China's SCS Strategy Thread

[confusion]

The Philippines coast guard opened fire on an unarmed Taiwanese fishing boat, killing its captain. There is a strong likelihood they mistaken it for a Chinese fishing boat.

I disagree with the part about mistaking the boat for a Chinese fishing vessel. The Philippines acted in an overtly bellicose manner precisely because it was dealing with Taiwan and not China. The incident occurred in a disputed EEZ region between Taiwan and the Philippines (outside of the disputed SCS region).

Unlike its dealings with China, the Philippines has often pursued an active, aggressive policy against Taiwan in the water in trying to enforce its sovereignty claims here, in combination with a diplomatic policy of denying Taiwanese sovereignty rights ("repatriating" detained Taiwanese fishermen to China, refusing to negotiate in good faith over disputed fishing rights - compare this to Japan). Essentially, the Philippines is bullying Taiwan both in the water and diplomatically because it knows it can get away with it.

The Philippines can get away with this because 1. it's taking advantage of Taiwan's uncertain international space 2. these incidents will never garner significant attention outside of Taiwan and 3. Taiwan is always low-key in dealing with these sorts of disputes in an effort to avoid upsetting the US, who has no interest in seeing disputes escalate between two of its allies.

Of course, it's certainly highly duplicitous for the Philippines to bully Taiwan on the one hand, and then turn around and claim victimhood vis-a-vis China when the situation suits itself. I'm pretty certain that the Philippines is the only disputant in the SCS that has fatally shot fishermen from other disputant countries using overwhelming, gratuitous force. I can only imagine the international uproar it would cause if China had used machine gun fire to kill Filipino fishermen.

The Philippines strategy is to play the victim to garner sympathy from an western audience only given half the picture to try and influence mainly American public opinion to support Obama's pivot to Asia and also to try and influence their arbitration case against China at the UN.

 

[nfgc]

What utter baseless flamebait nonsense.

I disagree with you plawolf, this is not flamebait. There is a difference.

I note that pro-China posters may attack and insult other posters, yet I may not. How...fair. But this forum is not pro-China. Got it. Understood.

The Philippines, and especially Vietnam, has occupied additional islands and had been building up and fortifying the islands and features they do hold as fast as they could for years and decades. China has protested peacefully about that, but the protests were ignored or brushed aside. Little wonder China has lost patience and decided to just do what they see as necessary to safeguard their interests in the area.

How does occupying unclaimed islands provoke someone?
If China can take what it wants, then it won't matter who is there. They just move in and take it by force. Easy...right? No need to be concerned, just take what they want when they want it. So then it won't matter who or what is there as they can do it at will.

Thus anyone else being there is irrelevant.
Thus it cannot be a provaction.

The Philippines Navy, not coast guard, staged a stand-off in Scarborough Shoal, where their biggest and most powerful warship cornered some Chinese fishing boats in the Shoal, yet did nothing more after boarding them other than wait for Chinese coast guard ships to turn up in order to create a stand-off.

The PI Navy is tiny with 3 frigates and 11 corvettes. If China thinks that a threat, they need to readjust their thinking. I can only imagine what they think of the Vietnamese or USNavy.

A 20kg person confronts a 100kg person. Normally, the larger person interprets this as a non-threat and ignores the smaller person.

.

Prominent Philippines politicians and leaders have made entire songs and dance events out of highly controversial visits to disputed islands and made highly provocative statements to anyone who would listen..

Only provactive and controversial to the interests of Mainland China. Last I checked, 18% of humanity.

The Philippines coast guard opened fire on an unarmed Taiwanese fishing boat, killing its captain. There is a strong likelihood they mistaken it for a Chinese fishing boat.

...and the PLAN mowed down dozens of Vietnamese, mistaking them for USA or PI fishing boats I must assume?

.

The Philippines might be puny compared to China, but that is precisely why they have been deliberately perusing a strategy of provocation to try and get China to react, knowing their friends and sympathisers (maybe advisors?) in the west would make sure the western press only reported China's reaction and either downplayed or outright omitted mentioning the preceding act by the Philippines which directly caused the Chinese reaction..

You are stating that Mainland China has a policy of 'Mom! He made me!".

This is an unsuitable policy for nations.

Do you know what grown men do when a small child hits them? They laugh and walk away.

The Philippines strategy is to play the victim to garner sympathy from an western audience only given half the picture to try and influence mainly American public opinion to support Obama's pivot to Asia and also to try and influence their arbitration case against China at the UN.

The Philippines strategy is to play the victim to garner sympathy from an western audience

By 'Western' you mean 'Non-Chinese', I assume. Yes? Because last time I checked neither Vietnam nor the Philippines nor Indonesia were considered part of 'The West'.

So far the policy of the PRC has alienated everyone in the region except for Laos and Cambodia, two nations that receive 90+% of their FDI from China.

If their goal is to alienate even more nations than the USA, then they are succeeding. I do not see how this policy is efficacious, since by your own admission they are going to take what they want anyhow.

China doesn't need to play any victim...

China stated in a press conference that it was the victim. Shall I post that in Putonghua and English as proof?

because it has the raw power take whatever it wants in the South China Sea, any time it wants.

That attitude will win fewer friends than even the USA has.

Well, if the only tools you ever use to try to get China to do anything are threats and abuse, what do you expect?

The world expects mature, adult like behaviour. Playing the victim when one can take whatever one wants at any time, is not an admirable stance.

 

[Blackstone]

Either a nation goes along with what China says and does, or China plays the victim, claims provocation, and then creates another dozen war films for CCTV. Claiming that the other SCS nations provoked China is aburd for China to state. The PI has almost no navy (much of it literally 75 years old rusting hulls), and is not a threat in any way to a nation 40x larger in gdp. Vietnam's is 1/5th the size, and so on. Yet China repeatedly uses language of provocation, aggressor, and so on.

There is no way to get China to do anything. Either one agrees to China's terms, or one is painted as the aggressor.

Regardless, China is going to do what it wants to do and nothing, no one, no nation or collection of nations, is going to stop them.

Thus the strategy for everyone else is either agree to everything China does, or China reacts to the 'provocation' of the other nation not being an obsequious toady.

In other words, China pursues its national interests with tools at its disposal, just like every other nation on Earth.

 

[vesicles]

The PI Navy is tiny with 3 frigates and 11 corvettes. If China thinks that a threat, they need to readjust their thinking. I can only imagine what they think of the Vietnamese or USNavy.

A 20kg person confronts a 100kg person. Normally, the larger person interprets this as a non-threat and ignores the smaller person.

It seems that the center of your argument is that it cannot be considered as aggression/provocation if it is a smaller entity that initiates the conflict. That is plain wrong. It does not stand in the court of law. In WWII, Japan attacked and invaded China. Japan is much much smaller than China. Does that mean China should ignore Japan? The size does not matter. The fact is that everyone is doing the exact same things in the SCS, but China is the only getting the blame. Again, size should not matter when considering right or wrong.

Using your example, a 20kg person confronts a 100kg person. If it was the 20kg guy who initiates the confrontation, it would be his fault. And he should be judged accordingly. SIZE DOES NOT MATTER in the court of law. The larger person should NOT interpret this as a non-threat and should NOT ignore the smaller person. This is because the larger person has the same rights to protect himself as the small guy. Just because someone has a different size, it does not mean that law should be different. Just remember that not all bullies are big guys. Just because you are small, it does not give you the right to bully others. Every grade school in the States has zero-tolerance policy for bullies, big or small.

Like Blackstone said, China is simply playing the same international politics game as everyone else. This is to say that everyone is trying to maximize their own interests.

 

[no_name]

A 20kg person confronts a 100kg person. Normally, the larger person interprets this as a non-threat and ignores the smaller person.

No. In the wild, the 20kg opponent knows to stay out of the way of a 100kg one, those that don't did not survive.

So it is Philippines that is taking advantage of international goodwill and laws, which may be why China finally decides to do things its way.

Quantity has a quality all its own
The mighty has certain rights for being mighty. (This may sound 'unfair' but that's the raw truth)

 

[joshuatree]

How does occupying unclaimed islands provoke someone?

Except they are claimed. You can disagree to the validity of the claim but it doesn't make occupying an unoccupied yet claimed island as a benign action.

The PI Navy is tiny with 3 frigates and 11 corvettes.....Playing the victim when one can take whatever one wants at any time, is not an admirable stance.

You've just described the Philippine's strategy. "We're small, we'll go occupy what we want, if someone stops us, we're the victim because we're small."

...and the PLAN mowed down dozens of Vietnamese, mistaking them for USA or PI fishing boats I must assume?

Yeah flamebait, if the Vietnamese is going to send in their military to actively engage, whether they choose to send troops in with or without guns, it's a military engagement. It comes with all the rewards, responsibilities, and risks associated with a military operation. Playing the victim card on this is as you say, not an admirable stance. Even a bit of a tantrum.

 

[plawolf]

I disagree with you plawolf, this is not flamebait. There is a difference.

I note that pro-China posters may attack and insult other posters, yet I may not. How...fair. But this forum is not pro-China. Got it. Understood.

It is flamebait because it is totally unsubstantiated nonsense, just like the above.

People are not "attacking" or "insulting" you, they are questioning your very questionable comments. Massive difference.

Trying to set up a strawman argument about this forum being "pro-China" and taking a condescending tone will get you precisely nowhere here amongst rational adults.

How does occupying unclaimed islands provoke someone?

Because others believe said islands belong to them?

If your neighbour moved his fence to include part of your backyard, would that not provoke you?

If China can take what it wants, then it won't matter who is there. They just move in and take it by force. Easy...right? No need to be concerned, just take what they want when they want it. So then it won't matter who or what is there as they can do it at will.

Thus anyone else being there is irrelevant.
Thus it cannot be a provaction.

What kind on nonsense argument is that supposed to be? I honestly cannot even being to understand how you think that makes any sense.

The PI Navy is tiny with 3 frigates and 11 corvettes. If China thinks that a threat, they need to readjust their thinking. I can only imagine what they think of the Vietnamese or USNavy.

When did I say China thinks the Philippines navy is a threat? Stop it with the strawman arguments already.

Besides, it wasn't the Chinese navy the Philippines navy was trying to stage a stand-off with, but rather unarmed Chinese civilian monitoring ships.

As puny as the Philippines navy is, there biggest and best warship still trumps an unarmed civilian ship easily.

A 20kg person confronts a 100kg person. Normally, the larger person interprets this as a non-threat and ignores the smaller person.

.Another strawman.

This isn't, and has never been an issue of one country confronting another for the sake of it or level of threat, but rather asset occupation.

What's the 100kg guy supposed to do when the 20kg guy comes and takes some of his property and refused to give it back?

Take it back by force and the little guy will cry his head off even if the big guy barely touched him and make the big guy seem like a bully. But the property is precious, so the big guy doesn't want to just let the little guy have it. If the big guy does that, odds are the little guy will see something else the big guy has that he likes the looks of and do it all over again.

Only provactive and controversial to the interests of Mainland China. Last I checked, 18% of humanity.

Just...what?!

...and the PLAN mowed down dozens of Vietnamese, mistaking them for USA or PI fishing boats I must assume?

Yet more blatant lying. :rolleyese:

The Vietnamese were stupid enough to start that firefight. The Chinese merely finished it.

You are stating that Mainland China has a policy of 'Mom! He made me!".

This is an unsuitable policy for nations.

Yet more strawman arguments and shameless distortions of facts.

Do you know what grown men do when a small child hits them? They laugh and walk away.

That seems terrible insulting to the Philippines and Vietnam.

The "logic" behind it is just pure nonsense.

There is no sliding scale of level of responsibility based on how big or small someone is. A big man does not have more legal obligations or liability compared to a smaller man.

Yes, you give spoilt brats a little bit more leeway, but the Philippines and Vietnam are not spoilt, immature brats of a country are they?

They are full fledge members of the international community, to suggest anything else is, as I already stated, is highly insulting to those countries and peoples.

If their goal is to alienate even more nations than the USA, then they are succeeding. I do not see how this policy is efficacious, since by your own admission they are going to take what they want anyhow.

Yet another strawman. Are you going for some sort of a record?

Please, show me where I said China is going to take what they want.

China stated in a press conference that it was the victim. Shall I post that in Putonghua and English as proof?

If someone steals from you, what are you except the victim of a crime?

That attitude will win fewer friends than even the USA has.

You seem to have a hard time understanding the difference between having the ability to do something and actually having done it.

The world expects mature, adult like behaviour. Playing the victim when one can take whatever one wants at any time, is not an admirable stance.

Well said! Precisely my point regarding the behaviour of Vietnam and he Philippines.

 

[nfgc]

To Everyone: I understand that the prevailing assumption on this forum is that the SCS has
always belonged to, or currently belongs to, China, and all follows from that. I reject this assumption and thus this exchange:

It is flamebait because it is totally unsubstantiated nonsense, just like the above.

Claiming something is nonsense, and providing no proof, is the definition of bias in favour of one side.

Trying to set up a strawman argument about this forum being "pro-China"

You misunderstand. Since *you* get to engage in behaviours that I have been rebuked for by the mod team, it is logical to conclude that there is a bias in favour of posters such as yourself.

Your posts are thinly reworded Chinese foreign policy, including the tell-tale English verbiage common to residents of Mainland China that are extremely nationalistic.

Yes, I read the announcements and watch the press conferences. Yes,
I correlate the wording used in them to the wording posted on this forum. Yes, I lived in China.
Yes, I spoke with Chinese about such topics.

Would you like me to post the similar verbiage? I would be more that willing to, but it would bog down any thread with a word-by-word comparison.

Having an Eisenhorn avatar from Warhammer 40k, and naming yourself 'plawolf' - that does not exactly reveal a peaceful or neutral stance with regards to China.

Thus it is logical to conclude a high probability of bias on your part.

If your neighbour moved his fence to include part of your backyard, would that not provoke you?

You, and others here all, operate from one massive flawed assumption: That the SCS is China's, and that everyone else is trespassing, theft, etc.

I reject that assumption, and thus your argument is void.

1) If you want to use historical precedent, the Vietnamese have been fishing in those waters since before the Sheng Dynasty, and the Vietnamese Neolithic societies predate those in China by a full 15,000 years when you compare the Banpo to the multiple known Viet sites.

2) If you want to use the UNCLOS precedent (and you won't), multiple nations have equal claims.

3) If you want to use the defacto sovereignty of reclamation and occupation argument, others have equal claims.

4) If you want to use the back yard argument, you neglected to mention you think your backyard extends 1,700 kms from your fenceline. Over several neighbour's properties.

When did I say China thinks the Philippines navy is a threat?

You alluded to it before and then below you wrote...

Besides, it wasn't the Chinese navy the Philippines navy was trying to stage a stand-off with, but rather unarmed Chinese civilian monitoring ships.

As puny as the Philippines navy is, there biggest and best warship still trumps an unarmed civilian ship easily.

Thus you conclude China interpreted this as a threat.

Q.E.D.

Take it back by force and the little guy will cry his head off even if the big guy barely touched him and make the big guy seem like a bully. But the property is precious, so the big guy doesn't want to just let the little guy have it. If the big guy does that, odds are the little guy will see something else the big guy has that he likes the looks of and do it all over again.

China is always the victim. Always. This concept is very common, I heard it often from people I spoke with in China when geo-political discussions arose.

This was mentioned verbatim by Foreign Minister Wang Yi when he said on Saturday, June 27, 2015. "...China actually has been the biggest victim in the South China Sea issue..."

Thus it is not something I have made up. It is quite real.

The Vietnamese were stupid enough to start that firefight. The Chinese merely finished it.

Never do you state that anything China does is unjustified. No nation is that perfect. None.

Yet more strawman arguments and shameless distortions of facts.

Plawolf, this is a debate. You do not get to just declare my post(s) a distortion of facts without providing proof. If you do not provide proof, then all you are doing is engaging in ad hominem. Are you so special, is your post count so high, that you are above criticism? Are your
ideas accepted as revealed truth on this forum? Is no one allowed to disagree with you? It certainly seems that way. You appear to get to state anything, and I am supposed to just agree with you.

If someone steals from you, what are you except the victim of a crime?

Since I reject your assumption that the SCS was/is Chinas - no crime was committed.

But if one was, you call the authorities and have them enforce the law. Of course, you would have to admit the law is valid, and the Chinese do not.

This all matters because:
China is alienating everyone in the region, all of ASEAN, even their Lao and Cambodian client-states, are asking the Chinese to tone it down and stop pushing everyone away. Yet China seems not only willing, but anticipating, unilateral action regardless of what any nation thinks.

Even the USA is able to gather a few supporters to further their misguided campaigns, and the USA have alienated most over the past 40 years.Yet China seems willing to alienate even more nations and go it 100% alone, all within one decade.

This is a very unwise course of action to take.

It isn't 'Western media bias' when Vietnam, Malaysia and Indonesia are getting worried about China's activities, as expressed in their own media.

Those nations are *not* Western in any sense of the word.

 

[jobjed]

You, and others here all, operate from one massive flawed assumption: That the SCS is China's, and that everyone else is trespassing, theft, etc.

Agree to disagree, then.

1) If you want to use historical precedent, the Vietnamese have been fishing in those waters since before the Sheng Dynasty, and the Vietnamese Neolithic societies predate those in China by a full 15,000 years when you compare the Banpo to the multiple known Viet sites.

Historical precedence only works if a modern claimant inherits a claim from forebears e.g. Zionists. Modern Vietnamese has no relation to Neolithic Vietnam save for both having lived on the same land.
What's the Sheng Dynasty?

2) If you want to use the UNCLOS precedent (and you won't), multiple nations have equal claims.

Clarify.

3) If you want to use the defacto sovereignty of reclamation and occupation argument, others have equal claims.

China does not claim SCS islands using the "we poured sand on it, therefore it's ours" argument. Their claims are founded on court records from Imperial Dynasties.

4) If you want to use the back yard argument, you neglected to mention you think your backyard extends 1,700 kms from your fenceline. Over several neighbour's properties.

There's nothing illegal with having a larger house than your neighbours. The land comprising the backyard do not belong to the neighbours'.

Thus you conclude China interpreted this as a threat.

Q.E.D.

Threat to Chinese fishermen's lives, not Chinese national security. Filipinos wish they can pose a threat to Chinese national security.

China is always the victim. Always. This concept is very common, I heard it often from people I spoke with in China when geo-political discussions arose.

This was mentioned verbatim by Foreign Minister Wang Yi when he said on Saturday, June 27, 2015. "...China actually has been the biggest victim in the South China Sea issue..."

In every claimant's view, they're all victims of belligerence. Don't single China out for having this viewpoint.

Never do you state that anything China does is unjustified. No nation is that perfect. None.

If you think it's unjustified, justify your viewpoint.

Plawolf, this is a debate. You do not get to just declare my post(s) a distortion of facts without providing proof. If you do not provide proof, then all you are doing is engaging in ad hominem. Are you so special, is your post count so high, that you are above criticism? Are your
ideas accepted as revealed truth on this forum? Is no one allowed to disagree with you? It certainly seems that way. You appear to get to state anything, and I am supposed to just agree with you.

Personal attacks are boring. Please stop.

Since I reject your assumption that the SCS was/is Chinas - no crime was committed.

But if one was, you call the authorities and have them enforce the law. Of course, you would have to admit the law is valid, and the Chinese do not.

There is no world police. No authority to call upon to settle territorial disputes. International law does not cover the settling of territorial disputes.

This all matters because:
China is alienating everyone in the region, all of ASEAN, even their Lao and Cambodian client-states, are asking the Chinese to tone it down and stop pushing everyone away. Yet China seems not only willing, but anticipating, unilateral action regardless of what any nation thinks.

Even the USA is able to gather a few supporters to further their misguided campaigns, and the USA have alienated most over the past 40 years.Yet China seems willing to alienate even more nations and go it 100% alone, all within one decade.

This is a very unwise course of action to take.

Your insight on geopolitics is greatly appreciated.

It isn't 'Western media bias' when Vietnam, Malaysia and Indonesia are getting worried about China's activities, as expressed in their own media.

Those nations are *not* Western in any sense of the word.

If push comes to shove, those countries have militaries that can put up a fight with each other but not with China. It's not so much an expression of solidarity for other claimants that drive these countries to express 'concern', it's the fact that they're helpless against only one claimant; China.

 

[Jeff Head]

nfgc, you need to understand that SD Forum does not take a positions as a forum on this.

SD Forum does not as you say, have or take the , "assumption on this forum is that the SCS has always belonged to, or currently belongs to, China."

I am a Super Mod here. I do not personally take the position that you state in the least.

But SD Forum is open to the views and comments of individuals of all stripes. Just keep the discourse civil, and back up you viewpoints wherever possible with facts...or state that they are your own personal beliefs.

At the same time, we are NOT a political or ideological forum...so keep away from that.

READ THE FORUM RULES and then follow them.

As long as you, or other members here, keep the dialog within the rules, you can discuss these issues as you have done. Try and civilly resolve differences...or agree to disagree. If you have a severe issue with another member, either:

1) Place that member on your ignore list, or;
2) Contact the Forum Moderation Team about the incident.

It has been our experiences that when two or more members get out of hand, if they continue out of bounds, or against the rules arguments, that they all end up being warned, suspended, and some times banned.

Please keep all of this in mind.

But please do not ascribe to SD Forum whatever views you may ascribe to some members of the forum.

DO NOT RESPOND TIO THIS MODERATION