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

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
Survey...research...etc, Yes many things are objected to by numerous nations..

But my point has been simple and steadfast...and not really related to those issues.

Military vessels, traveling along established SLOCs are something that...as long as they stay out of the territorial waters...are going to pass...EEZs or no.

The vast majority of maritime powers, or nations who depends on those SLOCs, are not willing to give that up.

When it comes to live fire traiinng...when it comes to surveying for resources...when it comes other (particularly commercial) research I am not taking a position on that.
 

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
Survey...research...etc, Yes many things are objected to by numerous nations..

But my point has been simple and steadfast...and not really related to those issues.

Military vessels, traveling along established SLOCs are something that...as long as they stay out of the territorial waters...are going to pass...EEZs or no.

The vast majority of maritime powers, or nations who depends on those SLOCs, are not willing to give that up.

When it comes to live fire traiinng...when it comes to surveying for resources...when it comes other (particularly commercial) research I am not taking a position on that.

Jeff, with respect, I don't think anyone is challenging your opinion, however going by shen's latest post and supporting document, you have to admit that there is a meaningful number of coastal nations who are opposed to foreign military ships entering their EEZ without consent and foreign ships of all types surveying their waters without consent.

Note, Shen's document says "legislation concerning hydrographic surveys" which has a broad meaning, but there's also the added caveat of many nations who are opposed to any kind of foreign hydrographic surveys in their EEZ, which I think we can reasonably infer to mean from any kind of waterborne vessel as well.
I.e.: including military ships or military associated ships; oh say let's pull a random ship out of a hat... a hypothetical 5,300 ton catamaran hydrographic survey ship towing a sonar line within a hypothetical nation's EEZ? :p

I'm not trying to say who's right or wrong here, nor am I claiming the US is isolated in its position but we also can't say that China is alone or a minority in its position given a number of other prominent coastal nations hold similar positions to it regarding military vessels and foreign surveying in their EEZ.
 

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
Jeff, with respect, I don't think anyone is challenging your opinion, however going by shen's latest post and supporting document, you have to admit that there is a meaningful number of coastal nations who are opposed to foreign military ships entering their EEZ without consent.
Never said that there weren't other nations that feel this way.

Note, Shen's document says "legislation concerning hydrographic surveys" which has a broad meaning, but there's also the added caveat of many nations who are opposed to any kind of foreign hydrographic surveys in their EEZ, which I think we can reasonably infer...
See...that's where we simply disagree.

I believe a lot of effort is going into characterizing things that apply to the very narrow definition I gave, that do not say that at all. It is inferred...it is interpreted...etc.

I have never said that China is "alone" or that it is "isolated." I still believe however that it is in the minority on this very specific condition I outlined.

But hey...that's my opinion.
 

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
Never said that there weren't other nations that feel this way.

Fair enough

See...that's where we simply disagree.

I believe a lot of effort is going into characterizing things that apply to the very narrow definition I gave, that do not say that at all. It is inferred...it is interpreted...etc.

I have never said that China is "alone" or that it is "isolated." I still believe however that it is in the minority on this very specific condition I outlined.

But hey...that's my opinion.

I feel like this is a point worth quibbling over, if you could indulge me, simply because "minority" really only counts when we know how big the majority is and just how many nations have opinions on this matter to begin with.

I'd be interested to know how many coastal nations have declared a position on this matter, and out of those who have declared, how many of them hold a position similar to the US and how many with PRC. If say, well over half of coastal nations (say 2/3rds) hold the position of the US then I could agree that there is a majority who hold the US position but also a significant minority who hold the opposite view. If it's say, 90% in US position, then I'd definitely agree the US position is the "vast majority" as you put it a few pages back. If it is split 50/50 then I'd say the issue is one which is under dispute.

But if we do not have a comprehensive list for those kind of numbers, then I think it is misleading to readers and people who may be new to the EEZ matter to use the word "minority" to describe China and other nation's similar positions. It would be better described as an issue which is under dispute between various coastal nations.

(And of course we can't assume that every coastal nation not on Shen's list automatically takes the US position -- they might simply not have been listed or may not have declared a position on the matter)
 

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
Well, Bltzio, I have given my opinion on the matter, and defined my condition fairly narrowly...which was my interest in this from the get go.

...and I believe it is an accurate one. I'm sticking with it.

Others are free to opine and feel however they wish.
 

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
Haha, alright then I won't push the matter :)

--

on a different subject, I'd like to pose a hypothetical situation in the near future in SCS. China has finished reclaiming its islands, and on one of the islands, say the Fiery Cross reef airstrip, they have decided to deploy a small contingent of fighter aircraft. Let's say half a regiment of J-10s or flankers.
No ADIZ is declared, but Chinese aircraft are there now and flying over the SCS in international air space and escorting various USN surveillance aircraft that approach the Chinese islands with the same kind of warnings we see today ("this is chinese navy, you are entering military zone, please leave"... something of that respect)

Jeff, do you think the US will allow China to develop the islands to such a degree, and what can they do to stop China? That is to say, even if they do sail ships and fly aircraft within the 12 nmi limit, they cannot physically stop the reclamation activities unless they board, intercept and/or sink the various ships conducting the reclamation work, which would obviously be considered as an escalation by China and likely lead to a military crisis if not regional war.

The second question is, if China does manage to develop the islands to this degree, what can the US do -- in other words what are the US's goals -- outside of enforcing its position on FON, in your opinion?
The second question has been bugging me for quite a while, because unless the US draws a red line for itself and is willing to enforce with consequences, the alternative is that China will inevitably continue with its operations and deployment patterns in future. While I do not believe a small SCS airbase will be of great military utility in a hypothetical no-punches-drawn military conflict between China and any military with decent long range land attack capabilities, the airbase would allow China to deploy limited air power in a relatively uncontested way during peacetime. I say uncontested, again, because unless the island and air strip/base itself are bombed or occupied by another force or made inoperable by other means (say a natural disaster/tsunami), then China will likely continue with whatever deployment pattern it ends up with.

I don't doubt the US would seek to advance partnerships with other nations in the SCS, and China would likely try to draw nations away from it, but as far as I can see there's little the US can do short of risking a military conflict with China in actually stopping the island reclamation and future operations or deployment of whatever the islands are used for.
Would my analysis be fairly accurate?
 

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
Haha, alright then I won't push the matter :)

On a different subject, I'd like to pose a hypothetical situation in the near future in SCS. China has finished reclaiming its islands, and on one of the islands, say the Fiery Cross reef airstrip, they have decided to deploy a small contingent of fighter aircraft. Let's say half a regiment of J-10s or flankers.

No ADIZ is declared, but Chinese aircraft are there now and flying over the SCS in international air space and escorting various USN surveillance aircraft that approach the Chinese islands with the same kind of warnings we see today ("this is chinese navy, you are entering military zone, please leave"... something of that respect)

Jeff, do you think the US will allow China to develop the islands to such a degree
Well, we want to guard against getting into direct confrontational scenarios between nations like this. Our rules really forbid it.

In this scenario, I do not see how the US could really stop it. The PRC is already building the airstrips and infrastructure.

if China does manage to develop the islands to this degree, what can the US do -- in other words what are the US's goals -- outside of enforcing its position on FON, in your opinion?
All the US can do is try and assist friendly nations to counter what the PRC is accomplishing...and to do it on those nation's own reefs and islands.

As I have said, if the US, Japan, and Australia come together with a strategy to help other nations...the Philippines, Malaysia, Vietnam, etc. develop their own claims similarly.

I do not think the US has the leadership in place that would or could do this.

But if they did...then you might see those nations basing their own aircraft out in the SCS in a similar fashion.

This way, everyone is using their own possessions and claims to counter growth of control.

While that is surely not as dangerous as one nation or the other trying to take possessions from others...it would still raise the stakes in the area overall.

The US has the naval and air assets to patrol...but they do not have the land...the terra firma to station assets like the PRC does. The other claimants however, do. But they are simply unable, without significant help, to counter what the PRC is doing.

Even such a consortium would probably not be able to match the PRC...but they would at least be able to keep it from being the absolute slam dunk for the PRC that it is turning into now.
 

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
Thansk Jeff

Yeah, I wasn't intending the post to be a direct confrontation scenario; mostly it was to illustrate how I think the current situation is likely to unfold and what is unlikely to happen (direct confrontation in the near future, for latter).

I can also imagine the US would support Philippines, Vietnam, and possibly Malaysia and Indonesia as well, and of course Japan and Australia. I suspect China would try to use its economic leverage to prevent the formation of too explicit an alliance directed against it, but who knows.

I suppose the key point I was seeking was whether there was any way for other nations to stop China stop what it was doing now short of a military crisis, and it's good to see you agree with my conclusion that it seems nigh impossible
 

Blackstone

Brigadier
Thansk Jeff

Yeah, I wasn't intending the post to be a direct confrontation scenario; mostly it was to illustrate how I think the current situation is likely to unfold and what is unlikely to happen (direct confrontation in the near future, for latter).

I can also imagine the US would support Philippines, Vietnam, and possibly Malaysia and Indonesia as well, and of course Japan and Australia. I suspect China would try to use its economic leverage to prevent the formation of too explicit an alliance directed against it, but who knows.
The South China Sea is China’s Greater Caribbean, and by controlling it, China connects the Western Pacific to the Indian Ocean and establishes de facto control of East and SE Asia. If the Washington can’t or wouldn’t lead a collation of the willing to effectively balance Beijing, then the writing is on the wall, and China will patiently and firmly push US out of Asia, one nautical mile at a time. Once the US is neutralized, then the rest will bend knee and we'll probably see a 21st Century version of the Tributary System.

I suppose the key point I was seeking was whether there was any way for other nations to stop China stop what it was doing now short of a military crisis, and it's good to see you agree with my conclusion that it seems nigh impossible
At this point, it’s pretty clear US doesn’t have any good solutions to retain primacy that China would accept, so the two awkwardly dance toward Thucydides' Trap. My guess is at some point, US and China would come to a meeting of minds and strike a grand bargain that will include the other two great Asian powers, India and Japan.
 

jkliz

Junior Member
Registered Member
This is an amazing video.

Whatever you may think of such a mission...where else could we get such views of the ongoing work there, and the US assets monitoring it?

I am surprised that they were allowed aboard and to post videos of this detail. Analysts will have a field day with this info. Typical of this administration's misadventures IMHO.

Just the same, I would urge everyone to watch this:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Seeing this reclamation effort from these surveillance videos is awesome. Seeing the inside of the Poseidon like this is awesome (if crazy), hearing the Chinese controllers warning the aircraft...seeing the structures going up on Fiery Cross and Mischief Reef.

Simply amazing.

So do you think the US military acted unprofessionally by allowing this footage to be released?
 
Top