic and trade ties with the U.S. not all have gone out of the way to form a strong defence relationship with the U.S., or at least be seen openly doing so. Of the original ASEAN member nations, Thailand was the first to form a strong defence relationship with China and has bought the most stuff from China, with the possible exception of Myanmmar.

The 3 ASEAN countries which have the strongest defence relationship with Uncle Sam are Singapore and Thailand and the Philippines, with the last two having been classed as non-NATO U.S. allies. Malaysia also has a strong defence relationship with the U.S. but is not so open about it. On the hand, Malaysian ties with China have also improved dramaticly in recent years. A country which has been moving closer to the U.S. but still sources its arms buys from Russia is Vietnam.

As it is, all the claiments in the Spratlys dispute are well within range of Chinese conventional cruise and ballaistic missiles, but they should only start worrying about their claims in the South China Sea when China seriously develops a strong amphibious capability and a fleet train for the PLAN.

[Kilo 2-3]

Though most ASEAN countries have close diplomatic and trade ties with the U.S. not all have gone out of the way to form a strong defence relationship with the U.S., or at least be seen openly doing so. Of the original ASEAN member nations, Thailand was the first to form a strong defence relationship with China and has bought the most stuff from China, with the possible exception of Myanmmar.

The 3 ASEAN countries which have the strongest defence relationship with Uncle Sam are Singapore and Thailand and the Philippines, with the last two having been classed as non-NATO U.S. allies. Malaysia also has a strong defence relationship with the U.S. but is not so open about it. On the hand, Malaysian ties with China have also improved dramaticly in recent years. A country which has been moving closer to the U.S. but still sources its arms buys from Russia is Vietnam.

You make a very interesting point about the current alignments and non-alignments of the states in the region.

I'm inclined to think that the skill in which foreign policy is handled will be the deciding factor in how this situation turns out. If the Chinese show too much aggression in the region or are percieved to threaten the sovereignty of an ASEAN state, then they'd risk losing support in the area, which would slow Chinese efforts to assert themselves in the area.

Conversely, the US could lose similar support if it proved to0 agressive or too "weak" in dealing with any Chinese moves into the region.

[STURM]

China like the Taiwanese have mantained that all of the disputed area is in their sovereign waters. The Chinese have also insisted that they will only engage in talks with other claiments on an individual basis and have rejected any attempts at joint mediation on a collective basis.
At present, even given the amount of untapped oil and gas reserves in the area, all parties are more than happy to mantain the status quo.

[OPSSG]

You make a very interesting point about the current alignments and non-alignments of the states in the region.

Yes, technically, the non-aligned movement (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-Aligned_Movement)still exists. There are important historical reasons why ASEAN formed and exists in its current form - as opposed to the other failed precursor attempts at creating enduring regional organisations (eg. Maphilindo (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maphilindo), SEATO and so on, which are now historical footnotes). Many Americans like to all ASEAN a talk shop but it has it's purposes, despite it's limitations.

Many ASEAN members did not join SEATO (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southeast_Asia_Treaty_Organization) and without local support, the US attempt to create a 'bloc' to oppose the Soviet threat did not succeed. IMO, ASEAN is a security community in the non-traditional sense (no active military alliance) but it can influence world opinion - as demonstrated by the original ASEAN 6's opposition to Vietnam's past invasion of Cambodia. If things get heated again, the ASEAN 10 will come together. It is this regional dynamics that serves as a soft power check on China's claims in the South China Sea.

Amongst the 'non-aligned' members of ASEAN, Singapore is the most pro-US (hosting a US logistics presence) but at the same time not anti-China. It's a fine line and we are actively trying to promote mutual understanding of these great powers at events like the Shangril-la dialogue (http://www.iiss.org/conferences/the-shangri-la-dialogue/shangri-la-dialogue-2010/) which are held annually and attended by 27 countries (Australia's PM, Kevin Rudd gave the 2009 Keynote Address (http://www.iiss.org/conferences/the-shangri-la-dialogue/shangri-la-dialogue-2009/plenary-session-speeches-2009/opening-remarks-and-keynote-address/keynote-address-kevin-rudd/)). And if an external military threat appears, Singapore will have to reassess the situation. Here's a link to a 2001 American perspective called 'S.E. Asia After 9-11 (http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf&AD=ADA400152)'.

The position Singapore takes is complex and people talking always forget one minor point, Singapore is the ONLY ASEAN country with military bases in Taiwan. Further, we have rejected China's offer to provide an alternate venue (on Hainan) for our overseas training facilities in Taiwan - whereas the SAF conducts annual exercises in Australia, Brunei, Thailand, India and NZ. In some cases, Singapore is deliberately opaque on the scale of our training abroad, so please do not ask me to clarify beyond what is officially released. For a Singaporean perspective, see this recent Straits Times article below:

The S-E Asian angle: Allies and partners

22 February 2010 - THE Obama administration released its Quadrennial Defence Review (QDR) on Feb 1. The 2010 review - the fourth since 1997 - certainly has its 'same old, same olds'. But it also bears the new Democratic administration's stamp.

If the preceding 2006 QDR stressed the idea of the 'Long War' against terrorist networks, the 2010 QDR is more focused on the US prevailing in ongoing conflicts. It maintains, nevertheless, that the United States should develop the capacity to deter and thwart a broad range of security threats. These include adversarial states and terrorist groups.

While those pronouncements reflect Washington's plans to maintain a militarily muscular approach in dealing with threats to its physical security, they also expose its recognition that resources are limited. Other approaches are therefore necessary to advance US interests. Indeed, the 2010 QDR stresses the importance of 'revitalising defence relationships with allies and partners in key regions'.

The logic of that emphasis is plain. To relieve the stress on US resources, discourage free-riding, balance rising powers and preserve American access to the global commons, enhancing relations with allies and partners is vital. Such calculations underscore the US intention to firm up its defence relations with a specific group of South-east Asian states.

While the 2006 QDR made references to unnamed South-east Asian states as potential security partners, the 2010 review has been more explicit in identifying them. Broadly, they comprise three groups: formal allies, strategic partners and prospective strategic partners.

The first comprises Washington's treaty allies, the Philippines and Thailand; the second, Singapore; and the third, Indonesia, Malaysia and Vietnam. The QDR states that the US intends to 'enhance' its alliance relations with the Philippines and Thailand, 'deepen' its cooperation with Singapore, and 'develop new strategic relationships' with Indonesia, Malaysia and Vietnam.

Specifically, the areas where cooperation will be developed involve 'counter-terrorism, counter-narcotics, and support to humanitarian assistance operations in the region'. Mentioned too is the Pentagon's plan for US forces to be more 'forward-deployed' in the area, where their presence 'supports increased multilateral cooperation on maritime security and enhanced capabilities for assured access to the sea, air, space and cyberspace'.

How the US will advance these aims is discernible. The US Pacific Command (Pacom), whose area of operations covers South-east Asia, has developed strong military-to-military relations with the Philippines, Thailand and Singapore. War games and manoeuvres are conducted annually between Pacom forces and these states in exercises like Cobra Gold. Bilaterally, Pacom units have been deployed for counter-terrorism action in the Philippines. Other American units also engage Singapore in map planning exercises.

With Indonesia, Malaysia and Vietnam, the Americans have made similar attempts to nurture relations. Indonesia has been participating in Cobra Gold. Exercise Garuda Shield brings together American and Indonesian soldiers for peace support exercises. Malaysian and US air forces exchange combat tactics in Exercise Cope Taufan. And since 2008, Vietnamese and American officers have met annually for dialogues on security issues and defence cooperation.

What bears watching is what effort the US makes to bring defence relations with these states to the next level. A possible restoration of US assistance to Indonesia's Special Forces - suspended in the early 1990s because of the unit's alleged human rights abuses in then-East Timor - will need to be addressed. Also, if a basing agreement enabling US access to Cam Ranh Bay can be obtained, it will mark a significant milestone in Vietnam-US relations since the Vietnam War.

The military architecture in South-east Asia looks solidly underpinned by a strong US presence - for now. China has yet to extend its military reach into the region as has the US. If the 2010 QDR has anything to say about this, it is that Washington intends to keep it that way. Building sturdy defence relations and maintaining basing agreements in the region will enable Washington to prevent potential adversaries from denying the US access to the global commons in the region.

South-east Asian states, insofar as they seek to hedge against any aggressive Chinese behaviour, will welcome Washington providing a strategic counterweight to Beijing. At the same time, they will continue to engage China in bilateral and multilateral exchanges in order to enhance cooperation and balance US influence. No country in South-east Asia wants to be put in a position where it has to choose between the two powers.

If the regional military balance is maintained and diplomatic interactions remain robust, they will not have to.

The writer is assistant professor of history and international affairs at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies.