ROILO GOLEZ SPEECH
AIM FORUM ON THE SOUTH CHINA SEA, First Philippine Holdings Caseroom
Asian Institute of Management, 10 October 2013
A study of the current South China Sea situation must start with map below which shows in red line apparent bounds of the so-called the nine-dash line claim of China over most of the South China Sea. The blue line shows the Exclusive Economic Zones of the Coastal States of the South China Sea namely: China, the Philippines, Brunei, Malaysia, Indonesia, Malaysia and Vietnam.
The EEZ’s of the various coastal states are in accordance with the UN Convention on the Law of the Seas or UNCLOS. China’s claim intrudes into the UNCLOS-recognized EEZs of the other Coastal States bounding the South China Sea.
The nine dash line of 1947
The nine-dash line is clearly shown in the preceding map. It was unilaterally declared in 1947 by the then Kuomintang government of the Republic of China under Chai Kai-Shek and adopted by the PROC in 1949 after the take-over of the communists under Mao Zedong.
In September 2013, China announced a change in their claim, making it a 10-dash line, with the 10th line East of Taiwan. The significance of the 10th dash is not clear. The PROC government did not provide an explanation, consistent with their lack of clear explanation of the original 9-dash line which suffers from absence of coordinates that normally accompany a claim whether sea or land.
And now the ten dash line of 2013. In my opinion, this does not affect the Philippine EEZ as the tenth dash is to the East of Taiwan.
My personal involvement in the South China Sea or Spratlys issue goes back a long way.
SPRATLYS, 1971
I was part of a secret mission that sometime in 1971 transported troops, weapons, equipment and supplies to the islands we occupied in Freedomland, now called Kalayaan Island Group.
OLD MAPS
To ascertain the veracity of China’s claim that they have history to back up their claims on the South China Sea, here’s an old map of what we now call South China Sea and adjacent seas. This is a map drawn in 1690 by the Italian navigator VINCENZO CORONELLI. Note that there is no reference to a China Sea or Mare dell Chine, unlike Mare Dell Indie to depict the Indian Ocean.
1690 MAP DRAWN BY ITALIAN VINCENZO CORONELLI
No reference to China Sea or Mare de Chine. There was Mare Dell Indie but no Chine!
And here’s another old map, done by Jesuit Pedro Murillo Velarde in 1744. It is called "Mapa de las Islas Philippinas" or Map of the Philippine Islands. It clearly shows Panacot, now called Scarborough Shoals or Bajo de Masinloc, as part of Philippine territory.
MAP OF THE PHILIPPINES BY PEDRO MURILLO VELARDE 1744
Scarborough Shoal, then called Panacot, is clearly shown as part of the Philippines
The Philippine Exclusive Economic Zone
Article 55 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea defines the Exclusive Economic Zone or UNCLOS as “an area beyond and adjacent to the territorial sea, subject to the specific legal regime established in this Part, under which the rights and jurisdiction of the coastal State and the rights and freedoms of other States are governed by the relevant provisions of this Convention.” UNCLOS further states “The exclusive economic zone shall not extend beyond 200 nautical miles from the baselines from which the breadth of the territorial sea is measured.”
And very importantly, UNCLOS states:
In the exclusive economic zone, the coastal State has:
(a) sovereign rights for the purpose of exploring and exploiting, conserving and managing the natural resources, whether living or non-living, of the waters superjacent to the seabed and of the seabed and its subsoil, and with regard to other activities for the economic exploitation and exploration of the zone, such as the production of energy from the water, currents and winds;
(b) jurisdiction as provided for in the relevant provisions of this Convention with regard to:
(i) the establishment and use of artificial islands, installations and structures;
(ii) marine scientific research;
(iii) the protection and preservation of the marine environment;
(c) other rights and duties provided for in this Convention.
And finally UNCLOS mandates the following:
In the exclusive economic zone, the coastal State shall have the exclusive right to construct and to authorize and regulate the construction, operation and use of:
(a) artificial islands;
(b) installations and structures for the purposes provided for in article 56 and other economic purposes;
(c) installations and structures which may interfere with the exercise of the rights of the coastal State in the zone.
Two features in the South China Sea are well within the 200-mile Exclusive Economic Zone of the Philippines:
1. Mischief Reef, which is 130 n.m. from Palawan, one of the largest islands of the Philippines.
2. Scarborough Shoal or Bajo de Masinloc, which is around the same distance from Luzon, the country’s largest island.
Accordingly, UNCLOS clearly states that China has no jurisdiction over Mischief Reef and Bajo de Masinloc or Scarborough Shoal as both are within the Philippine Exclusive Economic Zone or EEZ. China has no business exploiting natural resources or building structures!
MISCHIEF REEF
“In 1994, the PRC built the initial structures on stilts here while the Philippine Navy was not patrolling the area due to a monsoon season. Since the reef is just 130 miles (209 km) away from Palawan, well inside the Philippines' EEZ, the Philippines
immediately protested this action. However, China rejected the protest and stressed that the structures were shelter for fishermen.”
The photo below shows how the original structure on stilts looked like when discovered in 1994.
With the assurance that the structures were just temporary shelters for Chinese fishermen, the controversy quieted down.
But in 1999, I flew over the area on board a Philippine Air Force C-130, which flew at less than 500 feet, and I saw many obviously Chinese workers busy with civil works. I announced this in the Philippine House of Representatives where I was serving as a three-term congressman, the chairman then of the committee on public order and security and vice chairman of the committee on national defense. In spite of my revelations in Congress and the resulting uproar in media, the Chinese did not stop their construction activities. In 1999, China completed their structures in Mischief Reef which was transformed into a military installation instead of shelters for fishermen.
This is what the Chinese built inside the Philippine Exclusive Economic Zone in violation of UNCLOS.
SCARBOROUGH SHOAL OR BAJO DE MASINLOC
Now let’s look at Scarborough Shoal or Bajo de Masinloc, the Philippine legal term for the feature.
“On April 8, 2012, a Philippine Navy surveillance plane spotted eight Chinese fishing vessels docked at the waters of Scarborough shoal. BRP Gregorio del Pilar was sent on the same day by the Philippine Navy to survey the vicinity of the shoal, and confirmed the presence of the fishing vessels and their ongoing activities. On April 10, 2012, BRP Gregorio del Pilar came to inspect the catch of the fishing vessels. The Filipino inspection team discovered illegally collected corals, giant clams and live sharks inside the first vessel boarded by the team. BRP Gregorio del Pilar reported that they attempted to arrest the Chinese fishermen but were blocked by Chinese maritime surveillance ships, China Marine Surveillance 75 (Zhongguo Haijian 75) and China
Marine Surveillance 84 (Zhongguo Haijian 84) . Since then, tensions started between the two countries.” (from Wikipedia)
“By July 2012, China had erected a barrier to the entrance of the shoal, and vessels belonging to the China Marine Surveillance and Fisheries Law Enforcement Command were observed in the nearby disputed shoal. Since then, the Chinese government vessels have been turning away Filipino fishing vessels sailing to the area.” Thus thousands of Filipino fishermen have been deprived of the livelihood they have enjoyed and benefited from for hundreds, even thousands of years.
1999 Privilege Speech on Scarborough Shoal
Almost 14 years ago, in December 1999, I delivered a Privilege Speech in Congress on Bajo de Masinloc or Scarborough Shoal and made the following observations:
“Why would a military behemoth and an emerging economic power such as China be so preoccupied with microscopic Scarborough Shoal which rightly belongs
to us in the first place?”
“When US naval forces were still occupying Subic, the area was used for naval gunfire target practice by the US Navy. China did not make even a whimper. Obviously, the reason was that the US Navy was too big to handle. No less than the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea sealed off our territorial jurisdiction on Scarborough Shoal which is Situated well within the 200-mile exclusive economic zone.”
“The answer, Mr. Speaker, is military posturing. Scarborough Shoal is part of China’s military projection at the South China Sea.
“In Scarborough Shoal, China has found a perfect forward fortress at the east to back up its slow but nonstop political and naval march towards the north, where there are Korea, Japan, Taiwan, among others. China has unleashed a blob at the South China Sea, floating eastward, growing slowly, menacingly, nearly unopposed, devouring every speck, every shoal and reef along the way.
“Chinese military contingents are already positioned in various reefs, islets, and rocks of the South China Sea Region, particularly in the Spratlys and the Paracels. Scarborough Shoal is just one more step forward in their bid to secure full control of the world’s second busiest international sea lane."
And I concluded with this warning:
"Mr. Speaker, it is apparent from the foregoing that what the Philippines is facing is not a gentle, lovable Chinese panda, but a fire-breathing highly awakened Chinese dragon. It is a delicate, complex and crucial policy issue that we must resolve for the sake of the next generation. To me, it is a security threat that could overshadow all threats that we faced in the century that is about to end."
In that 1999 speech I also mentioned the following to further stress the strategic importance of the South China Sea:
“The US Energy Information Administration (US-EIA) has described the South China Sea Region as the world’s second busiest international sea lane, encompassing a portion of the Pacific Ocean stretching roughly from Singapore and the Strait of Malacca in the southwest, to the Strait of Taiwan in the northeast.”
“More than half of the world’s supertanker traffic passes through its waters”
“In sea commerce, the South China Sea also plays a crucial role, serving as a major water link. It is estimated that tanker traffic through the Strait of Malacca leading into the South China Sea is more than three times greater than the Suez Canal traffic, and well over five times more than that at the Panama Canal.”
“In addition, it contains oil and gas resources strategically located near large energy-consuming countries.
“The Spratlys alone sit atop 25-billion cubic meters of natural gas, 370,000 tons of phosphorous, and 105 billion barrels of oil with an additional 91 billion barrels of oil in the James Shoal. “
Still in that 1999 speech, I mentioned:
“Last March, buckling under pressure to stop increasing its presence in the Spratlys, China sent its Foreign Assistant Minister Wang Yi to this country. This was the first diplomatic act it initiated since 1995 when Filipino fishermen discovered Chinese installations at the Mischief Reef. That meeting, however, only demonstrated further China’s resolve to keep the Spratlys for itself. Wang Yi later admitted that they couldn’t share the facilities constructed in Mischief Reef.”
Today, the incumbent Foreign Minister of China Is the same Wang Yi who, as assistant minister, took a hard position on China’s land grab of Mischief Reef in 1995. This indicates we should expect more of the same.
Here’s an aerial photo of our Shoal. It is not small. Its area of around 150 square kilometers makes the Shoal as big as Quezon City, the country’s most populous city or around three times the area of Paranaque, my home city. China with its resources and engineering capability can easily convert our Shoal into a big naval station. Around its perimeter alone, more than 100 052D Class Chinese guided missile destroyers or DDGs can be berthed. Inside the 49 feet deep lagoon, more than 200 DDGs can be anchored (a destroyer has a draft of around 31 feet).
.
It is my considered opinion that China intends to convert our Shoal into a naval station the same way they did to the much smaller Mischief Reef. This is the danger that faces us within this decade.
A Chinese naval installation in Scarborough Shoal or Bajo de Masinloc will be a grave threat to the security of the Philippines and our allies, LIKE A DAGGER POINTED AT THE HEARTLAND OF THE COUNTRY.
South China Sea and Asia Pacific Region
Now let’s look at the South China Sea in relation to most of the Asia Pacific Area to appreciate that this situation cannot be addressed in isolation.
That is, other geopolitical factors inevitably must come into play.
THE SOUTH CHINA SEA:
THE South China Sea links the Indian Ocean to the vast Pacific Ocean.
It is a choke point. The power that controls the South China Sea can control the economy of major economic powers like China, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and the Philippines which is now considered an emerging economic power.
India must pass through the South China Sea to interact with China, Vietnam, the Philippines, Korea, Taiwan and Japan.
This may come as a shock to many but students of Sea Power Strategist Alfred Thayer Mahan know this:
China suffers from a very vulnerable geography. For years, in talk shows and speeches, I have been saying this.
China is surrounded in all directions and has a short coastline compared to its
landmass and population.
China’s naval assets have very restricted maneuvering space unlike those of
India, Japan, Indonesia, even the Philippines and of course the United States.
China’s Sea Lines of Communications or SLOCs are very vulnerable.
“Sea lines of communication (or SLOC) is a term describing the primary maritime routes between ports, used for trade, logistics and naval forces. It is generally used in reference to naval operations to ensure that SLOCs are open, or in times of war, as a hostile act, to close them.”
India’s Navy can blockade China’s trade passing through the Indian Ocean.
A small but deadly naval force based in Singapore can paralyze China’s sea bound trade West of the South China Sea.
Vietnamese submarines can wreak havoc on China’s Merchant Marine and even the PLA Navy.
A small squadron of Australian submarines positioned in the Southern periphery of the South China Sea can stop China’s seaborne trade there.
To the East, China can be blocked by Japan which has a potent Navy and Air Force considered among the most modern and powerful in the world.
And even the Philippines with a modest investment in military upgrading can interdict the Palawan Passage with a “Swarm” of small guided missile boats and an array of medium range land based mobile missiles hidden in the fastnesses of Palawan, Mindoro and Luzon.
A recent August 2013 Strategy Paper by The Australian Policy Institute on China's Maritime Dilemma generally supports my long held view on China’s weaknesses.
"The strategy behind China’s emerging naval capability is subject to considerable debate. Most of the commentary concentrates on the People’s Liberation Army Navy’s (PLAN) capability development. Some commentators argue that the PLAN has shifted its focus towards developing a ‘blue water navy’ to contest America’s maritime predominance in the Western Pacific. But, as David on The Strategist points out, the PLAN also continues to invest in defensive ‘anti-access/area-denial’ (A2/AD) for operations in its ‘ First Island Chain’. The common theme of these assessments is that China’s growing naval power should have us worrying.
"However, while the PLAN’s growing maritime capabilities potentially pose a challenge to the United States and countries in the Indo-Pacific region, it’s also important to consider the weaknesses in China’s maritime strategy. Indeed, I’d argue that provided the US and its allies and partners invest in smart counter-strategies, China will find it very difficult to overcome its maritime dilemmas and to coerce regional countries in accepting Beijing’s territorial claims."
TAIWAN DILEMMA:
"Let’s start with China’s ‘Taiwan Dilemma’. The conventional wisdom is that China has already ‘succeeded’ in its A2/AD strategy in the Taiwan Straits by raising the costs for third-party intervention prohibitively high, i.e. keeping US carrier battle groups at arms length. But even if the PLA manages to keep US forces out of a conflict through a ‘sea denial strategy’—which in itself is a very risky assumption given the importance of Taiwan in US Pacific strategy—it faces serious political and operational challenges in invading Taiwan. As I’ve argued elsewhere, Taiwan is systematically investing in its own ‘sea denial strategy’ and the PLA would need to physically destroy most of the island’s infrastructure prior to invasion, with disastrous consequences for China’s international and regional reputation. In short, the PLAN’s A2/AD approach in the Taiwan Straits might not translate into real political currency for Beijing’s leadership."
STRATEGIC CHOKEPOINT DILEMMA:
"Secondly, US naval strategists argue that the PLAN faces a ‘strategic chokepoint dilemma’. The moment the PLAN sails through the Taiwan Straits into the wider Western Pacific Ocean, it faces the combined naval power of the US Navy and her allies, particularly Japan. It couldn’t hope to establish a significant level of ‘sea control’ in this area. Moreover, as soon as the PLAN projects maritime power out of Hainan Island into the South China Sea to assert its claims in the ‘nine-dashed line’ it will face a reengaged US military as well as A2/AD ‘pockets’ of Southeast Asian countries. Just like the US Navy and other modern navies, the PLAN won’t be immune from sea denial capabilities such as submarines, anti-submarine warfare and anti-ship missiles."
MALACCA DILEMMA:
"Moreover, the Chinese Government has pointed to the country’s ‘Malacca Dilemma’—the PLAN’s inability to protect China’s energy transport in this strategic chokepoint. But given the geostrategic characteristics of the Malacca Strait—only 1.5 nm at its narrowest point and critical not just for China but the rest of Asia—military options for China are also very limited. Any attempt to project naval power to control this area will automatically draw China into conflict with regional heavyweights such as India, Indonesia and Japan—hardly a winning formula.
"Finally, Chinese strategists seem to be aware that the offensive use of naval power against its Asian neighbours will most likely not achieve any political objective; the opportunity costs of a war at sea are just too high. That’s probably why the most significant recent development in China’s maritime strategy has been the creation of a unified coast guard agency. This step potentially strengthens China’s capacity to use non-military vessels for coercive purposes in territorial disputes with Japan and Southeast Asian nations.
"But even this strategy has limits. Regional countries are upgrading their coast guards and other maritime agencies to level the playing field. They also cooperate, as in the case of Japan and The Philippines. In July, boats through a yen loan to help it to counter Beijing’s maritime assertiveness. Regional countries are also increasing their maritime surveillance capabilities to monitor and expose Chinese maritime behaviour to a domestic, regional and global audience. This fundamentally undermines Beijing’s attempt to restore its ‘soft power deficit’ accumulated over recent years.
“While China’s naval power projection will certainly grow in the future, it’s far from inevitable that the PLAN’s coercive potential will increase commensurately. Indeed, the PLAN’s current desire for big surface combatants and aircraft carriers runs counter to modern navies’ recognition that the future lies in a greater number of smaller, more dispersed and less vulnerable ships which operate as part of a joint force. I’m not yet convinced that China as a continental power has much to gain politically by investing in a very expansive, offensive blue water navy. And even if it does, the good news is that there’ll be lots of ways to offset the PLAN strategy."
In view of my long oft-stated observations on the geographical weakness of China, as buttressed by the foregoing Australia Strategy paper, I pose the question:
PLA NAVY – GETTING BIGGER BUT CAN IT BREAK OUT?
IN VIEW OF HER VERY ASSERTIVE AND AGGRESSIVE STANCE IN THE SOUTH CHINA SEA, EAST CHINA SEA AND OTHER PARTS OF THE ASIA, CHINA HAS TRIGGERED A COALITION AGAINST ITSELF!
And the potential members of that emerging coalition are big boys.
Here’s a recent ranking of the world’s top military powers. It will be noted that many of them are from Asia and part of an emerging coalition.
RECENT RANKING MILITARY POWERS PER WAFF OR WORLD’S ARMED FORCES FORUM
Note the following military powers that have strong presence in Asia: US (#1), China (#2), Russia (#4), Japan (#6), India (#9), South Korea (#11), Canada (#16), Taiwan (#17), Australia (#19) and Singapore (#24).
The most significant development affecting the power alignment in Asia is the US Strategic Pivot to Asia-Pacific.
And this is how the projected US rebalancing looks like in terms of troop deployment.
May I quote some excerpts from the US Congressional Research Study entitled: ‘Pivot to the Pacific? The Obama Administration’s “Rebalancing” Toward Asia’
According to the said paper, the US’s increased emphasis on the Asia-Pacific Region appears to have been prompted by four major developments:
1. the growing economic importance of the Asia-Pacific region, and particularly China, to the United States’ economic future;
2. China’s growing military capabilities and its increasing assertiveness of claims to disputed maritime territory, with implications for freedom of navigation and the United States’ ability to project power in the region;
3. the winding down of U.S. military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan; and
4. efforts to cut the U.S. federal government’s budget, particularly the defense budget, which threaten to create a perception in Asia that the U.S. commitment to the region will wane.
The US congressional paper also explains the “Adjustments in U.S. Security Policy” as follows:
“The highest-profile new initiatives lie in the security sphere. (See Text Box.) The planned deployments of troops and equipment to Australia and Singapore represent an expanded U.S. presence. Moreover, the pledge that reductions in defense spending will not come at the expense of the Asia-Pacific or the Middle East signals the Administration’s desire to reorient the Department of Defense’s (DOD’s) priorities. The most obvious implication, subsequently reflected in the DOD’s January 2012 “Strategic Guidance,” has been to minimize cuts in the size of the Navy, with reductions focused instead on Army and Marine ground forces.10 With the exception of the Korean Peninsula, Asia is seen mainly as a naval theater of operations, and the decision not to cut the Navy as sharply as other services reflects a shift in priorities that is unusual in year-to-year defense planning.
“The Defense Department is complementing these changes with perhaps equally far-reaching shifts in military-technological priorities in the U.S. defense posture, aimed at responding to potential future challenges as conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan recede. A number of initiatives are relevant to assessments of potential challenges in Asia, in general, and from China in particular. Among other things, the Defense Department’s Strategy Review endorsed the continued deployment of 11 aircraft carriers and reemphasized efforts to improve capabilities to defeat what planners describe as “Area Denial/Anti-Access” strategies, which are known to be a focus for China’s military.11”
And the congressional paper clearly defines the rationale of the Pivot:
The Rising Importance of the Asia-Pacific
“Underlying the “pivot” is the Administration’s belief that the center of gravity for U.S. foreign policy, national security, and economic interests is shifting towards Asia, and that U.S. strategy and priorities need to be adjusted accordingly. Since 2000, Asia has become the United States’ largest source of imports and second-largest export market after the North America region. (See Table 1.) As the world’s most populous area and fastest growing economic zone, Asia is expected to become even more vital for the U.S. economy in the future—an expectation that has led the Obama Administration to pursue the Trans-Pacific Partnership and to make Asian nations central to its National Export Initiative Greater trade flows through the Asia-Pacific (particularly the Strait of Malacca and South China Sea) have also reinforced greater U.S. security interests in the region, as have the major expansions of other local nations’ military forces, most notably China’s.”
The economic rise of Asia, and not just of China, is illustrated in the following Appendix from the congressional paper:
During the thirty years from1980 to 2010, as a destination for US exports, Europe declined from 44.1% to 37.0%, North America declined from 15.3% to 12.9% and the Middle East from 10.4% to 5.9%. However, Asia jumped dramatically from 15.9% to 33.3%.
As a source of imports, Europe declined from 48.8% to 37.4%, North America almost steady from 16.5% to 17.4% and the Middle East from 4.9% to 3.6%. However, Asia jumped dramatically from 16.9% to 31.4%.
And note the headline:
“The United States Air Force will dramatically expand its military presence across the Pacific this year, sending jets to Thailand, India, Singapore and Australia.”
“The U.S. military is encircling China with a chain of air bases and military ports. The latest link: a small airstrip on the tiny Pacific island of Saipan. The U.S. Air Force is planning to lease 33 acres of land on the island for the next 50 years to build a "divert airfield" on an old World War II airbase there.
“The Pentagon's big, new strategy for the 21st century is something called Air-Sea Battle, a concept that's nominally about combining air and naval forces to punch through the increasingly-formidable defenses of nations like China or Iran.
“An important but oft-overlooked part of Air-Sea Battle calls for the military to operate from small, bare bones bases in the Pacific that its forces can disperse to in case their main bases are targeted by Chinese ballistic missiles.”
The US Defense Secretary is busy crisscrossing the Asia Pacific Region. He embarked on a Southeast tour which included the Philippines.
US Vice President Joe Biden dramatically articulated US policy in an occasion that projects the US realignment in Asia, on board the ultra modern Littoral Combat Ship USS Freedom deployed in Singapore to help guard one of the world’s most strategically important choke points, the Malacca Strait:
"I state without apology that we are a Pacific power. America is a Pacific resident power and we will remain so. The truth of the matter is our resident power status is the reason why this area of the world is able to grow and be stable.
"Our mere presence in the Pacific is in and of itself the basis upon which stability of the region is built. You are the glue that holds all this together."
Vice President Joe Biden, addressing the crew of USS Freedom, first in a new class of U.S. Navy ships based in Singapore. July 27, 2013
Even the US Senate entered the fray with a strongly worded resolution directed at China:
"The Senate condemns the use of coercion, threats, or force by naval, maritime security, or fishing vessels and military or civilian aircraft in the South China Sea and the East China Sea to assert disputed maritime or territorial claims or alter the status quo,"
"Whereas, in recent years, there have been numerous dangerous and destabilizing incidents in this region, including... Chinese vessels barricading the entrance to the Scarborough Reef lagoon in April 2012; ...and, since May 8, 2013, Chinese naval and marine surveillance ships maintaining a regular presence in waters around the Second Thomas Shoal, located approximately 105 nautical miles northwest of the Philippine island of Palawan."
China’s response through its Foreign Ministry was immediate, as reported by the Xinhua News Agency:
“China today said it opposes a US Senate resolution on disputes in the East China Sea and South China Sea as it wrongly blamed the country, disregarding facts.
“Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Hua Chunying said the resolution places blame on the Chinese side without regard for history and facts, "sending a wrong message."
The US Pivot to Asia has led some analysts to consider the scenario of an “unthinkable war” between the US and China. In an article carried by the LA Times, two think tank analysts drew this scenario. They are David C. Gompert, an adjunct senior fellow at Rand Corp. and who served as President Obama's principal deputy director of national intelligence and Terrence K. Kelly, the director of the Strategy, Doctrine and Resources Program at Rand's Arroyo Center. They stated:
“The specter of economic doomsday makes war between China and the United States as unthinkable as fear of nuclear doomsday made Soviet-U.S. war. Or does it? In fact, Chinese and American military planners are thinking in exquisite detail, as they are expected to do, about how to win such a conflict. The problem is that the specific plans being concocted could make hostilities less unthinkable, and two great powers with every reason to avoid war could find themselves in one.”
“Having been impotent against two U.S. aircraft carriers during the Taiwan crisis of 1996, the People's Liberation Army has concluded, as Chinese military writings show, that the best way to avoid another such humiliation is by striking U.S. forces before they strike China. While not seeking war, the Chinese especially dread a long one, in which the full weight of American military strength would surely prevail. So they are crafting plans and fielding capabilities to take out U.S. carriers, air bases, command-and-control networks and satellites early and swiftly.
“China now has the economic and technological heft such a plan requires, and it is China's top defense priority. The Chinese military is deploying vast numbers of missiles (including carrier killers), hard-to-find submarines, long-range sensors to track and target U.S. forces, anti-satellite weapons, digital networks to coordinate attacks and cyberwar weapons to crash U.S. networks. When the Department of Defense announced its "Asia pivot" last year, it made it clear that defeating such capabilities is now a major focus of the U.S. military.
“There are several sources of friction that could cause a showdown: Chinese harassment of Japanese vessels in the disputed East China Sea could dictate a U.S. show of force in support of its ally; U.S. naval forces could oppose a Chinese attempt to restrict freedom of the seas in the South China Sea; instability in North Korea could bring both China and the United States to consider intervening; China might contest the presence of U.S. ships or aircraft suspected of snooping off its coast; Taiwan could declare independence. In such situations, an incident or mistake could transform the logic of avoiding conflict into the logic of avoiding defeat.
XXX
“Although the China-U.S. agenda is jammed with pressing issues, from cyber espionage to currency rates, time must be found to improve procedures and channels to defuse crises and avert military miscalculation, lest the unthinkable becomes unavoidable. And political leaders in each capital should not wait for a crisis before scrutinizing war-fighting plans and insisting on ones that strengthen, not weaken, stability. Given the stakes, plans to win must not be allowed to make war more likely.”
JAPAN
And now let’s look at Japan, the No. 6 military power of the world.
Japan’s Minister of Defense, Itsuno Onodera, redefined Japan’s defense posture:
“Japan could be a key participant if conflict breaks out in Asia, the defence minister said on Monday, warning that China is seeking to exploit difficulties between allies.
“The comments by Mr Itsuno Onodera, who said Japan needs new equipment and must reconfigure its defence, come as Tokyo is embroiled in an ongoing spat with Beijing over disputed territory that has sparked warnings of a possible armed skirmish.
"The crisis that Japan faces now may lead to situations in which the country may have to be involved as a main player," Mr. Onodera told a symposium in the capital.”
Since last year, Japan’s hawkish Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has been advocating a very strong coalition, Asia’s Democratic Security Diamond which PM Abe defined as follows:
“I envisage a strategy whereby Australia, India, Japan, and the US state of Hawaii form a diamond to safeguard the maritime commons stretching from the Indian Ocean region to the western Pacific. I am prepared to invest, to the greatest possible extent, Japan’s capabilities in this security diamond.”
Read more at http://www.projectsyndicate.org/commentary/a-strategic-alliance-for-japan-and-india-by-shinzo-abe#KRkkyztzrPukMblL.99
Japanese PM Abe went on an Asian tour which included the Philippines. Philippine President Benigno Aquino III formalized an agreement not just with words but with very tangible hardware for deployment in the West Philippines Sea: 10 coast guard ships.
“President Benigno Aquino III and Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe on Saturday pledged to pursue a common stance against maritime aggression in the Asian region amid their growing territorial disputes with China.
“We reviewed the security challenges that confront our nations and pledged to cooperate in advancing our common advocacy for responsible action from international players,” said Mr. Aquino, reading from a prepared statement following his meeting with Abe.
“In line with this strategic partnership, the two agreed to strengthen “maritime cooperation, which is a pillar of our strategic partnership,” according to Mr. Aquino.
“He thanked Japan for building 10 “multi-role response vessels” for the Philippine Coast Guard and providing communication systems for coast patrol through a yen credit facility.”
Read more: http://globalnation.inquirer.net/81729/aquino-abe-vow-common-stand-vs-china#ixzz2hehh3PRj
Follow us: @inquirerdotnet on Twitter | inquirerdotnet on Facebook
Michael Reagan, political strategist and very influential son of President Ronald Reagan, the president of The Reagan Legacy Foundation and Chairman of the League of American Voters, wrote a well-circulated article “Japan won’t Be Bullied by China.” Here are some interesting excerpts:
“…that Japan will be launching its largest warship since WWII is good news among Americans who still place value on the thought of a free world guaranteed by the United States and its allies.
“According to The Associated Press, the new vessel is named Izumo — after the mythical location where the gods landed in Japanese mythology — and features a flat deck that bears a remarkable resemblance to that of an aircraft carrier. That deck is 820 feet long and will hold 14 helicopters, or, one assumes, a like number of vertical takeoff and landing aircraft.
“The Japanese say the ship is to be a part of the nation’s anti-submarine warfare and border surveillance efforts.
“While Americans don’t have a problem with the new Japanese vessel, China is not pleased.
“This is because a belligerent China has been asserting unilateral territorial rights throughout the South China Sea and parts of the Pacific. A newly assertive Japan is a Japan that won’t be pushed around by the Chinese dragon.”
And ABC reported the new Japanese warship in the following words:
“[S]ome experts believe the new Japanese ship could potentially be used in the future to launch fighter jets or other aircraft that have the ability to take off vertically. That would be a departure for Japan, which has one of the best equipped and best trained naval forces in the Pacific but which has not sought to build aircraft carriers of its own because of constitutional restrictions that limit its military forces to a defensive role.”
Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/japans-giant-new-destroyer-sends-a-clear-message-to-china-the-world-2013-8#ixzz2hemQognI
This is the destroyer IZUMO of Japan:
China’s response was predictable with this South China Morning Post news headline:
CHINA FREAKED OUT OVER JAPAN’S FLAT-TOPPED ‘DESTROYER’
The article noted the capabilities and technical specifications of the IZUMO:
“Japan's Izumo 'helicopter destroyer' is a flat topped ship — without catapults for fighter jets — that has size greater than that of other fixed wing carriers, notably Britain's HMS Invincible-class ships.
“The ship is designed to carry several helicopters, can be fitted for vertical lift off F-35Bs, and it's also worth mentioning that ships like the Izumo can be retrofitted for linear take-off fighter jets, should the need arise.”
Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/china-freaked-over-japans-destroyer-2013-8#ixzz2heosinAb
Vietnam
Of all the South China Sea coastal states, Vietnam is the only country with a record of recent bloody military encounters with China. In 1979, Chinese troops invaded Vietnam “to teach Vietnam a lesson” and met fierce resistance. 20,000 Chinese soldiers were reportedly killed in battles where the combat seasoned Vietnamese Army did not budge. In 1988, Chinese and Vietnamese navy ships had a deadly sea battle in the Spratlys: three Vietnamese ships were sunk and around 70 Vietnamese sailors were killed.
Vietnam is an outspoken critic of China’s claims in the South China Sea. Vietnam’s President Truong Tan Sang was in the news recently when he spoke in a forum organized by the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS):
“Vietnam's President Truong Tan Sang accused China of making "groundless" claims of ownership of the vast South China Sea, saying the Philippines has the right to question the claims at the United Nations.
“Speaking during a visit to Washington, Sang said Beijing's nine-dash line, which demarcates Chinese territories in the strategic and resource-rich South China Sea, lacks any legal foundation.
"The position of Vietnam is we always oppose the nine-dash line of China because it's a groundless claim—legally and practically," the Vietnamese leader said in answer to a question at a forum organized by the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS).
“Sang then told experts at the CSIS that it would be helpful if they could determine whether China's claims are based on a strong legal foundation.
"We cannot find any legal foundation for the claim or scientific basis for such a claim," he said “
The Philippines and Vietnam have been closely cooperating on their disputes with China as shown by recent ministerial level meetings.
Last August, the foreign ministers of the two counbtries met in Manila and VOA issued this news report:
MANILA — Foreign ministers from the Philippines and Vietnam said they have agreed to work together on a framework for resolving maritime territorial disputes in the South China Sea. Both countries have clashed with China over competing territorial claims.
Maritime security was a top issue in Thursday’s talks between Philippine Foreign Affairs Secretary Albert del Rosario and Vietnamese Foreign Minister Pham Binh Minh.
Del Rosario told reporters after the meeting that he and Minh agreed to work more closely together to try to convince the rest of ASEAN’s 10 member states to push for substantive progress in a meeting with Chinese officials later this year. “We want to be able to bring it to a negotiations stage. Consultation probably is not enough. We need to talk about negotiation,” he stated.
Also last August 2013, the Vietnamese Defense Minister visited Manila to enhance defense ties. This meeting of defense minsters attracted international attention as shown by this Gulf Times report:
Manila agrees to enhance defence ties with Vietnam
Defence chiefs of the Philippines and Vietnam agreed yesterday to pursue further cooperation as Vietnamese defence minister General Phung Quang Thanh visited the Philippines.
During their meeting, Philippine Defence Secretary Voltaire Gazmin and the visiting Vietnamese defence minister “assessed joint activities of the defence and military establishment and explored cooperation initiatives,” said Peter Paul Galvez, spokesman for the Philippine Department of National Defense (DND).
The two ministers also exchanged views on recent security issues of mutual concern particularly on the situation in South China Sea and the US policy of rebalancing in the Asia-Pacific region, said Galvez. “The visit of General Thanh to the Philippines clearly reflects the commitment of both countries to enhance cooperation in jointly developing their defence capabilities,” Galvez said.
The DND spokesman said defence exchanges between the two countries have been progressing since the signing of a defence cooperation agreement in 2010.
India
India is not a South China Sea coastal state but a potential big player because of its interest in oil exploration with Vietnam and is concerned about freedom of navigation. India, being ranked number 9 military power of the world, has the muscle to control the Indian Ocean, a critical SLOC for China.
Right now, it can defeat China in any naval conflict in the Indian Ocean or can easily execute an Anti-Access/Area Denial strategy in that ocean. Let’s note what India boasts of in naval power:
Two aircraft carriers
Nine Kilo Class Submarines
One Akula class nuclear submarine
Nine Stealth Frigates
And last August, it rocked the military world with this headline:
India to launch its 1st indigenous aircraft carrier INS Vikrant today
Kochi: India will launch its first indigenous aircraft carrier INS Vikrant on Monday. It is the biggest warship to be built by India and will also mark India's entry into a select club of countries capable of designing and building a carrier of this size.
The launch will take place in Cochin making an entry into a select club of countries capable of designing and building a carrier of this size and capability. India is now only the fifth county worldwide to build a ship of this size besides the US, the UK, Russia and France.
India, Vietnam to strengthen defence ties - A headline form Pakistan Defence News
Source: http://www.defence.pk/forums/indian-defence/282259-india-vietnam-strengthen-defence-ties.html#ixzz2i1IAdR8r
October 9: India and Vietnam will be on the road to further consolidate their defence ties, with the addition of a fourth pillar, by the time Vietnamese Communist Party General Secretary Nguyen Phu Trong visits the country next month, said diplomatic sources.
Security ties between the two countries have always been close but they began accelerating in the field of defence two years ago when the Chinese objected to Vietnam inviting India to prospect for oil in a contested portion of the South China Sea.
Since then New Delhi has overcome its own inhibitions and agreed to partner with Vietnam in areas of submarine and fighter aircraft training and transfer of medium-sized warships.
The two countries have also been making gestures signaling proximity. Indian warships visited Nha Trang port, located near the strategic Cam Ranh Bay.
AUSTRALIA
Australia is down south of the South China Sea but she has very vital interests to protect. Australia is ranked Number 19 military power of the world, small compared to the great powers, but capable of putting up a good fight in the southern periphery of the South China Sea as an interdicting or blocking force.
Australia can deploy 6 Collins class submarines, 8 Anzac class frigates and 4 Adelaide Class frigates.
Last month, September 2013, the new government of Australia announced the following, as carried by China Daily Mail:
Australian navy to protect sea lanes to China, Japan and South Korea
Protecting the massive resources projects in northern and Western Australia and export supply lines to China, Japan and South Korea will be a major Defence priority for the Abbott government.
New Defence Minister David Johnston said last night that this was one reason the navy needed highly capable long-range submarines to complement its surface warships.
Australia is also part of a recently announced trilateral coalition forged in the sidelines of APEC 2013. The South China Morning Post had this headline and news:
Trilateral statement on maritime disputes seen as targeting China
(From left) Australia's Foreign Minister Julie Bishop, Japanese Foreign Minister Fumio Kishida and US Secretary of State John Kerry at their trilateral meeting ahead of the APEC forum in Bali. Photo: Reuters
A joint statement by the United States, Japan and Australia opposing "coercive unilateral actions" in East China Sea territorial disputes is being seen as aimed squarely at Beijing.
The statement issued after a three-way meeting on the sidelines of the Asia-Pacific Economic Co-operation forum summit was the fruit of Japan's efforts to rally support in the dispute over the Diaoyu, or Senkaku, islands, analysts said.
US Secretary of State John Kerry, Japanese Foreign Minister Fumio Kishida and Australian Foreign Minister Julie Bishop met on the sidelines of the Apec summit in Bali on Friday. Although the statement did not name China, it highlighted the East and South China seas, where Beijing has been engaged in several tense territorial disputes.
The three countries "opposed any coercive unilateral actions that could change the status quo in the East China Sea", the statement said. They stressed "the importance of efforts to reduce tensions and to avoid miscalculations or accidents".
The statement also "affirmed the importance of peace and stability, respect for international law, unimpeded trade and freedom of navigation in the South China Sea".
This triggered an immediate response from China as reported by Reuters:
China Warns US, Japan, Australia Not to Gang Up in Sea Disputes, REUTERS
China said on Monday that the U.S., Australia and Japan should not use their alliance as an excuse to intervene in territorial disputes in the East China Sea or the South China Sea, and urged them to refrain from inflaming regional tensions
“The United States, Japan and Australia are allies but this should not become an excuse to interfere in territorial disputes, otherwise it will only make the problems more complicated and harm the interests of all parties,” Chinese Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying said.
“We urge the relevant countries to respect facts, distinguish right from wrong, be cautious, and stop all words and deeds that are not beneficial to the proper handling of the issue and undermine regional stability,” Chunying continued in comments on the ministry website.
RUSSIA
Russia recently reminded the world that it is a Pacific power when the Russian Navy conducted an extensive joint sea exercise with China’s PLA Navy last September.
So does that make Russia a steadfast, uncompromising ally of China? Not necessarily. Last year Russia entered into a contract on the delivery of six Kilo class diesel submarines to Vietnam, worth a total of $3.2 billion. It is the largest deal in the history of Russian exports of naval equipment. Obviously, Russia has taken a “larger view on Southeast Asian affairs” with the decision to sell six Kilo class subs to Vietnam. Russia without doubt is aware that the Kilo class submarines are offensive, not defensive, weapons which can wreak havoc on the PLA Navy.
PHILIPPINE EXTERNAL DEFENSE
REALIGNMENT
And now let me present my views on what we should add to the Philippine External Defense Realignment.
I remember during my first terms as a member of the Philippine Congress and even as a member of the Philippine Cabinet as National Security Adviser for three years, deliberations on security concerns were dominated by internal security matters such as the communist insurgency, the Mindanao secessionist movements and terrorism. External defense started to figure prominently only in recent years with the growing assertiveness and show of force of China.
In my opinion, external defense should be made the top priority for the realignment of our national defense strategy.
We are facing an external threat from the world’s second most powerful country whose military might is growing each day. And while China is not our land neighbor, we share the same relatively small body of water, the South China Sea.
Some sound very defeatist about the prospect of a conflict with an emerging super power in view of China’s overwhelming economic and military superiority and ask, how can we resist? What’s the use?
My answer:
First it is our constitutional duty to defend and protect our territorial integrity. We reaffirm this mandate every time we sing our National Anthem: “Sa manlulupig, di ka pasisiil!”
And second, it is not an entirely losing proposition to confront a giant. History and the Bible are replete with stories of smaller forces winning a conflict with or successfully resisting a much bigger force, both in the battlefield and the geopolitical arena.
We are now in the process, more than at any period of our recent history, of beefing up of our external defense capability.
We have two new Navy ships, not much by international standards given the magnitude of the threat, but they constitute a big leap and their presence has made our Philippine Navy more capable than at any time in our recent history. These are the two converted coast guard cutters acquired from the US: the BRP Greogorio del Pilar and the BRP Ramon Alcaraz, with very fitting names after two Filipino heroes who won their place in Philippine history fighting overwhelming military odds.
I propose Asymmetric Warfare as our principal strategy in confronting the bully in the neighborhood.
We should use ANTI-ACCESS/AREA DENIAL methods and strategy.
We cannot match a giant military power frigate for frigate or plane for plane.
But we can easily afford a few hundred cruise missiles to target intruders and prevent access to our Exclusive Economic Zone.
I propose the following:
MISSILE DEFENSE
Landbased Supersonic Cruise Missiles, LIKE the Brahmos, deployed in the fastnesses of Palawan, Mindoro and Luzon.
BrahMos is a supersonic cruise missile that can be launched from submarines, ships, aircraft or
land. It is a joint venture between Republic of India's Defence Research and Development Organisation
(DRDO) and Russian Federation's NPO Mashinostroeyenia who have together formed BrahMos Aerospace Private Limited.
A technical description reads as follows:
“BrahMos has the capability of attacking surface targets by flying as low as 10 metres in altitude. It can gain a speed of Mach 2.8, and has a maximum range of 290 km. The ship-launched and land-based missiles can carry a 200 kg warhead. It has a two-stage propulsion system, with a solid-propellant rocket for initial acceleration and a liquid-fuelled ramjet responsible for sustained supersonic cruise. Air-breathing ramjet propulsion is much more fuel-efficient than rocket propulsion, giving the BrahMos a longer range than a pure rocket-powered missile would achieve. The high speed of the BrahMos likely gives it better target-penetration characteristics than lighter subsonic cruise missiles such as the Tomahawk. Being twice as heavy and almost four times faster than the Tomahawk, the BrahMos has more than 32 times the on-cruise kinetic energy of a Tomahawk missile, although it carries only 3/5 the payload and a fraction of the range despite weighing twice as much, which suggests that the missile was designed with a different tactical role. Its 2.8 Mach speed means that it cannot be intercepted by some existing missile defence system and its precision makes it lethal to water targets.”
With an array of cruise missiles deployed in our West Coast, I don’t think a prudent commander of a foreign DDG or even a flotilla of DDGs would dare go in harms way within our EEZ. Ditto to the foreign troops stationed illegally in an installation, like in Mischief Reef, knowing they could be pulverized in an actual conflict. This missile defense system should be assigned to the Philippine Air Force.
SWARM Navy:
The BRP Del Pilar and BRP Alcaraz are there, and perhaps two or three more modern frigates will be acquired soon to give the Philippine Navy credible capability. However, in a direct confrontation, they are no match against China’s modern DDGs and frigates.
We need to support our frigates with Swarm tactics and strategy in protecting our EEZ and territorial seas. This is cost effective credible defense. Even the world’s most powerful Navy, the US Navy, finds a swarm navy in the Persian Gulf a credible deterrent.
I propose a SWARM of Missile Boats SIMILAR to the
HAYABUSA Class Missile Boats of Japan.
SPEED OF 46 KNOTS WITH FOUR (4) TYPE 90
Ship-to-Ship Missiles or SSM-1B, Range 150-200 km and 1 otobreda 76 mm gun
Complement of 21
ARE FUNDS AVAILABLE? YES!
P130 Billion is immediately available from the Malampaya Fund.
Security is a direct, critical and essential part of energy development whether on land or sea.
To those who say the Malampaya Fund cannot be used for AFP modernization, TAKE A LOOK AT THIS OIL PLATFORM OUT IN THE OPEN SEA. CAN IT SURVIVE FROM INCEPTION TO OPERATION WITHOUT SECURITY?
DEFENSE ALLIANCES
A vital part of any defense strategy is the forging and strengthening of alliances, such as the PHILIPPINES-UNITED STATES ALLIANCE
Part of the terms of the proposed strengthening of the Philippine-US Alliance is making our military bases available for rotational visits by US Navy ships and other military assets. This accommodation must also be given to other friends like Japan, Australia and India.
This is now under negotiation and done transparently. US Defense News reported this in the open:
WASHINGTON — Greater access to Philippine facilities for the US military will be part of the upcoming negotiations between Manila and Washington on establishing a framework agreement that would be “nested” under the 1951 Mutual Defense Treaty (MDT), Philippine and US defense officials here said.
Both indicated there would be no changes to the MDT, no permanent US military bases, and, despite media speculation, no basing of US Air Force F-22 fighters or B-2 bombers.
The Philippines is shifting from internal security requirements related to the threat from terrorism to maritime security concerns in the South China Sea, and “our treaty agreement needs [to be] updated,” a US defense source said.
What the “access agreement” will look like has yet to be established. But one thing is certain — it will be rotational, the US defense source said. Rotational is the new framework and the concept is still developmental with each treaty ally in the region, the source said.
Part of this move is the proposed relocation of the country’s navy and air force assets to Subic. But China, through mouthpiece China Daily, immediately objected to a move that simply parallels what the PLA Navy and other forces have been doing in the South China Sea.
Here’s how China Daily reported it:
Manila's plan to relocate its major air force and navy camps to a former US naval base near the South China Sea is designed to increase pressure on China and introduce more outside forces to the region to contain the country, experts said…The Philippine government plans to transfer air and naval forces, with their aircraft and warships, to Subic Bay, northwest of Manila, to gain faster access to the South China Sea, Philippine Defense Secretary Voltaire Gazmin said.
"It's for the protection of our West Philippine Sea," said Gazmin, using Manila's newly adopted name for part of the South China Sea. Subic's location will cut the time it takes for fighter aircraft to get to the South China Sea by more than three minutes, compared with flying from Clark Air Base, north of Manila, where some air force planes are currently based, according to a confidential defense department document obtained by The Associated Press.
The natural deep harbor can also accommodate two large warships that the Philippines recently acquired from its ally the United States, and will grant visiting US forces, ships and aircraft temporary access to more of its military camps to allow for more joint military exercises than are currently held, the media reported.
The first US coast guard cutter was relaunched as the Philippines' largest warship in 2011. Philippine President Benigno Aquino III will lead ceremonies on Aug 6 to welcome the second ship at Subic, the Philippine navy has said.
Aggressive stance
Li Guoqiang, deputy director of the Center for Chinese Borderland History and Geography at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, said Manila is building up and concentrating its military forces near the South China Sea "with a clear target — China".
The move continues Manila's stance on the issue this year, which violates the spirit of the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea and increases the risks of conflicts in the region, Li said.
"If all related parties resort to military means as Manila has for a resolution, the region will surely become a powder keg."
China, the Philippines, Malaysia, Vietnam and Brunei have overlapping territorial claims over parts of the South China Sea. China's call for a peaceful solution has recently gained a positive response from nearly all the involved parties, but not Manila.
The report AP cited said that the cost of repairs and improvements at Subic needed for an air force base there will be at least $119 million.
Despite the high cost, the plan is likely to take place with assistance from Washington, which has been shifting its strategic focus to the Asia-Pacific region, and Tokyo, whose ties with Beijing have been strained after Japan illegally "nationalized" China's Diaoyu Islands in the East China Sea, Li said.
Complicating issue
Su Hao, a professor of Asia-Pacific studies at China Foreign Affairs University, said external forces that share the Philippines' goal of containing China are complicating the regional South China Sea issue.
"What Manila sometimes did was to meet the needs of Washington and US allies, to seek more support from them," he said.
Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe presented Manila 10 patrol boats for the country's weak naval forces last week, during his third trip this year to Southeast Asia.
The US-based Military Times website said that with the Pentagon's strategic focus shifting to the Pacific, the Philippine bases are an ideal stopping point that's roughly 1,600 km west of Guam, where four US ships are based.
"With this recognition of an existential threat from China, I think there's much more interest in having the US presence," the media quoted Carl Baker, a Hawaii-based defense expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, as saying.
But Su said the role Washington can play in the future is still unclear. "The US would like to see Manila posing threats to China or to back Manila behind the scenes, but it is reluctant to have open conflicts with China," he said.
From the foregoing, it appears that to China, it is acceptable for them to occupy and militarize reefs and islets within our EEZ and that should not be considered a violation of “the spirit of the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea.”
China Daily should direct to Beijing instead of the Philippines this statement in their article: "If all related parties resort to military means as Manila has for a resolution, the region will surely become a powder keg."
After all, it was China that started grabbing features in our EEZ using their superior forces and has resorted to military means.
We should have more military exercises with our allies in the regions such as this one:
SAN ANTONIO, Philippines, Sept 18, 2013 (AFP) - The Philippines and the United States launched war games Wednesday at a naval base facing turbulent waters claimed by China, as the allies sought to highlight their expanding military alliance.
About 2,300 marines from both sides are taking part in the annual manoeuvres which this year are being staged alongside the South China Sea and come ahead of US President Barack Obama's planned first visit to the Philippines next month.
The Philippines, which has been seeking US military support to counter what it perceives as a growing Chinese threat to its South China Sea territory, welcomed the exercises as another important plank in building its defence capabilities.
And of course more technical assistance from the US, like “unmanned US Navy surveillance planes to help monitor activities in Philippine waters, particularly in the South China Sea.”
Oyster Bay
I support the plan for a Mini-Subic in the Palawan area, described as follows:
Mini-Subic' being planned
near Palawan's underground
River
By ANDREW R.C. MARSHALL and MANUEL MOGATO, Reuters October 2, 2013
Reuters - Oyster Bay, a postcard-perfect cove on Palawan Island that the Philippines expects to transform into a port for its naval frigates and eventually for American warships--all overlooking the disputed South China Sea (West Philippine Sea). Oyster Bay is about 160 km (100 miles) from the Spratlys.
"In Manila, the leaders must move behind rhetorical blandishments about a new spirit of partnership and start to detail specific actions
That will strengthen Philippine defense capabilities," said Patrick Cronin, an Asia-Pacific security expert at the Center for a
New American Security in Washington. That includes building a permanent home for the Philippines' two big warships. It also means finding strategic areas where the United States could rotate troops, ships and naval aircraft — all within easy reach of territory claimed by Beijing."Oyster Bay may be the best choice," said Cronin.
The arrival of the two converted coast guard cutters is part of the resurgence of the Philippine Navy with the assistance of the US.
President Benigno Aquino III made this statement upon arrival of the second Navy ship BRP Alcaraz: “Now that the BRP Alcaraz is here, it will definitely boost our patrols around the Philippine Exclusive Economic Zone and our ability to quell threats and dangerous elements, respond to search and rescue operations, and needs of our marine resources,”
The Philippine Navy’s resurgence follows global trends.
From Reuters is this article entitled “From Syria to South China Sea, Navies Cruise Back Into Vogue. Reuters” which also mentions the upgrading of the Philippine Navy:
From Syria to South China Sea, Navies Cruise Back Into Vogue. Reuters
“LONDON — After a quarter century of Middle Eastern land wars and a sharp fall in big powers' naval spending after the Cold War, sea power is back in vogue in response to the rise of China… Washington is moving ships from the Atlantic to Pacific in part to confront Beijing's People's Liberation Army Navy, seen the primary beneficiary of years of double-digit defense budget increases.”
“Beijing began operating its ex-Soviet carrier late last year, though it says it is not yet fully operational. It is also building submarines, patrol boats and other warships
“In September, state-backed China Shipbuilding Industry announced it planned to raise $1.4 billion through a private share sale to buy assets used for building warships, the first time Beijing had tapped the capital market to fund its military expansion.”
“Worried nearby nations - particularly those with Maritime boundary disputes with China - are upgrading everything from radar to missiles…
“Japan will next year see its largest defense spending rise in 22 years, purchasing patrol boats and helicopters and creating a force of marines.”
“Australia is boosting its navy to include new assault ships, while Vietnam is buying Russian submarines.
“The Philippines is dramatically expanding its once almost moribund force, acquiring two former U.S. Coast Guard cutters,
Japanese patrol boats and a second-hand French warship.”
The Economic Factor: China’s Economic Downturn and the Philippine Economic Rise
China’s military rise and assertiveness are the result of its dramatic economic rise.
However there is hope that China’s rise will soon slow down, and this reduce as well her aggressiveness in the face of domestic economic troubles.
Let me quote the article of Stratfor Founder George Friedman in his article “Recognizing the End of the Chinese Economic Miracle” last July 23, 2013 in Stratfor’s Geopolitical weekly:
“Last week, the crisis was announced with a flourish. First, The New York Times columnist and Nobel Prize-recipient Paul Krugman penned a piece titled "Hitting China's Wall." He wrote, "The signs are now unmistakable: China is in big trouble. We're not talking about some minor setback along the way, but something more fundamental. The country's whole way of doing business, the economic system that has driven three decades of incredible growth, has reached its limits. You could say that the Chinese model is about to hit its Great Wall, and the only question now is just how bad the crash will be."
On the other hand, from neutral international economic analysts, there are the very bullish and optimistic reviews on the Philippine economy.
Here’s a bullish forecast from Standard Chartered:
The Philippines can grow faster than China in the coming years, a top official of British bank Standard Chartered said Thursday.
Standard Chartered global macro research head Marios Maratheftis said the economy might expand 8 percent or faster annually beyond 2015, if current policies of the present administration, healthy fundamentals and strong business confidence were sustained.
“There is no reason for the Philippines not to grow faster than China,” Maratheftis said.
“Policy, fundamentals and confidence would be the three key drivers of growth. Policies are moving in the right direction, especially on public-private partnership projects, fundamentals are also very healthy and confidence is high. These three are well aligned for the Philippines,” Maratheftis said.
A Standard Chartered’s recent business confidence survey showed the Philippines obtained the highest score in 2013, with the United Arab Emirates getting the second highest result.
“Generally, there is more confidence from the corporate sector. If this level of confidence can be translated into actions, the Philippines can attract more foreign direct investments,” Maratheftis said.
And from Reuters last May 2013:
Philippines' surprisingly strong first-quarter growth eclipses China
(Reuters) - The Philippines on Thursday posted surprisingly strong growth in the first quarter, knocking China from pole position in Asia, driven by robust domestic consumption and government spending.
The stellar pace of expansion, which blew past expectations, pulled the peso up from an 11-month low and cemented views the central bank would leave its key policy rate on hold this year.
Growth is seen powering on after the Philippines earlier this month got an investment grade rating from Standard & Poor's, the second debt agency to do so this year. That lowers borrowing costs and helps to attract foreign capital for an economy mired with high unemployment and poverty.
First quarter GDP grew a seasonally adjusted 2.2 percent over the prior three months, the fastest clip since the first quarter of 2012. A Reuters poll of economists had forecast 1.6 percent growth.
From a year earlier, the economy grew 7.8 percent, helped by robust domestic spending, making the Philippines the fastest growing economy in Asia as it pushed past China's 7.7 percent annual pace and 1.6 percent quarterly growth.
The Philippines' year-on-year GDP figure also topped the 6.1 percent growth forecast in a Reuters poll and was the fastest since the second quarter of 2010, then boosted by spending related to national elections that put President Benigno Aquino in power.
"We may now be moving along a new growth trajectory," economic planning chief Arsenio Balisacan told reporters.
Capital formation jumped an annual 47.7 percent in the first quarter as the private sector invested heavily to expand capacity given strong domestic consumption.
Public construction climbed 45.6 percent as a faster budget roll-out and better fiscal position allowed for more spending to rehabilitate decrepit school buildings, roads and bridges.
Per capita GDP grew an annual 6.1 percent in the first quarter, the highest in at least two years, although unemployment was at a year-high of 7.1 percent as of March.
And from one of the best arbiters of a country’s economic performance, here’s a recent headline only in early October 2013:
Moody’s Gives Philippines Investment-Grade Rating
By BETTINA WASSENER
5.
HONG KONG — The Philippines received an investment-grade rating from Moody’s Investors Service on Thursday, underscoring the rapid growth and political stability that the country — once seen as a “sick man of Asia” — has enjoyed in recent years.
The one-notch upgrade to Baa3 means the Philippines is now rated as investment grade by three of the world’s leading ratings agencies. Fitch Ratings ranked the country as investment grade in March, and Standard & Poor’s followed suit several weeks later.
Moody’s said the country’s robust economic performance, fiscal and debt consolidation, political stability and improved governance were reasons for the upgrade.
“The Philippines’ economic performance has entered a structural shift to higher growth, accompanied by low inflation,” Moody’s said in a news release.
It added: “The new growth path is being reinforced in part by improved fiscal management. Revenue growth has accommodated sizable increases in infrastructure and social spending.”
Scarborough Shoal another Mischief of China???
Now, let’s look at China’s newest apparent territorial push:
The latest development is that there appear to be some construction activities in Bajo de Masinloc or Scarborough Shoal. According to the Department of National Defense, around 75 concrete blocks were spotted during a recent aerial surveillance of the area. This is very ominous as it could be the prelude to converting our Shoal into a Chinese military installation right in our front yard.
This is another challenge and China may be crossing a red line if it builds a structure in Scarborough Shoal.
But in the face of all these provocations, the Philippines maintains its Rule of Law approach. The Economist noted this:
PHILIPPINES RESPECTS RULE OF LAW:
From the Economist
“The Philippines has also invoked a United Nations body the International Tribunal on the Law of the Sea (ITLOS).
In January it asked ITLOS to rule on China’s claim in the South China Sea, a vaguely explained U-shaped “nine-dashed line” looping round virtually all of it. ITLOS has now asked the Philippines to present a detailed “memorial” by the end of March 2014. China will simply ignore the proceedings, but risks some embarrassment.”
Status of ITLOS CASE:
REUTERS: Philippines S. China Sea legal case
Against China gathers pace
Fri Sep 27, 2013 5:09am EDT
* South China Sea legal case a "proxy battle" for tensions at sea
* Philippines builds crack legal team
* China still objecting, saying case has no merit
* Case resonating widely as tensions build
* Recent move by judges' panel possibly favourable to Manila
CONTINUATION REUTERS ARTICLE:
By Greg Torode
HONG KONG, Sept 27 (Reuters) - The Philippines' legal challenge against China's claims in the South China Sea is gathering pace, emerging as a "proxy battle" over Beijing's territorial reach.
Manila has assembled a crack international legal team to fight its unprecedented arbitration case under the United Nations' Convention on the Law of the Sea - ignoring growing pressure from Beijing to scrap
the action.
Any result will be unenforceable, legal experts say, but will carry considerable moral and political weight.
Spain to help
There’s good news from Europe. Spain, with its hundreds of years of history in navigating the South China, has announced its support for the Philippine legal case and will “turn over 70 historical maps to strengthen Philippine claim over disputed territories.”
STATE DIPLOMACY:
MALACANANG AND DFA
State Diplomacy is handled by the President or Malacanang Palace and the Department of Foreign Affairs when the Philippine case was filed in the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, in dealing with ASEAN, in bilateral discussions with China, the United States, Japan, Vietnam, India, Australia and other relevant countries.
But there’s another kind of diplomacy that is as important, especially in making the world know about the aggressive, hostile, bullying and land grabbing behavior of another country especially the bully in the neighborhood: Public Diplomacy.
ALSO IMPORTANT IS PUBLIC DIPLOMACY
“In international relations, public diplomacy or people's diplomacy, broadly speaking, is the communication with foreign publics to establish a dialogue designed to inform and influence.”
And that is why I organized a movement of citizens called “Di Ka Pasisiil”Movement to help in the needed public information campaign so the nation and the rest of the world will know about China’s violation of Philippine sovereignty in the West Philippine Sea.
And the Di Ka Pasisiil Movement joined the umbrella organization called the West Philippine Sea Coalition.
In a short time the Public Diplomacy efforts and movement made waves here and abroad!
IS THERE A PEACEFULWIN-WIN SOLUTION?
Last September 26, I listened to the speech of China Ambassador Ma Keqing when she spoke in the Rotary Club of Manila
where I belong.
She stressed the Chinese Dream: “Powerful & prosperous state. Dream of peace. Peace & development. Aware of preciousness of peace. Without peace little can be accomplished. Dream of development and benefits for Chinese people.”
She dangled the trade carrot:
“Chinese development has made significant contributions to the world. 10 trillion dollars imports target. Provide massive opportunities for the rest of the world.”
“China remains Philippines third largest export market. Tourist arrival 245,000, third largest for the Philippines. Trade however left far behind compared with other ASEAN countries. 2 Million Chinese tourists in Thailand. We can be important market for each
other. Opportunity waits for nobody. In dispute in the South China Sea, China is ready to solve dispute through dialogue, peaceful solutions. Preferred joint exploitation of natural resources. Serve interest of both countries and promote regional peace.”
She was asked: “Why is China not participating in arbitral tribunal?”
Her answer: “In China, we resolve disputes by talking to each other. When people file a case in court, they are not anymore friends. Solve problem by dialogue. Better way is to talk to each other. Arbitration was resorted to without consulting China. It was a unilateral act of the Philippines.”
(Golez: They also did not consult us when China
Occupied Mischief Reef and
Scarborough Shoal!)
We asked her: “What peaceful solution do we have in the West Philippine Sea? “
Her Answer: “Difficult, not easy issue to solve. We are very patient to solve the problem. Let's focus on joint exploitation; we cannot let the natural resources remain idle. “
That is China’s position as articulated by their Ambassador.
China plans Maritime Silk Road with ASEAN nations:
Report
China President Xi Jinping presented a big carrot to ASEAN:
China plans Maritime Silk Road with ASEAN nations: Report
“China is the 10-member ASEAN group's largest trading partner, with the two-way trade exceeding $400 billion last year.
China proposes to build a Maritime Silk Road with Southeast Asia countries where it is locked in a vexed dispute over the South China Sea to boost its foreign trade, state media here reported today.
The Maritime Silk Road (MSR) formed the basis for the plans to enhance trade between China and ASEAN countries during the current visit of Chinese President Xi Jinping to Indonesia and Malaysia where he stated the MSR would help turn the "Golden Decade" between China and the region into "Diamond Decade".
Such a project would be built upon solid political basis and economic foundations, and is in line with the common aspirations of the peoples of China and the ASEAN countries, a commentary by the state-run Xinhua news agency said.
MARITIME SILK ROAD WITH ASEAN NATIONS?
MEGATRADE WITH CHINA?
WHY NOT?
BUT CHINA MUST GET OUT OF OUR WEST PHILIPPINE SEA FIRST!!
Addendum:
SMALL COUNTRY CAN BEAT MUCH BIGGER COUNTRY
From "David and Goliath" the newest book of best selling author Malcolm Gladwell:
"Suppose you were to total up all the wars over the past two hundred years that occurred between very large and very small countries. Let's say that one side has to be at least ten times larger in population and armed might than the other. How often do you think the bigger side wins? Most of us, I think, would put the number at close to 100 percent. A tenfold difference is a lot. But the actual answer may surprise you. When the political scientist Ivan Arreguin-Toft did the calculation a few years ago, what he came up with was 71.5 percent. Just under a third of the time, the weaker country wins.
"Arreguin-Taft then asked the question slightly differently. What happens in wars between the strong and the weak when the weak side does as David did and refuses to fight the way the bigger side wants to fight, using unconventional or guerrilla tactics? The answer in those cases , the weaker party's winning percentage climbs from 28.5 percent to 63.6 percent.”
No comments:
Post a Comment