China Projecting Power in South and East China Seas

[kaiserd]

The way China is trying to gain territory in the South Chinese Sea
- most likely violates international law
- might lead to war
... but China still feels its aims impaired by the presence of US and US-allied military forces in East and South East Asia. With its economic boom, it now has the means to do something about the matter. Whether it's wise/effective to try to achieve its goals in ways that are offending all its neighbours is, well, open to debate. When China last invaded Vietnam in 1979, the PLA didn't exactly cover itself in glory.

The PRC may encourage the N. Koreans to "assist" them by opening another front which would be devastating for the Koreans.

Highly unlikely.

I, coming from where I come from (Ireland) and having the values and attitudes would naturally look far, far more favourable view of US intentions and methods versus China's current goals and behaviour.
No ifs or buts.

However many of these discussions appear to drift towards semi-racist views of a sinister secret Chinese conspiracies and the like (not accusing NeilChapman, that just appears to be the direction of travel).
No country (or government, or race) has an ultimate monopoly on righteousness or evil, or really bad decisions.

NeilChapmans fantasies of China egging on North Korea into apocalyptical war is bizarre and displays zero understanding of China.

China single mindedly pursues its perceived self interest; a Chinese version of realpolitik mentioned above.
So does every major power (US etc) in the world, with obvious differences.
Understanding and managing these differences is the very nature of diplomacy.
Some of Chinese claims would be ridiculous if not for the underlying economic & military threat.
Understanding and seeking to manage the real Chinese perspective, not some fantasy doomsday version of it (which is not the same as surrendering or pandering to it) is the best we can do.

 

[NeilChapman]

The way China is trying to gain territory in the South Chinese Sea
- most likely violates international law
- might lead to war
... but China still feels its aims impaired by the presence of US and US-allied military forces in East and South East Asia. With its economic boom, it now has the means to do something about the matter. Whether it's wise/effective to try to achieve its goals in ways that are offending all its neighbours is, well, open to debate. When China last invaded Vietnam in 1979, the PLA didn't exactly cover itself in glory.

Those "aims" have so far included a great deal of very aggressive behavior to include those listed above. Not the behavior that is welcomed by the PRC's neighbors and their strategic allies or the international community.

The world cannot allow some to put the cart before the horse. The PRC's neighbors and their strategic allies are responding to this aggressive behavior, not causing it.

With respect to 1979, they weren't covered in glory in Korea either with deaths estimated between 400k-1000k PRC soldiers though they only gave 150k as the official number.

The PRC may encourage the N. Koreans to "assist" them by opening another front which would be devastating for the Koreans.

Highly unlikely.

You know this is unlikely why? The history of the region? The relationship between North Korea and the PRC? What country was it that supplied the Chinese communists against the nationalists?

It is interesting, however, that you should use those words. You are in august company. It happens to be the same reply MacArthur gave Truman when asked if he thought the PRC would openly enter the Korean War.

 

[Arjen]

You know this is unlikely why? The history of the region? The relationship between North Korea and the PRC? What country was it that supplied the Chinese communists against the nationalists?

Because South Korea, while suffering badly, would annihilate North Korea in an intra-Korean war - and North Korea would not be worth fighting with the USA over. Much better to have North Korea as a thorn in the side.

 

[NeilChapman]

I, coming from where I come from (Ireland) and having the values and attitudes would naturally look far, far more favourable view of US intentions and methods versus China's current goals and behaviour.
No ifs or buts.

However many of these discussions appear to drift towards semi-racist views of a sinister secret Chinese conspiracies and the like (not accusing NeilChapman, that just appears to be the direction of travel).
No country (or government, or race) has an ultimate monopoly on righteousness or evil, or really bad decisions.

NeilChapmans fantasies of China egging on North Korea into apocalyptical war is bizarre and displays zero understanding of China.

China single mindedly pursues its perceived self interest; a Chinese version of realpolitik mentioned above.
So does every major power (US etc) in the world, with obvious differences.
Understanding and managing these differences is the very nature of diplomacy.
Some of Chinese claims would be ridiculous if not for the underlying economic & military threat.
Understanding and seeking to manage the real Chinese perspective, not some fantasy doomsday version of it (which is not the same as surrendering or pandering to it) is the best we can do.

Semi-racist? Sinister? What?

This sounds like the President of the United States for many years. In his press statements there were only two options. No engagement or war that involves thousands of troops in Syria.

Why use the term "apocalyptical war"? Is there no other level of crisis that would keep the US engaged in Korea? Any military event in Korea would be devastating for the Koreans and would complicate any other US military actions.

There are myriad reasons that the PRC wants to limit US prestige in the region. If it felt that some kinetic action was necessary, it's highly suspect that the PRC would want to engage the US Military unilaterally. The Russians definitely don't, but it's likely that they would encourage the PRC much as Stalin did in Korea. That leaves North Korea as a likely candidate. South Korea is not the only candidate for some crisis escalation by N. Korea.

 

[sferrin]

"However many of these discussions appear to drift towards semi-racist "

There it is. Don't like what they say, out come the accusations of racism, sexism, or whatever other -ism or -phobia they think will cow you. Predictable as the sun rising in the East.

 

[NeilChapman]

"However many of these discussions appear to drift towards semi-racist "

There it is. Don't like what they say, out come the accusations of racism, sexism, or whatever other -ism or -phobia they think will cow you. Predictable as the sun rising in the East.

Perhaps they've changed the definition of racist in Ireland.

Kaiserd, understanding that you were not stating that my comment was racist perhaps you could explain how you came to the conclusion that this was "the direction of travel".

 

[kaiserbill]

The same old stuff from the same posters....

 

[VH]

The reasoning for China's aggressive actions can be traced to problems with their economy and the Chinese leadership fears that they are losing control of China.

 

[sferrin]

The same old stuff from the same posters....

Indeed.

 

[bobbymike]

"However many of these discussions appear to drift towards semi-racist "

There it is. Don't like what they say, out come the accusations of racism, sexism, or whatever other -ism or -phobia they think will cow you. Predictable as the sun rising in the East.

We support our Philippino Taiwanese Vietnamese Japanese allies so are concerned with Chinese actions.

RACIST!!!!!

That makes sense

 

[NeilChapman]

The reasoning for China's aggressive actions can be traced to problems with their economy and the Chinese leadership fears that they are losing control of China.

I've been wondering about that. "Nationalist/Internal Control/Power Consolidation" was the certainly impetus for Mao to enter the Korean War. Xi seems to have the same needs. We've seen the preliminary power consolidation and use of nationalism. The struggles with the economy might give a sense that more internal control was needed.

External threat could help consolidate domestic control, and by taking the fight to the Japanese and the Americans, Xi would strengthen his prestige among Communists internally. Perhaps he is ready to make use of heightened tension as an excuse for cracking down on even potential opposition.

 

[Grey Havoc]

Japan rescues 6 Chinese near Senkaku Islands; 8 still missing (The Asahi Shimbun)

Japan warns citizens to be wary in China as tensions rise (The Asahi Shimbun / Associated Press)

 

[NeilChapman]

Understanding and seeking to manage the real Chinese perspective, not some fantasy doomsday version of it (which is not the same as surrendering or pandering to it) is the best we can do.

When we review what the PRC has said, as well as the recent history of the region we get a picture which guides response. If the picture included the peaceful rise of the PRC then the response would reflect that peace. It has not. That doesn't mean that the only solution is kinetic.

It's helpful to recall the 1960's when Japan's economy was dramatically increasing there was rising irritation that everything was "Made in Japan". In the 1970's, Japanese cars were better made and less expensive than many other cars. There was angst that the Japanese system was "beating" the western systems for various structural reasons. But this was not racism, it was frustration based on poor performance and a closed Japanese system. By the 1980's the Japanese are buying Rockefeller Center and Columbia Pictures. But there were no military threats against its neighbors. In fact Japan was part of the original G5.

Russia was added to the G7 in 1998 following Yeltsin's reforms. Russia was actively courted in the late 90's and early 2000's. There was even Russian cooperation with NATO. It was until 2014 after Russia invaded Crimea that it was expelled from the G8. The world had to respond to Russia's aggressive behavior.

It's also obvious the US would rather not engage in the East and South China Seas. They have enough on their hands with Clinton, Trump, other domestic issues and the Middle East mess.

No, the world has not seen a peaceful regional rise of the PRC as it has with Japan. Their neighbors are past being nervous, concerned and anxious. They're fed up - to the point that Vietnam has installed rocket launchers on one of it's contested islands. The PI took them to the UN and Japan is seeking the ability to perhaps modify its constitution.

We respond to the data and come to a reasonable conclusion. It may be the wrong conclusion but it is reasonable based on the data. You respond not by providing data but using terms like racist, fantasy and apocalyptic.

I'm suggesting that the PRC's neighbors and their strategic allies be vigilant, train together, create harmony, even invite the PRC to participate based on positive behavior. Further, watch for manipulation, be proactive internationally in condemning aggressive PRC behavior and be prepared to defend yourself should the PRC choose poorly.

 

[kaiserbill]

Can't we make a dedicated closed thread where the usual can go and vent their anger and personal issues and takes on what they deem peaceful or aggressive, depending on their geographical location? Sort of like a quarantined bashing thread that attracts the handful.
They can also weave the usual domestic partisan political musings and outrage that the majority of the rest of us on this international forum couldn't care less about....

As has been stated by others here often enough, there are plenty of run-of-the-mill websites/forums that cater for that type of stuff.....this forum has always been far superior to those.

 

[sferrin]

If you don't like this conversation, nobody is making you participate. Exercise some self-control and avoid it. Better yet, how about you take your own advice and make your own thread to play in instead of complaining about people who disagree with you in this one?

 

[kaiserbill]

If you don't like this conversation, nobody is making you participate. Exercise some self-control and avoid it. Better yet, how about you take your own advice and make your own thread to play in instead of complaining about people who disagree with you in this one?

It is irrelevant what I believe in, or who disagrees with me. I, like the vast majority here, don't discuss politics, nor use this forum as a vehicle to air out our personal issues regarding other countries.

You are known on these forums for invariably involving two countries you particularly despise, mixed in with sniping about internal domestic politics from your country that the vast majority of us on this international forum couldn't give a hoot about. Yet we are forced to wade through this stuff, lack of self- control, and pet campaigns/bashing.
Your recent contribution on the J-20 thread about Chinese there, where you inferred they even stole the F-22/F-35 paint, even if you tried to veil it flimsily in humour, is just the latest in an extremely tiresome campaign for probably the majority here. It's difficult to understand the rationale, or indeed the value, of such comments to that thread other than the obvious.
It is well known you feature heavily in threads that get locked.....

Is it so hard to exercise self-restraint, which the majority here do? Keep a clean persona and deal in facts regarding why we are on this forum, and leave the personal pontificating and bashing to lesser sites, or more nation-centric sites like F-16.net...

 

[kaiserd]

If you don't like this conversation, nobody is making you participate. Exercise some self-control and avoid it. Better yet, how about you take your own advice and make your own thread to play in instead of complaining about people who disagree with you in this one?

It is irrelevant what I believe in, or who disagrees with me. I, like the vast majority here, don't discuss politics, nor use this forum as a vehicle to air out our personal issues regarding other countries.

You are known on these forums for invariably involving two countries you particularly despise, mixed in with sniping about internal domestic politics from your country that the vast majority of us on this international forum couldn't give a hoot about. Yet we are forced to wade through this stuff, lack of self- control, and pet campaigns/bashing.
Your recent contribution on the J-20 thread about Chinese there, where you inferred they even stole the F-22/F-35 paint, even if you tried to veil it flimsily in humour, is just the latest in an extremely tiresome campaign for probably the majority here. It's difficult to understand the rationale, or indeed the value, of such comments to that thread other than the obvious.
It is well known you feature heavily in threads that get locked.....

Is it so hard to exercise self-restraint, which the majority here do? Keep a clean persona and deal in facts regarding why we are on this forum, and leave the personal pontificating and bashing to lesser sites, or more nation-centric sites like F-16.net...

I agree with every word and apologise for my own part in not resisting the temptation to engage with / try to counter that sort of nonsense.

 

[kaiserbill]

Yes, it's a well worn path that I also fell onto, expecting change..

I'm disengaging from the thread too....

 

[sferrin]

If you don't like this conversation, nobody is making you participate. Exercise some self-control and avoid it. Better yet, how about you take your own advice and make your own thread to play in instead of complaining about people who disagree with you in this one?

It is irrelevant what I believe in, or who disagrees with me.

Sure, sure. That's why you're having a fit over people disagreeing with you on the topic of this thread. First you resort to name calling, then you try to shut down discussion. Like I said, if you don't like people disagreeing with you you might want to grow thicker skin or find another thread.

 

[NeilChapman]

Can't we make a dedicated closed thread where the usual can go and vent their anger and personal issues and takes on what they deem peaceful or aggressive, depending on their geographical location?

Looks the NYT is calling this behavior aggressive.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/14/opinion/sunday/chinas-defiance-in-the-south-china-sea.html?_r=0

As does the political editor at the Daily Telegraph in Australia

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/nsw-electricity-selloff-scott-morrison-blocks-mike-bairds-sale-of-ausgrid-to-chinese-bidders/news-story/4d8098b915bb66f0ff143341044a812c

As does Al Jazeera

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2016/07/china-cares-south-china-sea-160714105126859.html

As does the Irish Times. But to be fair they also call out North Korean, South Korean and Japanese aggressive posturing.

http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/editorial/tensions-rising-ominously-in-southeast-asia-1.2746491

I'd call that a pretty diverse set of geographical locations.

 

[sferrin]

It's difficult to wrap one's head around the notion that one country taking territory recognized as belonging to another country as NOT acting aggressively.

 

[sferrin]

Japan Plans to ‘Go On Offense’ with 300 Km-Range Missiles

"Japan's decision to develop surface-to-sea missiles with a range of 300 kilometers to cover the disputed islands shows the country may be eyeing a shift to an offensive posture, analysts said.

The Japanese government has decided to develop the missiles to "protect the nation's isolated islands," including the disputed Diaoyu Islands, the Yomiuri newspaper reported.

Development costs will be part of the Defense Ministry's budget request for the fiscal year ending March 2018, and the weapons are set to be deployed on islands, such as Miyako, in Japan's southernmost Okinawa prefecture by 2023.

"Japan is trying to use the missile system to lock down the Miyako Strait and prevent Chinese forces from entering the Western Pacific Ocean," Zhou Yongsheng, a professor at the Institute of International Relations of China Foreign Affairs University, told the Global Times. "

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articles-view/release/3/176152/japan-plans-to-develop-300-km_range-antiship-missile.html

China's chickens starting to come home to roost.

 

[VH]

China is stupid as they construct a critical mass of enemies who will oppose their access to Pacific waters. Japan's decision to develop surface-to-sea missiles with a range of 300 kilometers will bottle up the PLAN in the first island chain. They will have to ask permission to enter into the Western Pacific. How will China handle developments like this? Hope China thinks this through.

 

[sferrin]

China is stupid as they construct a critical mass of enemies who will oppose their access to Pacific waters. Japan's decision to develop surface-to-sea missiles with a range of 300 kilometers will bottle up the PLAN in the first island chain. They will have to ask permission to enter into the Western Pacific. How will China handle developments like this? Hope China thinks this through.

If China keeps on it's current path I would not be at all surprised to see both Japan and South Korea become nuclear powers. They'll have to.

 

[NeilChapman]

It is irrelevant what I believe in, or who disagrees with me. I, like the vast majority here, don't discuss politics, nor use this forum as a vehicle to air out our personal issues regarding other countries.

You are known on these forums for invariably involving two countries you particularly despise, mixed in with sniping about internal domestic politics from your country that the vast majority of us on this international forum couldn't give a hoot about. Yet we are forced to wade through this stuff, lack of self- control, and pet campaigns/bashing.
Your recent contribution on the J-20 thread about Chinese there, where you inferred they even stole the F-22/F-35 paint, even if you tried to veil it flimsily in humour, is just the latest in an extremely tiresome campaign for probably the majority here. It's difficult to understand the rationale, or indeed the value, of such comments to that thread other than the obvious.
It is well known you feature heavily in threads that get locked.....

Is it so hard to exercise self-restraint, which the majority here do? Keep a clean persona and deal in facts regarding why we are on this forum, and leave the personal pontificating and bashing to lesser sites, or more nation-centric sites like F-16.net...

Wilhelm - This is not a thread discussing a particular ship, missile, aircraft or armament of any kind. It is to discuss the "China Expanded Air Defense Zone". Inevitably this is a political maneuver hence it will be a political discussion.

http://chinachristiandaily.com/2016-08-15/society/china--philippines-consider-joint-fishing-rights-in-scarborough-shoal-during-south-china-sea-talks_2141.html

Here is an interesting report which suggests that the PI acknowledge PRC control over the Scarborough Shoal. For this acknowledgement the PRC will allow the PI will share fishing rights with the PRC.

This is a political decision. The UN has stated that the the PRC has no claim in this area yet the PRC seeks to bargain with assets that it does not own but controls through force of arms. Does this make us despise the PRC? Do these actions concern only the PRC and the PI? No. These behaviors affect many countries in the region, thus they are international concerns.

As a side note, I find it fascinating that the PRC rejects the UN decision yet it now seems to recognize the ability of the PI to acknowledge control over the Scarborough Shoals e.g. the PI has the ability to cede dominion. Perhaps now that the PRC has acknowledged the rights of the PI over Scarborough Shoals it is worth a discussion to determine reparations to the PI from the PRC for rent of the islands and destruction of the reef.

 

[bobbymike]

http://origin.www.uscc.gov/sites/default/files/Research/Staff%20Report_China%27s%20Expanding%20Ability%20to%20Conduct%20Conventional%20Missile%20Strikes%20on%20Guam.pdf

 

[Grey Havoc]

http://www.tank-net.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=41934

Thoughts?

 

[sferrin]

http://www.tank-net.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=41934

Thoughts?

I would hazard a guess they aren't breeding unicorns there. Difficult to say what it is.

 

[NeilChapman]

http://www.tank-net.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=41934

Thoughts?

Looks pretty tall when you compare the shadow to the multistory building off to the right of the second picture.

 

[Grey Havoc]

In other news I forgot to add:

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-southchinasea-china-satellite-idUSKCN10M07H
https://gcaptain.com/china-launches-high-resolution-maritime-surveillance-satellites/

 

[sferrin]

In other news I forgot to add:

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-southchinasea-china-satellite-idUSKCN10M07H
https://gcaptain.com/china-launches-high-resolution-maritime-surveillance-satellites/

I suspect satellites like that would be at the top of the SM-3 target list.

 

[Grey Havoc]

Via TankNet: http://www.chinatopix.com/articles/98199/20160814/xi-calls-new-world-order-dominated-china-russia-elimination.htm

Talk about pouring fuel on the fire, and then some.

 

[Orionblamblam]

Hmmm. Care to provide a summary?

 

[NeilChapman]

Via TankNet: http://www.tank-net.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=38972&p=1261011

Talk about pouring fuel on the fire, and then some.

Listening to the speech referenced in the post (Xi at 95th anniversary of CPC) gives me the sense that the CPC is feeling a bit uneasy about their legitimacy - longterm. The 'nationalism' is being used the same way in Russia - perhaps for the same reason. The in-country news reports about the SCS (PRC) and NATO (Russia) could have been written by the same folks. Seems to be working well for both leaders at the moment.

To me, authoritarian leaders that are unconstrained (control the military and access to high office) and feel threatened can be particularly dangerous. Historical examples might include Stalin, Saddam Hussein and Hitler. They can more likely hide the cost of fighting from internal audiences and they also may be more sensitive to losing. An example of this would be some of Hitlers all-or-nothing military decisions in WWII. A more recent scaled down example might be why the PRC has been belligerent at the loss of the SCS UN ruling. In a way, the island building is also an all-or-nothing decision.

I'm not saying that Putin and Xi have the same intentions as Hitler. I am suggesting that we look to history at how unconstrained authoritarian leaders have behaved and ratchet up the statecraft to counter their actions. Free peoples should also understand be ready to defend against the threats or live with the results of not doing so which is also an option.

 

[Grey Havoc]

Hmmm. Care to provide a summary?

Woops, meant to put in the direct article link there. On a side note, will they ever fix that anti-virus blacklist false positive problem, one wonders.

Anyhow, as NeilChapman has already mentioned, it's a news report (by the CHINA TOPIX) about Xi's speech at the 95th anniversary of the founding of the Chinese Communist Party back in July. In what was apparently a very anti-western speech, he called for a new 'New World Order', to be based around a Sino-Russian military alliance which would render NATO "powerless" and "put an end to the imperialist desires of the West."

To directly quote from the article: ""The world is on the verge of radical change," said Xi to his communist comrades. "We see how the European Union is gradually collapsing, as is the US economy -- it is all over for the new world order."

"So, it will never again be as it was before. In 10 years we will have a new world order in which the key will be the union of China and Russia," said Xi."

Among other things, the analysis in the article postulates that because of recent foreign and domestic setbacks, along with increasing blowback on his ambition to become uno supremo of the PRC in the mold of Mao Zedong, Xi is being forced into increasingly bellicose rhetoric (and actions) in other to shore up his previously secure position.

 

[NeilChapman]

Hmmm. Care to provide a summary?

Woops, meant to put in the direct article link there. On a side note, will they ever fix that anti-virus blacklist false positive problem, one wonders.

Anyhow, as NeilChapman has already mentioned, it's a news report (by the CHINA TOPIX) about Xi's speech at the 95th anniversary of the founding of the Chinese Communist Party back in July. In what was apparently a very anti-western speech, he called for a new 'New World Order', to be based around a Sino-Russian military alliance which would render NATO "powerless" and "put an end to the imperialist desires of the West."

To directly quote from the article: ""The world is on the verge of radical change," said Xi to his communist comrades. "We see how the European Union is gradually collapsing, as is the US economy -- it is all over for the new world order."

"So, it will never again be as it was before. In 10 years we will have a new world order in which the key will be the union of China and Russia," said Xi."

Among other things, the analysis in the article postulates that because of recent foreign and domestic setbacks, along with increasing blowback on his ambition to become uno supremo of the PRC in the mold of Mao Zedong, Xi is being forced into increasingly bellicose rhetoric (and actions) in other to shore up his previously secure position.

I listened to the speech and didn't hear the sino-russian rhetoric.

 

[Grey Havoc]

Hmmm. Care to provide a summary?

Woops, meant to put in the direct article link there. On a side note, will they ever fix that anti-virus blacklist false positive problem, one wonders.

Anyhow, as NeilChapman has already mentioned, it's a news report (by the CHINA TOPIX) about Xi's speech at the 95th anniversary of the founding of the Chinese Communist Party back in July. In what was apparently a very anti-western speech, he called for a new 'New World Order', to be based around a Sino-Russian military alliance which would render NATO "powerless" and "put an end to the imperialist desires of the West."

To directly quote from the article: ""The world is on the verge of radical change," said Xi to his communist comrades. "We see how the European Union is gradually collapsing, as is the US economy -- it is all over for the new world order."

"So, it will never again be as it was before. In 10 years we will have a new world order in which the key will be the union of China and Russia," said Xi."

Among other things, the analysis in the article postulates that because of recent foreign and domestic setbacks, along with increasing blowback on his ambition to become uno supremo of the PRC in the mold of Mao Zedong, Xi is being forced into increasingly bellicose rhetoric (and actions) in other to shore up his previously secure position.

I listened to the speech and didn't hear the sino-russian rhetoric.

Interesting.

 

[Triton]

"Experts: China Continues Using Fishing Fleets for Naval Presence Operations"
by John Grady
August 17, 2016 11:57 AM

WASHINGTON, D.C. — When you look at the thousands and thousands of fishing boats operating out of China, you really should consider them a third arm of Beijing’s naval presence, an expert in maritime security said this week.

Christopher Rawley, a member of the board of directors of the Center for International Maritime Security and a captain in the U.S. Navy Reserve, asked, “What are we preparing for” as a nation? “Conventional war,” he answered, citing freedom of navigation as part of that thinking.

The threat to escalating tensions is broader than that. The United States is not looking at “marine-based protein” as a strategic resource for half of the world’s population and a potential flashpoint in areas in the East and South China Seas that already are over-fished.

China is not alone in its thinking about the value of a “third arm” residing in its fishing fleet. Vietnam has used fishing vessels to bolster its territorial claims to the Paracel Islands, and other nations are considering taking similar steps. Historically, Russia used its trawlers to monitor air operations from Andersen Air Base, Guam, during the war in Vietnam, and more recently it has been accused by the United Kingdom of using trawlers off its coast to spy as tensions have risen since Moscow’s seizure of Crimea and backing of separatists in eastern Ukraine. During the Falklands War, the United Kingdom itself so concerned about its ships being trailed by Argentine fishing vessels that it sank the ELINT-equipepd ARA Narwal.

During a forum jointly sponsored by his organization and think-tank Center for a New American Security. Rawley cited the recent decision by an international tribunal against Chinese territorial claims in the South China Sea in a case brought by the Philippines as an example that raises those two questions of harvesting the sea and building fortifications. Beijing rejected the court’s ruling....

Source:
https://news.usni.org/2016/08/17/experts-china-using-fishing-fleets-naval-presence-operations#more-21194

 

[NeilChapman]

"Experts: China Continues Using Fishing Fleets for Naval Presence Operations"
by John Grady
August 17, 2016 11:57 AM

WASHINGTON, D.C. — When you look at the thousands and thousands of fishing boats operating out of China, you really should consider them a third arm of Beijing’s naval presence, an expert in maritime security said this week.
...

The threat to escalating tensions is broader than that. The United States is not looking at “marine-based protein” as a strategic resource for half of the world’s population and a potential flashpoint in areas in the East and South China Seas that already are over-fished.

China is not alone in its thinking about the value of a “third arm” residing in its fishing fleet. Vietnam has used fishing vessels to bolster its territorial claims to the Paracel Islands, and other nations are considering taking similar steps. Historically, Russia used its trawlers to monitor air operations from Andersen Air Base, Guam, during the war in Vietnam, and more recently it has been accused by the United Kingdom of using trawlers off its coast to spy as tensions have risen since Moscow’s seizure of Crimea and backing of separatists in eastern Ukraine. ...

Source:
https://news.usni.org/2016/08/17/experts-china-using-fishing-fleets-naval-presence-operations#more-21194

There needs to be US presence in the East and South China Seas that is not US Navy for myriad reasons. This is one of them. Perhaps the US Coast Guard?

As an aside, the Russian trawlers would sit off the end of the Kadena runway in Okinawa. You couldn't get more conspicuous.

 

[Grey Havoc]

http://gcaptain.com/china-is-hungry-its-oceans-are-empty/