What's new

3 naval fleets 100 ships drill in SCS: China "strike the mountain to warn the tiger"

If White House has idea to accept a win-win formula, the N.o1 and N.o2 r American and Russian not today China ... lol. If BeiJing believe that, no surprise China will become next USSR.:rofl:

Well maybe at that time, they have never though of that :D, and we Chinese are not naïve neither after what has happens to USSR. Regardless if US want or no, there will be a No 2 and US will have to chase their future fictive enemies.

China should never give up the diplomatic front and explore exhaustive peace solution before the war option, if we have to fight than so be it.
 
Last edited:
Well maybe at that time, they have never though of that :D, and we Chinese are not naïve neither after what has happens to USSR.
Don't be naive or it will kill Chinese :mod: ... following China economy development, building more type052D & type055 DDGs, building more nuclear attack subs with cruise missile VLS units, building more stealth fighters, building more nukes and DF ICBMs ... Foreigner don't understand Chinese but can understand how many weapons in ur hands, they will think twice ... and don't forget be a Gentleman ~!!! :-)
 
Don't be naive or it will kill Chinese :mod: ... following China economy development, building more type052D & type055 DDGs, building more nuclear attack sub with cruise missile VLS units, building more nukes and DF ICBMs ... foreigner don't understand Chinese but can understand how many weapons in ur hands ... and don't forget be a Gentleman ~!!! :-)

Stroke a deal doesn't mean to be naïve, in contrary we want to find the best "non war" solution to save Chinese and China interest.
 
This massive Naval exercise is not good enough, it should have coordinated with Chinese second core artilleries and try to sink few obsolete cargo or warships with DF-21D, together with our naval and air missiles attack to experiment the multi-level, multi-platform attacks..

DF21 is tactical ballistic missle, too expensive to be fired in a drill.
 
DF21 is tactical ballistic missle, too expensive to be fired in a drill.

If you don't have a realistic test, how can ensure the reliability in war time? It is a must to have some tests if this missile means to deal with AC and it should fire a salvo of 10 or 20 at same time to ensure to sink a carrier, 10 to 20 of this missile is just a fraction of Aircraft carrier cost, if we can't even afford for such test, then it's worthless to call it as carrier killer.
 
Last edited:
Before the “sensitive” moment, China exerts its 'muscle"
Updated at Wednesday, 29 Jun 2016, 17:14
The Hanoitimes - China`s motive since the Philippines promoted legal solutions to the East Sea dispute, is to focus on developing its "muscle power" to assert sovereignty in the field.


20160627161544-chau-vien.jpg

A vessel in the area where China builds an artificial island at the Chau Vien (Cuarteron) Reef on October 4th, 2014. Photo: Asahi Shimbun

Last week 180 delegates from Asian and European countries discussed marine security at a conference themed “Marine security and development: International cooperation and European-Asian experience sharing” in Ha Long city, Quang Ninh province.

During the 2-day conference, delegates discussed ways to enhance cooperation in dealing with marine security issues and affirmed the need to foster cooperation, amidst the escalation of strategic competition between countries. They also talked about the upcoming ruling by the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) on the "East Sea case" as well as the reaction of the parties involved.

On this issue, VietNamNet would like to introduce the following analysis.


China’s ignorance and use of "muscle"

Recently at the Shangri-La Dialogue 2016, US Defense Secretary Ash Carter acknowledged that the upcoming decision of the PCA about the East Sea case is an opportunity for China and the countries in the region to re-commit the principles of behavior, to show a new foreign policy, and to reduce conflict. The legal path and the other mechanism for resolving conflicts through peaceful negotiation and dialogue are the shortest way to promote security and to address the security issues globally, especially in Asia - Pacific.

Meanwhile, China's attitude to the upcoming verdict of the PCA is completely contrary. Also at Shangrila Dialogue, Admiral Sun Jianguo, deputy chief of general staff of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army, emphasized that China would not accept the decision made by PCA on the East Sea case.

“On the one hand, we have noticed that some countries apply international laws only when it is convenient. On the other hand, they support allies confronting China,” Sun said. “China firmly opposes such behavior…. We do not make trouble, but we have no fear of trouble."

The two statements represented entirely conflicting stances in approach to the East Sea dispute and they were watched very carefully by the international community.

This is the "sensitive" moment as the time for the PCA to make the decision on the East Sea case against China lodged by the Philippines is coming. Most of the delegates to the Shangri-La Dialogue 2016 paid attention to every move and of Beijing, such as rumors on the decision on the establishment of the ADIZ (Air Defense Identification Zone) in the East Sea as a response to the decision of the PCA.

These moves strengthen the trend that has been developed over the past three years: Since the Philippines promoted the legal process against China, this country has ignored it, focused on its "strength" - developing "muscles" to assert sovereignty in the field.

According to Prof. Carlyle A. Thayer (University of New South Wales, Australia) there are four main motives for China’s construction of artificial islands in the East Sea in recent times: rising nationalism, aquatic resources, mineral resources, and strategic geographical location.

He said that the favorable geopolitical position is the most important reason, because China is trying to deal with the rebalancing strategy of the Obama administration in the Asia - Pacific. Accordingly, China wants to assert sovereignty over the East Sea to ensure maritime communications and avoid the risk of interference from the south by the US Navy and Air Force in the future.

In contrast, the US strategy, as Dr. Patrick Cronin (American Institute for New Security Policy Studies) told the International Conference on the East Sea dispute at Yale University last May, includes five key elements, which are the catalyst and decisive determinants for the foreign policy of the United States in the East Sea in the coming time. They are: (1) closely linked with the re-balance policy in the Asia - Pacific region; (2) bilateral relationship between the US and China; (3) decisive role of the next president of the US on the US participation; (4) the strategy carried out comprehensively, not just limited to the political-diplomatic field, but also the economic, commercial areas and international law; (5) ensuring US interests in the region.


The choices of ASEAN

The choices of the two powers will force ASEAN to make its own choice. William Choong, a Shangri-La Dialogue Senior Fellow at the the International Institute for Strategic Studies, which organises the Shangri-La Dialogue, in his presentation at the Shangri-La Dialogue 2016, mentioned the response of ASEAN states before the PCA’s decision.

He said that if the ASEAN countries cannot release a joint statement supporting the PCA’s decision, China will become a hands-free in the East Sea issue. At that time China can claim the ADIZ in retaliation for the verdict of the PCA and the US patrol for freedom of navigation in the East Sea. It's one of the scripts that ASEAN countries should take into account when tensions escalate resulting in China’s "retaliation" on the economy and diplomacy.

On the other hand, the change of strategic environment is necessary for ASEAN to promote the protection of international law in the region.

Jeremy Lagelee, from the Faculty of Law, Georgetown University* raised a number of legal ideas that ASEAN should take into account after the PCA’s decision. The case between the Philippines and China also pointed out opportunities and challenges for ASEAN countries when choosing a bilateral solution.

Lagelee mentioned successful cases at the arbitration court when the case is beyond the bilateral framework, such as the collaboration between New Zealand and Australia to sue Japan on fishing in 1999, thereby encouraging ASEAN countries to find a common voice in the East Sea issue.

He suggested the new approach in the East Sea dispute resolution, such as the ability to expand to a third party (in order to protect freedom of navigation - FONOP), or non-state actors, in order to shift territorial disputes to judicial conflict resolution mechanisms, such as the law governing conflicts between enterprises - state, or the law protecting investors. Thereby, ASEAN on one side reaffirms its stance on the East Sea issue and on the other hand it is a way for the bloc to respond to the criticisms of the loss of its importance and role in regional security issues.

At the International Conference on East Sea disputes at Yale University in May, Dr. Ta Van Tai (Harvard University) said that Vietnam was and will always give priority to the legal path. Accordingly, the rights of Vietnam on the islands and archipelagos in the East Sea are entirely based on the legal practices in line with international law.

In the exclusive economic zone (EEZ) and the continental shelf, the fishing rights, exploitation of natural resources, environmental issues and maritime traffic of Vietnam are ensured by the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea 1982 (UNCLOS) .

He also rejected the ADIZ set by China in the East Sea, because it is the right of self-defense that is only deployed on the legal territory of a country. In addition, Vietnam can be based on the oil rig crisis in 2014 to enrich the record of the case in the future, and it should seek further assistance from the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the Arbitration Court of the international Convention on the Law of the Sea, and the UN.

Vietnamnet
 
What do you mean by saturation attack?
It is a military tactic. In the case of naval battle with AC, it means if enough anti-ship missiles are launched by an adversary against the carrier from a variety of platforms and directions simultaneously, it would be difficult for the AC battle group,if not impossible, to defend such saturation missile attack.
 
It is a military tactic. In the case of naval battle with AC, it means if enough anti-ship missiles are launched by an adversary against the carrier from a variety of platforms and directions simultaneously, it would be difficult for the AC battle group,if not impossible, to defend such saturation missile attack.

So how does that depict a saturation attack?
 
If you don't have a realistic test, how can ensure the reliability in war time? It is a must to have some tests if this missile means to deal with AC and it should fire a salvo of 10 or 20 at same time to ensure to sink a carrier, 10 to 20 of this missile is just a fraction of Aircraft carrier cost, if we can't even afford for such test, then it's worthless to call it as carrier killer.

Have been tested, but not in this drill.
 
When near appear far, when far appear near.

A wise ruler first attains conditions for victory and then, only then engages in battle.

Please, remember the highest form of wisdom and skill is to win without doing battle.

What China is doing now is not showing her best weapons or beat chest... but telling everyone, war is really bad idea.

China is making sure there is no war in the region.

Remember, please, war is going to destroy Asia.

So those wishing China ill must remember..this.

Indian posters must hold their glee and do not belittle China.

This obession to put China or Chinese down at every turn... is it necessary?

And to the Chinese posters... be one with the Tao. Remember that monkey god can never jump on the hand of Buddha.

Let the Indian friends express their feelings as they please. No doubt they have a vast country and great potential! Wish them all the best and move on.

Peace is better than war.
YOU are Wrong. Peace is important for ALL the Asians,but ONLY Chinese try to keep peace ,if we sit aside in the past years, I bet the Asia ,specially the East Asia will not get peace . But what we get at last? nothing and hatred. We are tired of keeping peace of Asia and other Asia countries try to get benefits between us and USA ,if the Asia lose peace,we will see who will the losers, us or other tiny Asia countries.
By the way, we are not afraid of the Korean war between NK and SK, we are not worried of US military stationed in Philippine. We dont like these ,but we can accept these. If there is a war between us and USA ,the military of USA in Asia is meaningless since we will destroy the whole US, so if we get hatred from other Asia countries, let them under the USA control,it is none of our business.
As I mentioned , a war is OK for China, great power never be destroyed, a war can speed up our military development .
 
Last edited:
YOU are Wrong. Peace is important for ALL the Asians,but ONLY Chinese try to keep peace ,if we sit aside in the past years, I bet the Asia ,specially the East Asia will not get peace . But what we get at last? nothing and hatred. We are tired of keeping peace of Asia and other Asia countries try to get benefits between us and USA ,if the Asia lose peace,we will see who will the losers, us or other tiny Asia countries.
By the way, we are not afraid of the Korean war between NK and SK, we are not worried of US military stationed in Philippine. We dont like these ,but we can accept these. If there is a war between us and USA ,the military of USA in Asia is meaningless since we will destroy the whole US, so if we get hatred from other Asia countries, let them under the USA control,it is none of our business.
As I mentioned , a war is OK for China, great power never be destroyed, a war can speed up our military development .

From your perspective you are quite right. Also it is fact that China has been accomodating smaller ASEAN countries a lot. Just because China want to have peace in the neighbourhood to focus on her development.

Perhaps some can see it as weakness. And miscalculate.

The point is Asian must break through this senseless politics and join to create an Asian century of indepence, development and peace. China has been trying to convince other asians to this paradigm but with little success.

Would you not agree that peace is better than war? Look at India...it is challenging China now at every turn...
Will it be good for them to have peace with China or seek conflict. With peace and development the indian can lift their people out of poverty just like China did.

One has faith in the rational and pragmatic wisdom of chinese leadership to slove this SCS and ECS in a peaceful way. ECS and SCS has been historically part of China and everyone knows it. Just like half of Tibet under Indian control.
 
From your perspective you are quite right. Also it is fact that China has been accomodating smaller ASEAN countries a lot. Just because China want to have peace in the neighbourhood to focus on her development.

Perhaps some can see it as weakness. And miscalculate.

The point is Asian must break through this senseless politics and join to create an Asian century of indepence, development and peace. China has been trying to convince other asians to this paradigm but with little success.

Would you not agree that peace is better than war? Look at India...it is challenging China now at every turn...
Will it be good for them to have peace with China or seek conflict. With peace and development the indian can lift their people out of poverty just like China did.

One has faith in the rational and pragmatic wisdom of chinese leadership to slove this SCS and ECS in a peaceful way. ECS and SCS has been historically part of China and everyone knows it. Just like half of Tibet under Indian control.
Thanks for your reply. but I disagree with you.
(1)India is changlleging us at every turn? no ,they are far away,their social structure is ridiculous,I rather believe Vietnam has better future because of the Communist Party. Moreover,If China is down as the USSR was, India will be next ,the West will not leave him alone, they may seperate him into pieces. I like to see India people get out of poverty , in fact ,India development direction is the India ocean ,we actually donot have conflict . And frankly speaking , I never think a country is a threat if they even cannot make a good gun.
(2) We fight lots of war after WW2, a war is a disaster for Sigapore,but not for us. War around China will be controlled for us ,it can speed up our development . A war is good for big power.
Today ,we need a powerful leader to lead us into next development stage, he can restructure the politics and economy frame, a war not bad for us, a powerful leader can earn his credit from war.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom