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

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
Now back to some pictures of the islands. These were taken early this month.

Chigua (Johnson South) Island. It's fast becoming a little village. That white building is estimated to have 9 floors.

Dongmen (Hughes) Island. Also has a massive new building adjacent to the original outpost.

Huayang (Cuateron) Island.

Nanxun (Gaven) Island.

View of Yongshu (Fiery Cross) Island. In this picture, the airstrip is almost complete.

Zhubi (Subi) Island. There could be another airstrip on this island.

WOW! Those pictures are simply phenomenal.

Having watched the SCS for years...and knowing of the original structures on several of these reefs over the years...to see this rapid development, and the scale of it, is simply amazing.
 

Equation

Lieutenant General
Now back to some pictures of the islands. These were taken early this month. In the last 3 weeks, there would have been further developments. Enjoy!
By the way, the dates at the bottom of the pics are in the format CCYY-MM-DD.

Chigua (Johnson South) Island. It's fast becoming a little village. That white building is estimated to have 9 floors.
View attachment 14212

Dongmen (Hughes) Island. Also has a massive new building adjacent to the original outpost.
View attachment 14213

Huayang (Cuateron) Island.
View attachment 14214

Nanxun (Gaven) Island.
View attachment 14215

View of Yongshu (Fiery Cross) Island. In this picture, the airstrip is almost complete.
View attachment 14216

Zhubi (Subi) Island. There could be another airstrip on this island.
View attachment 14217

Simply gorgeous. Dubai eat your heart out with your Palm artificial islands.:D I bet China could construct one if they wanted to as well.
maxresdefault.jpg
 

Jeff Head

General
Registered Member
Sorry guys, last night I indicated plainly that this thread is not about Strategy and it is not about potential conflict.

We have two strategy pages fpr thje SCS, oen for China dn one for other countries..

Posters have elected to ignore (or not read) that instruction. All of those types of posts are going to be deleted per my original post.

If you want to post these strategy/policy oriented posts...and do so without going into US vs China conflict, you will have two hours to move them to the appropriate Strategy Thread.

I ain't your momma so I am not going to do it for you since I already plainly instructed it not to happen.

DO NOT RESPOND TO THIS MODERATION
 
Last edited:

Blackstone

Brigadier
I have a question. Those 12 nm areas, have they ever been mentioned by China? I have seen it only reported as mentioned by US.
That's the frustrating part of China's claims within the 9-dash line (Cow Tongue). It hasn't clarified what exactly it owns! Is it just some of the islands and land features inside the Cow Tongue, or is it all of the land features, including locations current occupied by other claimants? Is it some or all of the water within Cow Tongue? Does China accept international law on artificial land features not getting 12 mile territorial limit? I get it, China is intentionally vague on its claims so it could retain maximum options, but without clear and concise baselines, how could the parties get on with it? China is fighting for its territory, I get it and I agree, but not making its claims crystal clear invites the worst fears and reactions from its neighbors and from the current hegemon.
 

delft

Brigadier
That's the frustrating part of China's claims within the 9-dash line (Cow Tongue). It hasn't clarified what exactly it owns! Is it just some of the islands and land features inside the Cow Tongue, or is it all of the land features, including locations current occupied by other claimants? Is it some or all of the water within Cow Tongue? Does China accept international law on artificial land features not getting 12 mile territorial limit? I get it, China is intentionally vague on its claims so it could retain maximum options, but without clear and concise baselines, how could the parties get on with it? China is fighting for its territory, I get it and I agree, but not making its claims crystal clear invites the worst fears and reactions from its neighbors and from the current hegemon.
The best way, as China has been saying it sees it for a long time, is to discus the matter. In general over the last few hundred years academics, mostly inspired by governments but not formally under their responsibility, presented a point of view that was subsequently supported by peace treaties or other agreements. Hugo Grotius wrote his "Mare Liberum" at the behest of the Vereenigde Oost-Indische Compagnie, the Dutch East India company. It seems China doesn't use the same tactic but is inclined to concede much territory / sea space / participation in mineral or fishery exploitation in bilateral agreements in return for acceptance of the principles it wants to see applied. This would of course exclude US who don't have territory in the area since 1946.
There has been no suggestion by China that use of the sea for navigation should be limited at all and no-one has given a suggestion why China would want to introduce such.
 
Top