China must think the resource potential and perceived influence increase is worthwhile but the negative for them is creating a unified opposition of all the players in or near the region including some of their friends. One has to wonder what's the point of securing trade routes if you turn most of your customers off. This seems to turning into a game of chicken and the outcome could have some terrible consequences.
I don't think there is a unified front as media claim to be. most ASEAN are fractured, even Vietnam and phillippine has dispute with each other. then there are neutral party who do not have claim over scs, such as Thailand, Lao, etc etc. and most ASEAN stay in neutral because china are enticing them with trade/economy. also china continue to use its economy/trade to entice other country not to get involve, and most country wont since they don't gain anything. china will just push it, then back off if it encounter too much resistance, try again few more years later. the dispute can dated back to centuries, and they are play the long game.
Some reports called the Foreign Ministry statement a backdown from the more strident and militaristic Global Times editorial but the consistent message from China is always the same.
I wonder if anyone here can let us know whether the closure of international waters for the purposes of exercises like this is permitted under international law [ignoring for the moment China does not accept these as international waters].
I think it is clear that they have only one objective. To push the US out at all costs to allow themselves to be the dominant power. The idea of trade routes being threatened I feel is a misnomer. If smaller nations are under any threat at all it is in fishing, and loss of oil exploration rights because China will take all.
China wants to be recognised as the new dominant power in the region and wants claimants to deal with it direct, rather than run to Uncle Sam for support and encouragement.
There is a school of thought that says when the day comes that the other claimants start dealing with China directly and acknowledge that it is China and not the U.S. that is the dominant regional power; then China will make its own arrangements with the other claimants towards joint oil exploration and fishing rights. As far as China is concerned the U.S. has been sticking its nose into matters that don't concern the U.S, in an area that is not in the U.S's backyard and that it is because of the U.S. that certain claimants have taken such as hostile [hostile from a Chinese perspective] approach towards China. The Chinese are also convinced that if if hadn't been for the U.S. encouraging certain claimants to behave in a way that is hostile to China, that the issue could have been settled with minimum fuss, to the mutual benefit of all the claimants involved.
I realise you may just be acknowledging the existence of the school, rather than arguing its case. But, the illogicality with that school of thought is that it is China's very aggression that is chasing countries that were previously ambivalent towards the US into stronger relations with it.
China is still an immature and insecure ''power'' making similar mistakes that other powers did when they were in the process of becoming ''powers'' and finding their way around. I don't fully agree with the school of thought that I mentioned but I agree that what China desperately seeks is recognition of its new status as the power in the region and that it really irks China that certain countries are taking what the Chinese perceive as ''aggressive'' actions in the knowledge that the U.S. is behind them.
Indeed but at the end of the day, these countries will still have to reach some kind of accommodation with China. Given China's status as an economic and military power; these countries in the long run can't afford to have bad relations with China; irrespective of the Spratlys issue. Take the Philippines for example; along with Vietnam, the Philippines has been the most publicly assertive with regards to dealings with China over the Spratlys; yet the newly elected Philippines President has made it clear that he intends to improve relations with China and has stated that he may even accept a Chinese offer to construct a railway line from Manila to Angeles City [both being about 60km apart].
Of course, the essence of the described situation is that if you don't take any action to lay claim to what China claims is theirs - whether or not you disagree and actually think its yours - then they won't criticize you.
there are plenty countries building island on top of reef etc. Vietnam extend their own island with drenching. beside few island is not gonna stop US if we decide to sail their. also china is not the only aggressive party in the dispute, Vietnam/Indonesian also done thing that consider aggressive. but consider chinas size/economy/military it has much more weight to swing, and its the only country in the region that can challenges US influence in the region.
Malaysia not only claims but occupies 5 reefs in the Spratlys. All the reefs are garrisoned by troops and there is a permanent naval presence in the area. The key difference is that unlike Vietnam and the Philippines; Malaysia does not publicly criticise China as it sees nothing to be gained from doing so. Whilst maintaining good relations with China; Malaysia also maintains the position that its claims in the Spratlys are legitimate and are non-negotiable.
Very true. I'm not defending China but what China is doing is similar to what Western powers previously did - history tends to repeat itself. When the U.S. became the dominant power in the Caribbean it was willing to go to war with any European power that chose to contest this. We keep hearing about China's military buildup yet the U.S. has permanent bases in Japan and South Korea, has treaty allies in the region and it is China that is surrounded by countries that are linked to the U.S. via treaties, i.e. South Korea, Taiwan, the Philippines and Japan.
The islands/reefs are not intended to stop anyone but to strengthen China's claims in the area and to make it easier for China to maintain/sustain a military presence in the area.
back then there is no radar or sensor we have today. But now we see all major power follow each other around and Intel gathered is much more sophisticated compare back then
thats not exactly correct.
i was refer to US and caribbean time, as the some poster draw parallel to US caribbean in 19-20th century to current china expansion in ScS
Mate, do you reckon you could proof read your posts before committing them? We're not particularly strict on spelling and grammar but I think it'd benefit you and the people responding to you. Cheers.
My reference to the Caribbean was to illustrate the point that like other powers in the past that were finding their way around; China too is making its share of mistakes and doesn't care too much about world opinion as it's convinced that what it's doing is in line with its national interests. When the U.S. was on its way to becoming a power and became the hegemonic power in the Caribbean; it did what it had to for it's national interests; to the extent that it didn't bother what other powers said and was even willing to go to war with any power that chose to contest the U.S's new status as the dominant power in the area. And let's not mention the Philippines and the bloody campaigns [which had their share of massacres] U.S. troops fought to subjugate the locals.
Maybe not but for quite a long period a weak and divided China was trampled on by outside powers to the extent that it was outside powers who were calling the shots and Chinese in parts of their own country had become 2nd class citizens. The Chinese haven't forgotten this. Sure, it doesn't excuse their actions in the Spratlys and I'm not implying it does but it's worth contemplating on how history drives the actions, threat perceptions and insecurities of certain countries. Also, lets not forget that for many years [way before the West entered the war against the Axis] China had been engaged in a brutal war against Japan that resulted in the deaths of millions and the devastation of much of the country. We all know about Stalingrad, Midway, Tarawa, etc, but it's often not realised that very heavy fighting also took place in China on a very large scale.