"How Defensible Are China’s Island Bases?" Topic

"China has built some islands in the South China Sea. Can it protect them?

During World War II Japan found that control of islands offered some strategic advantages, but not enough to force the United States to reduce each island individually. Moreover, over time the islands became a strategic liability, as Japan struggled to keep them supplied with food, fuel and equipment.

The islands of the SCS are conveniently located for China, but do they really represent an asset to China's military? The answer is yes, but in an actual conflict the value would dwindle quickly…."
Main page
link

Amicalement
Armand

Well, none of the countries directly affected by their presence have what it takes militarily to remove those islands, so I'd say those islands are doing just fine.

Something should have been done in 2009 when the claim was made.

Something should have been done in 2012 when they started being built.

I have no idea what can be done now, short of bombing the hell out of them and, like I said, none of the nations directly threatened by the presence of those islands (and the theft of thousands of square miles of international fishing waters and territorial EEZ) have the means to do that.

Dan

Dan
I agree the people who might want to attack can't and those that could won't. Bring in the big boys, the US and USSR… sorry Russia, and the game changes both could do it quite easily with only what comes next making problems.

Of course India could slip one of her "Smiling Buddha's" into the sea near the bases and set it of to see how Tsunami proof the islands are. "Who us? No we wouldn't do that" would fool no one but public opinion but they might think it worth it.

Fatman

There will never be a conflict!

Philippines has already warned they will fire if provoked.

I wonder how earthquake, tsunami and typhoon proof they really are? 'Climate scientists' are predicting a 60cm/2 foot rise in sea level over the next 20 years. Of course by then fish stocks will have been reduced to extinction levels by industrial trawling.

They are fantastic in peacetime and useless in a conflict. This is part of China's encroachment strategy on both land and sea. They know that no one wants war, so they build the islands, arm them, and know that nobody will risk war to remove them.

It's brilliant low risk brinksmanship on their part. China doesn't want war, but realizes that pushing the limits backed up by the mere threat of a strong military gets them what they want- control of the SCS.

If a war ever did break out, they are highly indefensible fixed targets in an age of gps precision guided munitions, and fantastic forward bases for a conquering enemy.

But the odds of a modern peer state going to war with them to force the issue are slim to none. So in the meantime they are bases from which small military patrol forces can exert pressure to make the entire SCS a Chinese control zone.

It's brilliant long term strategy.

The fact that the islands are militarily indefensible is irrelevant. By constructing these islands in the first place, China is basically sending a clear message that any country which attacks "their" islands will be perceived as the belligerent and start a war with China, giving China free rein and causus belli to retaliate "in defense."

It's staking territory and daring anyone to do anything about it. Which they won't.

They are not perhaps inundibles aircraft carriers?…

Amicalement
Armand

Think of the islands like the "crumple zones" on modern cars; they get completely destroyed in a crash, but they insulate the passengers from harm. Likewise, the island bases get destroyed in the first attack, but the Mainland has that much more advance warning and time to react.

The bases' survivability isn't the point.

A couple of modern SAM systems and it would be very costly for anyone to take those islands.

The value of these islands is not in war. It is in peace. No one will attack China's claim to the fish & energy resources. As long as there is peace, China wins the war of economics.

I think that's the main difference between war and warfare. Warfare encompasses so much more.

Dan