China's SCS Strategy Thread

Discussion in 'Strategic Defense' started by lilzz, Apr 16, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. janjak desalin
    Offline

    janjak desalin Junior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2014
    Messages:
    533
    Likes Received:
    1,294
    Why another thread when it's most relevant here?
     
  2. janjak desalin
    Offline

    janjak desalin Junior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2014
    Messages:
    533
    Likes Received:
    1,294
    No, PanAsian's most salient, explicit, and not-implied, point pertains not to media rhetoric, i. e., words, alone, but also to the US gov't and corporate policies and practices that follow the neo-colonialist model. Yes, rhetorical persuasion/propaganda is an element of this model, but even that emphasis neglects the fact that literal rhetoric is but one of many modes of symbolic communication/persuasion. What you're neglecting to acknowledge is PanAsian's explicit reference to the coercive elements of this model, that coercion is, in fact, the iron-fist in the velvet glove. Don't think, for one minute, that astute Samurai maxim, pen and sword in accord, has been lost on "the west".

    China is, and has been, in a bind. That is a statement of fact. Hell, they only got their sovereignty back in Hong Kong and Macau 19 and 17 years ago, respectively, and from two, two-bit, has-been, empires, at that. Portugal, realy??? And, they still have the present, dying, empire interfering in what they consider to be their internal domestic affairs (Taiwan). In no way does PanAsian imply that this is a permanent condition; facts change. Nevertheless, emotional reactions to factual statements don't make for good intellectual discussion. And, on that note, I'll leave this discussion, 'cause it ain't good!
     
    #1712 janjak desalin, Jan 3, 2016
    Last edited: Jan 3, 2016
    GreenestGDP likes this.
  3. Ultra
    Offline

    Ultra Junior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2014
    Messages:
    853
    Likes Received:
    1,286





    I couldn't agree more.
    I think the US has essentially over the years taught China what the real geopolitics is - that "might is right". For example, US has illegally occupied Guantanamo Bay for over a century because Cuba cannot do anything about it. The Crimean crisis last year also amply demonstrate to China if you have arsenal of nuclear weapons that can complete annhilate United States of America, Uncle Sam will only pay lips service bitching about it and wouldn't dare to do the stunts they pull in SCS.

    What this means I am afraid is that China will eventually pursue a policy of nuclear brinkmanship with US - because when people don't respect you or listen to you when you are being nice, eventually they will realize they need to bring a shotgun to the table just to be heard.
     
    #1713 Ultra, Jan 3, 2016
    Last edited: Jan 3, 2016
  4. Equation
    Offline

    Equation Lieutenant General

    Joined:
    May 11, 2011
    Messages:
    11,053
    Likes Received:
    13,675
    So tell me how is China in a "bind" as in my opinion meaning containment? If the West had successfully used coercive elements to keep China in check, than they shouldn't be worrying about China's rising in any shape or form because their sovereignty are not being threaten just the status quo.
     
  5. Blackstone
    Offline

    Blackstone Brigadier

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2012
    Messages:
    5,288
    Likes Received:
    4,678
    The status quo is exactly what's at stake for US, China, and the rest of Asia. Currently, American military primacy is the basis of Asia's security order, but China served up notice a few years ago that it no longer accepts US primacy, but wants a say in Asian leadership. Obama's answered with the "Pivot" and TPP, and Xi reposed with AIIB and "One Belt, One Road." It's all about the status quo.
     
  6. Brumby
    Offline

    Brumby Major

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2012
    Messages:
    3,575
    Likes Received:
    3,683
    I don't agree with your view that the issue is about American military primacy per se but before we dwell further I would like to ask you what is meant by American military primacy? In particular how does that directly address Asia's security order and if that was to change to Chinese military primacy how would Asia's security look like?
     
    Equation likes this.
  7. vincent
    Offline

    vincent Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2012
    Messages:
    1,075
    Likes Received:
    1,712
    American military primacy mean Uncle Sam can do whatever he wants? He can blockade Chinese shipping and throw a few Tomahawks into mainland at will if China doesn't behave, like invading Taiwan?
     
    antiterror13 and GreenestGDP like this.
  8. joshuatree
    Offline

    joshuatree Captain

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2006
    Messages:
    2,049
    Likes Received:
    1,930
    Agreed, there's too many SCS related threads - SCS China strategy, SCS China bases, SCS other claimants strategy, US-China naval encounter in SCS. Would rather just make one centralized thread on SCS claims and be done with.
     
    Equation and PanAsian like this.
  9. Blackstone
    Offline

    Blackstone Brigadier

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2012
    Messages:
    5,288
    Likes Received:
    4,678
    You say you don't know what I meant by China no longer accepts American primacy as the basis of Asian security order, but you disagree with it. Wonderful. What am I missing?
     
    delft and GreenestGDP like this.
  10. PanAsian
    Offline

    PanAsian Major

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2005
    Messages:
    3,600
    Likes Received:
    4,352
    The world keeps turning so it's an ongoing effort. Containment is just a euphemism for strangulation-rather-than-bash-their-skull-in, so the goal has not been achieved yet. The threat is any potential to challenge whatever the powers-that-be want to do, especially when what they want to do is particularly unfair, unreasonable, and harmful to others.

    Hard power example - the US military pivot to Asia which is very real, significant, and effective despite domestic political bashing often heard in this forum. More of the best of the best military in the world, the most cutting edge equipment of all stripes, will be based in Asia. A slew of arms deals and military exchanges not just to improve the military capabilities of a number other Asian countries but also to influence those militaries to prime them for an anti-China alliance even if informal. China's maritime geographical disadvantage has already long been exploited with the annexation and militarization of the Ryukyus, support for the Taiwan military, foreign naval basing in the Philippines and possibly Vietnam, and the fact that China is in such a disadvantageous physical position in the Spratlys which it is trying to ameliorate with building on its holdings.

    Soft power example - the recent South Korea-Japan agreement on permanently settling the comfort women issue was very much in Japan's terms and it has been reported to be inked under pressure from the US. The settlement deprives China of common ground with South Korea, sets up a low bar (importantly also the expectation of low bars) for Japan for any other potential settlements surrounding this issue as well as other outstanding issues from Japan's past offenses, and any further complaints against Japan by others about said issues can be more convincingly cast as obstinate grudge bearing, especially with ulterior motives, against a reasonable player who has already redeemed itself with other offended parties.
     
    delft, antiterror13, plawolf and 5 others like this.
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page