It seems the domestic political situation in China would force them to take action against any blockade of their artificial islands in the South China Sea. China’s advanced ballistic missile capability is how they would likely respond. Before any blockade is called for I hope people fully understand the risks:
Rex Tillerson
Rex Tillerson, the former Exxon chief, didn’t get where he is by being nice to China. When Beijing tried to force his company to abandon a gas exploration project in the waters off Vietnam in 2008, ExxonMobil showed it the finger. BP, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, and several others caved to Chinese pressure. ExxonMobil is still there, drilling on a Vietnamese license in waters also claimed by China.
Is Tillerson about to do the same on behalf of the United States? On Wednesday, the secretary of state-designate seemed ready to give China the finger again. He called on the incoming Trump administration to deny China access to the seven artificial island bases it has built in the southern part of the South China Sea.
In response to a question about whether he would support a more aggressive posture in the South China Sea, he told his Senate confirmation hearing, “We’re going to have to send China a clear signal that, first, the island-building stops and, second, your access to those islands also is not going to be allowed.” The jaws of the Asia policy-watching community hit the floor. [Foreign Policy]
You can read the rest at the link, but the author thinks Tillerson may have misspoke and meant blockading any action by the Chinese to build a base on the Scarborough Shoal which would be less dangerous, but still quite a risky strategy to implement if China is committed to forcing the issue. It seems it would be a tough sell to the American people to risk war with China over the Scarborough Shoal.
The other wild card in all of this is what if President Duerte in the Philippines cuts a deal with China to let them build on the shoal which is claimed by the Philippines?
This looks like something the Chinese had planned as a provocation since they shadowed the US ship waited for the drones to emerge from the water and then snatched one. They also made sure to snatch a drone that did not have sensitive US military technology which could have really increased the scale of a possible US response to this action:
This file picture shows the Chinese Navy frigate Daqing 576 approaching the waterfront in San Diego, Calif., with a U.S. aircraft carrier on the North Island base in the background in December. The Three People’s Liberation Army (Navy) ships were visiting San Diego as part of a routine port visit. [USA Today]
China “unlawfully” seized an unmanned US naval probe in international waters in the South China Sea, the Pentagon said Friday, a move sure to heighten tensions around Beijing’s military presence in the disputed area.
The underwater vehicle was taken around 50 nautical miles (90 kilometers) northwest off Subic Bay in the Philippines late Thursday in a non-violent incident, said Captain Jeff Davis, a Pentagon spokesman.
The event unfolded as the civilian-crewed USNS Bowditch was retrieving a pair of “naval gliders” that routinely collect information on water temperatures, salinity and sea clarity.
A Chinese Dalang-III class submarine rescue ship then stopped within 500 yards (meters) of the Bowditch and snatched one of the probes. The Americans safely hoisted the other one back onto their ship.
Davis said he could not recall another time when something like this has happened, and the Pentagon issued a statement calling on Beijing to “immediately” return the probe that it had “unlawfully seized.”
The US personnel “were asking over bridge-to-bridge radio to please leave it there,” Davis said.
Other than a brief acknowledgment that it had received the message, the Chinese ship did not respond.
“The only thing they said after they were sailing off into the distance was: ‘We are returning to normal operations,'” Davis said.
Washington has issued a formal request through diplomatic channels to ask for the probe back.
“It is ours. It is clearly marked as ours. We would like it back, and we would like this not to happen again,” Davis said.
Pentagon spokesman Peter Cook said China had acted unlawfully.
“The UUV (unmanned underwater vehicle) is a sovereign immune vessel of the United States. We call upon China to return our UUV immediately, and to comply with all of its obligations under international law,” Cook said in a statement. [AFP]
Here is what they stole:
Davis said the seized vessel is off-the-shelf technology that is commercially available for about $150,000. Data it gathers are unclassified and can be used to help submarines navigate and determine sonar ranges in murky waters.
You can read the rest at the link, but here is what Donald Trump had to say:
China steals United States Navy research drone in international waters – rips it out of water and takes it to China in unprecedented act.
Beijing hit back in the diplomatic spat over its seizure of a US Navy drone in the South China Sea after Donald Trump claimed in a message on Twitter that China has stolen the device.
Chinese officials had earlier indicated there would be a “smooth” resolution of the diplomatic incident, but after the President-elect’s tweet, they accused Washington of “hyping up” the issue. [UK Independent]
Stealing seems pretty accurate to me, did the Chinese want him to say they are borrowing the drone?
This is pretty significant because with the Japanese participating in training patrols in the South China Sea it may encourage other countries to do so as well which would only further erode Beijing’s claims to the South China Sea:
China is “disappointed to the point of despair” with Japan’s conduct in the South China Sea, it said Monday, after Tokyo announced it may set up training patrols with the US in the contested region.
China asserts sovereignty over almost all of the strategically vital waters in the face of rival claims from its Southeast Asian neighbours, and has rapidly turned reefs in the area into artificial islands capable of hosting military planes.
In a speech last week Japanese defence minister Tomomi Inada called China’s actions a “deliberate attempt to unilaterally change the status quo, achieve a fait accompli, and undermine the prevailing norms”, according to a transcript released by Washington-based think tank the Center for Strategic and International Studies.
Inada said Japan would increase its engagement in the South China Sea through joint training cruises with the US Navy, exercises with regional navies and capacity-building assistance to coastal nations. [AFP]
You can read more at the link, but it will be interesting to see what the ROK will do if more countries come forward to conduct these training patrols in the SCS.
It sounds like Duterte may be trying to bring his country more closely into the orbits of Russia and China in a bid to keep control over their contested South China Sea islands:
Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte said Tuesday he won’t allow government forces to conduct joint patrols of disputed waters near the South China Sea with foreign powers, apparently scrapping a deal his predecessor reached with the U.S. military earlier this year.
Duterte also said he was considering acquiring defense equipment from Russia and China. The Philippines has traditionally leaned on the U.S., its longtime treaty ally, and other Western allies for its security needs.
The remarks were the latest from a Philippine president who has had an uneasy relationship with the U.S. but also has tried to mend relations with China strained over South China Sea disputes.
Duterte said he wanted only Philippine territorial waters, up to 12 nautical miles offshore, to be patrolled by Filipino forces, but not other offshore areas that are contested. He added he opposes Filipino forces accompanying foreign powers like the U.S. and China in joint patrols which could entangle the Philippines in hostilities. [Associated Press]
Fortunately the article that sparked the controversy was just a Chinese style Onion click bait site which I am not going to provide a link to. However, it shows the ridiculousness of China’s recent territorial claims that people were actually taking it seriously for a while:
Even though the map and article were someone’s attempt at a little fun, there is a larger point. China’s use of maps, passports and other mapfare-style methods of pushing a narrative of rightful territorial claims whether over Taiwan or the 9 or actually 10-dash-line in the South China Sea and others areas has been part of Beijing’s toolkit for sometime now. The fact that none of us at the conference were shocked speaks volumes to the now ingrained perception of China on the international stage as a power bent on changing the status-quo—no matter what the cost. A reputation as some sort of rogue state is a tough thing in international politics to change—and it’s something Beijing should bare in mind. [National Interest]
It seems that if the Chinese are coming out and threatening the Japanese with military action for moving their ships through waters that an International Court has said is not Chinese; this almost forces the Japanese to sail through them to force the point that these are international waters and that they will not be intimidated:
Satellite images of South China Sea taken show China’s construction of aircraft hangars on the disputed Spratly islands
Beijing is thought to have threatened Japan that it would launch military action if Tokyo pressed ahead with its stance on the South China Sea dispute. Chinese officials are reported to have conveyed the warning to a top-ranking Japanese official in June.
According to diplomatic sources, cited by Japan’s Kyodo news agency, China’s ambassador to Japan, Cheng Yonghua, told Japan that it would cross a “red line” if Japanese vessels took part in the so-called freedom of navigation operations launched by the US in the South China Sea. Cheng even went on to indicate that Beijing would not hesitate to take military action. This emerged only on Sunday, 21 August though the incident reportedly occurred in June. [IB Times]
Considering Australia’s strong economic ties to the Chinese I will be surprised if they commit to supporting freedom of navigation patrols in the SCS. These calls to strike Australian ships I believe is just a signal from the Chinese to the Australians to stay out of this dispute in response to the US request for freedom of navigation patrols:
China’s state-run Global Times has published an editorial attacking Australia for supporting the recent international ruling on China’s activities in the South China Sea and called for strikes on any Australian ships which might undertake “freedom-of-navigation” activities in the region.
The editorial said Australia “is not even a ‘paper tiger’, it’s only a ‘paper cat’ at best”. It says that even though “Australia calls itself a principled country… when it needs to please Washington, it demonstrates willingness of doing anything in a show of allegiance”.
As a result, the Global Times says (our emphasis):
China must take revenge and let it know it’s wrong. Australia’s power means nothing compared to the security of China. If Australia steps into the South China Sea waters, it will be an ideal target for China to warn and strike.
Earlier this year, the Commander of the US Seventh Fleet, Vice Admiral Joseph P Aucoin, said it would be in the “best interests” of the region if Australia was to send ships to within 12 miles of the disputed area. Australia has so far not sent any of its ships there. [Business Insider]
The UNCLOS ruling was expected to rule in favor of the Philippines, but I think no one expected it to be this much of harsh rebuke against China:
An international tribunal in The Hague delivered a sweeping rebuke on Tuesday of China’s behavior in the South China Sea, including its construction of artificial islands, and found that its expansive claim to sovereignty over the waters had no legal basis.
The landmark case, brought by the Philippines, was seen as an important crossroads in China’s rise as a global power and in its rivalry with the United States, and it could force Beijing to reconsider its assertive tactics in the region or risk being labeled an international outlaw. It was the first time the Chinese government had been summoned before the international justice system.
In its most significant finding, the tribunal rejected China’s argument that it enjoys historic rights over most of the South China Sea. That could give the governments of Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, Taiwan and Vietnam more leverage in their own maritime disputes with Beijing.
The tribunal also said that China had violated international law by causing “irreparable harm” to the marine environment, endangering Philippine ships and interfering with Philippine fishing and oil exploration.
“It’s an overwhelming victory. We won on every significant point,” said the Philippines’ chief counsel in the case, Paul S. Reichler.
But while the decision is legally binding, there is no mechanism for enforcing it, and China, which refused to participate in the tribunal’s proceedings, reiterated on Tuesday that it would not abide by it.
Speaking at a meeting with European leaders, President Xi Jinping was defiant, reasserting China’s claim to sovereignty over the South China Sea “since ancient times,” the state-run People’s Daily reported. His remarks echoed a statement from the Foreign Ministry. The tribunal’s decision “is invalid and has no binding force,” the ministry said. “China does not accept or recognize it.” [NY Times]
You can read much more at the link, but first of all as the court pointed out Chinese historical claims to the SCS are ridiculous. Should the Mongolians put in a claim for the parts of China and central Asia they once controlled? Maybe the Koreans should put in a claim to the parts of northeast China they once controlled as well?
It will be interesting though to see what China does in response. Considering how much nationalism the communist regime has put into their South China Sea claims they will have to do something. The easiest thing would be to declare an ADIZ; the most provocative would be to start land reclamation at the Scarborough Shoal which they stole from the Philippines and the international court confirmed. The Scarborough Shoal is just off the coast of the Philippines and building a base there would put potential US assets based in the Philippines at risk.
So what does the US do in response? I can’t imagine anyone wants a war over this and the Chinese know this so what is to stop them from moving forward with their consolidation of the SCS? There needs to be an asymmetric response and the recent approval to sell US weapons to Vietnam is a perfect example. Determining weapons that could be sold to other regional countries in response to Chinese provocations could be a strategy to think about.
I have always wondered why the environmentalists are not involved in this? The international court confirmed the Chinese are destroying a fragile eco-system with their scorched earth fishing and dredging in the SCS. Where is Sea Shepherd and Greenpeace? This is actually an area I would support them protesting instead of non-endangered whales. The environmentalists could bring international attention and embarrassment against what the Chinese are doing in the SCS.
Anyone else have any ideas and how the international community should respond to China’s now confirmed illegal territorial grab in the South China Sea?
