What's new

CNN says US destroyer to sail in SCS. I say it's pointless.

US believes it is important to "Make A Statement". That is all there is.

Lots of statements. They are doing similar stiff with respect to Syria. They did that before with respect to Crimea.

I believe that capable great powers do not give much heed to US statements because they are getting of lesser value.

I would like to see China to continue at full speed with island genesis and build-up without making much fuss over the sailing US ship but using this as an excuse to further speed up the construction efforts.
 
This is a difficult position and quite a win win for USA. What if China open fire or do a collision on USA ship or USA open fire?

The result will be open confrontation between China and USA and USA can hope to move all manufacturing from China to USA.

That must be one of game plans for USA hawk.

What if China stooge?

Then China will loss prestige and no one will heed any sovereign claims of China.
 
The US and the rest of the world recognizes the need for freedom of navigation in the SCS. That is what matters more. In the end, no matter how many 'islands' China build, the US and allies will be there to ensure China will remain on those islands and unable to molest honest shipping.


It is interesting, US always thinks it represents "the rest of world", and you think you represent "the US and the rest of world". :tup:
 
This is a difficult position and quite a win win for USA. What if China open fire or do a collision on USA ship or USA open fire?

The result will be open confrontation between China and USA and USA can hope to move all manufacturing from China to USA.

That must be one of game plans for USA hawk.

What if China stooge?

Then China will loss prestige and no one will heed any sovereign claims of China.

China has not officially claimed sovereignty over the 12NM but it did with the islands and the island construction efforts.

China won't respond as the capability build-up has not completed yet. US move does not curb or affect in any way the build-up work.

What is important is to keep the initiative: China acts, US reacts. That's by itself a tactical gain.
 
Last edited:
Im pro U.S., im not big fat coward Phung Quang Thanh general of VCP known for pro China. Who constant praise China even poor Viet fishermen ship got sinks. Phung Quang Thanh famous qoute " oh im so worry why Vietnamese so anti china"
 
Im pro U.S., im not big fat coward Phung Quang Thanh general of VCP known for pro China. Who constant praise China even poor Viet fishermen ship got sinks. Phung Quang Thanh famous qoute " oh im so worry why Vietnamese so anti china"

Why would you value pro-US more than pro-China whom Vietnam share the same culture with? Vietnam is historically an ancient Chinese outpost. What did the French do to our baby nan yue.
 
Who came out ahead?

The US sailed within 12 miles of a Chinese South China Sea island. Then it went home.

Now, let's look at what China got out of the event. China has greater control of the South China Sea. China has started to use armed fighter jets. This is a new military practice.

As far as I am aware, the Chinese Coast Guard is still using unarmed ships in the South China Sea. Unless there is a provocation, I doubt this policy will change.

In contrast, the US destroyer transit near a Chinese island has created a change in Chinese military patrols. We can expect to see more ARMED Chinese fighter jets.

Chinese Navy Holds Drills Over Disputed South China Sea Area

aZUoFe4.jpg
 
Are you talking about your viet fellows?

they always like to post some weird map here.


and cn claimed scs after world war 2.

we do not need silly.map

Maps can be redrawn as we keep having our baby islands growing up into adulthood.

Ain't watching them grow up one of the best national pastime?

:partay:
 
Who came out ahead?

The US sailed within 12 miles of a Chinese South China Sea island. Then it went home.

Now, let's look at what China got out of the event. China has greater control of the South China Sea. China has started to use armed fighter jets. This is a new military practice.

As far as I am aware, the Chinese Coast Guard is still using unarmed ships in the South China Sea. Unless there is a provocation, I doubt this policy will change.

In contrast, the US destroyer transit near a Chinese island has created a change in Chinese military patrols. We can expect to see more ARMED Chinese fighter jets.

Chinese Navy Holds Drills Over Disputed South China Sea Area

aZUoFe4.jpg

Notice the short-range and medium-range missiles on the Chinese J-11B fighter. They are now armed during flight patrols in the South China Sea.

Chinese jets training with missiles fly by disputed South China Sea waters near Vietnam in new response to US warships | South China Morning Post

UwoWhkf.jpg


 
Last edited:
Notice the short-range and medium-range missiles on the Chinese J-11B fighter. They are now armed during flight patrols in the South China Sea.

Chinese jets training with missiles fly by disputed South China Sea waters near Vietnam in new response to US warships | South China Morning Post

UwoWhkf.jpg



**
Comment: How to counter American provocation
Zhang Tao
2015-11-02 22:220

BEIJING, November 2 -- An U.S. naval destroyer recently sailed within 12 nautical miles off China's islands in the South China Sea and stirred the entire Asia-Pacific. Why did the U.S. choose this time to do such a violation of China’s territorial waters? I think there are three reasons.

First, the U.S. wants to influence its Western allies' attitudes towards China.

After Britain showed goodwill to China, leaders of major European countries such as Germany, France and the Netherlands visited China consecutively to talk about cooperation, sign big contracts, look for development opportunities and establish comprehensive strategic partnerships with China.

It seems that these allies of the U.S. want to abandon their friend. As a result, Americans got very anxious because without Western allies, America will lose its position as the "world leader". That’s why the U.S. was eager to use the action to warn them that they cannot get too close with China. Instead, they should follow Uncle Sam when dealing with China.

Second, the U.S. wants to find allies in Asia to jointly contain China.

Ever after the “Asia-Pacific rebalance" concept proposed by the United States, peace eluded the Pacific Ocean. America's strategy is to summon some Asia-Pacific countries and build a small Asian version of NATO to contain China's development.

However, the U.S. has not yet achieved this goal.

Third, the U.S. wants to promote the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) in Asia-Pacific countries.

U.S. aims to promote the implementation of “Asia-Pacific rebalance" with military and economic wheels. Although the TPP agreement was already signed, voices of opposition can constantly be heard from those countries and the final agreement still has to be approved by parliaments of related countries.

At this point, the U.S. chose to escort its economy with military means in order to show muscle and strength and put pressure on these countries. U.S. aims for the right to speak in making the Asia-Pacific economic rules to restrict China’s economy.

Next, the U.S. will take three steps: patrol in the South China Sea and sail within 12 nautical miles off China's islands and reefs every quarter, increase the number of military exercises close to Chinese islands and reefs in the South China Sea and accelerate the pace of deploying military forces in the Philippines.

So, we must prepare for the U.S. provocation.

First, we need the firm will to counter any provocation.

The South China Sea is one of the key factors for the reviving of China. Now that China is forced to confront with the U.S. for a third time, we must dare to fight. Only by wining in the South China Sea game, we have the qualifications to go global.

It is a test for China and we must pass it. In history, China has beaten the U.S. under very difficult conditions and today we have more confidence to win again. The U.S. provocation in the South China Sea is also a wrong action at the wrong place and at the wrong time.

As its strength declines, the U.S. still chose to wrestle with two world powers, China and Russia. This time, Americans are not likely to win. Meanwhile, we shall prepare for a "protracted war" because strength, will and endurance are vital in the South China Sea game.

Second, we need steady and orderly strategies.

The U.S. Navy won the so-called “glory” by sailing within 12 nautical miles off China's islands. The Chinese PLA Navy properly disposed the incident and safeguarded our sovereignty and interests.

In the future, a four-step action can be implemented to deal with such incident. If foreign ships sail within 200 nautical miles off China's islands, we will closely monitor them; if they sail within 24 nautical miles, we keep track of them; if they are close to 12 miles, we send warnings; and if they sail within 12 nautical miles, we expel them.

Third, we need necessary measures to deal with militarization.

Gary Roughead, former U.S. Chief of Naval Operations, threw the topic of "demilitarization of the South China Sea" at this year’s Xiangshan Forum. But U.S. warships soon entered the South China Sea. It feels like the U.S. is in disorder and does not do keep their words.

For a long time, U.S. military aircraft have conducted close reconnaissance in the South China Sea and the scale of their military exercises is expanding. The U.S. military deployment is getting closer to China, and now they want to normalize the patrol in the South China Sea.

The fact is: the U.S. already militarized the South China Sea. China began to build islands and reefs in the South China Sea because we want to provide maritime public civil products.

In the South China Sea with U.S. militarization, we now have to strengthen the construction of necessary facilities in order to effectively protect the safety of people on the islands and reefs and safeguard our national interests.

In the future, U.S. warships may also sail within 12 nautical miles off China's islands and we must ensure that we have the initiative.

(Written by Liang Fang, Professor of the Department of Strategic Studies of the National Defense University of the Chinese People's Liberation Army)

@cirr , @cnleio
 

Back
Top Bottom