PLAN SCS Bases/Islands/Vessels (Not a Strategy Page)

according to USNI News
China Defends Deployment of Anti-Ship Missiles to South China Sea Island
Beijing is defending the deployment of anti-ship cruise missiles to Woody Island in the South China Sea, according to a Wednesday statement from the Chinese foreign ministry.

“China’s deployment of national defense facilities on its own territory is reasonable and justified,” ministry spokesman Hong Lei said on Wednesday.
“It has nothing to do with the so-called militarization.”

Last week, several international news outlets reported the Chinese fired an YJ-62 cruise missile from Woody Island based on images that emerged on the Chinese language Internet.

Woody Island is part of China’s disputed holdings in the Paracel Island off the coast of Vietnam. In the last few months, China has moved more offensive military hardware to the chain Beijing has controlled since the early 1970s.

Last month,
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
anti-air missiles batteries to Woody Island after the U.S. conducted a freedom of navigation operation (FON op) near Chinese holdings
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
.

Then as now, the foreign ministry said moving military kit to Xisha Islands – the Chinese name for the Paracels – were well within their rights and the missiles were for defensive purposes.

News of the new missiles on Woody comes as little surprise to experts who have monitored the military developments in the region over the last several months.

“While the HQ-9 deployment was a big deal because it was the first observation of a major weapon system on Woody Island, the YJ-62 is really the second act that provides an anti-surface capability to complement the HQ-9’s anti-air,” Chris Carlson, a retired U.S. Navy captain and naval analyst told USNI News on Thursday.
“In my view, China is making it clear that any attempted intrusion, be it by air or on the ocean surface, will be met by their defenses.”

While in open conflict, the fixed position of the islands would make the missiles easy targets but the weapons could have a coercive effect to China’s neighbors and U.S. operations in peacetime, Bryan Clark, naval analyst Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments (CSBA) and former special assistant to past Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Jonathan Greenert, told USNI News on Wednesday.

“In a conflict, the islands will be hard to defend, but their value is in curtailing U.S. peacetime operations and in the opening moves of a conflict when they can threaten U.S. forces with a surprise attack,” he said.
“If the U.S. deployed similar forces to Palawan [in the Philippines], it could similarly impact [People‘s Liberation Army] operations.”
There is a concern now that China could use the same rationale for deploying offensive weapons on its disputed artificial islands in the Spratly Island chain — closer to the Philippines.

“Chinese activities in the Paracels will likely at least partially presage activities in the Spratlys. Beijing may act as if it is using Paracels-based actions to signal — with the implication that they will deploy infrastructure and systems robustly in the Spratlys only if ‘forced’ to do so because Washington ignored Beijing’s message,” Andrew Erickson, a professor at the China Maritime Studies Institute at the U.S. Naval War College, told USNI News on Wednesday.

In the last year-and-a half China has stepped up land reclamation efforts in the Spratlys, building facilities that could easily host military equipment.
source:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

yuxiaochen

Junior Member
according to USNI News
China Defends Deployment of Anti-Ship Missiles to South China Sea Island

source:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Woody Island is a semi-military governed island, i would say 75percent of the facilities on the island belong to the PLA Navy, i dont think it should come as a surprise that anti-ship missiles are being deployed on the island since there are at least two types of fighter jets with anti-surface capabilities stationed on the island.
 

nfgc

New Member
Registered Member
Go re-read the Indonesian press articles. The vessel was under tow and when inside the 12nm limit it was rammed by a CCG vessel. They intercepted the vessel at 10pm, the ramming occurred at midnight or before.

Vessels under tow travel at 3 to 10 knots per hour. 2 hours under tow.

Therefore the vessel was operating nearly at, or inside, the 12nm limit of Indonesia before being intercepted.

How China interprets this as their "traditional fishing waters", is a mystery to the Indonesians who immediately protested this via diplomatic channels.

Also the continued silence here regarding the Chinese ramming other vessels as policy is curious.

If Indonesia did this to China at the same distance, how would China react?
 

plawolf

Lieutenant General
according to USNI News
China Defends Deployment of Anti-Ship Missiles to South China Sea Island

source:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

While in open conflict, the fixed position of the islands would make the missiles easy targets but the weapons could have a coercive effect to China’s neighbors and U.S. operations in peacetime, Bryan Clark, naval analyst Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments (CSBA) and former special assistant to past Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Jonathan Greenert, told USNI News on Wednesday.

“In a conflict, the islands will be hard to defend, but their value is in curtailing U.S. peacetime operations and in the opening moves of a conflict when they can threaten U.S. forces with a surprise attack,” he said.
“If the U.S. deployed similar forces to Palawan [in the Philippines], it could similarly impact [People‘s Liberation Army] operations.”
There is a concern now that China could use the same rationale for deploying offensive weapons on its disputed artificial islands in the Spratly Island chain — closer to the Philippines...

I just love the hypocritical and self-contradictory nature of that quote, which sums up much of the public US military position perfectly.

On the one hand, they are insisting that Chinse military assets on those islands will be 'hard to defend', because the location of the islands are known (as if that is enough to pinpoint the missiles for strikes), yet in the next breath they are arguing for US military bases in the region. As if those bases would somehow be able to magically run away to be at a different location in times of war.

It is quite clear to me that senior USN officials in charge of the Pacific, examplified by Harris, has an almost unseemly appetite for rising tensions in the SCS, as both a means to leverage a greater share of shrinking US military spending, as well as a means of extending their military reach into the region once more.

The backdrop to all of that is the shocking complacency and casual dismissal of Chinese military capabilities in the SCS they, and their mouthpieces in the media, have publicly voiced.

It is a truly bizzar spectacle to behold the same person hype up Chinese military threats on the one hand as justification for greater US military deployments in the region, while at the same time downplaying and dismissing Chinese military capabilities in case anyone asks awkward questions like - just how much blood and treasure would a war with China in the SCS cost the US if the chickenhawks miscalculate and push China too far?

Even more amazingly is how no one in the so called 'free' western press could apparently see such an obviously self-contradiction and call them out to explain and reconcile it.

It's quite clear that Harris and his men wants to have their cake and eat it also. But China isn't going to be nearly so considering of their wants.

Either Chinese military deployments in the SCS are a serious threat, which would justify USN opposition to them, since those military deployments would pose serious challenges to the USN's ability to operate in the region in times of hostilities. OR, those military deployments (not to mention the thus far purely civilian deployments in the Sparatlies) are of minimal threat even in times of war, in which case it begs the question of why the USN is trying to make such a massive deal out of it if they can just roll in and take those islands out and/or over anywhere close to as easily as Harris and other media talking heads are implying? And no, invoking Pearl Harbour is a stupid excuse, not least because unless the US sets up a major military base in the region and park a large fleet there, there would be nothing to ambush from those islands.

When senior military commanders starts playing political games so openly and brazenly is when one should be careful of value of the 'professional' opinion they are giving out.
 

kroko

Senior Member
And rightly so. None of those countries sent their CG cutters to take back the fishing boats while they were being towed back to being blown up, right? Well, China just did it. Again, because it wasn't the first time. This kind of behavior is short way to finally someone shooting bullets, isn't it? That's why it was widely reported even though there were Chinese attempts to keep the things out of medias which Indonesia ignored.

Normally i dont post on SCS threads (very political), but what chinese CG ships have done is not the way to behave at sea, even if they werent at indonesian territorial waters, and just at disputed EEZ waters. Just because china has a lot of CG vessels and the others dont, doesnt give them the legitimacy to do it, at least not in a way that will keep the friendship of these same nations. Although i think that in this case the chinese top leadership is aware that they went too far, judging by their intentions for indonesia to keep quiet about it:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


However now indonesia is getting ready for more escalation.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


IMO china must start to put red lines on its CG fleet. I understand that china is an infant naval power, and CG vessels perhabs dont have the same standart of behaviour as PLAN. However if incidents like these keep happening, china will have another adversary in SE asia, something that they really dont want to see. China already has more than enough of them in east asia, specially if we are talking about indonesia, a 255 million people nation.
 
Top