The international-law Irony of U.S. Provocations in South China Sea

[Aepsilons]

Japanese Empire's idea of Greater China is really a great joke. How can you believe in this rubbish excues? Last time, the Japanese propaganda I remember is liberating Asian nations from the European colonial occupation, right.

I am not supporting Japanese Imperialism, i am just giving a reason why Japan does not openly intervene or state its position in SCS area because HISTORICALLY SPEAKING Japan had sided with Chinese claims here. Actually , all actions the Japanese military had initiated in Indochina and South China Sea was done to preserve "Chinese" territory. That means even during the height of power of the Japanese Empire, Japan used Chinese legitimacy to initiate seizure of French possessions in the south china seas. In fact after Japan conquered the Philippines in 1942, the Governor-General of Philippines, General Masaharu Homma, had declared all islands under American-Filipino occupation in the south china seas were illegal and were territories of China.

So , historically speaking, the Japanese Empire always justified its actions by 'preserving China'.

This is why i think Japan will remain limited in its activities in SCS......for the foreseeable future.

 

[jhungary]

Very candid appraisal. Tho i am gambling to assume that the Chinese side are biding their time using their force projection to counter any Vietnamese or Filipino threats. Let's be honest here, the FIlipinos and Vietnamese don't really have the naval capability nor naval air power to counter the Chinese here. I hate to be pessimistic on our Vietnamese and Filipino friends here (as i value and cherish their relations with Japanese context), but if the Vietnamese or Filipinos were to be suicidal and 'attack' these Chinese bastions. Then, the PLAN SCF would use this as context to declare war and seize these poorly armed and poor defended Vietnamese and Filipino islands.

Right now the region looks like a waiting game. A game of who's going to strike first. The Chinese surely will not strike first; theirs is never the type to attack first (in any engagement , but is a reaction to a perception of military provocation).

The question again is what do these island project? A nice environment people can go vacationing?

Power projection means you have the mean and reach to touch people outside your own zone, traditionally you use a blue water navy to project your power. You cannot project your power just outside your own country. This is something quite stupid actually as your full power have already been revealed and you don't need nor wanted to project yet again.

Another problem is that you assume Vietnam and Philippine would be a non-factor now, in the near future and in the future, but look at it this way, China was considered a non-factor in the 80s to late 90s, and now it comes into plays, a mere 10 to 15 years can change a lot. Also given the support the west gave to these nation, they could eventually turn into a force to be reckon with within a short time. Well, may not be well enough to win, but most certainly will bleed the Chinese. And for a country as big as China versus a country as small as Philippine or Vietnam, you don't actually need to win the battle to win the whole situation. That's how Sweden stayed neutral during the whole WW2 and how Switzerland stayed neutral during the same war.

While China can wait, so does Philippine and Vietnam, in fact, there are actually a larger potential for Philippine and Vietnam to growth into a deterrence than China to growth into an undisputed winner, look at it this way, you need to destroy a large chunk (about 80%) of both Vietnamese and Philippine Force to take them out of the equation, however, What the Philippine and Vietnam need is to deal a 30% damage to the Chinese to deter the Chinese from getting what they want. It's always easier to deal 30% damage than have to totally annihilate 2 country from the map. And if that is a point or anything, time is actually on Vietnam and Philippine side, not China. Because every single percentage those two grow by day, the Chinese need to growth 3-4 fold just to cover it.

 

[nang2]

I am not supporting Japanese Imperialism, i am just giving a reason why Japan does not openly intervene or state its position in SCS area because HISTORICALLY SPEAKING Japan had sided with Chinese claims here. Actually , all actions the Japanese military had initiated in Indochina and South China Sea was done to preserve "Chinese" territory. That means even during the height of power of the Japanese Empire, Japan used Chinese legitimacy to initiate seizure of French possessions in the south china seas. In fact after Japan conquered the Philippines in 1942, the Governor-General of Philippines, General Masaharu Homma, had declared all islands under American-Filipino occupation in the south china seas were illegal and were territories of China.

So , historically speaking, the Japanese Empire always justified its actions by 'preserving China'.

This is why i think Japan will remain limited in its activities in SCS......for the foreseeable future.

Yes, even the war with Qing Dynasty was hailed as "preserving China" since Manchurian was the invader.

 

[jhungary]

If God forbid a war broke up, the battle ground wouldn't be just these islands.

That is true, but as I said, how much China is willing to lose to gain these rock? That is the actual question you should ask. When a war broke out, not just these island would be the battlefield. China, Philippine and Vietnam coastal city would be target too. So, again, the problem is, would Chinese lose justified the lose with Philippine and Vietnam?

 

[Aepsilons]

While China can wait, so does Philippine and Vietnam, in fact, there are actually a larger potential for Philippine and Vietnam to growth into a deterrence than China to growth into an undisputed winner, look at it this way, you need to destroy a large chunk (about 80%) of both Vietnamese and Philippine Force to take them out of the equation, however, What the Philippine and Vietnam need is to deal a 30% damage to the Chinese to deter the Chinese from getting what they want. It's always easier to deal 30% damage than have to totally annihilate 2 country from the map. And if that is a point or anything, time is actually on Vietnam and Philippine side, not China. Because every single percentage those two grow by day, the Chinese need to growth 3-4 fold just to cover it.

Poignant !

 

[asia2000]

Umm, are you actually blind? I said, nobody can proof the war is illegal, because it is ambiguous. And do you actually know what ambiguous means?
You cannot proof beyond reasonable doubt that it is illegal, but also you cannot proof beyond reasonable doubt that it is legal either. Geez, read a few book why don't ya?

Ok, am I allowed to have my own opinion? Did US find any weapon of massive destruction in Iraq and is Iraq better off?

Again, building the island represent a strategic liability on the issue, it does not matter who does it, it does not actually do anything. Rather, you are also wasting your resource and other item to defend such island with usually non-favourable outcome.

So what does these island give China in term of strategic edge than China got already by using their home bases?? If you cannot give any extra edge other than it look good, then it would be a tactical and strategically liability, it is this simple.

So, according to your theory, those islands built by Vietnam are also liabilities for them?

 

[nang2]

That is true, but as I said, how much China is willing to lose to gain these rock? That is the actual question you should ask. When a war broke out, not just these island would be the battlefield. China, Philippine and Vietnam coastal city would be target too. So, again, the problem is, would Chinese lose justified the lose with Philippine and Vietnam?

That is a question that nobody can answer so I wouldn't try. I will also reject any answer to that as gibberish.

 

[Aepsilons]

Yes, even the war with Qing Dynasty was hailed as "preserving China" since Manchurian was the invader.

I am in no ways a supporter of Japanese Imperialism, just an admirer of military history thats all. But from my objective analysis, never and i mean never had it been the case that Japan had ever repudiated the legitimacy of China as a historical preeminent power. In fact the Emperor Meiji (Japan's most revered Sovereign Lord) even declared that "Because of China, Japan Is!" This is what he said during the conclusion of the Sino-Japanese War of 1894-1895. Meaning he did not want to perpetuate Sino-Japanese hostility because in the end, he had seen the uniformity and similarity of both empires as one civilization.

You will see that even in the height of war, Japanese side always saw thee end goal of unifying Japan with China. Japan , ultimately, saw itself not as an enemy, or foreign entity, but savior of China and inherently Chinese as well.

I know, it may sound almost wierd to Chinese patriots, but it just shows another side of the equation that even despite the great war of China and Japan --- the Japanese leadership had seen the potential of a unified Japan and China. Unfortunatley, my friend, war and forceful coercion had caused millions of lives, and precious Japanese and Chinese blood were spilled. I suppose it shows us that force never wins, but through gradual reclamation and integration.

A bloody lesson for Greater East Asia to learn from.

 

[jhungary]

You think China will defence simultaneously those islands when somebody deliberately want to attack them? No, in my opinion, China don't has to defence those islands because the small islands are impossible and worthless to defence. Attacking those islands means declare war against China, China will turn to attack the counter-parts' main target, even nuclear weapons will be considered. We can count who will pay more price.
China may have lots of choices. You didn't read this sentence. This means China can control the scale of the counter attack and when China upgrade the seriousness of conflict. All basis is China won't have actual huge damage if those small islands attacked. Those islands have strategic values, but have limited actual military functions.

Well, what you said have zero strategically sense.

I just want to ask you two question.

1.) Would China use nuclear weapon just because these few rocks?
2.) You really do think in case of a war, China will not suffer any huge damage?

I am not going to discuss the first question, honestly quite dumb thing to say anyone is willing to unleash an Armageddon on a few island, however, on the second point. Running a war itself is a damage done to a country. You lose money by every day, you lose man everyday and even if your mainland was unharmed, you lose your production capability everyday,

Everyday in a war is a day that damage your country's economic might. Because everyday in war, you stop producing TVs, Refrigerator, Cars and you started to make bomb, bullet and guns. And how much and how long can China endure a war with 2 nations? They don't really need to do anything, just have you jumping around and hopping around SCS and you burn money everyday. That is the biggest damage of all. Forget about being hit by cruise missile, forget about being hit by bomb.

Ok, am I allowed to have my own opinion? Did US find any weapon of massive destruction in Iraq and is Iraq better off?

Oh my god, first of all, resolution 678 is NOT ABOUT PROOF that WMD did exist, it's about Iraq allowing UN inspector to inspect their WMD storage site. Which Iraq denied.

The US and UK uses force to enforce 678, which is to SEARCH FOR WMD. Not whether or not they find it matters. Again, please do read resolution 678 for more detail.

Beside, US did find Chemical Weapon in Iraq in 2008, As with many other poster, yes they are over their used by day but they pose a threat no less, or I will have to ask you to tour those "Expired" Chemical weapon without a mask and a NBC suit if you claim those "Expired" nerve agent is harmless.

And were you in Iraq? I was, I can personally attested to that the Iraq is better off today, I still receiving cards from people I help during my tour in Iraq, you have no idea how Iraqi hated Saddam Hussein. So, Are Iraq is better today than in 2003? OF COURSE.

I love how people talk about something they have ABSOLUTELY NO IDEA ABOUT. That's where the gold is in this forum, looking at dude trying to pass on as they know everything. LOL great fun.

So, according to your theory, those islands built by Vietnam are also liabilities for them?

Didn't I answered this already?

 

[XiaoYaoZi]

Japanese Empire's idea of Greater China is really a great joke. How can you believe in this rubbish excues? Last time, the Japanese propaganda I remember is liberating Asian nations from the European colonial occupation, right.

That is ridiculous rubbish propaganda for Japanese to foolish themselves, because except themselves no one believe it.

 

[nang2]

I am in no ways a supporter of Japanese Imperialism, just an admirer of military history thats all. But from my objective analysis, never and i mean never had it been the case that Japan had ever repudiated the legitimacy of China as a historical preeminent power. In fact the Emperor Meiji (Japan's most revered Sovereign Lord) even declared that "Because of China, Japan Is!" This is what he said during the conclusion of the Sino-Japanese War of 1894-1895. Meaning he did not want to perpetuate Sino-Japanese hostility because in the end, he had seen the uniformity and similarity of both empires as one civilization.

You will see that even in the height of war, Japanese side always saw thee end goal of unifying Japan with China. Japan , ultimately, saw itself not as an enemy, or foreign entity, but savior of China and inherently Chinese as well.

I know, it may sound almost wierd to Chinese patriots, but it just shows another side of the equation that even despite the great war of China and Japan --- the Japanese leadership had seen the potential of a unified Japan and China. Unfortunatley, my friend, war and forceful coercion had caused millions of lives, and precious Japanese and Chinese blood were spilled. I suppose it shows us that force never wins, but through gradual reclamation and integration.

A bloody lesson for Greater East Asia to learn from.

One civilization and unification of Japan and China are just rhetoric for empire expansion. Think about it. Japanese don't even celebrate Chinese new year.

 

[Place Of Space]

Well, what you said have zero strategically sense.

I just want to ask you two question.

1.) Would China use nuclear weapon just because these few rocks?
2.) You really do think in case of a war, China will not suffer any huge damage?

I am not going to discuss the first question, honestly quite dumb thing to say anyone is willing to unleash an Armageddon on a few island, however, on the second point. Running a war itself is a damage done to a country. You lose money by every day, you lose man everyday and even if your mainland was unharmed, you lose your production capability everyday,

Everyday in a war is a day that damage your country's economic might. Because everyday in war, you stop producing TVs, Refrigerator, Cars and you started to make bomb, bullet and guns. And how much and how long can China endure a war with 2 nations? They don't really need to do anything, just have you jumping around and hopping around SCS and you burn money everyday. That is the biggest damage of all. Forget about being hit by cruise missile, forget about being hit by bomb.



Oh my god, first of all, resolution 678 is NOT ABOUT PROOF that WMD did exist, it's about Iraq allowing UN inspector to inspect their WMD storage site. Which Iraq denied.

The US and UK uses force to enforce 678, which is to SEARCH FOR WMD. Not whether or not they find it matters. Again, please do read resolution 678 for more detail.

Beside, US did find Chemical Weapon in Iraq in 2008, As with many other poster, yes they are over their used by day but they pose a threat no less, or I will have to ask you to tour those "Expired" Chemical weapon without a mask and a NBC suit if you claim those "Expired" nerve agent is harmless.

And were you in Iraq? I was, I can personally attested to that the Iraq is better off today, I still receiving cards from people I help during my tour in Iraq, you have no idea how Iraqi hated Saddam Hussein. So, Are Iraq is better today than in 2003? OF COURSE.


Didn't I answered this already?

Choices means China have options or ability, I didn't say China must do this or that. Nuclear is ability. When a country decide to declear war against China, nuclear may help it to think about war twice.

"And how much and how long can China endure a war with 2 nations? They don't really need to do anything, just have you jumping around and hopping around SCS and you burn money everyday. That is the biggest damage of all. Forget about being hit by cruise missile, forget about being hit by bomb."
I don't know how much and how long China can endure a war. There is no "rational war" in history. Where we started the discussion? Filipines attack Chinese islands. If they have started an irrational war, Chinese have no responsibility of helping them to cool their brain down.

 

[Zero_wing]

Choices means China have options or ability, I didn't say China must do this or that. Nuclear is ability. When a country decide to declear war against China, nuclear may help it to think about war twice.

"And how much and how long can China endure a war with 2 nations? They don't really need to do anything, just have you jumping around and hopping around SCS and you burn money everyday. That is the biggest damage of all. Forget about being hit by cruise missile, forget about being hit by bomb."
I don't know how much and how long China can endure a war. There is no "rational war" in history. Where we started the discussion? Filipines attack Chinese islands. If they have started an irrational war, Chinese have no responsibility of helping them to cool their brain down.

Wow i don't know whats worse your ignorance, your spelling or your arrogance man your far crazier than average chinese drone here.

 

[Ewok6102]

1.) Would China use nuclear weapon just because these few rocks?
2.) You really do think in case of a war, China will not suffer any huge damage?

1) China will not use nuke because of a few rocks. But attacking our military installations and thousands of personnels that are stationed on our outposts then this becomes plausible.

So worry not my friend. Unless our adversaries memories resemble that of a goldfish and they have forgotten history. No one wants to see a repeat of Pearl Harbour, Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

2) Everyone suffers in a war, it is just a case of how much they have and are willing to lose.

 

[Zsari]

nope, you are the one that's confused on what I said.

What make you think Triton island is within Chinese Water? Because it was Chinese Claim or Chinese is the current administrator of the Island??

As I said, both case is not to be used as an assumption to allow for a true bearing under UNCLOS. As you assume the island belong to China as part of territorial water, but again, this is disputed.

Unless you came out ahead as a non-disputed owner of the Island, there would not be any ownership, of course you can enforce your own law on it, it does not mean you have your control of the island under international standard. You can, either go to a court and emerge as an undisputed owner, or alternatively, you can engage in any shipping that traverse thru the island, and the Chinese did not did either one of that.

A territory under dispute doesn't mean the territory doesn't have ownership, nor does it mean that the rights of the ownership doesn't exist, especially to a third party. Just like two people disputing the ownership of a house doen't mean any outsider can freely come in to live there. By US own statement, the US does not dispute any party's claim over the islands in the South China Sea, nor is the patrol aimed at challenging the soverignty of the claimants. Your argument is not one that even the US government is attempting.

 

[Zero_wing]

1) China will not use nuke because of a few rocks. But attacking our military installations and thousands of personnels that are stationed on our outposts then this becomes plausible.

So worry not my friend. Unless our adversaries memories resemble that of a goldfish and they have forgotten history. No one wants to see a repeat of Pearl Harbour, Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

2) Everyone suffers in a war, it is just a case of how much they have and are willing to lose.

You should tell that to comrade place of space for advocating using nukes in the first place