Why is the US constantly sowing discord in South China Sea?

[Zsari]

Why is the US constantly sowing discord in South ChinaSea?
February 05, 2015

The US 7th Fleet Commander Robert Thomas recently stated that the United States would welcome a Japanese extension of air patrols into the South China Sea. The Pentagon subsequently expressed support for this statement and said this would help to maintain stability in the South China Sea.

We all know the South China Sea is not peaceful. In recent decades, several countries surrounding the region have been eroding Chinese territory and violating China's economic rights and interests in the region.

Meanwhile, the United States pushes its 'rebalancing' strategy in the Asia-Pacific region and expands its military presence in the region . For some time, the Unites States has not only conducted close surveillance over China, but also expanded its alliances and partnerships in the region.

The Unites States is an obvious agitator in the South China Sea disputes, which would be resolved through direct negotiation without US interference.

Senior US military officials and officials of the Department of Defense are now encouraging Japan to get involved in South China Sea affairs Their objectives are as follows:

First, by expanding the internationalization of the South China Sea, to exert more international pressure on China; second, through a joint show of force by the United States and Japan, to upgrade the deterrent to China; third, sending a signal to the other parties involved that they have no need to rely on diplomatic means to seek mutual benefits; they can depend on the interference of the United States.

The United States has nothing more to offer than continued dominance in East Asia. It appears to take the view that neither China nor any of the other countries which are actually located in this region are entitled to develop rules that apply there. China only seeks to safeguard its legitimate rights and interests of national sovereignty, and does not seek any special entitlements. The South China Sea has historically belonged to China, and its neighboring countries have accepted that as a fact in the past.

The United States has repeatedly encouraged Japan to patrol in the region, an indication that it hopes to take advantage of the Sino-Japanese conflict to hinder independent consultations between China and the ASEAN countries.

In the name of regional stability, the United States is sowing discord in the South China Sea. It will not succeed in its attempts to dominate the region, and the East Asian countries should realize that achieving regional development and security depend on cooperation.

The author is Shen Dingli, a professor and associate dean at the Institute of InternationalStudies of Shanghai-based Fudan University.

Actually this is a good sign of a waning power that it is asking its junior partners to share the cost of maintaining its global empire. This would be unimaginable during its heyday. Reminds me of a crumbling empire authorizing warlords to field armies in order to defend the empire, a frequent occurrence in Chinese history that spell the end.

 

[Aepsilons]

The United States is not a crumbling power or populated with warlords. Don't be imbecilic. The United States will continue to have influence in this region as by her existential nature, America is a Maritime and Pacific Power. Her 7TH Fleet calls the vast Pacific Ocean its natural waters , her nuclear sub wolf packs are active here with relative impunity. The United States is not retreating from the Asia-Pacific Region, nay, she is deploying 60% of her Naval Assets here.

It is best to understand its nature, its goals, and how to live with this reality. The sooner the better.

 

[Zsari]

The United States is not a crumbling power or populated with warlords. Don't be imbecilic. The United States will continue to have influence in this region as by her existential nature, America is a Maritime and Pacific Power. Her 7TH Fleet calls the vast Pacific Ocean its natural waters , her nuclear sub wolf packs are active here with relative impunity. The United States is not retreating from the Asia-Pacific Region, nay, she is deploying 60% of her Naval Assets here.

The US is not full of warlords, but all its junior partners around the world are in essence warlords that will vie for power when the grasp over them is weakened. And yes, the grasp is weakening as US economic dominance is in decline.

 

[Aepsilons]

The US is not full of warlords, but all its junior partners around the world are in essence warlords that will vie for power when the grasp over them is weakened. And yes, the grasp is weakening as US economic dominance is in decline.

That's a retreat from your original post. Secondarily, the United States in economic decline? Its economy is growing at 4.5% per annum, while at the same time its GDP per capita is already over $50,000 USD. She's the fastest growing developed economy in the world.

LOL.

And, You live in the United States do you not? LOL

 

[haviZsultan]

The United States is not a crumbling power or populated with warlords. Don't be imbecilic. The United States will continue to have influence in this region as by her existential nature, America is a Maritime and Pacific Power. Her 7TH Fleet calls the vast Pacific Ocean its natural waters , her nuclear sub wolf packs are active here with relative impunity. The United States is not retreating from the Asia-Pacific Region, nay, she is deploying 60% of her Naval Assets here.

It is best to understand its nature, its goals, and how to live with this reality. The sooner the better.

I don't think it is right for the only country which has used a nuclear weapon, has engaged in war almost every 10-15 years of its existence or even fewer to wield so much influence over the world. I would like to know if most of the nations are in favor of the 219 countries in which the US has military bases or troops across the world. There were protests in Japan too over some incidents. There are over 1000 US bases outside America.

Most of these bases exist while the people of the country object. In Pakistan I know people vehemently reject US presense on their soil, yet the government keeps dealing double.

 

[Genesis]

The United States is not a crumbling power or populated with warlords. Don't be imbecilic. The United States will continue to have influence in this region as by her existential nature, America is a Maritime and Pacific Power. Her 7TH Fleet calls the vast Pacific Ocean its natural waters , her nuclear sub wolf packs are active here with relative impunity. The United States is not retreating from the Asia-Pacific Region, nay, she is deploying 60% of her Naval Assets here.

It is best to understand its nature, its goals, and how to live with this reality. The sooner the better.

The US isn't crumbling, it doesn't need to.

Pardon my reference, but Japan didn't crumble during WW2 either, it just got out gunned by the US.

China has enough resources, population, and will to do the same to the US. We accept the current realities, but that doesn't mean we like it and will continue with it.

Maybe the day isn't today, it isn't tomorrow, but we are patient, we will wait.

 

[Srinivas]

Chinese bullying and occupation of Islands is not helping the situation either.

 

[Aepsilons]

The United States is not looking to destabilize any powers in the Asia-Pacific, its presence is merely to maintain the status quo and prevent any acts of hegemony from any power. The US Navy, which is the arm of the United States , is dependent on the freedom of navigation of goods to and from this region, thus making the South China Sea and East Sea and Sea of Japan strategically vital for them and for many of the nations in this region. Do I believe the US wants war in said region ? No, of course not and her naval presence is a guarantor for relative 'ocean of calm' in said region.

 

[Genesis]

The United States is not looking to destabilize any powers in the Asia-Pacific, its presence is merely to maintain the status quo and prevent any acts of hegemony from any power. The US Navy, which is the arm of the United States , is dependent on the freedom of navigation of goods to and from this region, thus making the South China Sea and East Sea and Sea of Japan strategically vital for them and for many of the nations in this region. Do I believe the US wants war in said region ? No, of course not and her naval presence is a guarantor for relative 'ocean of calm' in said region.

lol that's exactly what propaganda sounds like. But it doesn't matter.

US constantly says we are bullying, not for freedom of navigation, not for this not for that, when we are the largest trading nation on earth.

We have different interests, to you what may sound true won't to us, and vice versa. We can never see things the same, because we don't want to, neither Americans nor China.

 

[Zsari]

That's a retreat from your original post. Secondarily, the United States in economic decline? Its economy is growing at 4.5% per annum, while at the same time its GDP per capita is already over $50,000 USD. She's the fastest growing developed economy in the world.

LOL.

And, You live in the United States do you not? LOL

The crumbling of the unipolar world order dominated by the US is exactly what I'm talking about in the initial post. Economic power is relative, and the US share of the global GDP is in perpetual decline. 50 years from now, would the US 7th fleet still sail the West Pacific with dominance and impunity? I don't think so. 100 years from now, there would certainly be more powerful fleet, actually fleets from number of nations that would outclass what the US would be able to field. By then, or even before that, someone in the US would figure out the cost of maintaining the fleet with limited significance and relevance would no longer make sense. Yes US has Guam, but Britain also have multiple islands in the far reach of the world. Does that translate into UK maintaining a dominant fleet everywhere they have territory? It all come down to what one can and cannot afford.

 

[Aepsilons]

The Flaw of your argument is that you're arguing about an epoch that hasn't taken place yet (ergo, 100 years from now). We are living in the here and now, policies / procedures are shaped and affect the present and in immediate future. Arguing about the British context has nothing to do with this because there is no comparison. Britain's economy is about 1/10th in size compared to America's. The United States is a $17.25 Trillion Economy and growing at 4.5% per annum (compare that to China's at 7%; thus only a difference of only 2.5%) --- this means that the US economy will add another $765 Billion by end of 2015.

As it stands, with a rejuvenated US Economy and an evolving Naval Doctrine. On the contrary to your argument that the US will 'retreat', it will press forward and entrench itself in the region. Again, its economy is growing thus it will be able to sustain its military doctrine regarding Asia-Pacific. Secondarily, it is forging close military partnerships in the region. Something that cannot and should not be ignored.

Lastly, America is by her existential nature --- a Maritime and Pacific Power. To think that there will be an acute about face to this paradigm is --- down right idiotic and an example of lack of strategic depth. Thinking like that will be to the detriment of America's rivals.


Thanks.

 

[Genesis]

The Flaw of your argument is that you're arguing about an epoch that hasn't taken place yet (ergo, 100 years from now). We are living in the here and now, policies / procedures are shaped and affect the present and in immediate future. Arguing about the British context has nothing to do with this because there is no comparison. Britain's economy is about 1/10th in size compared to America's. The United States is a $17.25 Trillion Economy and growing at 4.5% per annum (compare that to China's at 7%; thus only a difference of only 2.5%) --- this means that the US economy will add another $765 Billion by end of 2015.

It's not 4.5, from the sources I seen, it ranges, but never touching 4. There's an article on that, China adds more a year than the US.

As to living in the now, we are, that's why, small moves. You know how to pull a tree out from the ground? You shake it left, right, front and back. You loosen the roots and you pull, you don't just pull, that never works.

As it stands, with a rejuvenated US Economy and an evolving Naval Doctrine. On the contrary to your argument that the US will 'retreat', it will press forward and entrench itself in the region. Again, its economy is growing thus it will be able to sustain its military doctrine regarding Asia-Pacific. Secondarily, it is forging close military partnerships in the region. Something that cannot and should not be ignored.

The obvious move is to move forward, but that's going to be trouble, especially as time goes by. China will solve the disputes sooner or later, and with the way the world is going, China will pass the US as the number one economic power, by then it might be hard to convince a few others to take the "anti" China stance, especially since it's not a consensus now.

The US can do what it wants, it doesn't change how we will move.

Lastly, America is by her existential nature --- a Maritime and Pacific Power. To think that there will be an acute about face to this paradigm is --- down right idiotic and an example of lack of strategic depth. Thinking like that will be to the detriment of America's rivals.

The Americans can be any type of country it wants, just like we can, it's just a matter of who can impose their will on the other.

 

[Beidou2020]

SCS is China's backyard and will do what it wants, when it wants.

No one will displace China in the SCS as China's power grows.

SCS will become China's private lake.

Deal with it.

 

[Zsari]

The Flaw of your argument is that you're arguing about an epoch that hasn't taken place yet (ergo, 100 years from now). We are living in the here and now, policies / procedures are shaped and affect the present and in immediate future. Arguing about the British context has nothing to do with this because there is no comparison. Britain's economy is about 1/10th in size compared to America's. The United States is a $17.25 Trillion Economy and growing at 4.5% per annum (compare that to China's at 7%; thus only a difference of only 2.5%) --- this means that the US economy will add another $765 Billion by end of 2015.

And has it been always that the Britain's economy was 1/10 the size of the US? According to the US commerce department, GDP growth in 2014 was 2.4%. 4.5% is a quarterly number. To expect US economy to grow above 4% on average for the next century, or even the next decade would be absurd.

 

[jhungary]

Dude, you have admitted that you are not Chinese. Why are you still masquerading as one?

Just because i dont go with your flow does that means i have to change my DNA with it?

I dont see whats the different between you and me, except we have different view thats all. I dont realise the prerequisite of being Chinese have to be all of them thinking the same thing and goes in one direction

There are many different American have different point of view, does that mean all american have to think the same thing? What next? Just because i ate hamburger and you go yum cha then i am not Chinese or American or whatever?

By the way discussing members nationality is not allow in posting section, have anything about what I call myself or my flag please go to specific post and ask the moderator for any action

請不要再在這裡討論國籍問題，谢謝