China's SCS Strategy Thread

[00CuriousObserver]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1981636093029257522

 

[Heliox]

Where did the Aus "spy plane" took off regarding the recent incident w China in Scs? Like which airbase?

Prolly RAAF Base Edinburgh, where the P-8 squadron is based?

 

[vincent]

This interview that you linked?
Where does the PM "indicate that Singapore has decided to go all the way with the US"?

"many of us would like to create space for us to have autonomy, to make our own choices, and not to be forced to choose sides"

"ASEAN as a whole, we have taken a clear position that we want to engage all the major powers. We reject dominance by any single power and zero-sum competition."

His comments in the interview are very much politically correct middle of the road, that we want to maintain our autonomy in a complex multi-polar world. Note that he also adds that "We are not an (US) ally, we are a Major Security Cooperation Partner."

His position on Taiwan is likewise middle of the road - "(US wants to) deter China from invasion. And there is certainly some value in that, and it is certainly important. At the same time, there should also be attention paid to deterring moves towards independence. Because this is China's reddest of red lines. It is a matter of sovereignty for China"

In any case, this sidebar on SG is quite off topic for this thread, so I'll put in a thought to try to bring it tenuously back on topic ...

Interesting that the WSJ fielded a pointed question on SG's arsenal of US weapons and if there was concern about "the sovereign limits that come with US weapons". PM Wong's answer is very pointed - "It has not been an issue up till now." That is as close to saying that it causes us nightmares without saying so in diplo-speak.

Look, Singapore's focus is very much on it's neighbours, or rather, the threat it's neighbours pose.
Singapore's defence posture and choice of hardware is very much to achieve superiority to neighbouring threat matrixes. Alignment with great power struggles is way down low on the list of priorities - any perceived current alignment is due to over reliance on US equipment and the resultant vulnerability to coercion from US foreign policy due to such reliance.

Would Singapore prefer to be non-reliant? For sure.
SG military gear is not totally US centric.
On the Army side, a lot of primary platforms are homegrown.
On the Navy side, it is (not) surprisingly Euro centric.
On the Air Force side however, up till recently, there has been no game in town other than US military hardware, especially when it comes to kitting out an armed force for IKC2. The SG buy-in into the F-35 program was as early as 2003. The procurement of F-15s, 2005 and the G550 AEW in 2007.
Would China have been able to provide a similar level of assistance back in the 00's?
That is the crux of the SG dependance on US MIC due to the backbone of the IKC2 network being heavily dependent on US hardware primarily in the air but also for ground sensors.

Would China be able to bring Singapore into it's orbit now - 20 years down from the 00s?
Note that any attempt to buy into high-end non-US "approved" gear will also probably result in being blackballed by the US, see Turkey F-35 program as an example, which may cause the entire web of IKC2 platforms to start falling apart.
As such, any adoption of key Chinese equipment will have to be done in a wholesale manner rather than incremental. Meaning an accelerated program of platform replacements since US support will be withdrawn quite quickly for any remaining platforms once past a tipping point of SG going into the enemy's camp - current timeline is F-16s in 2030s by F-35s, F-15s in 2040s by F/J-?? and F-35s in 2050ish by goodness knows what. Given the volume of hardware in a very short space of time, it will require discounted pricing, very generous loans and interest rates.
Adding on to that, Singapore needs to maintain qualitative superiority over the regional battlespace and so, if the neighbours have J-10s, it will require China to offer up at least J-20/35 or even the NG platforms as well as no -E munitions.

Will China be willing to take the above steps and is it even in China's interest to have SG as a military partner given that it may make it harder to bring key ASEAN members into the same orbit (due to the adversarial nature of relations between Singapore and Malaysia and possibly Indonesia as well?

Do note that just as China took years to prepare itself to disengage from the US, it will take a long time for Singapore to prepare itself for the shitstorm that will inevitably come once it signals it's leaning to the other side, eg. potentially being disconnected from the Western financial and banking system. So far from the dick-ish little Red Dot, it is simply a pawn trying to stay alive in this fight between giants.

I will agree that China has been kind enough to understand the current hole that history has dug for SG and not push for a "with us or against us" rubbish that we get from the US. Were that the world returns to not too long ago where the US either isn't interested in SG or that there is true dual/multi-polarity, you will likely see Singapore be more like the SG of LKY's tenure in terms of where we stand.

I have highlighted the relevant section already:

No one has a good answer, but we should not allow a move away from the status quo that is done in a non-peaceful manner, and that would include deterring invasion, deterring any aggressive moves, but it would also include deterring unilateral moves toward independence.

”We“ should not allow… (we should) deter invasion

I don‘t see any ambiguity of Singapore’s intention regarding the Taiwan issue. Singapore will join the US to “deter” China from restarting the civil war which your PM called “invasion”.

 

[gelgoog]

In other words Singapore would likely help the US block the Mallaca Strait to Chinese shipping.

 

[lcloo]

In other words Singapore would likely help the US block the Mallaca Strait to Chinese shipping.

No going to happen. Instead of looking at the effect of such blokade on China's trades, we shall look at the importance of Malacca Straits and South China sea to Singapore.

Singapore 's import and exports and transhipment trades go through Malacca Straits and South China sea, is in fact closedly related to China's trade. Moreover these import and export and transhipment was reported at 322% (Three Hundred and Twenty Two %) of Sigapore's GDP in 2024. I don't know if there is any other country that depend on so much of a straits shipping lane on their GDP other than Singapore.

Blocking China's shipping in Malacca straits will kill practically every industry sectors in Singapore, from manufacturing, shipping, banking, insurance, shipyard repairs and mantenance etc. It is a suicide act of stupidity.

Morever, the control of Malacca Straits is jointly undertaken by binding agreement, by 3 countries, Singapore, Malaysia and Indonesia. Singapore's unilateral action, if taken, will invite excuses fro Malaysia and Indonesia to attack the island nation. And China will joint these two countries.

It is not a lost-lost situation, it is an extinction for Singapore, they will be erased from the map as a nation. Singapore is a small country of 719 Sq KM, or 1/47 the size of Hainan island, they have no area to fall back during an attack.

So, no, it is not going to happen.

 

[DeltaGreen]

In my opinion, China places excessively high demands on neutral countries while underestimating its own strength. In the past, China’s responses to various provocations and acts of bullying have been rather weak. It is only since this year that China has begun to regard the West and the United States as competitors.

If the strongest anti-Western power itself maintains neutrality toward the West, then it should not criticize some relatively weaker countries for adopting a somewhat pro-American stance.

For the sake of its own interests and the global good—including the well-being of ordinary people in the West—China should have the courage to take responsibility and protect its own interests. Only by doing so will more people dare to safeguard their own interests instead of allowing themselves to be bullied by the West.

 

[CMP]

In my opinion, China places excessively high demands on neutral countries while underestimating its own strength. In the past, China’s responses to various provocations and acts of bullying have been rather weak. It is only since this year that China has begun to regard the West and the United States as competitors.

If the strongest anti-Western power itself maintains neutrality toward the West, then it should not criticize some relatively weaker countries for adopting a somewhat pro-American stance.

For the sake of its own interests and the global good—including the well-being of ordinary people in the West—China should have the courage to take responsibility and protect its own interests. Only by doing so will more people dare to safeguard their own interests instead of allowing themselves to be bullied by the West.

Internally, China was too compromised and hence unable to do more. Think of all the idiots with mistresses, second wives, first wives, kids, business ventures, assets in the West, etc. It took the US leading hard on aggression to help consolidate the consensus in China and permit the weeding out of compromised leaders. I think going after Huawei laid the groundwork and kidnapping Meng Wangzhou really finalized it.

 

[vincent]

In other words Singapore would likely help the US block the Mallaca Strait to Chinese shipping.

Singapore’s military value came from its location. If US military can station fighters, bombers, AWACs, tankers and destroyers in Singapore, its ability to strike Chinese assets in SCS and southern China will be greatly enhanced. Fighters and tankers can provide escorts and refuelling to bombers that fly out of Australia and Guam. Destroyers can replenish food, water and munitions at a much closer location to SCS. Singapore’s own fighters can provide powerful additional protection to American assets stationed there.

 

[CMP]

Singapore’s military value came from its location. If US military can station fighters, bombers, AWACs, tankers and destroyers in Singapore, its ability to strike Chinese assets in SCS and southern China will be greatly enhanced. Fighters and tankers can provide escorts and refuelling to bombers that fly out of Australia and Guam. Destroyers can replenish food, water and munitions at a much closer location to SCS. Singapore’s own fighters can provide powerful additional protection to American assets stationed there.

Singapore would just be a second Guam. Compare their distance from China, geography, geology, etc. Not a game changer unless you think China would be deterred by the risk of causing civilian casualties. Or if you were to think 1 Guam is not a big problem but 2 Guams is an order of magnitude more problematic, though clearly not the case.

 

[SanWenYu]

In my opinion, China places excessively high demands on neutral countries while underestimating its own strength. In the past, China’s responses to various provocations and acts of bullying have been rather weak. It is only since this year that China has begun to regard the West and the United States as competitors.

If the strongest anti-Western power itself maintains neutrality toward the West, then it should not criticize some relatively weaker countries for adopting a somewhat pro-American stance.

For the sake of its own interests and the global good—including the well-being of ordinary people in the West—China should have the courage to take responsibility and protect its own interests. Only by doing so will more people dare to safeguard their own interests instead of allowing themselves to be bullied by the West.

Having only the courage won't be enough. China did not have the capacity to push back the bullying without inflicting major self harm.

In 1947 when KMT forces were on full scale offence invading Yan'an, Mao did not choose to push back on every inch of land being attacked. He said "存地失人，人地皆失，存人失地，人地皆存" to convince his comrades. And every Chinese knows the story of 卧薪尝胆.

What China wants from the global south has always been no more than "You may stay out of the struggle for your own good but do not try to stab me in the back." That's a totally reasonable demand.