Tag: South China Sea

It will be interesting to see how this plays out because it appears that the Chinese are all in, in regards to their South China Sea claims, is the US and its regional allies all in as well to deter them?

As a rising power, China is roughly charting the same course the Americans and Soviets did 50 years ago. China has land-based missiles, bombers, and missile submarines. And China is establishing its own bastion — in the South China Sea. This sea grab is a logical response to China’s strategic dilemma.

China’s coming submarine deployment is allegedly in response to the deployment of the American THAAD anti-missile system in South Korea. While it is true that the U.S. is deploying THAAD on the Korean peninsula, the system can only be used against missiles targeting South Korea — coming from China’s ally, North Korea. China’s explanation is designed to make Beijing look like the victim. But China, which has its main submarine missile base adjacent to the South China Sea, has been preparing to sail its missile submarines there for years.

China’s aggression in the South China Sea is not likely merely for aggression’s sake, or the result of a rising power feeling its oats. China is acting out of strategic necessity, something even more dangerous because it feels it is doing something because it must, not simply because it can. The ruling Chinese Communist Party has made the calculation that the strategic benefits — having a safe location for its nuclear missile submarines — outweighs the negative attention the country is receiving worldwide.

What does that mean? It means that Beijing is not going to back down. Chinese nuclear weapons, which are the ultimate guarantor of Communist Party rule, are involved, and anything crucial to the survival of the regime is non-negotiable. Barring a new nuclear strategy — perhaps one that rules out submarines and relies on land-based missiles hidden in tunnels — controlling the sea is a must. Beijing has access to other stretches of the Pacific, but they can be easily accessed by traditional rivals including Taiwan and Japan. The South China Sea, for example, is adjacent to a number of relatively poor, weak states.  [The Week]

You can read the rest at the link.

It is going to be really interesting to see what the Chinese reaction is going to be if in fact the UNCLOS ruling in regards to territorial sovereignty in the South China Sea favors the Philippines:

The simmering dispute in the contested South China Sea is about to turn to a boil.

With an international arbitration court ruling on the legality of China’s “nine-dash line” claim to much of the South China Sea set to be handed down in the coming days or weeks, experts say the situation is likely to get a lot more complicated in the months and possibly years ahead.

The case, brought before the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) at The Hague by the Philippines, is widely expected to end in a ruling favoring Manila, which says that Beijing’s claims violate United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) agreements about territorial seas and exclusive economic zones (EEZ).

While both China and the Philippines are signatories to the treaty, Beijing has refused to participate in the process and vowed to ignore its ruling.

“The PCA is likely to determine that none of the land features at issue are entitled to an EEZ or continental shelf, and that some are not entitled even to a territorial sea,” James Kraska, research director at the Stockton Center for the Study of International Law at the U.S. Naval War College, wrote in late April in a paper posted to the Maritime Awareness Project website.

“The decision will not make China walk back its claims or undo its island building, but it will challenge the country’s notion that the law is the instrument of the strong to control the weak,” Kraska wrote. “Ineffective as they are, international law and the moral authority of a liberal world order pose a central obstacle to Chinese ambitions.”

Another key result of the ruling could see China’s hand forced on the nine-dash line.

Analysts say a large part of China’s strategy in the disputed waters rests on the ambiguity surrounding its claims. Beijing has never clarified exactly what the nine-dash line claim entails, apparently in hopes of maximizing its gains. It has also used its man-made islands in the South China Sea to bolster claims to EEZs of 200 nautical miles (370 km) and territorial seas of 12 nautical miles (22 km).

“The nine-dash line is really what’s at the heart of this case,” said Harry Krejsa, a Research Associate at the Center for a New American Security.

“The court wants to bring as much clarity as possible to the South China Sea disputes while also being strategic about its ability to strengthen international norms over the long run,” Krejsa said.

But a decision in favor of Manila, one nixing the nine-dash line, will undoubtably prompt a furious reaction from Beijing.

“The whole situation is probably going to get worse before it gets better, but strategically, the case for international law and norms are going to get stronger,” Krejsa said.  [Japan Times]

You can read more at the link, but if for example the ruling declares that the Scarborough Shoal is Philippine territory and the Chinese refuse to vacate it what should be the US and United Nations reaction to this?  Economic sanctions?  Is the US government willing to absorb the retaliatory economic impact that would come from China in response to such sanctions?

Here is the latest on the South China Sea front where the US is expanding efforts to demonstrate to China the US commitment to freedom of navigation:

Filipino fishermen say they’ve seen more Chinese coast guard ships than usual around the contested Scarborough Shoal, which China effectively took over in 2013 after a tense standoff with Philippine vessels.

Although fishermen have been complaining they’re being driven away by Chinese ships, the Philippine Department of Defense said it could not confirm an increase in Chinese presence at the shoal, 145 miles (230 kilometers) from Luzon island.

Meantime, the U.S. Air Force flew its first mission over the Scarborough area as part of a new Air Contingent force stationed in the Philippines. It involved four A-10C Thunderbolt jets and two Sikorsky HH-60 helicopters.

The first ever export of a submarine by South Korea must not have made the Chinese government very happy considering the maritime and territorial disputes they are having with Indonesia in the South China Sea.  If these submarines ever do see combat it would likely be against Chinese ships:

South Korean-made submarine with Hall Number code H7712 has been released from Okpo Port on Thursday, March 24, which was witnessed by Defense Minister Ryamizard Ryacudu along with Indonesian Ambassador for South Korea, John A. Prasetio, and Chief of Navy Staff Admiral Ade Supandi.

According to Indonesian Minister Counselor for the Indonesian Embassy in Seoul, the submarine is the first of three submarine units ordered by Indonesia to secure Indonesian territory. The construction had begun in 2013 at the Daewoo Shipbuilding and Marine Engineering (DSME) in Okpo, South Korea. All the process is under the supervision of task forces for submarine procurement project (Satgas Yekda KDSE DSME209) led by Col. Iwan Isnurwanto.

“Based on the contract, the first and second construction of the submarine will be done at DSME, while the third will be done at PT PAL Indonesia shipyard with a transfer of technology (Tot) process,” Aji said in a statement on Thursday.

During the third submarine development process, PT PAL Indonesia has also sent 112 engineers to DSME, South Korea, so they could be directly involved in the ToT process and development study, as well as independent submarine development via on the job training (OJT) stage.

The diesel electric submarine DSME209, which is South Korea’s first export production, is an improvement from Chang Bogo Class type submarine owned by the Republic of Korean Navy (ROK Navy) and Cakra Class submarine, which belongs to the Indonesian Navy. According to Indonesian Military Attaché of the Republic of Indonesia for Seoul, Col. Aditya Kumara, the submarine measured 61.3 meters long with a maximum speed of 21 knots underwater and has the ability to sail for more than 50 days.  [Jakarta Post]

You can read more at the link.

Shortly after SAM deployment, fighter jets seen on disputed Woody Island in South China Seahttps://t.co/yntdmC6HnQ pic.twitter.com/YGzeMIUYHI

— Voice of America (@VOANews) February 24, 2016

I would also not be surprised if in the future the Chinese use large “fishing boats” as well to try and block US Navy ships from moving through contested areas in the South China Sea.  The Chinese would love nothing more to have a “fishing boat” sunk to portray the US as the aggressors in the South China Sea and to rally domestic support.  The US Navy is going to have to really think through procedures to deal with being blocked and rammed by Chinese ships in the South China Sea:

China has announced its intention to build a massive new coast guard ship ostensibly to patrol its territorial waters, protect its fisheries, and uphold its laws. This is a huge ship and its physical characteristics fall far outside the norms associated with the coast guard mission. For instance, the U.S. Coast Guard’s Legend-class national security cutter is 418 feet long and displaces 4,500 tons of water. The Chinese cutter will be over 500 feet long and displace more than 10,000 tons. The ship will be lightly armed, with two 76mm guns and other small arms, but these are not important to its true mission. This ship and its follow-on sister ships are built for one purpose: to move other ships out of the way.  [Defense One]

You can read the rest at the link.

Arguments Open in Philippine Case Against China's South China Sea Claims https://t.co/EhN0j2jDFO pic.twitter.com/kT4rJ6TiDM

— The Diplomat (@Diplomat_APAC) November 24, 2015

Did China Try Restricting US Bombers in the South China Sea? https://t.co/ErACSvWcs6 pic.twitter.com/MdJVu15Y36

— The Diplomat (@Diplomat_APAC) November 14, 2015

It is going to be interesting to see how this plays out.  The Chinese have so much invested in these South China Sea islands I just don’t see them backing down even if the UN court rules against them.  The domestic political blowback would be too much with accusations of the Chinese government backing down to foreigners.  The UN court though could legitimize the freedom of navigation patrols which are currently being executed by the US Navy.  The ruling is supposed to be released sometime in 2016:

The Hague (AFP) – An international tribunal ruled Thursday it had the power to hear a case brought by the Philippines over disputed islands in the South China Sea, in a move likely to trigger fury in Beijing.

Manila has insisted the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, which the Philippines and China have both ratified, should be used to resolve the bitter territorial row over isolated reefs and islets, which has triggered growing international alarm.

But China has refused to participate in the proceedings, arguing the Permanent Court of Arbitration — which is more than a century old and based in The Hague — had no jurisdiction over the case.

“Reviewing the claims submitted by the Philippines, the tribunal has rejected the argument” by China that the “dispute is actually about sovereignty over the islands in the South China Sea and therefore beyond the tribunal’s jurisdiction,” the court said in a statement.

Instead, the court ruled the case reflects “disputes between the two states concerning the interpretation or application of the Convention” — something which falls within its remit.

China insists it has sovereign rights to nearly all of the South China Sea, a strategic waterway through which about a third of all the world’s traded oil passes.

The disputed waters — claimed in part by Vietnam, Malaysia, the Philippines, Taiwan, and Brunei — have also become the stage for a tussle for regional dominance between Beijing and Washington, the world’s two largest economic and military powers.

Following a stand-off between Chinese ships and the weak Filipino Navy in 2012, China took control of a rich fishing ground called Scarborough Shoal that is within the Philippines’ exclusive economic zone.  [Associated Press]

You can read the rest at the link.

Chinese Internet posters are supposedly going bonkers over the fact that a US Navy ship conducted a freedom of navigation patrol through the South China Sea which the Chinese government ridiculously claims is part of China:

On Oct. 27, the high-stakes maritime game of chicken that has been playing out in the South China Sea came to a head. In a long-discussed freedom of navigation patrol, the United States sailed the USS Lassen, a guided missile destroyer, within 12 miles of artificial islands that China has built amid territorial disputes in the South China Sea. China tracked and warned the U.S. vessel; the operation concluded without incident and prompted swift condemnation from China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs. But after weeks of tough government rhetoric claiming that China would not stand for what it views as a violation of its territorial sovereignty, Chinese social media voices are now mocking what many perceive as a spineless official response.  [Foreign Policy]

Despite all the online venom to attack the US ship one Chinese Internet user left a popular post which accurately reflects what I think is going on:

China’s shrill online nationalists may dominate the web in the aftermath of a flashpoint, but while common, such online outrage has not led to government action in the past. And some netizens harbor more nuanced perspectives. One particularly discerning Weibo user, who identified himself as a 22-year-old native of China’s northeastern Shandong province, also seemed to take the long view of the South China Sea, noting the behind-the-scenes machinations that make the region so complex. “This seems like a game,” wrote the user in a popular comment. “Not only have both countries maintained their reputations, neither country has suffered any losses.” Another observed somewhat sardonically that the situation, all told, was “well managed.” The user noted that China had “gotten rid of the U.S. ship, maintained its sovereignty, and hasn’t worsened the situation. Afterwards, it can be used as an excuse for militarization in the South China Sea.”

Like I have said before the US’s and China’s interests in the South China Sea do no necessarily come into conflict.  From the US perspective we want freedom of navigation through the SCS.  From the Chinese perspective they want strategic space to defend the sea lanes leading to the southeastern China and to a lesser extent the fishing and mineral rights.  As long as each side respects the others interests in the SCS there is no reason for conflict unless the Chinese government is stupid enough to listen to hateful commenters on the Internet.