China's SCS Strategy Thread

[Blackstone]

All this talk of Militarisation & FON, and who is right or wrong are raising temperatures of various interested parties re: South China Sea. The best possible solutions would entail " serious talk, discussions" to examine how common sense could prevail in making the South China Sea PEACEFUL for global trade for ALL nations, without antagonising any particular country/countries. China I read, is now looking seriously at the "Code of Conduct" with ASEAN, and perhaps the other interested parties like the US etc. Hopefully, a reasonable and acceptable "Code of Conduct" will be tabled & acceptable by the major parties involved the South China Sea disputes. Give the "Owlish" diplomacy a chance to solve problems & succeed, and restrain the "Hawks" of all parties/countries from interfering.

We agree there are room for both US and China's core interests in Asia, including ECS and SCS. We probably agree China is located in Asia, ergo it has more interests in its own backyard. The key is for both sides to lower the temperature and go full bore for diplomatic solutions. As for the new Code of Conduct, I don't ascribe much credence to it unless it has binding arbitration processes that China signs up to.

 

[delft]

We agree there are room for both US and China's core interests in Asia, including ECS and SCS. We probably agree China is located in Asia, ergo it has more interests in its own backyard. The key is for both sides to lower the temperature and go full bore for diplomatic solutions. As for the new Code of Conduct, I don't ascribe much credence to it unless it has binding arbitration processes that China signs up to.

US talk implies that China has little interest in Freedom of Navigation but China has a much larger merchant navy than US and so have many other countries and all these countries have a larger interest in FON than US as far as their economies are concerned. The US has no specific interest in FON in SCS but a general interest in "protecting" other countries to maintain its pretence as World Hegemon. The SCS Code of Conduct has nothing to do with FON or with US.

 

[Iron Man]

We agree there are room for both US and China's core interests in Asia, including ECS and SCS. We probably agree China is located in Asia, ergo it has more interests in its own backyard. The key is for both sides to lower the temperature and go full bore for diplomatic solutions. As for the new Code of Conduct, I don't ascribe much credence to it unless it has binding arbitration processes that China signs up to.

What makes you single out China for needing to adhere to such "binding arbitration processes"? The US did not ratify UNCLOS for exactly such reasons. It does not hold itself accountable to any power other than itself while holding other countries accountable to standards it ignores/dismisses as it chooses. Stop viewing the world through the same hypocritical eyes that the US politicians do.

 

[sanblvd]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

That is one hella of firepower. I'm sure in the event of real thing, it will be protected by actual warships as well.

 

[Blackstone]

US talk implies that China has little interest in Freedom of Navigation but China has a much larger merchant navy than US and so have many other countries and all these countries have a larger interest in FON than US as far as their economies are concerned. The US has no specific interest in FON in SCS but a general interest in "protecting" other countries to maintain its pretence as World Hegemon. The SCS Code of Conduct has nothing to do with FON or with US.

Don't discount US freedom of navigation as a core interest from the early days of the Republic. It is real, it is palpable, and it is in the country's DNA. America has fought wars over FON, and it's willing to fight for it today. I hope that will always be so.

 

[delft]

Don't discount US freedom of navigation as a core interest from the early days of the Republic. It is real, it is palpable, and it is in the country's DNA. America has fought wars over FON, and it's willing to fight for it today. I hope that will always be so.

I know it. It's first overseas war was with the Barbary pirates in Tripoli. But now? It has a tiny merchant fleet even if you include US owned ships using cheap flags. It has small ports with inferior infrastructure. Look at this site with container ports:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

.

 

[Blackstone]

I know it. It's first overseas war was with the Barbary pirates in Tripoli. But now? It has a tiny merchant fleet even if you include US owned ships using cheap flags. It has small ports with inferior infrastructure. Look at this site with container ports:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

.

It isn't about US's tiny merchant fleet but it's role in providing global common goods to keep international waterways secure for itself and for all nations.

 

[Hendrik_2000]

Instead of war talk how about trade talk The early fruit of detente between China and Philippine. Resulting in 1 Billion US$ export of bananas to China.And that is just the tip of iceberg Bigger deal is in the plan. Duterte gamble paid off

 

[delft]

It isn't about US's tiny merchant fleet but it's role in providing global common goods to keep international waterways secure for itself and for all nations.

That is the responsibility of all navies not that of a single hegemon. And huge flattops have no significant role in that work.
The new Chinese islands will contribute more to fighting piracy in SCS than US FON actions.

 

[vincent]

That is the responsibility of all navies not that of a single hegemon. And huge flattops have no significant role in that work.
The new Chinese islands will contribute more to fighting piracy in SCS than US FON actions.

And has China threaten commercial shipping in anyway that need the hegemon to do FON?