Vietnam Defence Forum

[Svantana]

It is better to wait for the results of the investigation between the two countries,

the main thing is to resolve the dispute with the efforts of peace and diplomacy ...

As a friendly country, Indonesia and Vietnam have experienced settling disputes between two nations in such manner, for example as the case of disputes between Indonesian marine and fisheries resources surveillance (PSDKP), With a ship of Vietnam coast guard a few months ago.

Vietnam Fisheries Resources Surveillance ship KN490 and Indonesian fisheries patrol ship ORCA 04 6004.

http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2017/05/30/detained-fisheries-official-released-by-vietnam.html

Yes, I also agree Indonesia want to hide the incident and deny for that. Frankly, If they admit I will give them more respect than Dont forget they can shot Chinese ship, so Vietnam is not a matter, Dont need to deny

Yes, we did in 2016...
"The Indonesian warship KRI Imam Bonjol 383 fired several warning shots, the Navy said, adding that the Chinese fishing vessels ignored them."

kri imam bonjol 383, sistership of kri wiratno 379.

http://www.theepochtimes.com/n3/209...e-fishing-boat-beijing-says-1-person-injured/

The Indonesian navy does not discriminate against the perpetrators of our nation's sovereignty violations ... The main task of the Indonesian national army including the navy is to uphold the sovereignty of the state, to maintain the territorial integrity of the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia based on Pancasila and the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia Protecting the whole nation and the entire country of Indonesia from the threat and disruption to the integrity of the nation and state.

 

[Carlosa]

First chinese official statement about the conflict at the Repsol oil site in Vietnam's Vanguard Bank area:


China urges halt to oil drilling in disputed South China Sea

ReutersJuly 25, 2017

FILE PHOTO: A Repsol logo at a petrol station in Bormujos near the Andalusian capital of Seville, southern Spain March 3, 2016. REUTERS/Marcelo del Pozo/File Photo
BEIJING (Reuters) - China's Foreign Ministry has urged a halt to oil drilling in a disputed part of the South China Sea, where Spanish oil company Repsol had been operating in cooperation with Vietnam.

Drilling began in mid-June in Vietnam's Block 136/3, which is licensed to Vietnam's state oil firm, Spain's Repsol and Mubadala Development Co of the United Arab Emirates.

The block lies inside the U-shaped 'nine-dash line' that marks the vast area that China claims in the sea and overlaps what it says are its own oil concessions.

Foreign Ministry spokesman Lu Kang said China had indisputable sovereignty over the Spratly Islands, which China calls the Nansha islands, and jurisdiction over the relevant waters and seabed.

"China urges the relevant party to cease the relevant unilateral infringing activities and with practical actions safeguard the hard-earned positive situation in the South China Sea," Lu said at a regular briefing, when asked if China had pressured Vietnam or the Spanish company to stop drilling.

He did not elaborate.

This week the BBC reported that Vietnam had halted drilling there after Chinese threats, but there was no independent confirmation and neither Vietnamese officials nor Repsol made any comment on the report.

Thomson Reuters data showed the drilling ship Deepsea Metro I was in the same position on Monday as it had been since drilling began on the block in the middle of June.

An Indonesian naval ship that passed there on Saturday reported that three coastguard vessels and two Vietnamese fishing boats were nearby and there was no sign of trouble.

The Norwegian drilling ship operator, Odfjell Drilling Ltd., did not respond to an emailed request for comment.

China claims most of the energy-rich South China Sea through which about $5 trillion in ship-borne trade passes every year. Brunei, Malaysia, the Philippines, Taiwan and Vietnam also have claims.

China's naval build-up and its increasingly assertive stance over disputed territory in the South China Sea have unnerved its neighbors.

The United States has criticized China's construction of islands and military facilities there, concerned they could be used to restrict free movement and extend Beijing's strategic reach.

(Reporting by Michael Martina in Beijing and Matthew Tostevin in Bangkok; Editing by Clarence Fernandez)

 

[gambit]

Obviously you are the expert on this, but I wonder, if the aircraft is tasked with the extra burden of locating and attacking ground targets in a contested environment, would that be taxing the pilot quite a bit, or can be handled quite ok? The Indians are very happy with the 2 seater and they also want to change their upcoming PAK-FA fighter from the 1 seater Russian configuration to a 2 seater. Just wondering.

Tier One air forces, such as the US, pretty much expect their line fighter pilots to be proficient at both air-air and air-ground tactics.

The US Navy subordinate the 'Top Gun' program, which focuses on air-air, under the umbrella program Naval Strike and Air Warfare Center ( NSAWC ), pronounce n-sock, where pilots are expected to graduate with both air-air and air-ground ratings.

The USAF changed its Fighter Weapons School to simply Weapons School where fighter pilots are expected to be able to switch between air-air and air-ground at a moment's notice.

So let us take the US Navy F-18 platform for example...

An F-18 Super Hornet pilot is expected to be able to fight his way to the target area, deliver ground strike ordnance, and fight his way back out, if necessary. He is expected to be able to elude SAM and fend off opposition air.

But then why does the EF-18 Growler have to operators ?

Because electronics warfare ( EW ) is too different in associated tasks compares to the similarities between air-air and air-ground.

The weapons in this case are EM energy and are too different in characteristics and behaviors. An EW fighter maybe expected to support multiple friendlies and fight multiple enemies whereas an air-air engagement demands the pilot to totally focus on one enemy. An EW fighter, due to the nature of EM radiation behaviors, can negatively affect multiple targets, whereas the bomb can only negative affect one target. Such differences necessitates extra education and training and once an F-18 operator is certified as an EW combatant, he is a specialist the same way an Army sniper is such a specialist.

So now we come to the buzz words of 'task saturation'...

Task saturation is individual specific, meaning one person cannot perform expected multiple tasks efficiently. The keyword here 'efficiently'. You can train an F-18 operator to be a pilot and an EW specialist, but he will not be able to perform those tasks efficiently, especially under combat stress.

Task saturation can exist when the platform cannot do as much as you like, which leads back to the previous paragraph. Since the aircraft cannot do some things, you have to do it yourself. In a prop job Cessna 152, a simple aircraft, the pilot have to move the rudder to make a coordinated turn, but my F-16 can move the rudder for me. That is one less task for flying I have to do.

So if you are able to design the platform to automatically change the radar's operations from air-air mode to air-ground mode by way of a switch, you just removed a lot of tasks from yourself. The aircraft is your co-pilot.

The F-15's basic platform was too limited so in order to make the fighter air-ground capable, a second operator had to be introduced, else the USAF might as well plan for a new jet. So the F-15E Strike Eagle two-seater variant was created.

For the F-16, the B/D two-seater models are trainers, not combatants, even though they can be if necessary.

Tier One air forces expects its pilots, assigned to a multi-role platform, to be able to change from air-air to air-ground tactics as needed.

 

[Carlosa]

Tier One air forces, such as the US, pretty much expect their line fighter pilots to be proficient at both air-air and air-ground tactics.

The US Navy subordinate the 'Top Gun' program, which focuses on air-air, under the umbrella program Naval Strike and Air Warfare Center ( NSAWC ), pronounce n-sock, where pilots are expected to graduate with both air-air and air-ground ratings.

The USAF changed its Fighter Weapons School to simply Weapons School where fighter pilots are expected to be able to switch between air-air and air-ground at a moment's notice.

So let us take the US Navy F-18 platform for example...

An F-18 Super Hornet pilot is expected to be able to fight his way to the target area, deliver ground strike ordnance, and fight his way back out, if necessary. He is expected to be able to elude SAM and fend off opposition air.

But then why does the EF-18 Growler have to operators ?

Because electronics warfare ( EW ) is too different in associated tasks compares to the similarities between air-air and air-ground.

The weapons in this case are EM energy and are too different in characteristics and behaviors. An EW fighter maybe expected to support multiple friendlies and fight multiple enemies whereas an air-air engagement demands the pilot to totally focus on one enemy. An EW fighter, due to the nature of EM radiation behaviors, can negatively affect multiple targets, whereas the bomb can only negative affect one target. Such differences necessitates extra education and training and once an F-18 operator is certified as an EW combatant, he is a specialist the same way an Army sniper is such a specialist.

So now we come to the buzz words of 'task saturation'...

Task saturation is individual specific, meaning one person cannot perform expected multiple tasks efficiently. The keyword here 'efficiently'. You can train an F-18 operator to be a pilot and an EW specialist, but he will not be able to perform those tasks efficiently, especially under combat stress.

Task saturation can exist when the platform cannot do as much as you like, which leads back to the previous paragraph. Since the aircraft cannot do some things, you have to do it yourself. In a prop job Cessna 152, a simple aircraft, the pilot have to move the rudder to make a coordinated turn, but my F-16 can move the rudder for me. That is one less task for flying I have to do.

So if you are able to design the platform to automatically change the radar's operations from air-air mode to air-ground mode by way of a switch, you just removed a lot of tasks from yourself. The aircraft is your co-pilot.

The F-15's basic platform was too limited so in order to make the fighter air-ground capable, a second operator had to be introduced, else the USAF might as well plan for a new jet. So the F-15E Strike Eagle two-seater variant was created.

For the F-16, the B/D two-seater models are trainers, not combatants, even though they can be if necessary.

Tier One air forces expects its pilots, assigned to a multi-role platform, to be able to change from air-air to air-ground tactics as needed.

Thank you man, great info as usual coming from you.
Well, the SU-35 is a great aircraft, it should be a good addition to the Vietnamese air force, can't wait to get the good news of an order. The only negative about it is that the chinese also have it. Oh well.

Care to comment about the recent news and actions from the northern comrades? What do you think is VN's best course of action against such a dramatic escalation and display of arrogance and bullying?

 

[Carlosa]

Background Briefing: South China Sea: Is China Reasserting its 9 Dotted Line Claim? Carlyle A. Thayer July 15, 2017

Question 1: We have heard Vietnam and Repsol have suspended drilling oil in block 136-03 under pressure from China. These reports have yet to be confirmed. What is your assessment of this issue?

ANSWER: My sources told me a week ago that General Fan Changlong raised Repsol’s drilling activities in Block 136 when he visited Spain before coming to Vietnam. So there are three possibilities. First, Repsol took note of the warning and suspended exploration. Second, Vietnam is being cautious and asked Repsol to stop activities for the moment. Third, the report has not yet been verified.

Question2. Has Hanoi miscalculated in restarting oil activities in the South China Sea? Why did it do so and why has in stepped back?

ANSWER: It appears that Hanoi was cautious about oil exploration in the period from the HYSY 981 crisis in 2014 to early this year. Vietnam then went ahead with ExxonMobil and removed its restrictions on Repsol’s activities. The former was given much publicity while the latter was kept quiet. China nonetheless detected this activity and made its displeasure known during General Fan’s visit. This is a test of Vietnam’s policy of cooperation and struggle

If Vietnam forgoes oil exploration it will sets back its energy program. If Vietnam takes this course it is because of the fear of Chinese retribution and because it cannot yet count on the Trump Administration to provide support.

Question 3. Will China put pressure on Vietnam to stop drilling in any area within its 9 dotted line map?

ANSWER: There is a larger contect: this year President Duterte said China would act aggressively (go to war) if the Philippines restarted oil exploration in Recto Bank. Then China abruptly cancelled the 4th friendly border defense exchange activities when Vietnam’s leaders rebuffed General Fan’s request that Vietnam stop oil exploration. Finally, China protested when Vietnam extended ONGC’s lease in Block 128. If these dots are connected it appears that China is reasserting its nine-dotted map claim on the first anniversary of the Arbitral Tribunal’s Award.

Question 4. Is this a victory for China in dealing with Vietnam?

ANSWER: It is too early to make a definitive assessment. Information is speculative. If Vietnam does back down it will be a marked change from its struggle against China during the HD 981 crisis. And Vietnam’s leaders will quickly come to learn that giving in to China on one point will lead China to press on another. Vietnam will need to lobby fellow ASEAN members for support.

Question 5. How will the U.S., Japan and other countries view this move by Hanoi? How will it influence to other partners like ExxonMobil? Is Hanoi failing to protect the interests of these commercial partners?

ANSWER: When Prime Minister Nguyen Xuan Phuc met President Donald Trump at The White House on 31 May, they issued a joint statement that included a long paragraph on the South China Sea. This joint statement did not explicitly address the issue of Repsol oil exploration. The Joint Statement said, inter alia:

The two leaders underscored the importance of freedom of navigation and overflight and other lawful uses of the seas, and noted with concern the destabilizing impacts that unlawful restrictions to the freedom of the seas have on peace and prosperity in the Asia–Pacific region. The two sides also affirmed full support for the peaceful resolution of disputes without the threat or use of force or coercion, in accordance with international law, including full respect for diplomatic and legal processes, and called upon all parties concerned to implement their international legal obligations in good faith in any resolution to these disputes. They highlighted the importance that parties refrain from actions that would escalate tensions, such as the militarization of disputed features. President Trump stressed that the United States will continue to fly, sail, and operate anywhere international law allows.

Vietnam would need to make public that China was interfering in oil exploration in Block 136 in order to lay the ground work for diplomatic support from the U.S. and Japan. Obviously, ExxonMobil would be following this reported incident carefully in order to assess risks to its activities in the Blue Whale project. This is Vietnam’s largest natural gas deal. Prime Minister Phuc has already approved the construction of gas power plants on shore. If China put pressure on ExxonMobil the United States likely would have greater reason to become involved than the Repsol case. Vietnam usually offers some guarantee of support for oil companies operating in its Exclusive Economic Zone. At the moment, if the speculative reports are correct, China is only applying political and diplomatic pressure on either or both Repsol and Vietnam. China is more likely to take some punitive economic action before resorting to any confrontation at sea. China will likely use its fishing fleet, fishing militia and Coast Guard ships before it has to rely on the People’s Liberation Army Navy. It would be prudent to suspend any judgment about whether or not Vietnam is protecting its commercial partners until more information comes to hand. In other words, wait and see. Suggested citation: Carlyle A. Thayer, “South China Sea: Is China Reasserting its 9 Dotted Line Claim?”

Thayer Consultancy Background Brief
, July 15, 2017. All background briefs are posted on Scribd.com (search for Thayer). To remove yourself from the mailing list type, UNSUBSCRIBE in the Subject heading and hit the Reply key. Thayer Consultancy provides political analysis of current regional security issues and other research support to selected clients. Thayer Consultancy was officially registered as a small business in Australia in 2002

 

[Viet]

Rosatom expects Vietnam to revive construction plans for nuclear power plant

ASTANA, July 25. /TASS/. Russia’s state-run nuclear corporation Rosatom continues cooperation with Vietnam in the nuclear power sector, despite the fact that the project on construction of a nuclear power plant in the country has been suspended, Alexander Merten, President of Rusatom International Network (RIN), said in an interview with TASS.

"At this stage we are cooperating in the area of establishing a Center for nuclear science and technologies in Vietnam in accordance with a cooperation agreement signed in 2011. The memorandum of understanding on the implementation plan for the project was signed two weeks ago - on June 29 in Moscow," Merten said. "Also, we have participated in setting up an information center in the nuclear power sector, which aims at raising awareness in the area of nuclear energy and nuclear technologies, which we hope will become a background for Vietnam's returning to the (understanding) of the necessity to construct a nuclear power station," he added.

In late 2016, Vietnam abandoned the idea of implementing the nuclear energy development plan due to its high cost and the recent decline in prices for traditional energy resources. In particular, the country made a decision to suspend two nuclear power plant projects which involved Russia and Japan.

At the time, Russia’s Rosatom State Atomic Energy Corporation said that it understood Vietnam’s position and expressed readiness to provide every possible assistance to the country when it was ready to restart the implementation of the national nuclear program.


More:
http://tass.com/economy/957662

 

[Viet]

Russia national security council's General Nikolai Patrushev in Hanoi

Meeting Julie Bishop, Australian Minister of Foreign Affairs in Sydney

 

[gambit]

Care to comment about the recent news and actions from the northern comrades? What do you think is VN's best course of action against such a dramatic escalation and display of arrogance and bullying?

For starter, anyone who believes in the line "China's peaceful rise" is an idiot, and I say that kindly. Diplomats would use a different word but the intention to designate such a believer would be the same.

Am NOT saying China does not have the right to improve her lot. As a capitalist, I say 'Show Me The Money'. So to China, by all means, rise all you want.

But there are two major factors hard at work in the Chinese leadership's thinking.

One -- It is about security for the Chinese people as they lift themselves and their country out of that horrible experiment with communism.

Two -- That 'century of humiliation' is a constant emotional weight upon that leadership.

For item one, nothing wrong with that. But for item two, according to the Chinese leadership, since it is not possible to erase what happened, the only possible thing to do is to create a counterweight. Humiliation is a traumatic emotional event. To recover requires the typical 'eye for an eye' response. By that, I do not mean that China must seek vengeance against those who humiliated her, ie the Europeans. But what I mean is that the appropriate response for being poor is to be wealthy, for ignorance it is education, for weakness it is strength, for loneliness it is companionship, and so on. Since China was once a victim, the matching response is to make someone a victim of China's strength and power. That is the emotional counterweight China want to create.

For China, a peaceful rise is possible only if others do not resist what China want to take from them or deny them access to. It was a shrew rhetorical move to use precisely those words as they create an initial condition in the receiver's mind. Those words were not meant for those who have a history with China, such as our Viet Nam, for example, and that history have not been so peaceful. Rather, those words were meant for observers who have no such history and willing, in their own minds, to create a blank slate for China. China lose nothing if those words do not work for everyone, but for the few that worked, the gains will be enormous in terms of long term diplomatic and economic benefits.

China's bullying of her immediate neighbors is an inevitability as believed by observers, and the demand to recognize China's claim to the entirety of the South China Sea confirmed that inevitability. Obviously, China cannot do to Viet Nam what the Europeans did to her, but China must do something -- anything -- to start creating that emotional counterweight. That land grab of the sea surface was the perfect tactic that put all her immediate neighbors on notice of their vulnerabilities and possibly weakness to resist.

Viet Nam must resist China's claim to the entirety of the South China Sea. Resist in every avenue, from military to diplomacy to rhetoric. Viet Nam WILL be the first target of China's intention to humiliate someone -- anyone. Lose this fight and it will be worse for Viet Nam than how it was for the country when it was partitioned during the Vietnam War.

 

[xiao qi]

The most country Chinese wants to humiliate, I dont doubt It is not Vietnam, India, US.. It is Japan. Chinese films and magazines spend so much resources to against Japanese. Dont doubt, Chinese hate Japanese than any countries in the world. Maybe the SCS will become a battefield between China and Vietnam and other countries . It is worse situation but It dont think It will become a comprehensive war, Vietnamese and Chinese will get nothing from this land war, Chinese also get the lesson from Vietnam- Sino War. The affection to Vietnamese economy is enough to damage. But If China think They can control Vietnam like Philipine, Malay, Thailand..etc It is big mistake for them. Vietnam is not easy to control and have ambition than any countries in South East Asia. Even I suppose India is not tougher than Vietnam although they are bigger than Vietnam many times. Chinese are waiting. They need time

Can the US get a foot in Vietnam’s door?

The China-Vietnam relationship might be less complicated than Washington would wish, despite Beijing’s recent threat to use force against Hanoi to stop drilling in the South China Sea.

Interestingly, there was nothing in the 31 May joint statement issued by President Donald Trump and Prime Minister Nguyen Xuan Phuc that would commit the US to assisting Hanoi in its current dealings with Chinese threats.

Those in Washington who see Vietnam as a potential ally against China have quite possibly ignored the powerful and corrupting influence of cross-border trade between China and Vietnam.

While attending IMDEX in Singapore in May, a senior US defence industry source told Shephard that a recent meeting in Hanoi ended abruptly after Ministry of Defence officials informed the US delegation that an arms sale would require ‘25% off the top’. A secondary source in Singapore also said that Vietnam government officials were laundering money in Singapore via their wives.

The US is forbidden from conducting business in this manner due to the 1977 Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, which makes bribery a federal crime. This might explain why Vietnam will continue to rely on Russian weapons and thus nix any true military-to-military cooperation between the US and Vietnam.

It has been recently confirmed that Vietnam will purchase 64 T-90S/SK tanks from Russia, and that Russia is offering Vietnam the S-400 air defence system and MiG-35 fighters to replace Vietnam’s retired fleet of MiG 21s. If Vietnam opts for the MiG 35s this will end all hope of Vietnam following Indonesia in purchasing F-16A/Bs from the US, said Carlyle Thayer, emeritus professor at the University of New South Wales at the Australian Defence Force Academy.

There are other problems facing joint US-Vietnam military cooperation. One is Vietnam’s ‘Three-No’s’ defence policy: no military alliances, no foreign military bases on Vietnamese territory, and no reliance on any country to combat others, Thayer said.

He added this ‘coupled with deep suspicion of the United States on the part of both retired and active-duty senior military officers mitigates against any marked stepped up in defence relations’.

If we have learned anything about Vietnam in the past half century, it is that no one pushes Hanoi anywhere it does not want to go, said‎ Ralph Cossa, president of the Pacific Forum CSIS in Honolulu.

‘There is no love lost between Hanoi and Beijing, but the Vietnamese will be careful not to openly take sides with anyone. That said, there has been and remains an excellent opportunity for Washington and Hanoi to deepen their partnership, and China provides added incentive for both to do so,’ Cossa noted.

The US and Vietnam signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU) in 2011 that set out five priority areas of cooperation: maritime security, search and rescue, humanitarian assistance and disaster relief, exchanges between defence universities and research institutes, and UN peacekeeping operations.

However, the 2011 MoU has been disappointing for the US, Thayer said. For example, Vietnam turned down an invitation by then Secretary of Defense Ash Carter for Vietnamese military officers to fly on and observe P8 Poseidon maritime patrols over the South China Sea.

There is incrementally closer alignment but no alliance in the offing, said Patrick Cronin, a senior advisor and senior director of the Asia-Pacific Security Program at the Centre for a New American Security. ‘Vietnam preserves a balance of interests and the United States is keener to bolster Vietnam’s self-defence than provide a security guarantee. That said, it may depend on just how assertive China becomes should it succumb to a maritime Middle Kingdom mentality.’

However, there has been activity on coast guard matters. In May, Vietnam’s Coast Guard took delivery of six new Metal Shark 45-foot Defiant patrol boats and, in April,handed over a decommissioned US Coast Guard Hamilton-class cutter.

For now, Hanoi appears to be interested mainly in enhancing deterrent effects via modest defence cooperation with the United States, said Richard Fisher, senior fellow at the International Assessment and Strategy Center. ‘While Vietnam has diversified its arms sources in the last decade, it has been careful to avoid dependency on the protection of a foreign power.’

China’s 1979 invasion of Vietnam, no matter how poorly executed, demonstrated to Hanoi’s leadership that a foreign friend is not going to protect them when there is a risk of war with Beijing, Fisher said.

‘China is not pushing Vietnam into a new embrace with the Americans. More to the point, it is pushing Hanoi into acquiring nuclear weapons – which will scare Beijing far more than an alliance with Washington,’ Fisher warned.

https://www.shephardmedia.com/news/defence-notes/can-us-get-foot-vietnams-door/

 

[gambit]

The most country Chinese wants to humiliate, I dont doubt It is not Vietnam, India, US.. It is Japan.

That maybe so, but Viet Nam is the most immediate target.

Viet Nam is not as militarily capable as JPN or even SKR. Viet Nam has no alliance to rely upon, even if just in principle. Viet Nam is currently economically vulnerable as she struggles to reform. Viet Nam has the most to gain with a free SCS and the most to lose with the SCS under Chinese control. If Viet Nam is successfully bullied into submission, other Asian powers, including JPN, will eventually submit. In degrees of priority, Viet Nam is the highest. The spat with India is nothing compare to what China will gain, in strategic and economic terms, if Viet Nam lose.

 

[Carlosa]

That maybe so, but Viet Nam is the most immediate target.

Viet Nam is not as militarily capable as JPN or even SKR. Viet Nam has no alliance to rely upon, even if just in principle. Viet Nam is currently economically vulnerable as she struggles to reform. Viet Nam has the most to gain with a free SCS and the most to lose with the SCS under Chinese control. If Viet Nam is successfully bullied into submission, other Asian powers, including JPN, will eventually submit. In degrees of priority, Viet Nam is the highest. The spat with India is nothing compare to what China will gain, in strategic and economic terms, if Viet Nam lose.

Absolutely. As much as it is totally true that Japan is the main target of humiliation, that's mainly for internal consumption in order to galvanize the emotions of chinese public opinion and direct their anger towards an external enemy and in turn, that portraits the chinese regime as the protector / defender and particularly the avenger of the chinese nation and people. Anybody that watch chinese television will see movies everyday about ww2 with Japan where brave chinese fight against the evil Japanese. Its emotional brainwashing.

Vietnam on the other hand, needs to be humiliated and put in its place (as the chinese would say), purely for tactical reasons. Its the case of "kill the chicken to scare the monkey". VN is the only one that dares to stand up to China and hold its ground which is something that has traditionally done, so its a symbol of resistance to China in SCS. That's why Vietnam is the main target right now. PH has been subdued, Malaysia is becoming their client state. Brunei is not really pressing any issues, they are financially in bed with the chinese anyway (same as the Malaysian leadership), so Only Vietnam remains in the way in order to consolidate their control of the scs (assuming that USA does not get involved.

 

[Viet]

That maybe so, but Viet Nam is the most immediate target.

Viet Nam is not as militarily capable as JPN or even SKR. Viet Nam has no alliance to rely upon, even if just in principle. Viet Nam is currently economically vulnerable as she struggles to reform. Viet Nam has the most to gain with a free SCS and the most to lose with the SCS under Chinese control. If Viet Nam is successfully bullied into submission, other Asian powers, including JPN, will eventually submit. In degrees of priority, Viet Nam is the highest. The spat with India is nothing compare to what China will gain, in strategic and economic terms, if Viet Nam lose.

Of course the Chinese hate Japan due to what happened in the past and say openly want to kill to the last man and women in Japan but if history is a guide they won't. Why should they? To understand the Chinese,one should understand their psyche. Look how many Chinese tourists visit Japan today. How they treated Japanese war criminals in China after Japan surrender. All the Chinese want is to get recognition and love from the country of the rising sun. Too bad, the Japanese despise them.

How many times China attacks Japanese mainland and launches military onslaughts on Japanese hold islands? Yes it is zero. While the numbers the Chinese attacking Vietnam are too many to count. Even during the Ming, when the Chinese possessed the most powerful army in Far East, they could easily take on Japan but they didn't. They launched a full scale war on Vietnam instead. China is surrounded by how many countries? Someone can begin to question Chinese mental condition.

Vietnam/China military technologies during DaiViet/Ming period

http://www.ari.nus.edu.sg/wps/wps03_011.pdf

 

[Carlosa]

If Viet Nam is successfully bullied into submission, other Asian powers, including JPN, will eventually submit. .

I'm not so sure about that part, the Japanese are very, very nationalistic and have a deep dislike for chinese. I feel Japan can hold its position as long as they are not abandoned by USA. Time will say anyway.

 

[xiao qi]

Absolutely. As much as it is totally true that Japan is the main target of humiliation, that's mainly for internal consumption in order to galvanize the emotions of chinese public opinion and direct their anger towards an external enemy and in turn, that portraits the chinese regime as the protector / defender and particularly the avenger of the chinese nation and people. Anybody that watch chinese television will see movies everyday about ww2 with Japan where brave chinese fight against the evil Japanese. Its emotional brainwashing.

Vietnam on the other hand, needs to be humiliated and put in its place (as the chinese would say), purely for tactical reasons. Its the case of "kill the chicken to scare the monkey". VN is the only one that dares to stand up to China and hold its ground which is something that has traditionally done, so its a symbol of resistance to China in SCS. That's why Vietnam is the main target right now. PH has been subdued, Malaysia is becoming their client state. Brunei is not really pressing any issues, they are financially in bed with the chinese anyway (same as the Malaysian leadership), so Only Vietnam remains in the way in order to consolidate their control of the scs (assuming that USA does not get involved.

In other case, Chinese films about WW2 is good to watch My father now is watching a Chinese film that said how Chínese agaisnt and defeat Japanese in Shanghai. So funny, Sometimes it give the fake information to portrait how brave they are and how evil japanese were... It is not difficult to understand why the incident like Nanking incident is popular now. These films also help Chinese people to encourage them to do, to work more but It creates the invisible enemy makes Chinese thinks their enemy is Japanese no ones and they need to destroy them. My Chinese is good enough to read some Chinese stories where a big part of Chinese want to delete Japan out of the world map.

I'm not so sure about that part, the Japanese are very, very nationalistic and have a deep dislike for chinese. I feel Japan can hold its position as long as they are not abandoned by USA. Time will say anyway.

Japanese lose the far distance to develop her defence industry after WW2, In my opinion, Japanese is difficult to catch up US or China in some fields. They are strong but Time is not waiting them.

 

[Carlosa]

Of course the Chinese hate Japan due to what happened in the past and say openly want to kill to the last man and women in Japan but if history is a guide they won't. Why should they? To understand the Chinese,one should understand their psyche. Look how many Chinese tourists visit Japan today. How they treated Japanese war criminals in China after Japan surrender. All the Chinese want is to get recognition and love from the country of the rising sun. Too bad, the Japanese despise them.

How many times China attacks Japanese mainland and launches military onslaughts on Japanese hold islands? Yes it is zero. While the numbers the Chinese attacking Vietnam are too many to count. Even during the Ming, when the Chinese possessed the most powerful army in Far East, they could easily take on Japan but they didn't. They launched a full scale war on Vietnam instead. China is surrounded by how many countries? Someone can begin to question Chinese mental condition.

Vietnam/China military technologies during DaiViet/Ming period

http://www.ari.nus.edu.sg/wps/wps03_011.pdf

But I will tell you something, Japan is one the favorite countries that chinese tourists travel to and when they go there, they see a different type of country and different type of people than what the chinese regime tells them.

Just 2 months ago when in China, I was talking to a girl that is a close friend of mine, she had just come back from a 1 week free trip to Japan that her company gave to their best marketing people as a reward. She was shocked about the differences between Japan and China, she kept saying: people are very nice and polite, they go out of their way to help us, everything is safe, don't have to worry about toxic / fake foods, don't have to check anything, you can trust things, everything is so clean, I wish China would be like Japan.

Propaganda and brainwashing only go so far, eventually the pendulum turns and when that happens, the chinese regime will be in trouble and they know it which is a reason why they push so hard right now.

In other case, Chinese films about WW2 is good to watch My father now is watching a Chinese film that said how Chínese agaisnt and defeat Japanese in Shanghai. So funny, Sometimes it give the fake information to portrait how brave they are and how evil japanese were... It is not difficult to understand why the incident like Nanking incident is popular now. These films also help Chinese people to encourage them to do, to work more but It creates the invisible enemy makes Chinese thinks their enemy is Japanese no ones and they need to destroy them. My Chinese is good enough to read some Chinese stories where a big part of Chinese want to delete Japan out of the world map.


Japanese lose the far distance to develop her defence industry after WW2, In my opinion, Japanese is difficult to catch with US or China in some fields. They are strong but Time is not waiting them.

The chinese regime has no problem whatsoever about lying and rewriting history, they are ruthless people willing to do whatever it takes to stay in power.

Don't be so sure about Japan, they are starting to wake up and they are developing offensive, stand off weapons (portrayed against North Korea, but its actually against China). The key is US support. Sure, they will not be a China or a US, but they can defend themselves.

You can read chinese? Wow, smart girl.