Chinese Naval Threat to SEA?

[tankee1981]

There is alot of talk about the Chinese's ambitions to gain regional hegemony in the SEA region much like in the ancient times. A potential flashpoint is in the South China Sea where quite a few ASEAN members such as Vietnam,Malaysia,Philippines and Brunei together with PRC and Taiwan have full or partial claims in the Spartly or Nansha islands. Will the Chinese use its steadily growing navy to take over these islands and cut off SLOC in the future? Please comment. Thanks

[SampanViking]

I personally believe that the PRC is highly unlikely to use force in their immediate region (possibly excluding Japan) in the short, near or medium term future. Why?

Because they do not need too.

China is a rapidly rising economic power, its strength lies in its manufacturing and its trade. Territory alone is not a serious issue. China also knows that that the subtle inferrence of a big stick is far more effective than its blunt use.

Ultimately countries close to China will "freely" do the things China wants, just as countries close to the USA "freely" do the things it wants. Its very lucrative to be friendly to the Rich giant next door and potentially ruinous to antagonis it.

Wars and Invasions and Occupations are, on all fronts, expensive. Why bother when you buy what you want from your neighbours for a fraction of the price.

[Schumacher]

There is alot of talk about the Chinese's ambitions to gain regional hegemony in the SEA region much like in the ancient times. A potential flashpoint is in the South China Sea where quite a few ASEAN members such as Vietnam,Malaysia,Philippines and Brunei together with PRC and Taiwan have full or partial claims in the Spartly or Nansha islands. Will the Chinese use its steadily growing navy to take over these islands and cut off SLOC in the future? Please comment. Thanks

Interesting question. No one knows for sure but here's a note. When the former Malaysian PM Dr Mahathir was asked last year in a BusinessWeek conference in Beijing abt his views on any threat to SEA from China, he had this to say. He said SEA had peaceful contacts with China for hundreds of years before the Europeans came. Then within a few years after Europeans first came to SEA, SEA were colonized. :) Hope this is helpful to your question.
At that time, China was far more ahead of SEA than it is now. But I guess back then we have less Western press. :) Therefore less talk of 'China threat'.

[Mr_C]

It is extremely unlikely that the PLAN will use its military power to dominate the SEA region because it is politically and strategically counter productive to China's greater plans. The Chinese had spent years convincing the SEA countries that they r not a threat and would be beneficial to co-operate with China. This political competition against USA influence in the region began allthe way back the during 1990s. Now in 2006 it is very obvious that the USA had lost alot of ground to China in the SEA political area.
The Chinese does not need to control the SEA, all it needs is teh SEA to feel closer to China and co-operate with her and moving away from USA influence. This will allow China's SEA plans to go smoothly and China has made numerous concessions to SEA countries in terms of trade and various political favours in order to gain their trust (This trust is not just mere money politics).
The Chinese needs her fleet to protect the vital sea lanes that supports her trade and raw materials shipments. And China needs to build such a capability fast so that is one of the main reasons why we have witnessed such a huge increase in naval ship building in China in the last 2 yrs. China cannot do this effectively at the moment (protect her sea lanes) so that is one of the main reasons why they have been so quite during the USA invasion in Iraq and other Sino-US political confrontations during the last couple of yrs. This is strategically aimed at not provoking the USA to make any movements that is unfavourable to the overall Chinese plans.
Basically, China will not use military force to dominate the SEA region because it is counter productive. What China needs in SEA country's trust and it appears they have got it by 2005. This will allow China's SEA plans to go smoothly.

In regards to the "China Threat" I came across an interesting article from "Japan Times" which was written by a former Australian Diplomat. There is very little in this article that most of us don't know. But however it helps in clearing various things up.
Here is the link:

http://taiwansecurity.org/News/2006/JT-070106.htm

[akinkhoo]

why do China upgrading the south china fleet faster than even the fleet facing taiwan or japan anyway? The 'trick' China is using in SEA is to present its strength but not using it completely. by waving a giant 'sea rod' (like monkey king) around, none of the SEA nation dare to voice their claims in the area (like the sea dragon).

an example would be the islands China took from Vientam and Philippines by using naval blockage and pushing them off those islands. but neither dare to oppose China and sign a treaty with China after they were bullied to give up their claims.

China is taking abit here and abit there, while allowing the others to "keep some". it is like inviting a lion to dinner, the SEA nation must divide some meat for the lion or risk getting bitten by it.

-----

China knows it is in a commanding position and will take it share of the pie by showing its strength like a lion. it also know it is important to ensure the lesser animal survive to hunt for it. another words, china is up to its old trick of 'demanding tribute' from lesser state while allowing them to survive and grow under it 'care'. :rofl:

[PiSigma]

actually china signed a non-agression pact with the SEA nations already. and it doesn't really matter which fleet get all the ships. once war comes, all are mobilized. and the ships are reshuffled.

[akinkhoo]

"actually china signed a non-agression pact with the SEA nations already" after it has already taken some islands by force, the treaty is therefore in favour of china anyway. china managed to get a "joint exploitation" of the south china sea out of all the "military demostration" in the area.

and if you look at the claim china still has today, it reaches the maritime borders of SEA countries thousands of KM from China! by threat, I don't mean it will attack or something, by using military might to intimidate is enough.

"once war comes, all are mobilized. and the ships are reshuffled."
it can take a few days to travel the distance, while the result of conflict can be decided in a matter of hours.

there is a reason why US station a CVBG in asia and considers a 2nd forward CVBG basing. to be able to show the flag when challenge is an important role of the navy.

anyway, these are my thought. :nana:

[adeptitus]

and if you look at the claim china still has today, it reaches the maritime borders of SEA countries thousands of KM from China! by threat, I don't mean it will attack or something, by using military might to intimidate is enough.


Hello, if you're doing territorial negotiations, you don't start by giving away the farm. Both sides lay out their maximum-expansion claims and bargain down from there.

Same with buying used cars from an used car lot. If you're willing to pay $10,000 for an used car with $15,000 sticker price, you don't start the negotiations by offering $10,000.

I'll cite PRC's territorial settlements with Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan as examples. With Kazakhstan, the PRC settled with 20% of the claimed territory, and with Kyrgyzstan, about 30%. That means, for every 100 sq km that China had claimed in disputed areas, the PRC accepted 30 sq km while Kyrgyzstan kept 70 sq km.

The PRC also laid claim to approx. 11,000 sq miles of territory along the Pamir mountain range in Tajikistan, and settled for only 386 sq miles (PRC surrendered claim to 10,810 sq miles).

As for the South China Sea disputes, the PRC already signed a Code of Conduct agreement with ASEAN nations and is now actively engaged in joint exploitation of its resources. Regardless of what the PRC government might spew about territorial integrity, it has shown in the recent past that they can be very flexible when it comes to territorial settlements.

We often define "threat" as territorial disputes, that's a very closed minded way of thinking. What other countries do on their own territory often have drastic impact on its neighbors. For an example, a certain nuclear reactor at CHERNOBYL, or the dozen hydroelectric dams that China is building up the Salweek River in Yunnan. Put yourself in the shoes of South & SE Asian countries, look at a map, and note most of the major rivers have its headwaters and tributories in China. What China does to those rivers, will have a far bigger impact on the lives of those downstream than disputes over some fishing waters in the middle of South China Sea.

[Mr_C]

To truely understand what China is doing in SEA, one must try not to think like a European. I am not being racist here, all i am saying is that the European and Asian ways of thinking are similar in many areas but also different in many areas. The Europeans only sees territorial disputes as a prelude to confrontation and rarely sees possibilities of co-operation in resolving such disputes. China requires the support of the SEA in her greater schemes of things and she also requires stability in her periferary in order for her plans to go smoothly. Therefore the PRC has basically made numerous concession in these disputes espeically in the SEA. The PRC has basically resolve all of her territorial disputes except 3 from memory. This strategy is to gain support and co-operation with other nations and a tool to remove US influence.
There is a good article that you might what to read andit is about the resolutions of Chinese territorial disputes. I do not agree with everything that is written in this article (because the author is still thinking like a european) but agree with some.

http://mitpress.mit.edu/journals/pdf/IS3002_pp046-083.pdf

This article will allow to understand more about what china has been up to lately in her territorial disputes.

[Schumacher]

A very significant development, but little reported in western press, took place last yr, ie Vietnam & Philipines have agreed to start joint oil exploration with China in the Spratlys. I saw a report that a commercial contract has already been signed with an oil firm to start exploration. Not much details, but it was a pleasant surprise as I never thought especially the Vietnamese would agree to such a deal. Maybe the high oil price nudged the parties to see the benefits of cooperations. Score one at least for inter-Asian diplomacy, continuous squabble will benefit only the west and non of the Asian countries involved.

[FuManChu]

Score one at least for inter-Asian diplomacy, continuous squabble will benefit only the west and non of the Asian countries involved.

I don't see how Europe and the Americas benefit from disharmony in the region. After all, if those countries ever went to war, we wouldn't be able to trade with them.

[f2000]

as malaysian we dont think china is a threat
wat our leader said china will emerge as a big economic power.
and also china is offering us with weapon like ks-1a.
even our navy exchanged visit with plan recently
i think china only want to be good friend of sea country.

[vincelee]

why do China upgrading the south china fleet faster than even the fleet facing taiwan or japan anyway?

cough Taiwan cough. You don't exactly expect the 7th fleet to come cruising in from the east, do you?

[Typhoon]

In regards to the "China Threat" I came across an interesting article from "Japan Times" which was written by a former Australian Diplomat. There is very little in this article that most of us don't know. But however it helps in clearing various things up.
Here is the link:

http://taiwansecurity.org/News/2006/JT-070106.htm

Very good article. It seems worthwhile that akinkhoo can take a look of it. The writer of the article also has a website. It looks interesting, too.

http://www.gregoryclark.net/

http://www.gregoryclark.net/jt/index.html

[Lavi]

I think that the answer depends on what you mean. Would it be rational for China to claim the areas and perhaps become involved in a major regional war? No. Might it happen anyway? I think so.

In the "real world" people and nations do things that are not rational all the time, due to more abstract factors than economic profits. Here we have things like national pride, fear etc. Was the Falkland War rational? In the end Argentina ended up in a worse sitation than it started from. It was a war that came out of national pride and domestic problems.

I am not saying that China will invade and create a major war, but tensions are high in the whole area. Wars may spring out from unathorized provocations also, like the Jameissons raid which caused the Boer War. What if a bunch of fisherman make a landfall on an unihabited island and build themselves a hut were they fly their flag, and then the neghbouring government reacts, thinking it needs to show the surronding world that it has not given up it claims? Things like that have escaletad into wars earlier.

[akinkhoo]

Hello, if you're doing territorial negotiations, you don't start by giving away the farm. Both sides lay out their maximum-expansion claims and bargain down from there.international maritime law only allows you to claim a certain distance from your coast. china has exceeded this "maximum" claim. imagine US laying claim to every ocean that is not territorial waters of another country and call it their maximum! :D i think you get the point on just how much china is claiming now...;)

cough Taiwan cough. You don't exactly expect the 7th fleet to come cruising in from the east, do you?
Taiwan is opposing the east fleet, not the south fleet, what are you trying to say? :confused:

Very good article. It seems worthwhile that akinkhoo can take a look of it. The writer of the article also has a website. It looks interesting, too.

http://www.gregoryclark.net/

http://www.gregoryclark.net/jt/index.html
i seen his works a long time ago, however you should note he was writing in regards of western policies on china, not asean. anyway, this is completely unrelated to the point of the thread. :p

---

as said, i believe china wants the lion share of the south china seas. i would challenge anyone to say china does not have such intentions. i did not state i see china as a threat, i am saying china wants to dine. :D

[MIGleader]

Taiwan is opposing the east fleet, not the south fleet, what are you trying to say?

It was that way traditionally, but i doubt so anymore. Why does the south sea fleet have all the latest DDGs, landing ships, and 50,000 marines?

The east sea fleet appears to be deployed primarily against japan, not taiwan.