Providing Context to News on the South China Sea (Post 3 of 3)
And Indonesia has learn from the past, to stay passive was a bad choice.
Specially after whats happen last month, when one of Indonesia's patrol ships intercepted a Chinese fishing vessel on March 19 off the Natuna Islands, which was protected by a Chinese Coast Guard ship, i think it is the right decision.
10. Not sure if Indonesia is learning the right lessons or are they keeping the Pinoys in good company. As you are undoubtedly aware, Brunei, Cambodia and Laos (as ASEAN Chairman), have come to
four-point consensus with China on the South China Sea. This is a
sign of a fractured ASEAN stance arising from a lack of leadership. IMO, Indonesian politicians and law enforcement are in good company with the Pinoys, where they shoot first and think of consequences later, as the five points below illustrate:
One, on 21 March 2016, two Taiwanese fishing vessels reported being shot at by an Indonesian patrol vessel in the Strait of Malacca. According to the ship’s captains, Lien I Hsing No. 116 was fired at four or five times, while Sheng Te Tsai had 12 bullet holes. The two vessels, carrying 25 crew members on board, were on their way to Singapore to unload their catches and restock. Indonesian officials admitted to shooting the vessels, but claimed it was self -defense when one of the fishing boats nearly rammed the Indonesian patrol boat after being ordered to stop.
Two, maverick fisheries minister, Susi Pudjiastuti rose to prominence last year by blowing up impounded foreign boats that her ministry’s patrols had caught fishing without a license in Indonesian waters. But Susi was restrained by her cabinet colleagues in what she could do to Chinese fishing boats that Indonesia had captured and impounded. One was quietly scuttled, but her colleagues prevented her from blowing it up for the cameras. Sensing her opportunity following the confrontation on 20 March 2016, she quickly called a press conference to denounce China’s “arrogant” behavior – and later saying that Indonesia would consider taking China to court over the issue. Not to be outdone, Foreign Minister Retno Marsudi summoned China’s chargé d’affaires in Jakarta the next day, telling him that she felt the ministry’s efforts at diplomacy had been “sabotaged” by the incident. The confrontation comes at a pivotal time, as the Coordinating Ministry for Politics, Law, and Security conducts an inter-agency review of Indonesia’s South China Sea policy, the first since China’s new assertiveness in the sea became apparent, which is designed to settle differences on the subject within the Jokowi administration. Unless a face-saving arrangement between Beijing and Jakarta is reached soon, the 20 March 2016 incident will push the review to take a harder line, despite the risk that would present to Jokowi’s ambitions for Chinese investment in Indonesia.
Three, as a nationalist and populist politician, what fisheries minister, Susi Pudjiastuti say and actually do is entirely different. She loudly condemns China over a specific instance but released data of fishing boats sunk shows that her problem is with other ASEAN states. In the above paragraph, I report that she condemns the Chinese but she uses the Indonesian military to act against
Vietnamese, the
Pinoy, the Siamese and the Malaysian fishermen by sinking their fishing boats. Between October 2014 to February 2016, Indonesia sank a total of 152 fishing boats from various countries: 50 from Viet Nam, 43 from the Philippines, 21 from Thailand, 20 from Malaysia, 14 from Indonesia, 2 from Papa New Guinea, 1 from Belize and only 1 from China. I note that in this time period, the Indonesians sank a
total of 134 fishing boats from other ASEAN nations for illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing.
Four, instead of uniting ASEAN, Indonesian politicians, playing the populist card, are constantly looking for opportunities to engage in acts that defy common sense while supporting criminal acts by their countrymen (that harm their relations with other ASEAN states). For example, their arrogant statements on a range of issues on the harm Indonesia causes to its immediate neighbours. This includes the shooting at fishing boats, the handling of the
annual haze issue from Indonesian fires from land clearing or even the 2014 Indonesian Navy decision to name a new vessel after two convicted terrorists (whom the Indonesians honour as heroes). "The naming of the ship is a signal to Singapore that simply because past Indonesian leaders may have accepted the truce or Lee Kuan Yew's offering and visit to the shrine does not mean that current or future leaders will accept it," said
Antonio Rappa, head of management and security studies at Singapore Institute of Management University. The question Singaporeans ask ourselves is how far these quasi bully boy tactics would go if Indonesia really wanted to exert its strong arm in its
imagined abang-adik (big brother-little brother) dynamic?
Five, Indonesia's inability to lead will result in a fractured ASEAN. A power vacuum will develop; and every ASEAN member will seek to advance its own interest at the expense of another. Alternatively, let me rephase it another way (with regard to the balance of power in Southeast Asia) to help the Indonesians understand the conseqence of a leadership vacuum: A new equilibrium will arise, with great powers (i.e. US and China) having a greater say in lieu of an united ASEAN.
I read these and none of the measures suggested convince me they are likely to work. Neither the diplomatic or the escalatory. The US & allies have been forced onto a reactive, defensive and ultimately ineffective position.
11. Please don't listen to American authors/idiots who cannot understand regional dynamics. I hope that you realise that the Taiwanese claims to the South China Sea is as extensive as China's and they were able to recently humiliate an American ally, over a shooting a sea incident that we have documented in this thread. Who are the US allies with a claim? In actual fact, there is only 1 very unreliable ally and their pattern of behaviour well documented.
The second article contains the following:
"If China is bent on changing the status-quo in Asia, why should America respects its so-called core interests? If Beijing won’t respect Washington’s interests, two can play such a game — with Beijing once again being forced to play defense."
The author then suggests a few things, including selling more advanced weapons to Taiwan. I'm not convinced that any of the suggestions would make the PRC even pause, but it did get me thinking, what diplomatic issues matter the most to the PRC. Taiwan was the one that came to mind, and if the US recognised Taiwan or at least threatened to might at least get the PRC to stop and think about their current stategy. Inflammatory certainly, but at least it would signal the US displeasure and shake things up a bit.
12. That is so not wise; and it violates the 1972 "
Sino-U.S. Joint Communiqué". American credibility would be at stake, if it recognized Taiwan - loss of American credibility to China will have very adverse consequences for the smaller claimant states. IMHO, the history of the region does not fit your narrative. Taiwan currently holds, Itu Aba, an island with fresh water. And Taiwan's claims in the South China Sea, lend support and provide a legal basis for China's claims. Why would you want to help the Taiwanese? Have you forgotten the sanctions imposed on the Philippines by Taiwan over the 2013 Guang Da Xing No. 28 incident? This was the second fatal shooting at sea involving the Philippines Coast Guard. These are criminal acts by the Philippines, as they were violations of their own rules of engagement. The second incident occurred on 9 May 2013 and was between the Taiwanese fishing boat Guang Da Xing No. 28 and the Philippine Coast Guard patrol boat Maritime Control Surveillance 3001, which resulted in the death of Taiwanese fisherman Hung Shih-cheng in a hail of Philippine bullets.
13. While on the topic of arms sales, it is interesting to note that the American Defense Secretary Ash Carter on
28 April 2016 has opened the door to US arms sales to Vietnam. Thanks to China's aggression, Indonesia's inability to get its act together as leader of ASEAN and the Americans playing its cards right, they have increased their standing with other ASEAN member states.
Also Taiwan deserves to be recognised as a nation, it has been forged in 'blood & fire' and has developed it's own unique Taiwanese identity. Most of the world only don't recognise Taiwan simply to appease the PRC and keep doing business.
14. Really?
(i) The Democratic Progressive Party (DJP) of Taiwan cannot be trusted by the great powers. The recent election of Tsai Ing-Wen of the DJP, as President, spells trouble for Sino-American relations going forward and placed Washington in a difficult position: continue rejecting the island democracy as a nation-state and bow to China’s demands that the US abide by its “one China policy,” or recognize a sea change has occurred in the relationships among Taipei, Beijing and Washington.
(ii) Since winning the election, Tsai has made it clear that military modernization will be a priority in her administration, including a shift from foreign procurement to domestic development and manufacturing of weapons. Priorities include a plan to build eight attack submarines and advanced fighter trainers. I would say that you don't understand Taiwan, the toxic Taiwanese domestic politics relating to the DJP and KMT, and I don't want to derail this thread with further discussion on Taiwanese politics. Please accept my apologies for such an incomplete and late reply to your post.
Whatever the US does, it needs to do something differently, if it is to protect the principle of the sea as a global commons with rights of free passage, because fundamentally PRC actions would seem to be an attack on that principle.
15. Read paragraph 6 above (post 2 of 3) for prior details provided on FON conducted by the US Navy. FON for military vessels does not have widespread support from other ASEAN claimants or with Indonesia.
16. The greatest threat to the freedom of commercial navigation arises out of the ungoverned spaces that tri-border area of the Philippines, Malaysia and Indonesia. We should note that in relation to the recent kidnapping incidents, Indonesia does not share a maritime border with Philippines in the Sulu Sea but Malaysia does. Indonesia shares a maritime border with Malaysia in Sulawesi Sea. However, this may be complicated by outstanding territorial and other disputes between (a) Indonesia and Malaysia, and (b) Philippines and Malaysia.
(i) It was also reported on
18 April 2016 that Indonesia plans to establish military cooperation with the Philippines and Malaysia to address the rising threat of piracy through joint patrols. Coordinating Political, Legal and Security Affairs Minister Luhut Binsar Panjaitan said Jokowi had personally asked him to prepare for the cooperation with Kuala Lumpur and Manila, as he saw the protection of trade in the area as a top priority. "I am scared that the area will become like the Somalian waters," Luhut said, referring to the area in which hijackings and kidnapping for ransom is relatively common.
(ii) Ten Indonesian sailors who had been held hostage by Islamist militant group Abu Sayyaf in the Philippines were released,
Indonesia's President Joko Widodo announced in a televised statement. The hostages, who had been held since March 26, were in "good condition," and were expected to arrive in Jakarta on 1 May 2016, he said. Widodo thanked the Philippines government and the various parties who helped secure the release of the hostages. Four Indonesians were still being held, and the Indonesian government would continue to work to secure their release, he said.
...On to the selling of weapons in general, especially to the SCS claimant states. My thoughts: maybe, maybe it might work if there is a NATO-type alliance in South East Asia, where nations can be assured that the weapons and capabilities that they are acquiring will not someday be used against each other. However, presently I am not confident of that happening...
...It might be a great idea if ASEAN somehow becomes a NATO of the South East. Otherwise...(and I'll admit I'm more than a little paranoid here) this very action might be the catalyst for ASEAN to implode. In that sense, I'm more than a little glad that China's just playing the 'soft power' card for now.
17. Changing the balance of power in the region will have an adverse consequence on the security of the region. Intra-ASEAN conflict is not only possible but likely, if these nationalist tendencies are not moderated - the Pinoys have scores to settle with the Malaysians over Sabah, which they claim. The Indonesians are still sore with the Malaysians over a range of other issues and are keen to demonstrate their resolve. Disputes in the South China Sea has already result in deaths, shootings at sea and destruction of property of innocent parties on land, if you read prior posts on what has happened to Taiwanese fishermen, and the riots in Viet Nam over China's placement of a rig in disputed waters.
its the reason why the french, germans, dutch, danes and swedes never sold their subs to Taiwan
when I was contracting in 2000-2002 the taiwanese approached the company I was working with to see if we could facilitate access to Collins tech or the subs themselves
rebuffed for the same reason
18. Agreed.
