China's SCS Strategy Thread

tidalwave

Senior Member
Registered Member
I really love this line. I can understand US wants to be hegemon but the followers of US want to make sure China be a follower of US as well.

I am not sure what kind of logic is that? Its almost like jail birds couldn't stand a free man and want the free man to be jailed as well. Human nature is so crooked sometimes.

"Some Asian allies traveled to Washington to canvass support for the TPP among America’s political class and opinion makers – Singapore, Australia, New Zealand and Japan. They stressed that TPP forms part of the US’ pivot to Asia and aims at making China subordinate to American interests."

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 
Last edited:

Iron Man

Major
Registered Member
Yes, that jibes with my read of the situation, which is that everyone in Asia questions whether the US has both the will/attention and also the capacity to remain relevant in Asia in the long-run.

===

Plus this is what PACOM said 3 years ago.

"In East Asia today, Locklear said, “we’re not the biggest guy on the block, we’re just not, and we’ve to come to grips with it. Doesn’t mean we’re not a big guy, but
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
….so how do we look for those
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
that allow us to continue to protect US interests?”"

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
You don't honestly believe he literally means what he says here, do you? Or do you?
 
according to USNI News Geographer: China’s Claim to South China Sea Not Rooted in History
A British geographer and journalist described China’s claims to large swaths of seas and land formations off its coast are based on 20th-century events — from the Boxer Rebellion to the defeat of Japan in World War II — and not deeply rooted in its history.

This assertion brought several heated questions from the audience.

Bill Hayton, an associate fellow at London’s Chatham House and the author of South China Sea
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
,
said in response to a question that Beijing’s claims are valid “because [these territories] are ours” historically, said “a hundred years ago you [Chinese citizens] wouldn’t feel” the same way. For much of China’s past, most of the South China Sea was viewed as “a place where pirates roam.”

Speaking Thursday at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a Washington, D.C. think tank, he added, now, “every Chinese child is taught James Shoal is the southernmost part of Chinese territory.” The shoal is under water and claimed by China, Taiwan and Malaysia. It is more than 1,000 miles from the Chinese mainland and 50 miles from the Malaysia coast.

In answering a question about whether the media are increasing tensions over the disputes in the East and South China Seas, Hayton said, “The story has shifted” from one of China’s claims in the early 20th century in disputes with Japan and France over pieces of territory to one of who has the most influence in the region — Beijing or Washington.

He said the international arbitration panel’s recent ruling against China in a dispute with the Philippines over its so-called “9-Dash Line” territorial claims fell within the rules laid out in the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
that the Spratlys were not islands. “There are no records of settled families” by the Chinese on them. The treaty calls for “human habitation, so they [aren’t] islands in that sense.”

Hayton added that Beijing was an early and strong supporter of the treaty “to stop countries from” making territorial claims like the ones it made in the case over the Scarborough Shoal brought by Philippine case.

The first time the “9-Dash Line” appears in an official document is 1946″ and includes the Spratlys in a 1947 map, he said. The timing was part of an agreement among the Allies that “all the territory stolen from China [by Japan] will be returned.” The question was, “Where do China’s borders lay?”

Although China did not do much surveying work in the South China Sea and its fishermen did not continually inhabit the reefs and shoals, Beijing began producing in the early decades of the 20th century “maps of national humiliation.” They indicated certain land features also claimed by Japan, Korea, Malaysia and the Philippines were under its control. The “line,” which has shifted several times, was to make the territory appear to be contiguous.

Hayton said what moved Chinese imperial officials in the early 20th century to make these first claims was to “show it is standing up to foreigners.” The imperial government was trying to regain control of its own affairs and territory, usually close to the mainland, and solidify support with its people.

Later Chinese Republic officials continued these moves by “sticking in flags” on the Paracel Islands and sticking “one in the eye for the Japanese or anyone else,” who didn’t respect its sovereignty and claims.

At the beginning of his presentation, Hayton said China’s claims in the disputed waters “are just as incoherent as others” to these islands, reefs, barriers and shoals. He said Beijing is making these claims out of a “sense of entitlement,” which shows no signs of going away.
source:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

solarz

Brigadier
according to USNI News Geographer: China’s Claim to South China Sea Not Rooted in History

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

The issue of habitation is a red herring. Nobody lived on the SCS islands before the 20th century, so it's completely irrelevant.

The historical claim is based on the fact that Chinese ships plyed those waters and Chinese fishermen visited those fishing grounds long before any other claimant.

The argument that current claims are based on 20th century events is specious. These claims are based on current international norms, which did not exist in China before the 20th century.
 
this is interesting:
6cowv.jpg



and this is tough:
Sv9lB.jpg
 

AndrewS

Brigadier
Registered Member
@Ironman

You don't honestly believe he literally means what he says here, do you? Or do you?

On a day to day basis, the US doesn't have as many forces forward deployed as China has in the Western Pacific. On that basis, Admiral Locklear (Head of PACOM) is correct.
 
@Ironman

On a day to day basis, the US doesn't have as many forces forward deployed as China has in the Western Pacific. On that basis, Admiral Locklear (Head of PACOM) is correct.

What a joke comparing apples to oranges. This can only apply if you mean "forward deployed in the Western Pacific" as in forces deployed on or around China's home territory while on the other side of the planet from US home territory.

Not to mention a mere fraction of US forces deployed far from US home territory. This is the meaning of forward deployment:
fo1029_usbases12001.gif
 
Last edited:
this is interesting:
6cowv.jpg



and this is tough:
Sv9lB.jpg

More interesting are US bases in Asia even without weapons ranges marked which certainly match and most likely exceed those of China.
us-military-west-pacific-graphic.jpg


And more tough are just some not even all US military installations in Hawaii (rather than just the museum at Pearl Harbor) as well as the more relevant US bases on Okinawa, compared to Subi Reef at the same scale. Absolutely terrifying!
Hawaii_Okinawa_Subi.jpg
 

AndrewS

Brigadier
Registered Member
@PanAsian

It's not me you should be arguing with.

It's Admiral Locklear who was head of PACOM a few years ago. He was have been in charge of entire combatant command, so you would presume that he knew what the balance of forces is.
 
Top