Neutering & Defanging Chinese Threat (09-08-2014)

member_28386 · Post by **member_28386** » 24 Oct 2015 09:17

The Management of the Chinese Threat is a poor joke played on the Indians. Given that the terrain on the Indian side is not suitable for infrastructure being built, the country has failed in building infrastructure throughout the country and the Indo-Tibetan border from Kashmir to Arunachal Pradesh is just an extension of the poor state of our country. Whether it is telecommunication (mobile towers, landlines), transportation (all weather motorable roads, railways, airports) and electricity, hospitals, schools, just about everything. That the border populations are patriotic throughout the Indo-Tibetan border area is plain dumb luck, but in most areas people are voting with their feet and moving to the cities and towns in the plains for survival.

Let alone the strategic part, the simple fact of providing for the Indian citizens have been ignored. We are talking of establishing a separate security infrastructure for defending against the Chinese and deploying more troops and intelligence gathering equipment without caring for the most important human resources. We will always have a tough time. A small ray of hope is the Minister of State for Home who hails from Arunachal Pradesh and seems to be aware of the difficulties as are most patriotic Arunachalis who have been let down by us.

nandakumar · Post by **nandakumar** » 24 Oct 2015 09:59

One story that I heard from civil service circles is that the army itself has been surreptiously putting road blocks on the border road infrastructure project. Their fear is that if there is an infantry push (human wave tactics of the kind seen in the Korean war) by the Chinese, Indian army doesn't have the artillery fire power to stop them in their tracks. Then the road infrastructure itself becomes an aid in the Chinese army coming down the hills onto the plains of UP, Bihar, North Bengal.
I am not an expert. But the source is credible. Would be nice if experts can comment on it.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 24 Oct 2015 12:00

nandakumar wrote:One story that I heard from civil service circles is that the army itself has been surreptiously putting road blocks on the border road infrastructure project. Their fear is that if there is an infantry push (human wave tactics of the kind seen in the Korean war) by the Chinese, Indian army doesn't have the artillery fire power to stop them in their tracks. Then the road infrastructure itself becomes an aid in the Chinese army coming down the hills onto the plains of UP, Bihar, North Bengal.
I am not an expert. But the source is credible. Would be nice if experts can comment on it.

That is a very, very old story. And, perhaps it did have some merits in that era?

However, moving forward should paint a different picture. With an entire body that is being stood up to be offensive India could do the same with China now. That, at least, is the game plan. And, I do not see why it is not a good one.

kit · Post by **kit** » 24 Oct 2015 12:41

I wonder how tactical nuclear weapons would play out in the India China scenario .. if Pakistan has , then china most likely will have deployed battlefield nukes . Most of the war gaming scenarios put here in BRF doesn't take into account this vital part. Where does this put india which as far as i know has no deployed tactical nukes .. are we paying the west enormous amounts to maintain a semblance of technological superiority which gets eroded with every passing year ? is this not like a technological slavery , for ever dependent on imports ?

panduranghari · Post by **panduranghari** » 24 Oct 2015 13:34

Kaustav makes good points. But the same problems are present on the Chinese side x 10. They have to contend with the nationalistic Tibetans too. JUst because Chinese have built some infrastructure on the western flank, does not make them immune from problems that you have enumerated.

The management of Chinese Threat is not a poor joke played by Chinese on Indians. Its a poor joke played by the successive congress governments on India. There is no 2 ways about it.

Then there is the absence of recognition by the top army brass that China is a bigger threat than Pak. I am sure you have listened to the Bharat Karnad talk when his new book was released. He has recommended dismantling 2 out of 3 strike corps and concentrating on building up mountain corps.

Just like most of the country, the border people have been let down by the lack of political will to make things better. Empty 'THREATS' like garibi hatao dont work. Actual implementation of JDY is a proof of the number of people who have been disenfranchised. BUt thats for a political thread.

Isn't the term 'tactical nuclear weapons' an oxymoron? Use of TNW means all the tactics have failed, correct me if I am wrong.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 24 Oct 2015 19:09

Indian Ocean undeniable pivot-point for world economy: US - PTI

Describing the Indian Ocean region as an undeniable pivot-point for the world economy, the US has said the future prosperity and stability of the region is the collective responsibility of all nations.

"The world is increasingly focused on the Indian Ocean region. This vast maritime area has become an undeniable pivot-point for the world economy and is poised to remain at the heart of global affairs for this century and beyond," US Ambassador to Sri Lanka and Maldives, Atul Keshap said.

"The future prosperity and stability of the Indian Ocean region is the collective responsibility of all nations to ensure that the Indian Ocean region remains a place of peaceful commerce and exchange," he said.

"To achieve this vision, the region must first and foremost find its own voice and build the necessary structures to foster development," Keshap said in his address to the 15th Indian Ocean Rim Association (IORA) Council of Ministers meeting being held in Indonesia.

Observing that the countries of IORA have common cause against a range of contemporary global threats, including terrorism, violent extremism and maritime piracy, he said IORA presents an opportunity for the Indian Ocean region to craft its own identity, to set its own priorities, build its own connections, set its own peaceful and transparent norms, and strengthen its common voice.

He that the US's effort to "rebalance" to the Indo- Pacific region is based on the growing importance of this dynamic region, as does our strengthening of bilateral partnerships with key allies and partners in the region," he said.

To achieve this vision, the region must first and foremost find its own voice and build the necessary structures to foster development, he said.

Keshap said some countries in the region are already leading by example, resolving maritime boundary issues in a peaceful manner through binding arbitration.

The United States commends the example shown by India, Bangladesh and Myanmar recently in this regard, as it shows a positive way forward for all other Indo-Pacific countries in peacefully settling complicated matters in ways that enhance regional stability and prosperity, he said.

nandakumar · Post by **nandakumar** » 24 Oct 2015 20:47

panduranghari wrote:Kaustav makes good points. But the same problems are present on the Chinese side x 10. They have to contend with the nationalistic Tibetans too. JUst because Chinese have built some infrastructure on the western flank, does not make them immune from problems that you have enumerated.

The management of Chinese Threat is not a poor joke played by Chinese on Indians. Its a poor joke played by the successive congress governments on India. There is no 2 ways about it.

Then there is the absence of recognition by the top army brass that China is a bigger threat than Pak. I am sure you have listened to the Bharat Karnad talk when his new book was released. He has recommended dismantling 2 out of 3 strike corps and concentrating on building up mountain corps.

Just like most of the country, the border people have been let down by the lack of political will to make things better. Empty 'THREATS' like garibi hatao dont work. Actual implementation of JDY is a proof of the number of people who have been disenfranchised. BUt thats for a political thread.

Isn't the term 'tactical nuclear weapons' an oxymoron? Use of TNW means all the tactics have failed, correct me if I am wrong.

nandakumar · Post by **nandakumar** » 24 Oct 2015 20:49

panduranghari wrote:Kaustav makes good points. But the same problems are present on the Chinese side x 10. They have to contend with the nationalistic Tibetans too. JUst because Chinese have built some infrastructure on the western flank, does not make them immune from problems that you have enumerated.

The management of Chinese Threat is not a poor joke played by Chinese on Indians. Its a poor joke played by the successive congress governments on India. There is no 2 ways about it.

Then there is the absence of recognition by the top army brass that China is a bigger threat than Pak. I am sure you have listened to the Bharat Karnad talk when his new book was released. He has recommended dismantling 2 out of 3 strike corps and concentrating on building up mountain corps.

Just like most of the country, the border people have been let down by the lack of political will to make things better. Empty 'THREATS' like garibi hatao dont work. Actual implementation of JDY is a proof of the number of people who have been disenfranchised. BUt thats for a political thread.

Isn't the term 'tactical nuclear weapons' an oxymoron? Use of TNW means all the tactics have failed, correct me if I am wrong.

nandakumar · Post by **nandakumar** » 24 Oct 2015 21:01

For some reason, my earlier post simply vanished! I am reposting although not in the same words. Chinese game plan would be to just occupy enough space on the eastern sector so they could force India to negotiate. They would be interested in Tawang. So they would swoop down the hills and occupy so much space in the plains that a compromise involving ceding Tawang in return for the Chinese vacating the rest of Arunachal Pradesh and land down in the plains to the South. In 1962, they were interested in Aksai Chin. They occupied it along with land in the Eastern sector. They vacated the territories in the eastern sector but stayed put in Aksai Chin. So their ability come down the plains is critical to any negotiated settlement on Tawang. This is where border roads or their absence becomes critical.

Paul · Post by **Paul** » 25 Oct 2015 23:12

Xi appears to be an Army brat!That means he understands a lot about Military operational and deployments. Looks like a prosperous executive. Appearances can be deceptive

Paul · Post by **Paul** » 25 Oct 2015 23:17

Wonder if his old man was posted in Tibet, or served in 1962 war. Hopefully more will come out

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 26 Oct 2015 12:22

Paul wrote:Wonder if his old man was posted in Tibet, or served in 1962 war. Hopefully more will come out

Paul, I hope you are referring to Xi Jinping's father, Xi Zhongxun. I do not expect him to have been posted in Tibet or taking part in the 1962 war for the following reasons. By early 1950, Xi Sr. was the Propaganda Minister (a la Goebbels) under Chairman Mao and in early 1962 he was thoroughly discredited and sent to hard labour to be 're-educated'. His wife was also sent elsewhere for hard-labour and the Xi family was scattered.

More humiliation was awaiting Xi Sr. in 1967 after Chairman Mao, a close friend of Xi Sr., announced Cultural Revolution. This pitted sons and daughters against parents, students against teachers etc. as 'class enemies'. Xi. Sr. was confined to a military garrison. It was only in late 1976 that Xi. Sr. was 'rehabilitated'.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 26 Oct 2015 12:36

Malabar-2015 and Power Dynamics in the Asian Commons - Abhijit Singh, IDSA

Earlier this week, India, the United States and Japan completed Exercise Malabar, a joint multilateral naval exercise in the Bay of Bengal. This year the exercises were an improvement over previous engagements - owing not only to the close-coordinated nature of combat drills, but also because of the presence of Japanese navy that is taking part in an Indian Ocean iteration of the Malabar for the first time in eight years. Importantly, the interaction has transitioned from being an India-US bilateral engagement into a formal structured trilateral exercise, signifying a strategic push, which maritime analysts say is aimed at countering growing Chinese military presence in the Indian Ocean.

A clear symbol of warming strategic relations between the US and India, Exercise Malabar is the most wide-ranging professional interaction the Indian navy has with any of its partner maritime forces. Even so, the decision to include Japan as a permanent member came as a surprise, considering that New Delhi had been resisting overtures from the US to broaden the scope of the interaction.

Expectedly, China made its displeasure apparent, with the Global Times cautioning India against attempts at building an anti-China coalition in the Indo-Pacific region.1 Chinese analysts believe that India’s “multi-vectored diplomacy” which requires it to work constructively with all its partners does not allow it to be party to any moves to limit Chinese military power. Even so, India may have been compelled to raise the tempo of its participation in the Malabar at the behest of the United States, whose deployment of the aircraft carrier (USS Roosevelt) and a nuclear attack submarine (USS City of Corpus Christi) subtly pressured New Delhi to send the INS Sindhudhwaj (Kilo class submarine) and a P8 long-range patrol aircraft for the exercises.

More worrying for China is the inclusion of Japan in an India-US naval exercise, a move that may eventually end up reviving the maritime quadrilateral. In its original avatar in 2008, the “quad” – consisting of the navies of the US, India, Japan and Australia - had drawn sharp protests from Beijing. China’s strident reaction had forced India and Australia to withdraw from the grouping, acknowledging it to be an error of strategic judgment. Almost a decade later, growing People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLA-N) aggressiveness in the South China Sea seems to have reversed the consensus on keeping the peace with Beijing.

Last month, the Indian Navy (IN) embarked on a much publicised week-long maritime engagement with the Royal Australian Navy (RAN) in the Bay of Bengal - the first time the two navies met for a bilateral operational exchange in the Indian Ocean. The composition of the participating contingents -- especially the presence of a Collins class submarine and a P8 maritime surveillance aircraft – suggested an anti-China focus. Significantly, the AUSINDEX was held within weeks of Australia’s trilateral engagement with Japan and the US in the Southwestern Pacific in July, raising the possibility of a potential alliance of democracies to counter Chinese military activity in the Indian Ocean Region.

Speculation about an emerging ‘security quartet’ in the Asia-Pacific gained further momentum after the visit of the Australian defence minister, Kevin Andrews, to New Delhi in early-September. Addressing a public gathering, Andrews observed that the current Australian government was open to participating in a four-sided security initiative with the US, Japan and India, provided it were invited by New Delhi to do so.2 A few weeks later, Richard Verma, the US Ambassador, seemed to echo the same sentiment, when he urged New Delhi to assist the US in securing the global commons – affecting a transition from “balancing power” to “leading power”.3

To be sure, neither statement made any mention of Chinese maritime presence in the IOR. Yet, their central message was clear: strong defence ties with India were the key to the preservation of the maritime balance in the Indo-Pacific region. While the US and its allies remain prepared to share the bulk of the burden of “securing the Asian commons” - as the US ambassador seemed to suggest - India was expected to protect the sub-continental littorals from growing Chinese influence.

It is not as if New Delhi has not thought through the implications of formalising multilateral maritime exercises in the Indian Ocean. India has good reason to be wary of Chinese military presence in the IOR. Since May this year, when a Chinese Yuan class submarine visited Karachi, New Delhi has agonised over the possibility of Chinese takeover of its maritime neighbourhood. In the garb of anti-piracy operations, Indian observers believe, Chinese submarines have been performing specific stand-alone missions – a process meant to lay the groundwork for a rotating but permanent deployment in the Indian Ocean Region (IOR). More importantly, Indian analysts say the deployment pattern of PLA-N submarines reveals an intent to secure access in contested spaces, facilitating greater ‘open-seas’ presence – an operational imperative outlined in Beijing’s 2015 defence white paper. That such a tactic is at work was corroborated by India’s Andaman and Nicobar Command (ANC) recently, when it reported an alarming rise in attempts by Chinese naval ships to get close to Indian territorial waters.

Equally significant for New Delhi is China’s growing amphibious warfare capability. After Beijing announced its defence white paper in May 2015, recent PLA-N exercises have had an amphibious component, including ground assault drills by marine forces. Chinese naval contingents have conducted a series of island defence exercises this year, deploying dedicated amphibious task-forces in the Western and Far-Eastern Pacific. Even PLA-N anti-piracy deployments in the Indian Ocean have included the Type-71 class amphibious vessels, suggesting an aspiration for greater littoral presence. Indian analysts point out that China’s growing expeditionary capability can only be counteracted by the United States’ substantial amphibious assets, which is why the Exercise Malabar this year is reported to have laid emphasis on littoral operations.{The Littoral Combat Ship, USS Fort Worth, stationed at Singapore participated for the first time in Ex Malabar this year}

India’s reliance on the United States to curtail China’s Indian Ocean ambitions, however, has a significant downside. With the US Navy announcing its intention to conduct maritime patrols within the 12-mile territorial zone around China’s recently reclaimed islands in the disputed Spratly archipelago, the ground is being prepared for a wider maritime confrontation. Washington’s Pivot to Asia has already led Beijing to harden its maritime posture in the Western Pacific; the endorsement of “freedom of navigation” patrols might leave China with little option but to expand its military maritime presence across the Indo-Pacific – if only to show the US and its allies that Chinese maritime power cannot be contained within the cramped confines of the South China Sea.

As India reorients its maritime posture to cater to the new realities of Asia, there is a realisation that regional maritime stability is increasingly susceptible to growing power imbalances. India’s maritime managers remain acutely aware of the likelihood of future contingencies arising out of strategic imbalances in the Asian commons. The Malabar-2015 and AUSINDEX, therefore, need to be seen as part of a broader collective effort to preserve the balance of maritime power in the Indo-Pacific littorals.

kit · Post by **kit** » 26 Oct 2015 14:28

Isnt it true that the US does not recognize india s extended EEZ as well and flouts it regularly without any permission., by the same coin how can India be a party to Washington s similar adventures vs the Chinese .. do hope they dont keep quiet like India !

panduranghari · Post by **panduranghari** » 26 Oct 2015 14:53

What's wrong with India going full throttle into a maritime alliance with the other 3? These collaborations are carried out in high seas away from prying eyes of people asking questions. Its a win-win.

kit · Post by **kit** » 26 Oct 2015 15:29

Rather India should refrain if China settles the border dispute with India and stop their activities in POK ..quid pro quo ..let the US go about what it does best ., they are not real friends anyway

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 26 Oct 2015 15:47

kit wrote:Isnt it true that the US does not recognize india s extended EEZ as well and flouts it regularly without any permission., by the same coin how can India be a party to Washington s similar adventures vs the Chinese .. do hope they dont keep quiet like India !

kit, are you referring to the Extended Continental Shelf limits? There are five maritime zone boundaries out of which four are defined by distance, viz. Coastal Waters (3 nm from baseline), Territorial Sea (12 nm), Contiguous Zone (24 nm), and EEZ (200 nm). The fifth zone, the outer limit of the extended continental shelf, is defined by Article 76 of UNCLOS based on several combinations of geophysical, hydrographic and geomorphological data.

The Indian EEZ is well recognized and the US or any other nation cannot dispute that. We have settled all our maritime boundaries with our neighbours except Pakistan. The outer limit of the extended continental shelf is quite another matter. India made the first submission before the deadline of c. 2009 and a second submission was to be made of which I am unaware of the status. If accepted by UNCLOS, India's seabed would equal its landmass.

kit · Post by **kit** » 26 Oct 2015 16:42

SSridhar wrote:
kit wrote:Isnt it true that the US does not recognize india s extended EEZ as well and flouts it regularly without any permission., by the same coin how can India be a party to Washington s similar adventures vs the Chinese .. do hope they dont keep quiet like India !
kit, are you referring to the Extended Continental Shelf limits? There are five maritime zone boundaries out of which four are defined by distance, viz. Coastal Waters (3 nm from baseline), Territorial Sea (12 nm), Contiguous Zone (24 nm), and EEZ (200 nm). The fifth zone, the outer limit of the extended continental shelf, is defined by Article 76 of UNCLOS based on several combinations of geophysical, hydrographic and geomorphological data.

The Indian EEZ is well recognized and the US or any other nation cannot dispute that. We have settled all our maritime boundaries with our neighbours except Pakistan. The outer limit of the extended continental shelf is quite another matter. India made the first submission before the deadline of c. 2009 and a second submission was to be made of which I am unaware of the status. If accepted by UNCLOS, India's seabed would equal its landmass.

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/new ... 467749.cms

Here is the US position in black and white :

"India maintains an excessive maritime claim requiring prior consent for military exercises or manoeuvres in its Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ)," a senior Defence Department official told PTI when asked about a recent White House statement that US has challenged India's territorial claims in EEZs.

the US serves only its interests . They even dont have allies only vassals .. as one presidential hopeful has famously said !

India should deal with China on its terms period , mutually beneficial of course !

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 26 Oct 2015 17:19

That's because the UNCLOS itself is ambiguous about military exercises in the EEZ. So, it is subject to differing interpretations. The US does not and cannot indeed dispute the EEZ boundaries of India. That Economic Times article unfortunately uses interchangeably terms such as territorial waters and the EEZ. Territorial waters are sovereign. Whereas, that is not the case in SCS. There are boundary disputes (and hence even territorial waters) between China and almost every littoral state of SCS. The INS Airavat was on high seas in the SCS when it was buzzed and that is why we have been demanding 'freedom of navigation' in SCS.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 26 Oct 2015 17:46

China plays down Indian border standoff video - PTI

China today said ties with India and between the armies have improved as a result of bilateral mechanisms put in place by both sides to bring down tensions over the disputed border after a video emerged showing Indian and Chinese soldiers involved in a standoff in 2013.

"I have seen the report. The video showed something that happened several years ago. We released information and clarified our position at that time," Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Hua Chunying told a media briefing.

He was replying to question about a video shown by an Indian television channel in which soldiers from both sides animatedly argued that the particular area in Ladakh region where they stood belong to their respective countries.

The video was shown by China's Phoenix television creating a buzz on Chinese social media.

The standoffs began ahead of the visit of Chinese Premier Li Keqiang to India as his first overseas destination soon after he took over the post in 2013 as goodwill gesture.

The standoff in which Chinese troops pitched tents at Depsang area in Ladakh continued for several days before they withdrew.

After the incident the two sides activated the Working Mechanism for Consultation and Coordination (WMCC) which included senior diplomats and military officials to resolve a number of other standoffs including the one which took place during the visit of President Xi Jinping to India in 2014.

"As we have known, in recent years China and India have set up and improved cooperation mechanisms including the WMCC and border defence mechanism. These mechanism enhanced mutual trust and helped us to resolve these issues in timely fashion," Hua said.

"This showed that as long as the two sides have the political will they are capable and have the wisdom to resolve the issue and maintain peace and stability of the border areas. We all know that stable and sound development of bilateral ties are important to regional peace and stability.

"We hope the two sides can enhance mutual trust through this mechanisms and move forward cooperation properly deal with relevant issue and ensure peace and stability of the border area and maintain sound development of bilateral relations," she said.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 27 Oct 2015 10:49

US destroyer sails within 12-mile limit around Chinese islands in South China Sea - Reuters, Straits Times

The US Navy sent a guided-missile destroyer within 12 nautical miles of artificial islands built by China in the South China Sea on Tuesday (Oct 27), a US defence official said, in a challenge to China’s territorial claims in the area.

The official said the USS Lassen was sailing near Subi and Mischief reefs in the Spratly archipelago, features that were submerged at high tide before China began a massive dredging project to turn them into islands in 2014.

"The operation has begun ... It will be complete within a few hours,” said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

The mission would be the start of a series of challenges to China’s territorial claims in one of the world’s busiest sea lanes, another US defence official said.

The second official earlier said the ship would likely be accompanied by a US Navy P-8A surveillance plane and possibly P-3 surveillance plane, which have been conducting regular surveillance missions in the region.

The patrols represent the most serious US challenge yet to the 12-nautical-mile territorial limit China claims around the islands and are certain to anger Beijing, which said last month that it would “never allow any country” to violate its territorial waters and airspace in the Spratlys.

China’s Foreign Minister Wang Yi said Beijing was trying to verify if the US ship had entered the 12-mile zone.

“If true, we advise the US to think again and before acting, not act blindly or make trouble out of nothing,” the Foreign Ministry quoted Wang as saying.

The Chinese Embassy in Washington said the concept of freedom of navigation should not be used as an excuse for muscle flexing and the United States should “refrain from saying or doing anything provocative and act responsibly in maintaining regional peace and stability.”

Additional patrols would follow in coming weeks and could also be conducted around features that Vietnam and the Philippines have built up in the Spratlys, the second US official said.

“This is something that will be a regular occurrence, not a one-off event,” said the official. “It’s not something that’s unique to China.”

White House spokesman Josh Earnest referred questions on any specific operations to the Pentagon but said the United States had made clear to China the importance of free flow of commerce in the South China Sea.

“There are billions of dollars of commerce that float through that region of the world,” Earnest told a news briefing.“Ensuring that free flow of commerce ... is critical to the global economy,” he said.

The patrols would be the first within 12 miles of the features since China began building the reefs up in 2014. The US last went within 12 miles of Chinese-claimed territory in the Spratlys in 2012.

The decision to go ahead with the patrols follows months of deliberation and risks significantly upsetting already strained ties with China, the world’s second-biggest economy, with which US business and economic interests are deeply intertwined.

US Congressman Randy Forbes, chairman of the House Armed Services Seapower and Projection Forces Subcommittee and chairman of the congressional China Caucus, praised the plan.

“The passage of US vessels within 12 nautical miles of China’s man-made features in the South China Sea is a necessary and overdue response to China’s destabilising behavior in the region,” Forbes said.

China claims most of the South China Sea, one of the world’s busiest sea lanes, through which more than US$5 trillion (S$7 trillion) of world trade passes every year. Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei, the Philippines and Taiwan have rival claims.

COMPETING CLAIMS

The United States argues that under international law, building up artificial islands on previously submerged reefs does not entitle a country to claim a territorial limit and that it is vital to maintain freedom of navigation.

Washington worries that China has built up the islands with the aim of extending its military reach in the South China Sea.

The patrols would be just weeks ahead of a series of Asia-Pacific summits which President Barack Obama and Chinese President Xi Jinping are expected to attend in the second half of November.

Xi surprised US officials after a meeting with Obama in Washington last month by saying that China had “no intention to militarise” the islands.

Even before that, however, satellite photographs had shown the construction of three military-length airstrips by China in the Spratlys, including one each on Mischief and Subi reefs.

Some US officials have said that the plan for patrols was aimed in part at testing Xi’s statement on militarization.

In May, the Chinese navy issued eight warnings to the crew of a US P8-A Poseidon surveillance aircraft that flew near the artificial islands but not within the 12-mile limit, reported CNN, which was aboard the US aircraft.

That same month, the USS Fort Worth, a littoral combat ship,“encountered multiple” Chinese warships during a patrol in the Spratly archipelago, the US Navy said at the time. It did not go into detail.

In 2013, Obama ordered two B-52 bombers to fly through an Air Defence Identification Zone that China established in the East China Sea over territory contested with Japan.

Pentagon officials say the United States regularly conducts freedom-of-navigation operations around the world to challenge excessive maritime claims.

In early September, China sent naval vessels within 12 miles of the Aleutian Islands off Alaska. China said they were there as part of a routine drill following exercises with Russia.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 27 Oct 2015 12:02

China warns US against sending warships to South China Sea - PTI, Economic Times

Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi has warned the US not to "make trouble out of nothing" in the disputed South China Sea amid reports that the American navy plans to send its ships close to islands claimed by China.

Wang made the remarks during a seminar in Beijing when responding to a question on the US Navy's intention of sending a warship within 12 nautical miles of China's islands in the sea.

"We are checking out the matter," said the foreign minister, state run Xinhua news agency reported today.

"If it is true, we advise the US to think twice before its action," he said, urging them "not to act in an imprudent way and not to make trouble out of nothing".

The strong remarks followed recent remarks by US Defence Secretary Ash Carter during his Australia tour that "make no mistake, the United States will fly, sail and operate wherever international law allows, as we do around the world, and the South China Sea will not be an exception".

"We will do that in the time and places of our choosing," he said adding that US would focus on ensuring freedom of navigation through the South China Sea where, Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia, Brunei and Taiwan contest China's claims of sovereignty all most all of South China Sea.

China faced a piquant situation in the area as US is extending security support to the Vietnam, Philippines, Malaysia, Brunei and Taiwan.

The differences persisted despite extensive talks between US President Barack Obama and Chinese President Xi Jinping during the Chinese leader's visit to Washington last month.

In scathing commentary against Carter's comments, Xinhua said US Navy is reportedly preparing to conduct "freedom of navigation" operations, sending warships within 12 nautical miles of the disputed islands in the SCS claimed by China.

"Let us not forget that in October 1962, when the Soviet Union was building missile sites in Cuba - not even on US soil - US President Kennedy made it clear in a televised speech that the United States would not 'tolerate the existence of the missile sites currently in place'," it said in reference to the Cuban missile crisis of 1962.

"What on earth makes the United States think China should and will tolerate it when US surface ships trespass on Chinese territory in the South China Sea?," it said.

"China will never tolerate any military provocation or infringement on sovereignty from the United States or any other country, just as the United States refused to 53 years ago," it said.

Xinhua is utterly wrong in making such comparisons. First of all these are artificial islets created by China purely with the intention of extending its claims on the South China Sea where it already has disputes with all littoral states. There is therefore a clear motive why this artificial construction was carried out. Secondly, China is unwilling to settle the disputes either bilaterally or even through the aegis of the ASEAN. The parties agreed to a Code of Conduct but China is not moving on that proposal either. It is unwilling to accept UNCLOS arbitration either because it knows well that its claims hold no waters (pun intended) or it knows that the verdict will be unfavourable to it.. China has signed the UNCLOS agreement and got its mining lease in the IOR through it, but is unwilling to recognize that authority in the SCS disputes. Thirdly, the Chinese claims on 90% of SCS are purely arbitrary as they are based on either the 9-dashes or 7-dashes that somebody arbitrarily drew on a map! There are no historical back-ups for these claims. Fourthly, the Chinese behaviour is aggressive and confrontational with all its neighbours (land and maritime) with whom it has border disputes. There is an unmistakable pattern to its behaviour which is to incrementally grab other's resources and assets through illegal assertions, aggressive posture and lying through its teeth.

Of course, the US objected to the missile sites on Cuban soil because the Soviet intent was clear. The Chinese argument that these were not on the US soil is laughable. How could the USSR have built them on the US soil? China objects to India-US-Japan maritime exercises held in the Bay of Bengal or off Okinawa. Why? The exercises are not conducted on its waters. China objected to ADB funding for infrastructure projects in Arunachal Pradesh or ONGC Videsh drilling for oil in the EEZ of Vietnam upon Vietnam's invitation but it itself is building huge infrastructure in Indian lands illegally occupied by Pakistan. China has even built a highway on illegally occupied lands belonging to India in Aksai Chin. It is also in possession of India's Shaksgam Valley given to it by Pakistan. When questioned on these inconsistencies, Chinese Foreign Office spokesman said China was only doing developmental work in POK!! About the Shaksgam Valley, China once said that its fate can be determined when India & Pakistan eventually settle the J&K issue! China is tying itself up in knots.

kit · Post by **kit** » 27 Oct 2015 12:16

This is a good opportunity for India .. if it stays outside any groups ! .. China needs to stop its activities in POK and settle the border issue asap

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 27 Oct 2015 16:36

Beijing warns, follows US warship in disputed South China Sea - Reuters, ToI

One US defence official said the USS Lassen sailed within 12 nautical miles of Subi Reef. A second defence official said the mission, which lasted a few hours, included Mischief Reef and would be the first in a series of freedom-of-navigation exercises aimed at testing China's territorial claims.

China's foreign ministry said the "relevant authorities" monitored, followed and warned the USS Lassen as it "illegally" entered waters near islands and reefs in the Spratlys without the Chinese government's permission.

"China will resolutely respond to any country's deliberate provocations," the ministry said in a statement that gave no details on precisely where the US ship sailed.

Foreign ministry spokesman Lu Kang later told a daily briefing that if the United States continued to "create tensions in the region," China might conclude it had to "increase and strengthen the building up of our relevant abilities".

Lu did not elaborate, except to say he hoped it did not come to that, but his comments suggested China could further boost its military presence in the South China Sea.

"China hopes to use peaceful means to resolve all the disputes, but if China has to make a response then the timing, method and tempo of the response will be made in accordance with China's wishes and needs."

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 27 Oct 2015 16:59

On the SCS escalation, the US has, for the first time, after its announcement of 'rebalancing', walked the talk. This, to some extent, would reduce the apprehension in the minds of a small nation like the Philippines, a staunch US ally, that the US was only posturing without actioning.

Will it lead to a strident response from China? I do not think so especially with the poor economic situation of China with no possibility of an early revival.

The way China acts is a lesson in itself. In c. 1949 when the world was in turmoil, Zhou en Lai announced the nine-dashes boundary in SCS and claimed the whole of it. As Japan gave up any claims in SCS as part of its 1951 peace treaty, China upped its ante. As the French left Indo-China, the Chinese troops occupied eastern Paracell islands. In c. 1962, when the Bay of Pigs was at its height, the Chinese PLA attacked India and mysteriously retreated too before the world's attention could focus on the India-China border. China waited until c. 1972 when the US gave up administrative control of Ryukyu islands and returned them to Japan, before it raked up tensions in the East China Sea. In c. 1974, when the US left Vietnam and had already entered into a deal with China, the Chinese tried to occupy the rest of Paracell leading to a clash with South Vietnam. In the latter half of the 70s, as Vietnam came closer to USSR and offered it Cam Ranh Bay for the Soviet fleet, China quietened down until 1988 when it sensed an opportunity and attacked the Vietnamese navy killing sveral dozen Vietnamese navymen.

The Chinese tactics are clear.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 27 Oct 2015 18:36

The ‘Road’ to Success for the “Silk Road Initiative” is via Aerospace - Ajay Lele, IDSA Comment

A Conveyor Belt for Progress and Influence

China's "Belt and Road" (B & R) initiative has been formulated to offer new opportunities for its economic growth. Like other Chinese projects in recent times, this is also a gigantic proposal linking China with Europe through Central and West Asian region. There are proposed linkages with Africa too. The actualisation of this initiative involves connectivity by road/rail and sea. It is obvious that maritime connectivity would play a major role in this project because today more than 90 per cent of global trade happens via sea routes. The connectivity using rail and road network is also of importance because it would help integrating China with various parts of the world for global commerce. With this project, China is seen using commerce as a tool to expand to its geopolitical and geostrategic influence.

Although the aerial medium is the fastest for travel, it has never been a preferred medium for cargo traffic owing to weight and cost considerations. However, this does not mean that China would not depend on ‘air’ as a medium for its B & R initiative. In fact along with ‘air’ China is also found significantly depending on ‘space’ as a medium to ensure the smooth progression of this initiative.

The idea behind the B & R initiative is rooted in history. The ancient Silk Road was a 7,000-km-long pathway used by camel-driving merchants some 2,000 years ago. Today it is known by various names like the Silk Road Economic Belt, the 21st-century Maritime Silk Road, One Belt, One Road (OBOR). Broadly, this initiative has two components—the “Silk Road Economic Belt” (SREB), a Eurasian land corridor from the Pacific coast to the Baltic Sea and the 21st century “Maritime Silk Road” (MSR). Also, there are some additional components, like the “Air Silk Road” and a "Space-based New Silk Road." At present, in geographical terms the B & R initiative has not emerged as a network which could be specifically demarcated by using explicit points or lines on the map; it is essentially an area over land and sea where China’s politico-economic interests converge. Involving air and space elements allows China to have a greater flexibility to expand both business and influence over this region of its interest.

Air Silk Road

Aviation would have an important role in enhancing the B & R network. Presently, it is easier and cost effective to develop infrastructure around airports in comparison to the development of road and rail communication and transportation systems. In near future, China is proposing to invest approximately US$82 billion domestically for undertaking around 193 projects. Out of these, 51 strategic projects (costing approximately US$32 billion) would directly serve the B & R initiative. China has the world's second-largest civil aviation network, with 52 airlines and 202 airports operating on more than 600 routes connecting over fifty countries. During the last two years, China has built 15 airports and expanded another 28 in provinces along the routes of the B & R initiative. China is keen to increase direct connectivity with various Central Asian and European states. This would also help them to boost domestic aviation industry significantly.

However, only investment in aviation infrastructure is not sufficient and China would be required to adopt business friendly policies. Of particular importance are the issues dealing with the airspace management. China would be required to open up the military-controlled airspace and also allow access to lower altitude airspace. China has declared an Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) in the East China Sea during November 2013 which generated significant amount of controversy owing to restrictions on aviation traffic. China is yet to clearly establish any claim on ADIZ in the South China Sea, but there is no guarantee that China would not do so. It would be of interest to see how China manages these issues in its ‘Air Silk road’ project

In the satellite technology arena, China has made phenomenal progress during the last decade. Presently, China has around 120 satellites in orbit mainly providing communication, remote-sensing and navigational services. Their communications and remote-sensing networks have near global coverage. They have already established indigenous satellite navigational footprint over Asia-Pacific region with their Beidou (Compass) navigation satellite network and are expecting to widen this footprint globally within next five years. Various real-time inputs provided by their multiple satellite constellations would help them significantly in conducting various traffic planning and management activities on land and sea for B & R initiative.

Space Silk Road

The “Space-based Silk Road” is likely to encompass many powerful communications satellites and high resolution remote-sensing satellites. Naturally, Beidou system would be an inevitable component of this infrastructure. China is also collaborating with the service providers for the Russian satellite navigational system called GLONASS. Currently, GLONASS Union and Chinese manufacturing company Norinco have proposed joint development and production of a multisystem receiver module for satellite navigation systems. Their idea is to launch Russian-Chinese receivers for satellite navigation systems on the Silk Road Economic Belt (SREB) and the Eurasian Economic Union (EEU) markets. The budget for this project would be approximately US$10 million.

The Institute of Space & Earth Information Science (ISEIS) of the Chinese University of Hong Kong (CU) has signed an agreement with Dong Fang Teng Fei (DFTF, a subsidiary of the Beijing Xiangzhi company) during 2014 to join “Space Silk Road” for developing global satellite services. To promote international services for Chinese satellites, important aerospace enterprises and research institutes like the China Great Wall Industry Corporation, China Satellite Communication Co Ltd, etc have collaboratively formed an International Alliance of Satellite Application Service (ASAS) in August 2014 and have initiated the “Space Silk Road” programme to coordinate international cooperative research in space-based satellite technology for the 'Silk Road Economic Belt' strategy.

Apart from the governmental and private agencies, a few interdisciplinary non-profit NGO’s are also involving themselves in this project; the China Satellite Global Services Alliance (CSGSA) is one such agency. They are investing in developing ground facilities. Launching satellites is only one aspect of data collection. It is important to have the ground infrastructure for the purposes of collection, analysis and dissipation of data. Currently CSGSA has established trial satellite receiving bases in Xinjiang, Ningxia, Hainan and Fujian, all important locations for the B & R projects. Subsequently, for establishing receiving stations they propose to move westwards over land, through Central Asia and its neighbourhood to Europe, the Indian Ocean to Africa and to Latin America. China would require assistance from the Central Asian states, Malta, Malaysia, India, the US, Brazil and Norway for establishing satellite receiving facilities within their borders.

The idea of the “Space Silk Road” appears to be taking a definitive shape. On May 29, 2015, the CSGSA and the International Trade Centre (ITC) jointly held the 2nd China Satellite Global Services International Cooperative Talks where international experts discussed the construction of the Space Silk Road. With increase in global aviation traffic in general and increase in traffic in the region owing to B & R network, a rise in the safety demands of civilian airlines is expected. The disappearance of Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 and the shooting down of flight MH17 over Ukraine highlights the need for a more comprehensive satellite network to provide additional and real-time information about aircraft’s position.
The existing black boxes in aircrafts provide information only after a mishap (provided they are found and are not damaged). China proposes to use the Space Silk Road system to create a live-feed "black box" which would provide constant global coverage of all air, shipping and overland routes. The system is also expected to enable planes and satellites to communicate with each other. China proposes to use Beidou navigational network as one of the important component in this system. Naturally, all this would require addition to the civilian aircraft equipment inventory adding relevant transmitters, receivers, data storage equipment etc. This could generate additional business too.

Seamless internet connectivity would be a necessity for the success of B & R initiative. There would be problems with aircrafts and ships passing through areas covered by different satellite signals. The main satellite company in China, China Satellite Communications, has plans to launch new satellites using Ka-band frequency (offers higher speeds and requires a smaller satellite dish for operations) that will cover the B & R initiative region in near future. However, this is one area where more attention needs to be paid. China also may have to look for other options like high-altitude drones or near-space systems to ensure that no internet blackout takes place.

Silk Road: Sky is the Limit

For China, the Belt and Road initiative is a long-term strategy designed for it to assume a bigger role in global affairs through the business route. Various aerial and space-based platforms will play an important in making this strategy successful. Such platforms hold a larger promise than being merely labelled as transportation (passenger and cargo) and information provider platforms. Aircrafts and satellites have commercial, political/diplomatic and strategic significance. In the years to come, China would be required to make more investments both technologically and financially in these sectors.

For India there is much to learn from such initiatives. Today, India is proposing to launch a satellite for SAARC (South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation) countries. This satellite would be launched during 2016 with an aim to assist the region in education, health and communication. Next year India is also expected to operationalise its own navigational system called IRNSS (Indian Regional Navigation Satellite System). India is proposing to offer navigation, tracking and mapping services to their neighbours by using IRNSS platform. Today, India has one of the biggest remote-sensing satellite networks in place. Now, the time has come for India to use all these services in its best interest. India could develop a mega business model which could operate in the SAARC region and beyond.

kit · Post by **kit** » 27 Oct 2015 19:14

http://www.popsci.com/chinese-shipyard- ... ng-islands

For China, a floating island airbase, besides obvious deployments to disputed islands, could be a new kind of tool for global military projection, notably addressing one of China's strategic weaknesses compared to the US, its dearth of foreign military bases. In the near future, China could stage anti-piracy missions and humanitarian relief from well stocked floating islands. More forceful uses of floating islands could be temporary or permanent deployments off the waters of potential battlefields.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 28 Oct 2015 00:27

China warns US Navy after ship sails by Chinese-built island

BEIJING (AP) — A U.S. Navy warship sailed past one of China's artificial islands in the South China Sea on Tuesday, in a challenge to Chinese sovereignty claims that drew an angry protest from Beijing, which said the move damaged U.S.-China relations and regional peace."The Chinese side expresses its strong dissatisfaction and resolute opposition," the statement said.Navy officials had said the sail-past was necessary to assert the U.S. position that China's manmade islands cannot be considered sovereign territory with the right to surrounding territorial waters.

International law permits military vessels the right of "innocent passage" in transiting other country's seas without notification. China's Foreign Ministry, though, labeled the ship's actions as illegal.The U.S. says it doesn't take a position on sovereignty over the South China Sea but insists on freedom of navigation and overflight. About 30 percent of global trade passes through the South China Sea, which also has rich fishing grounds and a potential wealth of undersea mineral deposits.China says it respects the right of navigation but has never specified the exact legal status of its maritime claims. China says virtually all of the South China Sea belongs to it, while Brunei, Malaysia, the Philippines, Taiwan and Vietnam claim either parts or all of it."Make no mistake, the United States will fly, sail and operate wherever international law allows, as we do around the world, and the South China Sea is not and will not be an exception," Defense Secretary Ash Carter said earlier this month.
The Chinese Foreign Ministry statement said China adhered to international law regarding freedom of navigation and flight, but "resolutely opposes the damaging of China's sovereignty and security interests in the name of free navigation and flight.""China will firmly deal with provocations from other countries," the statement said, adding that China would continue to monitor the air and sea and take further action when necessary.Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Lu Kong said such actions by the U.S. might end up spurring further advances in Chinas defense capabilities."If any country wishes to disrupt or impede China's reasonable, justifiable and lawful activities on our own territories by playing some little tricks, I would advise these countries to cast off this fantasy," Lu said.State Department spokesman John Kirby said Monday the U.S. would not be required to consult with other nations if it decided to conduct freedom of navigation operations in international waters."The whole point of freedom of navigation in international waters is that it's international waters. You don't need to consult with anybody," Kirby said.The South China Sea has become an increasingly sore point in relations with the United States, even as President Barack Obama and China's President Xi Jinping have sought to deepen cooperation in other areas.Despite those tensions, exchanges between the two militaries have continued to expand, with a U.S. Navy delegation paying visits last week to China's sole aircraft carrier and a submarine warfare academy.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 28 Oct 2015 08:49

China: "All sound and fury signifying nothing...!

The Chinese bluff has been called.Either it increases physical attempts to stop US warships,aircraft et al from cruising past the "instant atolls",it is going to lose severe face,something that the neo-imperialist ruler of China XI Gins,will not be able to swallow.The impending crisis in the Indo-China Sea may be one reason why the US has suddenly turned around and invited Iran into the Syrian conflict resolution talks,also acknowledgeing that Russia has taken the burden of eliminating ISIS from its back. The whole of Asia is watching to see how far the Chinese will go in their threats. The arrogant Chinese ambassador to the US actually said that "some time ago there was no USA".What was he trying to prove? Not too long ago there was no Communist party of China either.

US threatens further naval incursions despite furious reaction from China
China accused US navy of ‘serious provocation’ after USS Lassen sailed close to Chinese artificial island, but US contends they have freedom of navigation

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/o ... -china-sea

The USS Lassen conducts a trilateral naval exercise in May of 2015. Photograph: EPA
Dan Roberts in Washington and Tom Phillips in Beijing

Tuesday 27 October 2015

The US has threatened further naval incursions into waters claimed by China after naval manoeuvres near two artificial islands in the South China Sea prompted an angry rebuke from Beijing.

China summoned the US ambassador to Beijing in protest and accused the US of a “serious provocation” following US naval manoeuvres during which the guided-missile destroyer USS Lassen sailed close to a Chinese artificial island.

But US defense secretary Ash Carter warned on Tuesday that naval operations in the area would continue. “We will fly, sail and operate wherever international law permits,” said Carter, during a congressional hearing in which lawmakers claimed the US risked losing credibility with its allies in the region if it did not act.

“There have been naval operations in that region in recent days and there will be more in the weeks and months to come,” he said.

The US navy began its mission through waters near the island at about 6.40am local time on Tuesday.

Carter confirmed that the USS Lassen traveled within 12 nautical miles (22.2km, or 13.8 miles) of the disputed Spratly archipelago, which is at the heart of a controversial Chinese island building campaign that has soured ties between Washington and Beijing. Chinese officials were not informed of Tuesday’s mission, US officials said.

The direct military challenge to Beijing’s territorial claims prompted a furious reaction in Beijing.

State television reported that the Chinese vice-foreign minister, Zhang Yesui, had branded the move “extremely irresponsible” when meeting with the US ambassador to China, Max Baucus.

Addressing journalists in Beijing, Lu Kang, a foreign ministry spokesman, said China was strongly dissatisfied with America’s actions, which he described as a threat to China’s sovereignty.

But he refused to be drawn on whether China would consider a military response. “I will not answer hypothetical questions,” Lu said. “We hope that the US side will not take actions that will backfire.”

Lu warned that further “provocative actions” might lead to accelerated Chinese construction in the South China Sea: “It would be a pity for us to realise that we have to strengthen and speed up relevant construction activities.”

The Chinese embassy in Washington said the concept of “freedom of navigation” should not be used as an excuse for muscle-flexing and the US should “refrain from saying or doing anything provocative and act responsibly in maintaining regional peace and stability”.

Analysis/ How China's artificial islands led to tension in the South China Sea

Beijing is attempting to build artificial islands, while other states in the region are looking to the US to flex its military muscle on their behalf

Read more

China’s military buildup in the South China Sea – including the construction of a 3km runway capable of supporting fighter jets and transport planes – has become a major source of tension between Beijing and Washington.

China claims most of the South China Sea, one of the world’s busiest sea lanes, although Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei, the Philippines and Taiwan have rival claims. Beijing says the islands will have mainly civilian uses as well as undefined defence purposes.

But satellite photographs have shown the construction of three military-length airstrips by China in the Spratlys, including one each on Mischief and Subi reefs.

Both reefs were submerged at high tide before China began a massive dredging project in 2014. It now claims a 12 nautical mile territorial limit around the artificial islands, although the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea says such limits cannot be set around man-made islands built on previously submerged reefs.

Barack Obama said he held “candid discussions” with his Chinese counterpart, Xi Jinping, over the issue during Xi’s recent state visit to the US.

Speaking earlier this month, officials in Beijing cautioned the US against “provocative” actions in the South China Sea. “China will never allow any country to violate China’s territorial waters and airspace in the South China Sea,” foreign ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying said.

Claims in the South China Sea.

Security experts in Washington described Tuesday’s intervention as a victory for hawks within the administration who had been pushing hard for a symbolic gesture against Chinese territorial claims.

Michael Green, a former senior director for Asia at the White House National Security Council, said this was despite a fear among those close to Obama of upsetting the Chinese over other issues.

“There was a very, very strong consensus building within the Pacific Command and among East Asia experts in the Pentagon, State Department and the White House that they had do this,” he told the Guardian.

“The resistance appears to have been from the White House at higher levels because they did not want to upset president Xi’s visit and there was concern it might affect US-China cooperation at the Paris climate change meeting,” added Green, who now works at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) in Washington.

“The timing was about finding a window after the Xi visit, but far enough ahead of the Paris meeting that they could recover from the Chinese reaction. That was the major calculation.”

The Pentagon insisted it was within its rights under maritime law to enter such waters, in a statement that coincided with a visit to Washington by Indonesian president Joko Widodo.

“The United States is conducting routine operations in the South China Sea in accordance with international law,” Bill Urban, a US Defense Department spokesman told the Guardian. “US forces operate in the Asia-Pacific region on a daily basis, including in the South China Sea. All operations are conducted in accordance with international law.”

“It’s one of the reasons you have a navy, to be able to exert influence and to defend freedom of navigation on – in international waters,” added State Department spokesman John Kirby on Monday.

“You don’t need to consult with any nation when you are exercising the right of freedom of navigation in international waters. The whole point of freedom of navigation in international waters is that it’s international waters.”

White House officials said Widodo and Obama had also discussed the issue during their meeting in Washington on Monday and claimed Chinese aggression “increased tensions, eroded trust, and threatened to undermine peace, security, and the economic well-being of the region”.

Obama is said to have been under particular pressure to tackle the issue ahead of an upcoming meeting of the Association of South East Asian Nations (Asean).

Analysis/ US manoeuvre in South China Sea leaves little wiggle room with China

US warship’s presence in disputed waters sure to draw Beijing retaliation, which could worsen ties and spread to other regional rows

But pressure was also mounting at home. Arkansas Republican Dan Sullivan said many members of the Senate armed services committee had been concerned that US “inaction” in the South China Sea was “undermining US credibility”.

But US security experts criticised the administration for appearing to time its intervention to suit conflicting agendas of the Asean and Paris summits rather than more boldly assert the principle of freedom of navigation.

“I think that’s the wrong way to do these things,” said Green at CSIS, “They need to appear routine and not halting and tentative,”

“This was necessary because the lack of response was causing deep concern among allies and this will go someway to reassuring them,” he added. “It does not have to happen on a regular basis, but it will have to happen again at some point.”

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 28 Oct 2015 09:24

China summons US ambassador to protest ship near reef in South China Sea - AP, Economic Times

China summoned the American ambassador to protest the US Navy's sailing of a warship close to one of China's artificial islands in the South China Sea, in an act that challenged Chinese sovereignty claims.

China's Foreign Ministry said on its website Wednesday that Executive Vice Minister Zhang Yesui told Max Bacaus that the US had acted in defiance of repeated Chinese objections and had threatened China's sovereignty and security. While offering no details, Zhang said Tuesday's "provocative" maneuver also placed personnel and infrastructure on the island in jeopardy.

China was "extremely dissatisfied and a resolutely opposed" the US actions, the ministry said. The US State Department declined to confirm the Tuesday meeting, or comment on any remarks made on the issue.

China says authorities monitored and warned the destroyer USS Lassen as it entered what China claims as a 12-mile (21-kilometer) territorial limit around Subi Reef in the Spratly Islands archipelago, a group of reefs, islets, and atolls where the Philippines has competing claims.

The sail-past fits a US policy of pushing back against China's growing assertiveness in the South China Sea. US ally the Philippines welcomed the move as a way of helping maintain "a balance of power."

Since 2013, China has accelerated the creation of new outposts by piling sand atop reefs and atolls then adding buildings, ports and airstrips big enough to handle bombers and and fighter jets activities seen as attempting to change the territorial status by altering the geography.

Navy officials had said the sail-past was necessary to assert the US position that China's man-made islands cannot be considered sovereign territory with the right to surrounding territorial waters.

International law permits military vessels the right of "innocent passage" in transiting other country's seas without notification, although China's Foreign Ministry labeled the ship's actions as illegal.

The US says it doesn't take a position on sovereignty over the South China Sea but insists on freedom of navigation and overflight. About 30 percent of global trade passes through the South China Sea, which also has rich fishing grounds and a potential wealth of undersea mineral deposits.

China says it respects the right of navigation but has never specified the exact legal status of its maritime claims. China says virtually all of the South China Sea belongs to it, while Brunei, Malaysia, the Philippines, Taiwan and Vietnam claim either parts or all of it.

State Department spokesman John Kirby said Tuesday the US has a right to freedom of navigation in international waters, and such maneuvers "should not be construed as a threat by anybody." He said the US wants relations with China to continue to deepen.

"The US-China relationship is vitally important and one that we want to see continue to improve and to grow for the benefit of both our countries, not to mention the region," Kirby told reporters in Washington.

Beijing's response closely mirrored its actions in May when a navy dispatcher warned off a US Navy P8-A Poseidon surveillance aircraft as it flew over Fiery Cross Reef, where China has conducted extensive reclamation work.

A Defense Department official, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the Lassen's movements, said the patrol was completed without incident incident. A Pentagon spokesman, Navy Cmdr. Bill Urban, declined to comment.

Speaking to foreign correspondents in Manila, Philippine President Benigno Aquino III said he supported the US naval maneuvers as an assertion of freedom of navigation and as a means to balance power in the region.

"I think expressing support for established norms of international behavior should not be a negative for a country," he said. "I think everybody would welcome a balance of power anywhere in the world."

Without identifying China by name, he said "one regional power" has been making "controversial pronouncements" that must not be left unchallenged.

The Obama administration has long said it will exercise a right to freedom of navigation in any international waters.

"Make no mistake, the United States will fly, sail and operate wherever international law allows, as we do around the world, and the South China Sea is not and will not be an exception," Defense Secretary Ash Carter said earlier this month.

The Chinese Foreign Ministry statement said China adhered to international law regarding freedom of navigation and flight, but "resolutely opposes the damaging of China's sovereignty and security interests in the name of free navigation and flight."

"China will firmly deal with provocations from other countries," the statement said, adding that China would continue to monitor the air and sea and take further action when necessary.

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Lu Kang said such actions by the US might end up spurring further advances in Chinas defense capabilities.

"If any country wishes to disrupt or impede China's reasonable, justifiable and lawful activities on our own territories by playing some little tricks, I would advise these countries to cast off this fantasy," Lu said.

The South China Sea has become an increasingly sore point in relations with the United States, even as President Barack Obama and China's President Xi Jinping have sought to deepen cooperation in other areas.

Despite those tensions, exchanges between the two militaries have continued to expand, with a US Navy delegation paying visits last week to China's sole aircraft carrier and a submarine warfare academy.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 28 Oct 2015 10:06

"..playing some little tricks".Who is? It is China with its "instant islands" who are the tricksters and upstarts in the region,not the other littoral nations of the Indo-China Sea (ICS).As the crisis escalates,India can beam with delight the corner that China has boxed itself into,and one sincerely hopes that "XI Gins" patience has worn thin and Taiwan elects a pro-Independence leader in the upcoming elections.China's bluff must be called for once and for all.

This is an action that the US should've done long ago when China first started building these instant atolls which have sprung up like a cancerous disease all over the ICS. It is now past time for India to accelerate its naval modernisation and expansion,especially in the sub fleet,both in numbers and capability. We need to acquire subs both built in India and built abroad as the gap is only increasing where China is concerned,not to mention its building 8 subs for Pak.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/o ... with-china

US manoeuvre in South China Sea leaves little wiggle room with China

US warship’s presence in disputed waters sure to draw Beijing retaliation, which could worsen ties and spread to other regional rows

The USS Lassen, a guided missile destroyer, sailed past one of China’s artificial islands in the South China Sea on Tuesday. Photograph: Eugene Hoshiko/AP
Simon Tisdall

Tuesday 27 October 2015 14.29 GMT

Barack Obama’s decision to send a US guided missile destroyer into disputed waters off the Spratly islands in the South China Sea on Tuesday has provoked predictable outpourings of rage and veiled threats from Beijing – but nothing, yet, in the way of a military response. The worry now is that the confrontation will catch fire, escalate and spread.

Both China, which claims the Spratlys as its own, and the US, which does not recognise Beijing’s sovereignty, have boxed themselves into a rhetorical and tactical corner. With the Pentagon insisting it will repeat and extend such naval patrols at will, and with the People’s Liberation Army Navy determined to stop them, it is feared a head-on collision cannot be far away.

China’s heated response to Tuesday’s manoeuvre by the USS Lassen off the Spratlys’ Mischief and Subi reefs, where Beijing is controversially building military airstrips and lighthouses on reclaimed land, left it little wiggle room. The American warship had been tracked and warned off, officials said, adding that what it termed an illegal incursion was a “threat to national sovereignty” and a deliberate provocation that could backfire.
Beijing summons US ambassador over warship in South China Sea
Read more

Anticipating the US move earlier this month, foreign ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying said: “China will never allow any country to violate China’s territorial waters and airspace in the South China Sea.” If ever a government has publicly laid down a red line, this is it. And Obama just crossed it.

Having personally failed to find a compromise in White House talks with Xi Jinping, China’s president, last month, Obama has upped the ante. As is also the case with Xi, it is now all but impossible to envisage an American climbdown without enormous loss of face and prestige.

By deploying a powerful warship, by declining to inform China in advance, and by insisting the US is upholding the universal principle of free navigation in international waters and will do so again whenever and wherever it wishes, Obama has deliberately challenged Beijing to do its worst.

Chinese retaliation, when it comes, and it surely must, may not centre specifically on the Spratlys. There are plenty of other potential troublespots and flashpoints where Beijing might seek to give the Americans pause. In prospect is a sort of geopolitical chain reaction.

A spokesman, Lu Kang, hinted at this on Tuesday: “China hopes to use peaceful means to resolve all the disputes, but if China has to make a response then the timing, method and tempo of the response will be made in accordance with China’s wishes and needs.”

Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Lu Kang warns the US over military moves in South China Sea

China is in dispute over other South China Sea islands and reefs with several countries that are all more or less at one with the US on the issue, including the Philippines, Vietnam and Malaysia. Renewed trouble could flare up in any of these places. One possibility is the Scarborough Shoal, claimed by Manila, where clashes have continued on and off since 2012.

Another obvious pressure point is the Senkaku islands (Diaoyu in Chinese) in the East China Sea, claimed by both Japan and China. In 2013 Beijing upped the ante, unilaterally declaring an air exclusion, or identification, zone in the area, which the US promptly breached with B52 bombers.

This dispute forms part of the background to the military buildup ordered by Japan’s hawkish prime minister, Shinzo Abe, who set a record £27bn defence budget this year. (China’s military budget is roughly £90bn; that of the US is about £378bn).
What’s behind Beijing’s drive to control the South China Sea?
Read more

Reacting to the perceived China threat, Abe is extending Okinawa’s defences and getting involved in South China Sea patrols in support of Washington. Japan also strengthened defence and security ties with Britain – a development that now makes David Cameron’s courtship of Beijing seem all the more incongruous.

Taiwan is another powder keg that could be ignited by widening US-China confrontation. While Beijing regards Taiwan as a renegade province and seeks its return, the present-day status quo is underwritten by US military might.

Tensions with the mainland have eased under the island’s current president, Ma Ying-jeou. But elections in January are expected to bring the more pro-independence Democratic Progressive party to power. This could provoke Beijing, where Xi has warned his patience is wearing thin.

US-China naval and aerial rivalry could expand even further afield. China is busy building a blue water fleet (a maritime force capable of operating across the deep waters of open oceans) including aircraft carriers, with the aim of challenging US dominance in the eastern Pacific.

Chinese naval ships recently showed up off the Aleutian islands during an Obama visit to Alaska, the mineral-rich Arctic being another possible theatre. Meanwhile, regional western allies such as Australia have serious cause for concern that escalating superpower friction could draw them in.

If Beijing and Washington cannot find a way of stepping back, cooperation on key international issues such as reviving the global economy, fair and sustainable trade, climate change, terrorism and cybercrime may suffer.

The latest developments on the high seas are not encouraging. Right now, the clear and present danger is of deteriorating bilateral relations across the board.

PS:A good technical description as to how China built these "instant atolls".
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/o ... n-briefing
How China's artificial islands led to tension in the South China Sea

Beijing is attempting to build artificial islands, while other states in the region are looking to the US to flex its military muscle on their behalf

panduranghari · Post by **panduranghari** » 28 Oct 2015 12:52

If China does not respond in force, does it mean the US pivot to Asia is more or less successful? And if China does respond in force, can we assume otherwise with regards to the pivot? What will the US action be if it deems its pivot has failed?

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 28 Oct 2015 17:28

panduranghari, I do not think anything will be proved by China choosing to respond or not respond. There have been instances before as well between the these two nations. But, this forceful US action might have inspired some confidence among those US allies which wanted to see some 'proof' of US rebalancing. After all, countries like Australia, Japan, Philippines (and even India) were investing heavily in the US position and they needed some re-assurance that was in the coming for a long while now. IMHO, this was more a message to the friends of the US in Indo-Pacific than to China itself. As I said before, China is not in a position to do much.

panduranghari · Post by **panduranghari** » 28 Oct 2015 18:29

There might just be enough reason for China and US to start a skirmish. If China escalates, US might need to as well
1. to save face
2. to show China, it means business

Another possibility IMO is to encourage the other allies to pitch in to ensure the Chinese are on a back foot.

dsreedhar · Post by **dsreedhar** » 28 Oct 2015 19:07

Do not think China will take on US anytime soon. It will spit its fire to assert its power on a smaller scale on powers such as Japan, Vietnam or even India on a pretext other than SCS. Not necessarily war but mobilize its forces to the brink of war to show its intent to act and scare any future challenges.

deejay · Post by **deejay** » 28 Oct 2015 19:19

Stoopid Q: Is the US deliberately heating up South - CHina Sea (Indo China Sea) to keep the Chinese busy and stop them from taking part in the festivities in Syria?

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 28 Oct 2015 20:03

This is just US flag operation to inspire confidence in US allies . China needs to be calm as its just minor irritant

chanakyaa · Post by **chanakyaa** » 29 Oct 2015 04:23

What if all this posturing by chacha is neither about showing support to allies or strength to Chaina? Is it possible that population's attention is being diverted (face saving action that is) from poor performance in the midldli-yeast? If they wanted Chaina to stop build islands in south chain sea, why didn't they do it before it was built? Unless they wanted Chaina to finish the island so that all this faaltoo dramebazzi can be put together. No crisis means no opportunity to demonstrate the strength. Burning few thousands gallons of KSA fuel driving by the island, does not mean anything.

I'm not denying the strong desire between the two countries (and everyone with a d!kc making a drive by visit) to show each other's khujli, but I've started to believe that the tactical understanding of agreement between the two countries is polar opposite of the differences they show out in open. A regional language saying, "I'll pretend as if I'm beating you, and you pretend as if you are hurt".

Just my two paisa, which is being debased by central bankers every day.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 29 Oct 2015 10:23

Uday,your 2 paisa has value indeed from this report.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/o ... s-official

US and Chinese navy chiefs to discuss South China Sea tensions – US official
Hour-long teleconference is arranged, and Australia says joint exercises with China will still go ahead amid fallout from USS Lassen’s patrol near artificial Chinese islands on Tuesday

Thursday 29 October 2015
The US chief of naval operations and his Chinese counterpart will hold an hour-long video teleconference on Thursday, days after Beijing was angered by a US warship’s patrol within a 12-nautical-mile (22km) limit around a man-made Chinese island in the South China Sea, a US official said.

The meeting was initiated by Admiral John Richardson and Admiral Wu Shengli to discuss recent operations in the South China Sea and naval ties between the two countries, the official said.

It will be the third video teleconference held between a US naval operations chief and the Chinese equivalent.

The news emerged the day Australia announced two of its warships would hold exercises with the Chinese navy in the South China Sea next week.

HMAS Stuart and HMAS Arunta will visit China’s main South China Sea base of Zhanjiang in the southern province of Guangdong before conducting drills early next week, said Australia’s defence minister, Marise Payne.

“The Royal Australian Navy has a long history of engagement with regional navies and regularly conducts port visits and exercises – including in China,” Payne said.

“There have been no changes or delays to the schedule of the HMAS Arunta and HMAS Stuart since the United States activity in the South China Sea on 27 October 2015.”

The USS Lassen’s patrol on Tuesday was the most significant US challenge yet to 12-nautical-mile territorial limits China claims around artificial islands it has built in the Spratly archipelago.

Separately, the English-language China Daily newspaper reported that Admiral Harry Harris, commander of US forces in the Pacific, would visit Beijing next week. It cited an unnamed source and gave no further details.

A US embassy spokesman declined to comment.

Harris has been highly critical of China’s island building in the Spratlys. Earlier this year he said China was using dredges and bulldozers to create a “great wall of sand” in the South China Sea.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 29 Oct 2015 13:24

About Obama’s ‘Freedom Of The Seas’ Hypocrisy—–When Taiwan Claimed The Spratlys Washington Didn’t Say Boo