South China Sea Strategies for other nations (Not China)

A

AndrewS

Brigadier
Registered Member
yungho said:
Japan will for sure join because it's an existentialist question for present day Japan (at least politically). SK will join due to US control of the CFC.

Philippines and India is hard to predict. I think the Philippines aids in minor ways - with the US being unsatisfied with their involvement. India will only join if China starts to show weakness. A second front in the west is a death sentence for any Chinese military conflict and America and India recognizes that. India won't dare start something if China looks strong, but if China looks weak they will move swiftly into war. Then again Pakistan might get involved too, which may cause India to hesitate.

Singapore and Indonesia won't join at all. Singapore will sit on the sidelines until a winner becomes clear. Indonesia will take this opportunity to gain influence by remaining neutral.

Imo it will be China vs USA/Japan/SK/Australia/UK. India and Philippines dipping their toes in to help. Everyone else stays neutral.
Click to expand...

If SK has declared war on China, there is no way that NK will be neutral.

And if South Korea is neutral and China is losing, NK will not be neutral either.

---

The reason is that NK is economically dependent on China, which accounts for 90% of NK trade. NK face the prospect of economic collapse and being next on the list of regime change. NK can't afford to have China lose.

And in a land war on the Korean Peninsula being CN/NK versus SK/US, it looks like Ukraine but with some important differences that favour China, eg.

1. SK is essentially an island which will likely be blockaded

2. Seoul accounts for half the SK population and is on the East Coast opposite, close by China

2. a land war favours the Chinese Military over an air-sea war

3. Equipment-wise, China is likely to really outproduce the opposition in terms of ground equipment and munitions
 
G

generalmeng

New Member
Registered Member
AndrewS said:
If SK has declared war on China, there is no way that NK will be neutral.

And if South Korea is neutral and China is losing, NK will not be neutral either.

---

The reason is that NK is economically dependent on China, which accounts for 90% of NK trade. NK face the prospect of economic collapse and being next on the list of regime change. NK can't afford to have China lose.

And in a land war on the Korean Peninsula being CN/NK versus SK/US, it looks like Ukraine but with some important differences that favour China, eg.

1. SK is essentially an island which will likely be blockaded

2. Seoul accounts for half the SK population and is on the East Coast opposite, close by China

2. a land war favours the Chinese Military over an air-sea war

3. Equipment-wise, China is likely to really outproduce the opposition in terms of ground equipment and munitions
Click to expand...
I don't think India have the ability to mobilize their country for war. The last time India and China had a small skirmish, China moved 2-3 artillery divisions into Tibet as a show of force. The total number of large caliber artillery China deployed rapidly into Tibet, is equal to the total number of large caliber in the whole Indian military.

China is already producing more than USA and India combined.
 
L

LuzinskiJ

New Member
Registered Member
In order for either SK or JPN to have leverage in SCS, they must have basing rights somewhere in that area, without that neither are credible threats. So how much talk is there for Japan or SK to base their ships in the Philippines ? Other than the the Philippines,
In the case of Japan, she will need to send naval or air assets in their southernmost islands (off of east coast of Taiwan), And while it does have have a coast guard base there, not sure if it alone can sustain any type of conflict. I am not sure what SK can do in a SCS arms conflict.
So I think the only belligerents in a SCS conflict will be China, USA and the Philippines. And I don't think none of those there are in any mood to start a arms conflict there. And unless China loses, those three will remain the sole parties to that fight. And if China does look like it is losing, or it begins to drag out, in my view, then the the conflict will not be limited to SCS.
 
MwRYum

MwRYum

Major
LuzinskiJ said:
In order for either SK or JPN to have leverage in SCS, they must have basing rights somewhere in that area, without that neither are credible threats. So how much talk is there for Japan or SK to base their ships in the Philippines ? Other than the the Philippines,
In the case of Japan, she will need to send naval or air assets in their southernmost islands (off of east coast of Taiwan), And while it does have have a coast guard base there, not sure if it alone can sustain any type of conflict. I am not sure what SK can do in a SCS arms conflict.
So I think the only belligerents in a SCS conflict will be China, USA and the Philippines. And I don't think none of those there are in any mood to start a arms conflict there. And unless China loses, those three will remain the sole parties to that fight. And if China does look like it is losing, or it begins to drag out, in my view, then the the conflict will not be limited to SCS.
Click to expand...
If we go by S.Korean rhetoric online, it'd be launching cruise missiles from S.Korea towards targets in China.

Anything that has 1000km range can reach Beijing, and they've 3000km range types in service. Of course that's purely "reading the spec sheet" talk.

If anything, S,Koreans, think of themselves as the center of universe, haven't learned their place in this world yet.
 
Sinnavuuty

Sinnavuuty

Senior Member
Registered Member
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
The United States is in the final stages of approving nearly $2 billion in security aid for the Indo-Pacific, part of a broader effort to help countries defend themselves against a China.

The package includes US$1.2 billion for Taipei, US$500 million for Manila and around US$300 million to be distributed among other partners, such as Vietnam, parts of South Asia and Pacific island nations. The numbers are not yet definitive, as the administration is still reporting to Congress and lawmakers may provide information. But the intention is to spend almost all of the $2 billion in Foreign Military Financing (or U.S.-funded security assistance) approved for the region this April, a senior State Department official said.
 
C

CMP

Senior Member
Registered Member
MwRYum said:
If we go by S.Korean rhetoric online, it'd be launching cruise missiles from S.Korea towards targets in China.

Anything that has 1000km range can reach Beijing, and they've 3000km range types in service. Of course that's purely "reading the spec sheet" talk.

If anything, S,Koreans, think of themselves as the center of universe, haven't learned their place in this world yet.
Click to expand...
South Korea lacks strategic depth and has tiny (by China standards) missile stockpiles. If they want to trade missile attacks, Seoul will be supersaturated very quickly.
 
coolgod

coolgod

Major
Registered Member
bebops said:
I know this is from reddit but I think China can manufacture 1000 cruise missile/day if they unlock their full potential. That number might not be 1000, but it could be 250 or 500. Still very deadly. Every country in the first island chain will fold very fast.

https://www.reddit.com/r/IndianDefense/comments/1buj1vw
Click to expand...
That post gave me cancer. I couldn't tell what's sarcasm or not. Please don't link to reddit in the future.
How does any of this relate to the SCS strategies of other countries?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top