"No One Knows How To Respond To China's Territorial..." Topic

… Grab In The South China Sea.

"It was no coincidence that the leak came just a week before Defense Secretary Ashton Carter set forth in April on a high-profile trip to Asia, which would include a helicopter flight to a U.S. aircraft carrier sailing through disputed waters in the South China Sea. According to a detailed account in the Navy Times, the U.S. Pacific Command's chief, headquartered in Honolulu, has become increasingly agitated not just by China's boldness in installing military facilities on islands it has constructed in the South China Sea—in waters claimed by other countries—but also at what the commander perceives to be a wholly inadequate U.S. response to Beijing's behavior…"

From here
link

Well, China has shown the will and commitment to aggressively stake its claims in the South China Sea …. and they have made it very clear to everyone that they are not going to back down. The response from the other countries in the region imho has been the opposite …. slow, disorganized, and fearful to not cross China's "red-lines". Will the U.S. make a difference?? …. probably not… specially putting only a few extra jet aircraft and helicopters in the Philippines… with this definitely they are not going to dissuade the Chinese.

Amicalement
Armand

Some other nations in the region need to stake their claims by anchoring vessels, putting troops on the islets, or building their own bases as well, since possession seems to be 95% of the "law" in the South China Sea.

The other 5% is having the military and will to back up competing claims.

Sabre rattling just helps the PRC by letting the government play the paranoia and nationalism cards. They know full well that there's few who would risk any military confrontation in the SCS escalating into a nuclear exchange. It's typical bully-boy tactics

What will get their attention, though, are disadvantageous trade decisions. If the rest of the world suddenly said "PRC, back off or we won't buy anything from you, nor sell anything to you, until you do." then the PRC would be much more open to discussion. However they know us and know that greed drives most of the decisions made in relation to the PRC.

Half the major corporations in the west (the only ones currently with enough economic clout to hurt the PRC) would sell their grandparents, parents and siblings for firewood, if meant making $2 USD extra on their balance sheets or yearly bonuses. Every time someone says they'll "bring up X with China", what they bring up is weasel-words that mean nothing and have no impact on the PRC's courses of action. All because using language that's too strong is damaging to trade and our in-debt-to-the-PRC economies.

Cancelling free trade agreements (here the acronym "FTA" is suspected to mean "Bleep The Aussies", thanks to the inept performance of DFAT over the last 20 years); putting an embargo on sales of food (they don't buy foodstuffs you say- read this: link ), raw materials and strategic materiel to the PRC; stop buying consumer goods from the PRC; and lastly, close down factories/business front offices/call centres now based in the PRC/Hong Kong/Macau. The middle class in the PRC has becomea political factor the government has to consider (ie be wary of), as shown by the shift in emphasis on the PRC's economic policies. Threaten the lifestyle of a quarter of a billion emerging middle class and any government is going to find itself in really deep pooh.

The pollies won't be allowed to even consider that, as businesses would immediately turn off the "contributions" to their parties and themselves. Besides, the squeal from a billion western consumers, who now had to pay 50% more than they planned for the new 52" HDTV to put in the dunny, would be deafening……

So the PRC will continue to get what it wants and do what it's doing. The West is too stupid and greedy to stop it.

Dal Gavan:
Good points, passionately made, but I would be careful about embargoes which could be construed by China as an act of war. Your clear description of the paralysis of the West due to corporate interests is spot on. Well said, sir.
Cheers.
Rod Robertson.

G'day, Rod.

Thanks for the kind words, mate. Yes, I do get a little heated about some things… A complete embargo may in fact be counter-productive. However, applying the PRC's own tariff scheme to goods coming from the PRC (fair's fair), allied to a refusal to sell specific strategic materiel (fair's fair again), may have at least send the message the West has grown a set and is ready to do something.

Reference your point about embargoes, I agree. There's a significant risk that the PRC would see them as an act of war. They will no doubt bluster to that end in any case, pounding out the West's supposed desire to keep Asians in thrall (shades of 1941 all over again). And they'll use history as a lesson, banging on about how embargoes supposedly pushed Japan to war in 1941 (but that view ignores Japan's own war with China and strategic aims).

However if nothing is done then war will be inevitable in any case, I believe. The PRC's annexation of the China Seas can't be ignored by the nations bordering those seas- it's a situation that puts them into de facto vassalage to the PRC. If they act, either individually or as part of a bloc (eg ASEAN light) they will outmatched very quickly, with the subsequent guerilla wars and the humanitarian issues that will follow. If other major powers (Europe/US) back any/all of Thailand, Taiwan, Malaysia, Vietnam, Singapore, Cambodia and the Philippines, then the scope of the war is increased exponentially by the possible use of nukes. Even without nukes, what do the economies of those involved look like after the war?

Then there's Russia, the joker in the pack. What chance cards will Uncle Vlad draw?

The question is whether to act now, when the PRC is still building its strength, and try to reach an agreement rather than risk fighting a future lose-lose war? Or does everyone keep bleating from the sidelines about international laws and agreements (which are observed only when convenient-including by the bleaters), while the PRC keeps publicly building their strength and has secured their territorial position?

Bleep these "interesting times". A nice, boring, settled geopolitical situation would be nice for a change.

Cheers.

Dal.

PS- "Out there" thought for the day- Is the annexation of the SCS really just an opening gambit? Is the PRC wanting the west to talk over economic tough issues, and the SCS is a way of making them think they avoided something worse?

Excellent points, DG.

So let them consider it an act of war.

They'll lose, just like the Japanese did in WWII. They're currently, militarily weak for anything other than local waters and their own territory.

They don't have the ability to project power.

They can bully the local, small Asian countries, but not the US or EU.

If they want a war, better to deal with them now, than to let them get stronger, and have to deal with them then, later.

Well, the Japanese seem to be being suitably robust, but not all nations in the region have the kind of militaries that enable that kind of behaviour.

For a start, frankly, some kind of UN board to determine who owns what out there is way overdue. It's not like these are new problems.

But I agree with economic sanctions and tariffs on the Chinese. they need to trade to keep their population in the state to which it has become accustomed.

Lots of countries in the region are building up their militaries. Most in fact.

The big boy on the block [that would be you the US] is now paying attention to the region after more than a decade of ignoring it. It's taking a while but better late than never.

Ultimately, the solution lies in a trade war with China. We gotta stop buying stuff and making stuff in China. War is not really an option.