Japan, Koreas, China and Taiwan regional issues

RobWilliams

Super Moderator
Staff member
Nevertheless, Tod's rough numbers of 2/3 in the manufacturing and roughly 1/3 in home care are more accurate than your belief that the proportions should be the opposite way round, thanks to the efforts of swerve. With a source of the numbers, I might add.

63,151 in manufacturing, and 23,015 in the services sector (including domestic + hospital workers).
 

alexsa

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
You probably know why I am so passionate about the Pilipino (correct spelling for citizens of the Philippines) people being employed overseas because I responded to Alexa's accussation in his post. If you take a look at those Pilipinos employed as factory/manufacturing workers, most of those workers have degrees in engineering or technical education, etc. I know this because of my Pilipino heritage. One of the requirements of foreign countries for Pilipinos to work there in their country is for them to have an education, so these people are basically under-employed. These Pilipino people are also multi-lingual...very educated people working in factories, etc.
Accusations, actually it was more of a restating of how many interpret the manner in which you responded. As I indicated the manner in which you present does you no favours.


As an example (and I accept I am being picky)............ It is a bit rich to correct others for writing "Filipino" in Lieu of "Pilipino" when you used the former in your previous post attesting to your heritage.
 

db2646

Banned Member
Nevertheless, Tod's rough numbers of 2/3 in the manufacturing and roughly 1/3 in home care are more accurate than your belief of the proportions, thanks to the efforts of swerve. With a source of the numbers, I might add.

63,151 in manufacturing, and 23,015 in the services sector (including domestic + hospital workers).
Rob, I believe you. Also, kindly check the education of those Pilipino workers in manufacturing. I'll guess that most of them have technical college degrees and probably most in engineering. And those in the services sector, I'll bet those workers are probably college educated too.
 

RobWilliams

Super Moderator
Staff member
Why would I need to check the education? If their academic record is something you wish to push then by all means provide the information about it (I would also like to know how you would expect me to find out the sort of academic standards those employees have, ring the companies up and ask for copies?), but it's not what matters to me and thus I won't bother.

My involvement is - and always has been - getting a clear idea of the numbers involved, accurate numbers plus evidence have been supplied by swerve and that's all the information I was looking to get.
 

alexsa

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
There you go, your first words...sound very patronizing and condescending. How may I conduct myself when I'm making an argument? What kind of tone is acceptable, may I ask? Shall I give you a heads-up first before I post to see if the tone of my post meets approval?
Or I could have simply meant good for you. That was what was meant and repeated in response to your posts on my profile. I admit my patience with you is at end as you insist on being respected and heard but feel no hesitation in demanding others back up their statements despite the fact you often provide no real evidence of you position.
 

Todjaeger

Potstirrer
Todjaeger's numbers are correct in principle. but are a little out of date. The most recent official figures for Filipino workers in Taiwan, from Taiwan's Council of Labor [sic] Affairs, as of end March 2013,
Indeed my numbers were a little old. They were from the latest reports I could find from the Philippine gov't on overseas workers, so some of them were from 2010. Thanks for locating more up to date information.

As had been brought up later on though, what sector the Filipinos work in, or even their average level of education is not particularly important. What IS important is whether as a group, OFW's in Taiwan can/are earning enough to send significant remittances back to the Philippines. In this case, the ability to send back an average of ~$1,700 p.a. per working in Taiwan is significant since that is nearly half the per capita (PPP) GDP. In effect, one of the Philippines most significant exports is workers, and another country threatening to place restrictions on that 'export' can be significant.

-Cheers
 

OPSSG

Super Moderator
Staff member
Todjaeger's numbers are correct in principle. but are a little out of date. The most recent official figures for Filipino workers in Taiwan, from Taiwan's Council of Labor [sic] Affairs, as of end March 2013, are -
Total: 87516
In services (this includes all the domestic workers, hospital workers, etc): 23015
In manufacturing: 63151

Of which the main employers are -
Electronic parts & components: 26593 (i.e. more than in all services)
Electronic & optical products: 6630
Fabricated metal products: 6508
Machinery & equipment: 4388

Source
TVBS News Report on Taiwan's reaction after the lapse of dateline

Initial indications are that the Taiwan Government was not satisfied with Philippines' official response and it was reported as lacking in sincerity and failed to meet the conditions imposed. News sources report the following: "Taiwan freezes hiring of Philippine workers over fisherman's death".
...This shooting-at-sea incident once again demonstrates the incompetence of the Philippine Government in the area of crisis management (its chronic misguided sense of self-importance and lack of urgency in a crisis). This incompetence will again have unfortunate consequences for their citizens abroad and make life more difficult than necessary for those seeking to leave Philippines to earn a living in Taiwan...

<snip>

...Pinoy pride is likely to prevent a quick settlement that may result in a period of hostility and tensions. The second and third order effects following from the incident is unfortunate and counter-productive for countries sharing a maritime border...
As predicted two days ago pride prevented a quick settlement. A second batch of 8 new sanctions being planned at a later time, with another dateline imposed. Details on the 8 new sanctions to be applied later is lacking, as a press conference will be held later, today. I am waiting for a Taiwan based English language media source for confirmation later in today or tomorrow. Likewise this latest development has not been reported by international media, like CNN or BBC, at the moment. Given that there is no invasion fleet (only a show of force in disputed EEZ waters), with little or no danger of war between Taiwan and the Philippines, this latest development is not deemed news worthy by the international media.

Edit: Taiwan English language news source with more details -Gov't unsatisfied with Philippines' response. It seems that the Philippines failed to reach agreement with Taiwan on how to compensate for the death of the 65-year-old Taiwanese fisherman. The Philippines will send MECO Chairman Amadeo R. Perez, the de facto Philippines embassy in Taiwan in lieu of diplomatic ties, to Taiwan today as a special envoy to express condolence and apology to Hung's family.

IMHO, the answer is simple from Taiwan's point of view. An ultimatum has been given and missed. Therefore, Taiwan must make good on their promise to freeze Filipino immigration and work permits, with further additional economic sanctions to follow.
 

Sun

New Member
Desired and likely outcome will determine what happens next.

The situation is quite confusing, with so many interested parties, conflicting accounts, and more importantly the unspoken political agendas. It would probably be easier to just ignore what you hear and see on the ground, on the seas, and in the relevant domestic media (foreign media to most of us). If you look at the situation from a desired outcome perspective, you can get a better feel for what will likely need to happen to achieve that desired outcome.

For China, the best outcome is for Taiwan to partner up and present an united stance, politically and militarily. That would be the dream come true for China, as it can kick start some sort of reunification process; remember that China and Taiwan already share very deep racial and cultural ties, are still technically at war, and each side still claims the other as its own.

On the other hand, as often happens in schoolyard fights, the antagonists have a tussle, and then make up and turn into the best of friends. I think it would be far more likely that the Philippines and Taiwan will make good, and embark on some enhanced level of cooperation - while being guided (goaded) by the big man in the room, the USA, who is supposedly neutral. The reasons for this more likely outcome is that: 1) nobody wants to actually fight; 2) nobody wants to team with China - at least for now; 3) The leaders can appear mature and wise by turning what appears to be an inflammatory and escalating armed situation, into greater understanding and friendship; 4) Taiwan, for all its military capabilities, has more than its hands full with the Taiwan Straits situation vis-a-vis China; 5) Despite its one China policy, the USA can't let Taiwan slip closer to China; 6) the Filipino attack was probably accidental, or acted out by a loose canon (they may even have thought the ROC ship was PROC - and Filipinos have a bigger axe to grind with China). I'm 99.9% certain the act was not officially sanctioned. As such, it's easy for the Philippine government to acknowledge the mistake, make amends, and earn some respect, credibility, and emotional capital.

If the desired and most likely outcome is where the Philippines and Taiwan make good, then I think you will see a few things:

i) The situation will escalate a bit more until both sides' pride run into some undetermined dangerous threshold.
ii) Then one side or both will acknowledge mistakes were made, followed by some joint apologetic statements and expressions of regret or remorse.
iii) Both sides will form some committee or process to tighten cooperation in the political and maritime spheres. The stated goals will be to prevent this type of incident from reoccurring, but a partial intent is to present an united front against China's rising maritime assertiveness.
iv) Everybody walks away happy. Even China, which won't lose anything, but has said a few things and so may plausibly claim they influenced a positive outcome.
 

OPSSG

Super Moderator
Staff member
For China, the best outcome is for Taiwan to partner up and present an united stance, politically and militarily. That would be the dream come true for China, as it can kick start some sort of reunification process; remember that China and Taiwan already share very deep racial and cultural ties, are still technically at war, and each side still claims the other as its own.
What has race got to do with this shooting-at-sea incident between Philippines and Taiwan?

Do you even read the thread you post in?!?

BTW, China is comprised of over 50 ethnic groups; and Taiwan has its own indigenous peoples, too (and not just Chinese). Further, the Chinese are comprised of various dialect groups (with their own unique spoken dialect and customs). As you may be aware, there are many political and economic differences between China and Taiwan, in terms of systems of government, stage of economic development and political culture. In terms of written language alone, Taiwan uses the complex character set, whereas, China uses the simplified character set - these are all political choices, made by politicians/leaders in both sides of the Cross Straits divide. For China, 'putong hua' is a relatively recent historical and political construct, used as a unifying language for the different dialect groups in China (i.e. a political tool, used to 'unify' China). Likewise 'kuo yu' or national language is a political construct, used as a unifying language for the different ethnic groups in Taiwan. In broad terms, these differences negate simple claims of common political culture that transcends political divides, when there is quite a bit of diversity in the so called 'Chinese' diaspora in Asia. This means the myth of a 'Han Chinese' in Asia, is just that a myth when you look at the details (i.e. an over simplified stereotype that is often used for political purposes by commentators). IMHO, what we are seeing is the development of distinct brand of Taiwanese nationalism, from this incident.

If you don't mind, I would say that it would be more accurate to say that being Chinese is an ethnic identity, rather than racial identity. Please do not bring this point on race again, in such a stereotypical manner (as racism relies on the use of negative stereotypes). While what you have said does not cross the line, please be aware that it is forum policy to immediately ban all racists (see rule 12 of forum rules). Read the prior warnings and directions issued by the Moderators and Super Moderators in this thread. No reply or further clarification, by you, on this point will be necessary.

On the other hand, as often happens in schoolyard fights, the antagonists have a tussle, and then make up and turn into the best of friends.
What school yard fight!?! School yard fights do not result in 52 bullet holes and death (we will only know more once the investigation is completed and further information released by the Philippine Authorities). In the mean time, have some respect for the Taiwanese fishermen who have died in the past in this disputed fishing area in the hands of law-enforcement authorities.

I think it would be far more likely that the Philippines and Taiwan will make good, and embark on some enhanced level of cooperation...
How is this relevant now? Think before posting.

There is a huge difference between having a wishful political opinion or political advocacy of a position versus having a sound technical understanding of the military and economic levers available to the Government of Taiwan (in its options for escalation, in the event of non-compliance). For example, Taiwan can just cancel prior self-imposed limits they had set in terms of naval patrols in the disputed EEZ areas, to deny access to Philippine law enforcement. Reading the thread before posting would help prevent a discussion from going in circles.

The reasons for this more likely outcome is that: 1) nobody wants to actually fight; 2) nobody wants to team with China - at least for now; 3) The leaders can appear mature and wise by turning what appears to be an inflammatory and escalating armed situation, into greater understanding and friendship; 4) Taiwan, for all its military capabilities, has more than its hands full with the Taiwan Straits situation vis-a-vis China; 5) Despite its one China policy, the USA can't let Taiwan slip closer to China; 6) the Filipino attack was probably accidental, or acted out by a loose canon (they may even have thought the ROC ship was PROC - and Filipinos have a bigger axe to grind with China).
Your whole discussion quoted above is not useful enabling other members understand the options available to Taiwan, as they bring more pressure to bear on the Philippine authorities, with the 8 new sanctions.
I'm 99.9% certain the act was not officially sanctioned. As such, it's easy for the Philippine government to acknowledge the mistake, make amends, and earn some respect, credibility, and emotional capital.
That is not the issue. The issue at hand is that Philippines law enforcement authorities in a bigger and faster boat (a 115.45 ton vessel and over 30m in length) killed an unarmed Taiwanese citizen by firing at least 52 rounds at his smaller fishing boat (a 15.15 ton vessel at 14.7m in length). Which is why Taiwan and external parties like the US welcome the conduct of a transparent Philippine investigation on this latest shooting-at-sea incident.

The situation will escalate a bit more until both sides' pride run into some undetermined dangerous threshold.
No, this is a wrong assessment.

In 2 prior posts I have covered escalation options and Taiwan's mastery of it (please read them before posting another reply to this post). There is no Philippine invasion threat or any such hostile intention to attack the forces of another country by the Taiwanese. It has been stated that Taiwan's Navy and Coast Guard will not enter Philippine territorial waters. Further, the Taiwanese Navy is NOT going to attack and sink Philippine ships; given the disparity of naval and air power between the parties a show of force by Taiwan is intended to demonstrate Philippine naval impotence. As I mentioned before, the Philippines has a very poor hand in escalation options; but their pride prevents a quick settlement.

In essence, this is a fisheries dispute between Taiwan and Philippines, with Taiwan applying economic sanctions to motivate the Philippines authorities and therefore it is hardly even news worthy for international media. Just turn on TV and watch BBC or CNN and they are not reporting the latest developments as a headline news item.

Everybody walks away happy. Even China, which won't lose anything, but has said a few things and so may plausibly claim they influenced a positive outcome.
How so? More magical thinking by you, I see.

China's opinion stated through the editorial comments in news sources controlled by them and condemnation has caused more resentment in the Philippines and as I mentioned earlier, complicates the options currently available to Taiwan. The Taiwanese may not be appreciative of China's acts and deeds, if they do intervene. If China was a leader, it has few willing followers. Check-book diplomacy (and often acknowledged as such by client states of China) and naked displays of force can increase tensions in the region. Do not mistake fear/concern as respect.

As for your quib on positive outcome, the family of the fisherman killed will never get him back. A responsible Taiwanese government would want to prevent such an incident from recurring, and statements of support made by China has been of no help to Taiwan. On the other hand, Taiwan's unilateral demand for an investigation will help start the process of ensuring transparency and shine a light on Philippine law enforcement practice and ROEs.
 
Last edited:

OPSSG

Super Moderator
Staff member
According to the Manila Times report dated 20 May 2013, 'PH official bungles talks with Taiwan'. See quote below for details.
20 May 2013 -- Officials of the Taiwan Economic and Cultural Office (TECO) on Monday also revealed that two letters presented by the Manila Economic and Cultural Office (MECO) to Taiwan were deemed acceptable at first but were scrapped after a “secret phone call” from the official, who has not been named. The phone call “blew up everything” previously agreed upon, David Chen, TECO’s assistant to the representative, told reporters during a luncheon briefing in Makati City. He said the phone call was made to Antonio Basilio, MECO’s resident representative in Taipei, merely minutes after a third “acceptable” letter was handed to Taiwan Foreign Minister David Lin...

According to Chen, the fourth and final version of the letter was “unacceptable and beyond imagination”... All four letters, which were presented between 8 p.m. and midnight of May 14, were signed by Basilio but the last version had a second copy signed by MECO Chairman Amadeo Perez Jr., President Benigno Aquino 3rd’s personal representative to Taipei.

Chen said the first and third letters were acceptable to Taiwan because the “regret and apology” over the incident were conveyed by the “Philippine government” and not by the “Filipino people” as mentioned by the second and fourth versions.
It seems that Philippines and Taiwan were so close and yet so far apart over the details of the apology letters, particularly, the 4th version of the letter. In other words, an ultimatum was given with conditions; and that Taiwan had some expectation that Philippines would meet those terms. From Taiwan's point of view, an ultimatum has been given and missed. Therefore, Taiwan made good on their promise to freeze Filipino immigration and work permits. The freeze bars new work permits, and the 88,000 Filipino workers in Taiwan now must leave once their contracts end. Contracts of this sort usually cover three years. According to Forbes, when Taiwan banned importation of Filipino labor in over a civil aviation dispute 14 years ago, the number of migrant workers onshore dropped from about 114,000 to just under 73,000 between 1999 and 2001. There is no word on how long the current freeze will last. Further, Filipinos working in Taiwan remit more than US$650 million in total to the Philippines each year, according to a statement made by the Taipei Economic and Cultural Office in Manila.

Another issue at hand is the ongoing investigation by the Philippines law enforcement authorities, in the shooting-at-sea incident; where there is thus far limited cooperation between the relevant Philippines authorities and Taiwan, with parallel investigations. Taiwan claims that the shooting was “a disproportionate response by the Philippine authorities.” If Taiwan admits that it was a response to something, what then were the Philippine law enforcement authorities responding to? By way of background, the Philippine Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources vessel - PCG-BFAR MCS-3001 involved in the in the shooting-at-sea incident was a bigger and faster boat (a 115.45 ton vessel and over 30m in length) killed an unarmed Taiwanese citizen by firing over 50 rounds at a smaller Taiwanese fishing boat (a 15.15 ton vessel at 14.7m in length), in a fisheries law enforcement incident. According to a Taiwanese source, 'Shipboard data refutes Manila’s claim'.

Taipei Times said:
22 May 2013 -- The US is calling on both Taiwan and the Philippines to quickly complete their separate investigations into the shooting of a Taiwanese fisherman. “We have not seen final reports from either investigation, from either side,” US Department of State spokesman Patrick Ventrell said on Monday. “We hope these will be released soon and will help clarify the circumstances surrounding the incident,” he said. Speaking at a daily press briefing, Ventrell said that although US Assistant Secretary of State Joseph Yun was going to the region he would not become directly involved in any negotiations involving the incident...
This is why external parties like the US, welcome the conduct of a transparent Philippine investigation on this latest shooting-at-sea incident; as a means to resolve the crisis. Unfortunately, with the lack of cooperation between the parties this is going to be another sticky point that would not go away.

IMHO, neutral parties should start to question how this incident has been handled by both parties - with their desire to take positions even before the end of investigations. This crisis, seems to look like a series of mis-steps by both parties that does not do credit to the credibility of either. Taiwan's ability to apply military and economic levers against Philippines is limited; but their are not without options. One of options that I mentioned earlier:- Taiwan can just cancel prior self-imposed limits they had set in terms of naval patrols in the disputed EEZ areas, to deny access to Philippine law enforcement.

An absolute freeze Filipino immigration and work permits for period beyond 6 months hurts Taiwan too; and is a crude tool. But they can change such a measure to a relatively large 'annual processing fee' for each Filipino immigration and work permit processed; which will give employers a choice of paying more for Philippine workers or using another country source (substitution effect). This will filter out the low end of some parts of the complex OFW market in Taiwan, while giving Taiwanese employers an option to retain better valued employees for a fee. And a variety of these sort of measures have been implemented in other countries to keep a lid on immigration. The Taiwanese Government could also provide tax breaks for greater automation, which will a side effect of reducing demand for workers in factories.

Options like the above can be very painful for the Philippine Government to bear; and if carefully calibrated, Taiwan can inflict pain on the Philippine Government without a US response.
 

neocloud

New Member
Looks like Taiwan is considering abolishing the southern boundary for fishing protection, it will be interesting to see how long Taiwan will keep the patrols up and what the response from the Philippines government will be


By Adam Tyrsett Kuo ,The China Post
May 21, 2013 - The government is moving toward abolishing Taiwan's southern boundary for fishery protection, an act which would extend the formal operational area of the Navy, the Coast Guard and local fishermen further south within Taiwan's exclusive economic zone (EEZ) toward the Philippines.

The boundary is currently set at the latitude of 20 degrees north.

In light of the recent fatal shooting of a local fisherman by Philippine coast guards, the Ministry of the Interior (MOI) and the Fisheries Agency (FA) are currently in the process of revising the government's fishery protection procedures to achieve an equal basis for negotiations with the Philippines over a possible fishery pact.

Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Anna Kao (高安) said that fishery talks are one of four demands made following the shooting incident, adding that the Foreign Ministry hopes to demarcate operation procedures between Philippine and Taiwanese fishermen.

Collecting evidence and investigating the case, however, are currently the higher priorities for the ministry, Kao said, adding that the commencement of fishery talks will depend on whether the case can be resolved.

Given that fishery protection operations conducted by the Coast Guard Administration and the Navy are not limited by the southern boundary, the boundary itself, which was announced by the Council of Agriculture, is effectively void, even though as a formal guideline it still exists.

After the government announced that protection operations will not be limited by the boundary, four Taiwanese fishing boats operating in the Bashi Channel crossed it yesterday morning to fish further south, while three approached waters close to the Philippines' Batanes Islands and Babuyan Islands.

Since Taiwan and the Philippines are at a critical juncture with regard to talks over a joint investigation into the shooting, the CGA's three vessels stuck close to the southern boundary yesterday morning, apparently to avoid giving rise to more tension.
 

OPSSG

Super Moderator
Staff member
Philstar said:
25 May 2013 -- Justice Secretary Leila de Lima said... the NBI has “bits and pieces of initial findings” and is beginning to draft a report. The STAR learned from a source that coast guard personnel manning the Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (BFAR) patrol vessel may face criminal and administrative charges for possible violations of rules of engagement, excessive use of force, and neglect of duty. PCG personnel admitted having fired warning shots at two Taiwanese vessels some 39 nautical miles off Bantayan Island in the Balintang Channel. Authorities said such warning shot is not allowed under the rules of engagement.

There is excessive use of force if the 50 bullet holes reportedly found on the fishing vessel can be proven to have come from the firearms of PCG personnel.

In its incident report submitted to the NBI, the PCG confirmed that its personnel left the site after firing at the fishing vessel without checking on the victim...

<snip>

...MECO head Amadeo Perez, however, said visas had already been issued to eight NBI agents and forensic experts and that De Lima already agreed to the demand of Taiwanese investigators that they be allowed to see the video footage of the May 9 encounter...

<snip>
According to a news report from the Philstar, a source said that coast guard personnel manning the Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (BFAR) patrol vessel may face criminal and administrative charges for possible violations of rules of engagement, excessive use of force, and neglect of duty. However, as the final investigation report is not out, let us not jump to conclusions at this point. A lingering source of tension between Taiwan and Philippines over this incident, will be the reports (when they are eventual published) produced by both sides, as Taiwan, Philippines to launch parallel probe into fisherman's death.

Looks like Taiwan is considering abolishing the southern boundary for fishing protection, it will be interesting to see how long Taiwan will keep the patrols up...
I understand that there is a fishing season (which is not too long but I don't have the details on hand) for certain types of fish in that area. They don't have to be there all the time; and these patrols should be there to follow and protect Taiwanese fishermen (until an agreement is reached with the Philippine Government). If that does not occur, Taiwan might have to do it again for a few months, next season; and the Taiwan lobby in the US should go to work and shortly, we shall see Think tanks explain Taiwan's perspective of the incident to US Congress. The Taiwan lobby will also work to ensure support from members of US Congress; and urge them to speak on this issue. These include:-

(1) Rep. Ron DeSantis (R-Florida) wrote a letter to the Philippine Ambassador to the United States Jose Cuisia - urged Manila to work with Taipei to expeditiously and peacefully resolve the issue to the satisfaction of both parties, including an apology, appropriate compensation for the victim's family, the conduct of a thorough investigation into this incident, ensure accountability, and work together on a fishery agreement);
(2) Rep. Howard Coble (R-North Carolina) wrote a letter to Taiwan's President Ma - expressed his condolences to the family and friends of the dead fisherman, 65-year-old Hung Shih-cheng);
(3) Rep. Kerry Bentivolio (R-Mich.), who wrote to the Philippine ambassador;
(4) Rep. Scott DesJarlais (R-Tenn.), who wrote to Taiwan's President Ma;
(5) Rep. Robert Brady (D-Penn.), who wrote to both Taiwan's President Ma and the Philippine ambassador;
(6) Rep. Steve Chabot (R-Ohio) issued a statement in support of Taiwan;
(7) Rep. Eni Faleomavaega (D-American Samoa) issued a statement in support of Taiwan; and
(8) Rep. Matt Salmon (R-Ariz.) issued a statement in support of Taiwan.​

Taiwan was the 10th largest investor the Philippines in 2012 (at US$58.54 million or 0.85 percent of total FDI); and each month that this dispute drags on, 2,500 OFW jobs in Taiwan are affected (the number of work permit applications, per month, before the freeze). Technically, the hiring freeze from Taipei is technically more of a “slowdown.” Visa processing has not stopped, but the 7-day processing period has lengthened to 14 days. Taiwan was the 9th top exporter to the Philippines with a total value of exports of US$1.92 billion; and was 4th top import country with a total value of imports of US$4.83 billion in 2012. Peaceful resolution is in everybody's interest - for both Philippines and Taiwan. In related news, see this story on an event in Taiwan: 'Young Taiwanese show solidarity with Filipinos'.

...what the response from the Philippines government will be.
The logical Philippine response is to monitor the Taiwanese presence; and do nothing more to avoid any escalation. On 23 May 2013, President Ma Ying-jeou said Taiwan is a peace-loving country and it is not seeking to flex its military muscles, while receiving the French representative to Taipei at the Presidential Office:

"While we have to take measures to protect our fishermen operating within our 200-nautical mile exclusive economic zone, none of these actions should be misconstrued as military exercises or flexing our military muscles."​

Despite President's Ma's statement, that is not how the Philippines would see it. In President Aquino III’s speech at the Philippine Navy’s anniversary on 21 May 2013, he said (translated from Filipino):

“We have a clear message to the world: The Philippines is for Filipinos, and we have the capability to resist bullies entering our backyard.”​

The link enclosed is what a reporter Rigoberto D. Tiglao of Manila Times, thought of President Aquino III’s speech quoted above; namely, Aquino rattles non-existent saber. As I said in another thread, war is unlikely between the Philippines and it's neighbours to the north, like China (2012 defence spending of US$166 billion) or Taiwan (2012 defense spending of US$10.7 billion). This is because the power disparity between China or Taiwan versus the Philippines (2012 defense spending of US$2.97 billion) is just too great for war to occur.
 

cdxbow

Active Member
I think things have speed up a bit and moved past that. From The Oz:
"Growing citizen reports indicated today that China is preparing for trouble across its 1420km border with North Korea - its partially-estranged ally - by deploying troops. Social media claims were given some added credence by an unusual online story in the Global Times that sourced entirely from South Korea’s Yonhap newsagency its information about 150,000 extra Chinese troops being sent to the border region.
China’s more mainstream media, usually led by state newsagency Xinhua, has not reported on this deployment.
South Korea’s Chosun.com had reported that medical and other units were being deployed by China to handle North Korean refugees and be ready for the after-effects of “unforeseen circumstances” such as a pre-emptive US strike on North Korea."


Also allegedly the Global Times in an editorial in its Chinese language edition said:

“North Korea should not misjudge the situation at this crucial moment, it should not venture to take more risks by thinking a sixth nuclear test will lead to nothing as did the previous five. If it does so, responses from both Beijing and Washington might be unprecedented, even becoming a ‘turning point’"

I think President Xi & President Trump may have cooked up something other than seafood at Mar-a-lago.
 

OPSSG

Super Moderator
Staff member
BBC reported that South Korean fighters fired warning shots at Russian military aircraft for intruding into South Korea’s territorial airspace on 23 July 2019, Reuters reported citing the Korean Ministry of National Defense. In this case, warning shots were fired by the Koreans, who used F-15Ks and KF-16s to intercept the Russian A-50 command and control aircraft above the East Sea (near South Korea's easternmost islets of Dokdo, claimed by Japan and South Korea, but occupied by South Korea since 1954). The first warning rounds were fired at AM local time and then the 2nd in a matter of 20 plus minutes. This incident is unusual, as both Japan and Korea routinely intercept Russian or Chinese aircraft that intrude into their respective air defence identification zones, without much incident. In this unusual case, the Russian aircraft entered the Korea Air Defense Identification Zone (KADIZ), along with two Chinese H-6s who also entered the KADIZ, after which they met up with the two Tu-95 Russian aircraft — which is a hallmark of joint planning by the Russians and Chinese forces.

"The South Korean military took tactical action including dropping flares and firing a warning shot," the defense ministry statement said (see CNN report: South Korea fires warning shots at Russian military aircraft). This is a deliberate act by Ivan, as penetrating to a point of requiring the Koreans to fire 10 rounds (as warning shots) to turn away is serious, but to do it twice (for the Koreans to fire another 280 rounds) seems to be a test of Korean resolve (and I suspect, may be used to collect intelligence and on the standby follow forces available at tiered alertness on the Korean side).

Analysts said the mission may have been designed by Russia to draw out South Korean and Japanese aircraft for intelligence gathering purposes. "This mission will have given them a comprehensive map of the (South Korean) national air defense system," said Peter Layton, a former Royal Australian Air Force pilot and analyst at the Griffith Asia Institute. Moscow furiously denied Seoul's account of the encounter, claiming that South Korean military jets had dangerously intercepted two of its bombers during a planned flight over neutral waters. But in a statement, Japan's Ministry of Defense backed up South Korea's claims, saying the A-50 had flown over the islands and that Tokyo had scrambled fighters to intercept.

Edit: In other news, Korea is to launch a new version of a large-deck landing ship. This secession was made during a 12,July 2019 meeting presided over by Gen. Park Han-ki, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. “The plan of building the LPH-II ship has been included in a long-term force buildup plan,” said a spokesman for the Joint Chiefs, speaking on condition of anonymity and using an acronym for “landing platform helicopter.” The new LPH is to be refit to displace 30,000 tons, double the capacity of the previous two LPHs — Dokdo and Marado — with 14,500 tons of displacement. The carrier-type vessel is also bigger than the 27,000 tons associated with Japan’s Izumo-class helicopter destroyers.

The Jamestown Foundation’s Eurasian Daily Monitor reports on the implications of growing alliance between Russia and China reflected in their recent joint bomber patrols intercepted off S. Korea and Japan. Graham Allison has noted, “Russian and Chinese General Staffs have candid, detailed discussions about the threat U.S. nuclear modernization and missile defenses pose to each of their strategic deterrents. It therefore stands to reason that these militaries also conduct equally probing discussions concerning conventional warfare and Korean issues” (Cited in Alexander Korolev, “On the Verge of an Alliance: Contemporary China-Russia Military Cooperation,” Asian Security, April 30, 2018).

A number of Russian experts have also confided to this author that Moscow and China have conducted and are conducting talks on strategic stability, “and we know how many nuclear missiles China has” (Author’s interview, July 16, 2019). Be that as it may, it seems clear from the recent joint air patrol—not to mention Russian-Chinese joint exercises during last autumn’s Vostok 2018 drills and all other manifestations of cooperation—that, as Russia and China have agreed, the military relationship is set to further deepen.
 
Last edited:
Top