South China/West Philippine Sea

[Bugatti Veyron]

It’s the fight of the big boys. We are just collateral damage.

So, we should think smart.

Do we really want to be used as pawns? If we are willing to play as pawns, what’s in it for us?

In the long run, taking whose side would be less hurtful to us?

Can we be smart enough to build our strength so we can be neutral to both?

Of course the ideal situation is to build our strength so we can afford to be neutral to both. But until such time that this ideal situation is achieved, I think we have no choice but to take sides. And if it's a choice between siding with the good old US of A and the neighborhood bully to the north, well, it's quite obvious whose side I'll personally take.

[maxiev]

http://dailycaller.com/2014/06/03/south-china-sea-standoff-the-u-s-must-get-off-the-sidelines/

 

South China Sea Standoff: The U.S. Must Get Off The Sidelines

12:05 PM 06/03/2014

 

TAIPEI, TAIWAN — Within days of President Obama concluding his recent trip to Asia, which was meant to reinforce America’s commitment there as the Chinese threat grows, China attacked Vietnamese vessels to advance its claim over disputed waters and to test Washington’s resolve. A firm, multilateral response is needed to avoid escalation and to demonstrate that China’s combativeness pushes its adversaries together and closer to the U.S.

 

China has sought to aggressively expand its control of the East and South China Seas, where its claims conflict with those of other countries. Throughout 2011, China harassed Vietnamese fishing and oil exploration vessels. In June 2012, after India and Vietnam agreed to jointly explore oil in the South China Sea, a Chinese navy vessel shadowed Indian ships traveling in international waters between the Philippines and South Korea. In mid-2012, China expelled Filipino ships from the Scarborough Shoal, which is 399 miles closer to the Philippines than China. In November 2013, China expanded its air defense identification zone (ADIZ) to cover parts of the East China Sea claimed by Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan. In March 2014, China blocked the Philippines from resupplying a ship in disputed territory.

 

Distracted by budget issues and foreign policy crises outside of Asia, the U.S. took little action against China’s pattern of coercion. Indeed, China aims to press its interests in small increments that do not individually provoke a strong U.S. response. The reason for President Obama’s tour of Asia last month was to demonstrate that America’s security guarantees remain strong. Beijing was unconvinced.

 

On May 2, just three days after President Obama’s Asia trip, China placed a state-owned oil-drilling rig in contested parts of the South China Sea — 120 miles from Vietnam and 180 miles from China. Vietnamese ships intervened, but some of the 80 or so Chinese vessels accompanying the rig rammed and blasted them with water cannons. A tense standoff persists as Beijing plans to keep its rig there until August 15.

 

Beijing is gauging Washington’s resolve to stop its creeping expansionism. China seeks in the contested waters more than control of natural resources and a valuable trade passage. Indeed, China wants to seize these assets by overpowering Vietnam while keeping the U.S. on the sidelines to show that it can engage in a string of hostilities without the U.S. and its partners stopping it. Emboldened, China’s confrontations will continue until it supplants American primacy in Asia or it is met by a resolute balancing bloc.

 

The U.S. and its Asian partners must meet China’s aggression together.

 

First, China must realize that escalation is costly. The U.S. should declare that if China continues using force, it will dispatch naval and aerial support near the rig to restore peace and consider sanctioning the subject Chinese energy company and its leaders.

 

By maintaining ships near the rig and returning water cannon fire, Vietnam has shown that it will stand up to China. Still, Vietnam, which has no defense treaty with the U.S., must calibrate its use of defensive force because it cannot beat China in a maritime battle and it benefits from China being seen as the sole aggressor. Hanoi should thus continue talks with Beijing to reach a nonviolent resolution, but it must not unilaterally withdrawal from the area as Beijing demands. During the Scarborough Shoal incident, the U.S. brokered a deal requiring China and the Philippines to simultaneously remove their ships from the disputed waters, but only the Philippines did so and China has since controlled the shoal. Additionally, Vietnam should continue mobilizing international support and shaming China, because Beijing values its image. Indeed, after the Philippines initiated international arbitration of the Scarborough Shoal incident, China allegedly offered to withdrawal from the area if the Philippines delayed the arbitration.

 

Other Asian countries clashing with China over territorial and maritime claims should condemn it and announce that Chinese hostility drives them closer to each other and the U.S. This dynamic is already underway. The Philippines recently increased U.S. access to its military bases and agreed to enhance naval cooperation with Vietnam. Japan announced this week that it would provide maritime aid to Vietnam. India has offered Vietnam a credit line to purchase weapons and agreed to train Vietnam in submarine warfare. The goal is for regional partners to respond jointly when China targets one of them.

 

Second, Vietnam’s defensive capabilities, including its maritime law enforcement and surveillance capacities, must be strengthened. Additional weapons sales and aid from the U.S., Japan, and India are necessary. The U.S. must therefore revisit its ban on the sale of lethal weapons to Vietnam. To supplement its defense budget, Hanoi can offer these countries’ companies favorable terms to exploit natural resources near its coast. Further, the U.S., Vietnam, and other countries sparring with China should conduct multilateral military exercises.

 

Third, Hanoi should invite Washington to return to Vietnamese military bases. Given political sensitivities, Vietnam can retain control of its facilities, but grant American forces rotational access and allow them to build new infrastructure and pre-position equipment. America will be able to project power into the South China Sea more easily and China will be deterred from harassing Vietnam.

 

Fourth, the U.S. should conclude the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). That free trade agreement is being negotiated by the U.S., Vietnam, Japan, and nine other countries that make up over one third of world trade and about forty percent of global output. The TPP will open up its signatories to more trade and investment. For instance, numerous textile companies are moving from China to Vietnam because wages are lower and the TPP will cut textile tariffs. As TPP countries prosper, they can increase their military spending. And by creating such a large market, the pact will reduce its members’ economic reliance on China, giving them greater freedom to oppose Beijing’s power grabs.

 

The single time that the U.S. and its allies responded firmly to recent Chinese aggression, China essentially backed down. Days after China expanded its ADIZ, Washington, Tokyo, and Seoul sent warplanes through it. The U.S. and Japan provided military aid to Southeast Asian countries embroiled in territorial disputes with China, and Japan increased its military budget and drafted its first national security strategy, which focused on countering China. South Korea enlarged its ADIZ to include areas claimed by China. Beijing has since largely fallen silent about its ADIZ and not followed up on its statements about creating an ADIZ in the South China Sea.

 

The U.S. and its Asian partners must demonstrate that they can regularly make tough, coordinated responses to Chinese aggression. Otherwise, Beijing will further doubt U.S. commitments and continue trying to control Asia.

 

Paul J. Leaf is an attorney at an international law firm, a commentator on U.S. foreign policy, and a former editor of the Stanford Law Review.

[maxiev]

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-06-04/china-refuses-to-defend-its-south-china-sea-claims-to-un-court.html?cmpid=yhoo

 

China Refuses to Defend its South China Sea Claims to UN Court

By Bloomberg News Jun 4, 2014 4:55 PM GMT+0800

 

China refused to defend its territorial claims in the South China Sea to a United Nations tribunal because it doesn’t recognize international arbitration of its dispute with the Philippines.

 

“China’s position that it will not accept or participate in the tribunal case involving the Philippines hasn’t changed,” Foreign Ministry Spokesman Hong Lei said in Beijing today.

 

The UN’s Permanent Court of Arbitration announced yesterday it was giving China until Dec. 15 to respond to the complaint by the Philippines filed in March, when it asked the court to uphold its right to exploit waters within its 200-nautical mile exclusive economic zone. So far China has refused any international efforts to resolve the dispute, insisting any discussions on the issue must be held directly between China and the Philippines.

 

Under President Xi Jinping, China has been tapping its economic and military muscle to assert its claims to surrounding waters that may be rich in mineral and energy deposits. China claims much of the South China Sea under its “nine dash-line” map, first published in 1947, which extends hundreds of miles south from China’s Hainan Island to equatorial waters off the coast of Borneo, taking in some of the world’s busiest shipping lanes.

 

Hagel Rebuked

 

U.S. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said China’s action in the South China Sea risked destabilizing the region and that the “U.S. will not look the other way when fundamental principles of international order are being challenged.”

 

Hagel made the remarks on May 31 at a gathering of defense officials in Singapore, where he drew a rebuke from Lieutenant General Wang Guanzhong, deputy chief of general staff of the People’s Liberation Army, who said Hagel’s criticism was “groundless.”

 

The U.S. is treaty-bound to defend the Philippines and Japan, involved in a separate dispute with China in the East China Sea, in case of any conflict.

 

The Philippines and China have had regular dust-ups in the area. On May 7, Philippine police fired warning shots before arresting a boatload of Chinese fisherman near the Spratly Islands, known as Nansha in Chinese, for violating their sovereignty and catching endangered sea turtles. Chinese ships used water cannons in January to drive Filipino fishermen away from the Scarborough Shoal, the Philippine military said on Feb. 24. China warned off two Philippine boats near the Second Thomas Shoal, its Foreign Ministry said on March 10.

 

Vietnam Spat

 

Vietnam is preparing legal action against China in a separate dispute over a different area of the South China Sea after China set up an oil rig near the contested Paracel Islands, Prime Minister Nguyen Tan Dung said in a May 30 interview. The placing of the rig set off anti-Chinese protests in Vietnam last month that left at least three dead.

 

In the East China Sea, Chinese and Japanese coast guard boats regularly tail each other around a chain of islands disputed by the two countries. Two Chinese fighter jets came within tens of meters of two Japanese surveillance planes near the islands last month, a move that Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe called “dangerous.”

 

Speaking at the same international conference as Hagel last week, Abe said that countries shouldn’t try to change the status quo by force and that Japan would make every effort to help Southeast Asian nations secure their seas and airspace.

[camiar]

Of course the ideal situation is to build our strength so we can afford to be neutral to both. But until such time that this ideal situation is achieved, I think we have no choice but to take sides. And if it's a choice between siding with the good old US of A and the neighborhood bully to the north, well, it's quite obvious whose side I'll personally take.

Are we really taking sides? Or are we nothing but unwitting pawns?

 

It's obvious that the US cannot respond to China's creeping invasion - from reclaiming of shoals in the Philippine EEZ, to create islands big enough to build naval or air station, to outright drilling for oil right at Vietnam's doorstep.

 

It's World War II scenario again as we are reminded of Pres. Manuel Quezon's lament that "Uncle Sam sits idly while his daughter is being raped in the backroom, wringing his hands in worry about the fate of his cousins in Europe..."

 

And we, Filipinos, never learned that the only way we can get out of this morass is to rely solely on ourselves, as Vietnam does.

Edited June 5, 2014 by camiar

[oscartamaguchiblackface]

Are we really taking sides? Or are we nothing but unwitting pawns?

 

It's obvious that the US cannot respond to China's creeping invasion - from reclaiming of shoals in the Philippine EEZ, to create islands big enough to build naval or air station, to outright drilling for oil right at Vietnam's doorstep.

 

It's World War II scenario again as we are reminded of Pres. Manuel Quezon's lament that "Uncle Sam sits idly while his daughter is being raped in the backroom, wringing his hands in worry about the fate of his cousins in Europe..."

 

And we, Filipinos, never learned that the only way we can get out of this morass is to rely solely on ourselves, as Vietnam does.

I agree we should face this problem as a nation and not rely on the help of the US. Problem is I find our leaders too timid (and obviously intimidated) by a much more powerful China. Vietnam has shown a lot more balls than the Philippines in facing off against China.

[sonnyt111]

http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2014/06/08/is-japan-planning-to-create-an-anti-china-asian-na.aspx

 

 

Is Japan Planning to Create an Anti-China "Asian NATO"?

By Rich Smith

June 8, 2014

 

China has an aircraft carrier -- and it's making the neighbors nervous.

 

Across Southeast Asia today, plans are afoot from Taiwan to South Korea, and from Australia to the Philippines to Japan, to boost military spending to counterbalance an increasingly bellicose Chinese navy. Now, it seems that one of these countries, Japan, is ready to step to the fore and lead an alliance.

 

How did it come to this, and what does it all mean to investors?

 

http://g.foolcdn.com/editorial/images/124508/9-dash-line_large.png

China's famous "nine-dash line," which claims as China's exclusive province nearly all of the South China Sea. Boxed areas indicate areas of ongoing conflict with Vietnam and the Philippines. Illustration: Wikimedia Commons.

 

The background

For the past few weeks, a mixed fleet of Chinese warships and commercial fishing vessels have been skirmishing with local Vietnamese boats in the South China Sea, battling for position around an oil rig that CNOOC (NYSE: CEO ) has set up within Vietnam's exclusive economic zone. Last week, this dispute escalated when a Chinese vessel rammed, and sank, a Vietnamese fishing boat. (The sailors were rescued by other Vietnamese fishing boats nearby, but the incident escalated hostilities nonetheless.)

 

Not far away, off the coast of the Philippines, Chinese warships are threatening civilian fishing boats, and blockading a Filipino outpost on a local reef, refusing Philippines' ships access to resupply their troops. And to the north, tempers continue to flare over China's unilateral declaration of an "air defense identification zone" encompassing most of the East China Sea -- including territory claimed by South Korea and Japan.

 

As stories like these proliferate, naval analysts at AMI International predict that nations neighboring China will invest some $200 billion in buying over 1,000 new submarines, small surface combatants, and aircraft carriers to beef up their militaries over the next 20 years -- making the region the world's second-biggest market for military warships, after the United States. There's even talk of seeing these nations band together to "contain" Chinese influence.

 

And Japan wants to lead in this effort.

 

Rising sun

Last month, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe called for a "reinterpretation" of Article 9 of Japan's post-WWII Constitution. This article contains Japan's famous renunciation of "the threat or use of force as means of settling international disputes." It's the one that -- read literally -- bans the country from even having a military consisting of "land, sea, and air forces, as well as other war potential." But it's also the one that poses the greatest obstacle to Japan's leading of a coalition of countries opposed to China's bullying in the region.

 

While stopping short of actually rewriting the constitution, Prime Minister Abe wants to read this article in the context of the United Nations Charter. Article 51 of the charter specifically permits countries to act in "individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations." And Abe wants to claim that right for Japan, in spite of the wording of its own constitution.

 

What it means to investors

The Washington Post explains the import of this move: "By allowing for collective self-defense, Japan ... would be allowed, for instance, to help a U.S. vessel under attack on the high seas." Japan could similarly send its military forces to aid other allied nations under attack that request Japanese assistance. But two things are probably necessary to make this happen -- and herein lies the opportunity for investors.

 

First, and most obviously, if Japan wants to be able to aid its neighbors in distress, it needs a military capable of undertaking such missions. So while Japan's self-defense forces are already quite capable, the nation must take steps to make them even more so.

 

Last year, the Abe administration announced plans to invest $240 billion (not a typo -- that's nearly a quarter-trillion dollars in defense spending) to beef up its military. On the shopping list are P-8A maritime surveillance aircraft from Boeing (NYSE: BA ) , surveillance drones such as Northrop Grumman (NYSE: NOC ) produces, and V-22 Osprey tilt-rotor aircraft from Textron (NYSE: TXT ) -- tailor-made to operate off the decks of Japan's new fleet of helicopter destroyers.

 

What else it means to investors

More broadly, though, investors need to consider the potential follow-on effects from Japan's new engagement with its neighbors.

 

From a practical perspective, alliances work best when the members operate similar weapons systems. This aids both in cooperation on military exercises and, at an even more basic level, makes it easier for the weapons to "talk" to each other to prevent friendly fire incidents. This is why, for example, whenever the U.S. Defense Security Cooperation Agency goes to Congress seeking authorization to sell a weapons system to a NATO ally, it makes sure to point out the advantages of making the sale to ensure "U.S. and NATO interoperability."

 

Should Japan proceed with its reinterpretation of Article 9, and should its neighbors begin to rely upon Japan's assurances that it will aid in collective self-defense, the logical result would be that allied nations would begin to mirror weapons purchases that the Japan Self-Defense Force makes. Thus, once a U.S. defense contractor succeeds in getting its weapons system into the Japanese arsenal, it would win some measure of protection from competition (from competing, analogous weapons manufactured in Europe, Russia, or, of course, China itself) when bidding to sell the same weapons system to Japan's Asian-Pacific allies.

 

Result: The more bellicose China's actions in the South China Sea, the better the news for U.S. defense companies.

 

 

 

[sonnyt111]

http://www.businessinsider.com/south-korea-donates-philippine-2014-6

 

 

South Korea Is Giving The Philippine Navy A Free Ship As Tensions Rise With China

http://static4.businessinsider.com/image/52b30fa969beddbc74f15456-50/agence-france-presse.jpg Agence France Press

 

Jun. 6, 2014, 6:24 PM

 

 

 

 

South Korea will donate a corvette warship to the poorly-equipped Philippine navy amid growing tensions -- particularly with China -- over maritime territorial disputes in the region, the government said Thursday.

 

 

 

The "Pohang-class corvette" will be decommissioned by the end of the year and donated to the Philippines, the Department of Foreign Affairs in Manila said in a statement issued this week.

 

It was unclear if the donation would include the ship's weapons systems.

 

South Korean Defence Minister Kim Kwang-jin informed his Filipino counterpart Voltaire Gazmin of the donation during his visit to Seoul on May 30, the statement added.

 

The gift follows South Korea's recent donation of a landing craft and 16 rubber boats to the Philippines, it added.

 

"South Korea's gesture is a small token compared with the great contribution of Filipino troops during the Korean War," the South Korean minister was quoted as saying.

 

Officials at the Manila's foreign ministry and the South Korean embassy could not be contacted for comment.

 

The donation comes as the Philippines is facing increasing pressure from China over their conflicting claims to the South China Sea.

 

China claims most of South China Sea even up to the coasts of its neighbours and the Philippines has increasingly accused its larger neighbour of using bullying tactics to enforce its claim.

 

The Philippines, which has one of the most poorly-armed militaries in the region, has been upgrading its defence capabilities in recent years.

 

It has also been improving its defence relations with South Korea and in March, it signed an agreement to buy 12 South Korean-made FA-50 jets for about $421.12 million.

 

 

 

[sonnyt111]

It's nice to see the growing cooperation between the Philippines and Vietnam as well as other nations in this part of the world. China is increasingly viewed as the bad guy, undermining stability in South East Asia and North East Asia.

 

The increased cooperation between ASEAN countries is heart warming.

 

http://news.yahoo.com/philippine-vietnamese-troops-drink-beer-play-volleyball-disputed-074315622.html

 

Philippine, Vietnamese troops drink beer, play volleyball on disputed isle

 

By By Manuel Mogato and Nguyen Phuong Linh 7 hours ago

 

MANILA/HANOI (Reuters) - Vietnamese and Philippine troops got together on a disputed island in the South China Sea on Sunday to play soccer and volleyball - as well as drink beer - in a display of unity that will not go unnoticed in Beijing.

 

Philippine naval officials billed the event on the Vietnamese-held island as a chance to show the world there can be harmony in the South China Sea despite a web of overlapping claims to the potentially energy-rich waters.

 

The gathering on Southwest Cay in the Spratly archipelago also symbolises how once-suspicious neighbours are cooperating in the face of China's growing assertiveness in disputed waters.

 

About 40 Philippine naval personnel sailed to the island for the day-long event, Philippine naval officials said.

 

Coincidentally, the Philippines occupied Southwest Cay until early 1975, when troops from then South Vietnam seized it after Philippine forces sailed a couple of miles to Northeast Cay, which was under Manila's control, for a party.

 

The South Vietnamese were soon displaced by the communist forces of a victorious Hanoi.

 

Besides playing soccer and volleyball, the troops held a tug-of-war competition, put on cultural shows involving singing and dancing and shared food and beer, said Philippine naval spokesman, Lieutenant-Commander Gerard Fabic.

 

They also shared information on maritime security, natural disaster warnings and search and rescue operations.

 

Colonel Le Xuan Thuy, a Vietnamese naval official, said the event reflected the goodwill between the two countries.

 

He told troops from both sides that current conditions in the region were complicated by the "unruly actions of China seriously violating international laws".

 

The gathering underscores the growing cooperation between Hanoi and Manila - the two capitals most feeling China's wrath over the South China Sea - even though both still claim Southwest Cay and dispute other islands. Southwest Cay is almost equidistant from Vietnam and the Philippines.

 

"We are not only bringing down walls of mistrust and suspicion with one another but building trust and confidence towards peacefully resolving our competing claims," said a senior Philippine naval official who declined to be identified.

 

The Philippines would hold a similar event next year, officials said.

 

CHINA DRIVING COUNTRIES TOGETHER

 

The Philippines, Malaysia and Brunei each claim some of the Spratlys, while China, Taiwan and Vietnam claim the whole chain.

 

China also claims 90 percent of the 3.5 million sq km (1.35 million sq mile) South China Sea, its reach displayed on its official maps with a so-called nine-dash line that extends deep into the maritime heart of Southeast Asia.

 

Beijing accuses the other claimants of stirring up trouble in the region.

 

Diplomats and experts have described the nascent partnership between Hanoi and Manila as part of a web of evolving relationships across Asia that are being driven by fear of China as well as doubts among some, especially in Japan, over the U.S. commitment to the region. [iD:nL4N0MV236]

 

They have said there were increasing levels of trust at a working level, as countries find that China's projection of naval power into Asia's waters is driving them together.

 

Most recently, Vietnam expressed interest in a legal case Manila filed at an international arbitration tribunal in late March, challenging China over its claims in the South China Sea.

 

Indeed, Vietnamese Prime Minister Nguyen Tan Dung said last month his government was considering taking legal action against China following the deployment of a Chinese oil rig to waters that Hanoi also claims. Vietnamese officials have not elaborated.

 

The Philippine and Vietnamese navies recently agreed to expand cooperation in disputed areas and a Vietnamese guided missile cruiser will soon visit Manila, Philippine naval officials have said.

 

 

 

[filibustero]

I'm all for the RP-Vietnam friendly games in disputed territory. I just wish they picked a different sport to play. Would have been nice if they set up a paintball arena instead and played the game soldiers were meant to play. Plus that would have sent China up in arms in protest instead of laughing. Hehe.

[hit05]

The US military will never trust the Philippine Government to be its ally. It has not removed it from the list and is next only to Iraq in the war on terror. But the Filipino People want the Americans here. In a recent survey, 85% of them approve of American presence. The Filipino politicians who are but a few are defying the popular stance by creating political block to the US military.

 

What happened in Leyte and Cagayan de Oro are proof of the growing influence and presence of mainland Chinese in the country who are legally sponsored by the DENR and even the Philippine Congress. They seem to defy the total log ban, total mining ban policies, even the criminal laws of the country. The Chinese are allowed to murder Filipinos like the incident in San Juanico Bridge that unfolded on nationwide television where hundreds of motorists reacting from news that the bridge is open were blocked and murdered by suposedly NPA rebels, then with the help of Filipino officials who gave safe passage to a Chinese Medical Mission, certified the deaths as typhoon related. Deaths due to illegal activities are placed hurriedly in mass graves to cover up the genocide taking place which even the Chinese Ambassador personally visited to expedite the effort before local officials make a tour of the area. Even investigators like the two police officers from Cagayan de Oro were found to be among the victims of calamity despite the fact that they reported for work 2 days after the rains stopped.

[maxiev]

http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2014/06/08/is-japan-planning-to-create-an-anti-china-asian-na.aspx

 

 

Is Japan Planning to Create an Anti-China "Asian NATO"?

By Rich Smith

June 8, 2014

 

China has an aircraft carrier -- and it's making the neighbors nervous.

 

Across Southeast Asia today, plans are afoot from Taiwan to South Korea, and from Australia to the Philippines to Japan, to boost military spending to counterbalance an increasingly bellicose Chinese navy. Now, it seems that one of these countries, Japan, is ready to step to the fore and lead an alliance.

 

How did it come to this, and what does it all mean to investors?

 

http://g.foolcdn.com/editorial/images/124508/9-dash-line_large.png

China's famous "nine-dash line," which claims as China's exclusive province nearly all of the South China Sea. Boxed areas indicate areas of ongoing conflict with Vietnam and the Philippines. Illustration: Wikimedia Commons.

 

The background

For the past few weeks, a mixed fleet of Chinese warships and commercial fishing vessels have been skirmishing with local Vietnamese boats in the South China Sea, battling for position around an oil rig that CNOOC (NYSE: CEO ) has set up within Vietnam's exclusive economic zone. Last week, this dispute escalated when a Chinese vessel rammed, and sank, a Vietnamese fishing boat. (The sailors were rescued by other Vietnamese fishing boats nearby, but the incident escalated hostilities nonetheless.)

 

Not far away, off the coast of the Philippines, Chinese warships are threatening civilian fishing boats, and blockading a Filipino outpost on a local reef, refusing Philippines' ships access to resupply their troops. And to the north, tempers continue to flare over China's unilateral declaration of an "air defense identification zone" encompassing most of the East China Sea -- including territory claimed by South Korea and Japan.

 

As stories like these proliferate, naval analysts at AMI International predict that nations neighboring China will invest some $200 billion in buying over 1,000 new submarines, small surface combatants, and aircraft carriers to beef up their militaries over the next 20 years -- making the region the world's second-biggest market for military warships, after the United States. There's even talk of seeing these nations band together to "contain" Chinese influence.

 

And Japan wants to lead in this effort.

 

Rising sun

Last month, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe called for a "reinterpretation" of Article 9 of Japan's post-WWII Constitution. This article contains Japan's famous renunciation of "the threat or use of force as means of settling international disputes." It's the one that -- read literally -- bans the country from even having a military consisting of "land, sea, and air forces, as well as other war potential." But it's also the one that poses the greatest obstacle to Japan's leading of a coalition of countries opposed to China's bullying in the region.

 

While stopping short of actually rewriting the constitution, Prime Minister Abe wants to read this article in the context of the United Nations Charter. Article 51 of the charter specifically permits countries to act in "individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations." And Abe wants to claim that right for Japan, in spite of the wording of its own constitution.

 

What it means to investors

The Washington Post explains the import of this move: "By allowing for collective self-defense, Japan ... would be allowed, for instance, to help a U.S. vessel under attack on the high seas." Japan could similarly send its military forces to aid other allied nations under attack that request Japanese assistance. But two things are probably necessary to make this happen -- and herein lies the opportunity for investors.

 

First, and most obviously, if Japan wants to be able to aid its neighbors in distress, it needs a military capable of undertaking such missions. So while Japan's self-defense forces are already quite capable, the nation must take steps to make them even more so.

 

Last year, the Abe administration announced plans to invest $240 billion (not a typo -- that's nearly a quarter-trillion dollars in defense spending) to beef up its military. On the shopping list are P-8A maritime surveillance aircraft from Boeing (NYSE: BA ) , surveillance drones such as Northrop Grumman (NYSE: NOC ) produces, and V-22 Osprey tilt-rotor aircraft from Textron (NYSE: TXT ) -- tailor-made to operate off the decks of Japan's new fleet of helicopter destroyers.

 

What else it means to investors

More broadly, though, investors need to consider the potential follow-on effects from Japan's new engagement with its neighbors.

 

From a practical perspective, alliances work best when the members operate similar weapons systems. This aids both in cooperation on military exercises and, at an even more basic level, makes it easier for the weapons to "talk" to each other to prevent friendly fire incidents. This is why, for example, whenever the U.S. Defense Security Cooperation Agency goes to Congress seeking authorization to sell a weapons system to a NATO ally, it makes sure to point out the advantages of making the sale to ensure "U.S. and NATO interoperability."

 

Should Japan proceed with its reinterpretation of Article 9, and should its neighbors begin to rely upon Japan's assurances that it will aid in collective self-defense, the logical result would be that allied nations would begin to mirror weapons purchases that the Japan Self-Defense Force makes. Thus, once a U.S. defense contractor succeeds in getting its weapons system into the Japanese arsenal, it would win some measure of protection from competition (from competing, analogous weapons manufactured in Europe, Russia, or, of course, China itself) when bidding to sell the same weapons system to Japan's Asian-Pacific allies.

 

Result: The more bellicose China's actions in the South China Sea, the better the news for U.S. defense companies.

 

It sure seems that way according to this article. Imagine, Japan providing the Philippines with 10 new patrol vessels!!

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/t-dean-reed/japan-to-china-lets-talk-_b_5460823.html

 

 

Japan to China: Let's Talk Regional Peace, but Meanwhile We Will Arm Our Neighbors

Posted: 06/09/2014 9:04 pm EDT Updated: 06/09/2014 9:59 pm EDT

 

Japan's prime minister Shinzo Abe's declaration of aid for Asian countries, coupled with offers to sit down for talks with China, is a major step that could well offer a pathway to new stability in the region's seas -- if China will respond better than its bluster at the recent Shangri-La Dialogue, the Asia Security Summit in Singapore.

 

Abe was specific in his offers to China: Words, not conflict; operate the 2007 agreement he sought between Japan and China for maritime and air communications to avoid miscalculations; start now to create a roadmap for success at next year's important East Asia Summit, its 10th anniversary and a key time for progress; publicly disclose each step in military budgets so that they can be cross-checked, because "sunshine is the best disinfectant."

 

Simultaneously, Abe made clear that Japan will be proactive, offered "utmost support" to the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) and was equally specific. What will Japan actually support, and how? Ten new patrol vessels for the Philippine Coast Guard; three new patrol ships to Indonesia, already underway; similar vessels to Vietnam, to be constructed; all followed by scores of expert instructors with technical skills.

 

While U.S. Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel's sharp denunciation of China's high-handed efforts to seize the South China and East China Seas commanded the headlines, it was Abe, keynoting the dialogue, who offered peaceful solutions and long-term regional security.

 

How China will respond is uncertain, although its leaders have a history of refusing to talk except on their own terms. They also renege or refuse to act on agreements, such as with ASEAN countries not to use force in the South China Sea, with Japan to better communicate at sea and in the air, and with the Philippines not to occupy Scarborough Shoal. The latter is typical. The United States in 2012 negotiated an agreement for both China and the Philippines to remove forces from Scarborough. The Philippines did. China stayed.

 

Yet China, when under pressure, has been known to act in its own best interests, beyond the bluster displayed at the Shangri-La Dialogue.

 

Chinese officials at the meeting were prepared for U.S. criticism from Hagel but received much more than they bargained for. Hagel, in unusually strong language, said the U.S. "firmly opposes any nation's use of intimidation, coercion, or the threat of force" in the South China Sea. A senior Chinese military official, Lt. Gen. Wang Guanzhong, complained that Hagel's remarks were more than expected and "full of hegemonism." Later a Chinese military professor, Major Gen. Zhu Chenghu, said the U.S. was making "very, very important strategic mistakes."

 

From Singapore, the discussion then moved to the G7 meeting in Brussels, where the group of leading nations -- the U.S., Japan, Britain, Germany, France, Canada, and Italy -- "oppose any unilateral attempt" to assert claims in the East China Sea, where China threatens Japan's Senkaku Islands, or in the South China Sea, where China opposes the Philippines, Vietnam and others.

 

With world leaders, east and west, voicing their concerns to China, it may well be Japan's strengthening of its neighbors, such as the Philippines, Vietnam and Indonesia, that will give China pause.

 

Freedom of the seas has been accepted worldwide since the days of the early Greeks and Romans, Japan's Abe told the meeting in Singapore. He described the rule of law at sea and asked, "What exactly do we mean in concrete terms?" He answered with three principles:

 

States shall make and clarify their claims based on international law.

 

States shall not use force or coercion in trying to drive their claims.

 

States shall seek to settle disputes by peaceful measures.

 

If China continues to disregard these principles and stays in the internationally accepted zones of countries such as the Philippines and Vietnam, it may well be the other side of Abe's dual offer -- defensive armed aid to those countries -- that will deter aggression and bring stability back to Asia.

Edited June 10, 2014 by maxiev

[sonnyt111]

http://nationalinterest.org/feature/five-japanese-weapons-war-china-should-fear-10660

[oscartamaguchiblackface]

http://nationalinter...ould-fear-10660

Seems the Japanese Home Defense Force is quite impressive despite the fact that these advanced weapons systems are for defensive use only.

 

The Chinese and the Japanese better start talking about their common problem very soon lest the current hostilities get out of hand and escalate into a full blown war.

[Bugatti Veyron]

Seems the Japanese Home Defense Force is quite impressive despite the fact that these advanced weapons systems are for defensive use only.

 

The Chinese and the Japanese better start talking about their common problem very soon lest the current hostilities get out of hand and escalate into a full blown war.

 

Japan may be barred by its constitution from creating an armed forces for offensive purposes because of its rejection of war as an instrument of national policy. So the next best thing they can do is to arm its neighbors who have their own problems with China.

 

What's alarming though is the move of Vladimir Putin to ally itself with China and North Korea. A China-Russian military alliance is the worst possible scenario I can think of at this time.

 

It's like we are being transported back to early days of the Cold War. And this time, it's China, not Japan, that's the aggressor.

 

Is history repeating itself?

[sonnyt111]

Japan may be barred by its constitution from creating an armed forces for offensive purposes because of its rejection of war as an instrument of national policy. So the next best thing they can do is to arm its neighbors who have their own problems with China.

 

What's alarming though is the move of Vladimir Putin to ally itself with China and North Korea. A China-Russian military alliance is the worst possible scenario I can think of at this time.

 

It's like we are being transported back to early days of the Cold War. And this time, it's China, not Japan, that's the aggressor.

 

Is history repeating itself?

Only this time around the US, Vietnam, Japan, and the Philippines are allies. It's just good to know that Europe isn't in any kind of upheaval now unlike it is over here in Asia.

[maxiev]

Japan may be barred by its constitution from creating an armed forces for offensive purposes because of its rejection of war as an instrument of national policy. So the next best thing they can do is to arm its neighbors who have their own problems with China.

Which Japan says it's planning to do. Please refer to this article:

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/t-dean-reed/japan-to-china-lets-talk-_b_5460823.html

[sillyo]

The best course of action for the Philippines is to put down a few oil rigs of their own in the disputed region. China will not take aggressive action, that I can guarentee. China is playing a game of chicken in the South China Sea, the aim is not to gain maritime territory, but to show the US that they can't protect all of their assets in Asia. The ultimate goal is to use their various claims in the South China Sea as bargaining chips and pressure the US into returning the Senkaku Islands to the Communist Government of China, thus reaffirming their legitimacy and atone for some of shame they caused when they gave Mongolia and parts of Manchuria to the Soviets 65 years ago.

[Bugatti Veyron]

do you know that it was former speaker de venecia's fault kung bakit pumasok ang china sa spratlys?

pano naging fault ni jdv?? kindly explain.. im interested thanks

 

Yeah I was wondering the same thing myself....

[oscartamaguchiblackface]

The best course of action for the Philippines is to put down a few oil rigs of their own in the disputed region. China will not take aggressive action, that I can guarentee. China is playing a game of chicken in the South China Sea, the aim is not to gain maritime territory, but to show the US that they can't protect all of their assets in Asia. The ultimate goal is to use their various claims in the South China Sea as bargaining chips and pressure the US into returning the Senkaku Islands to the Communist Government of China, thus reaffirming their legitimacy and atone for some of shame they caused when they gave Mongolia and parts of Manchuria to the Soviets 65 years ago.

It takes a lot of money to put up oil rigs. Money that the Philippines may not have.

[heatseeker0714]

Yeah I was wondering the same thing myself....

 

He was the one who urged, nudged & nagged the petite klepto from Lubao to agree to that bulsh.i.t Joint Marine Seismic Undertaking we entered into with China and Vietnam in the mid 2000s... Which confirmed Recto Bank's gas deposits na hindi naman pinag-iinteresan ng China dati na biglang naging parte ng kanilang "Sovereign Territory" na ngayon...

 

That's why them chicom pirates are pressuring us to abandon Ayungin Shoal... Cause Ayungin Shoal is the gate to Recto Bank... We lose Ayungin Shoal, kiss Recto Bank goodbye!

[lomex32]

How about other physical structures ? Like a lighthouse etc..

 

It takes a lot of money to put up oil rigs. Money that the Philippines may not have.

[sonnyt111]

 

This provocative action by China will surely heighten the already tense situation in the China/West Philippine Sea. Vietnam has acted admirably and bravely in confronting Chinese aggression but this may push the Vietnamese past the breaking point. What happens if Vietnam goes into a full blown shooting war with China and asks the Philippines for assistance and we do nothing to help Vietnam? We will be perceived as a nation long on talk and short on action.

 

http://news.yahoo.com/china-says-moving-2nd-oil-rig-closer-vietnam-095447651--finance.html

 

China says moving 2nd oil rig closer to Vietnam

http://l.yimg.com/os/152/2012/04/21/image001-png_162613.png By CHRISTOPHER BODEEN 1 hour ago

 

 

BEIJING (AP) — China said Thursday it is moving a second oil rig closer to Vietnam's coast, showing its determination to press its territorial claims and continue searching for resources in disputed waters despite a tense confrontation with Vietnam over another oil rig to the south.

 

The 600-meter (1,970-foot) -long rig is being towed southeast of its current position south of Hainan Island and will be in its new location closer to Vietnam by Friday, the Maritime Safety Administration said on its website. It asked vessels in the area to give it a wide berth.

 

Vietnam's government isn't expected to react strongly to the placement of the second rig because it lies far to the north of the politically sensitive waters surrounding the Paracel Islands, where ships from the two countries have been ramming each other for more than 40 days near the first oil rig.

 

A Vietnamese Foreign Ministry official who spoke on normal condition of anonymity said Hanoi believes that no country should take unilateral action in contested waters, but that China has explored the area previously without causing a crisis in relations.

 

Vietnamese authorities broke up a small protest against the Chinese move on Thursday. About a dozen people gathered at a park in central Hanoi and chanted slogans such as "Down with Chinese aggression" for several minutes before being dispersed. At least two protesters were taken away.

 

The shifting of the rig came as officials from both sides said they made no progress in talks Wednesday over the deployment of the other Chinese rig on May 1 that sparked the current standoff. Each country claims the Paracels as its territory and accuses the other of instigating the ship rammings around the rig.

 

The first rig's deployment triggered anti-China demonstrations across Vietnam that led to attacks on hundreds of factories believed to employ Chinese workers, five of whom were killed and hundreds more injured. Many of the factories were built and run by investors from Taiwan, which has nothing to do with the current dispute.

 

China's military expelled Vietnamese troops from two of the islands in the group in 1974, and in 1988 used force to kick Vietnam out of Johnson South reef in the Spratly Islands to the east.

 

The border between China and Vietnam in the area of the second rig near the mouth of the Tonkin Gulf has never been properly demarcated, despite five rounds of talks on the matter.

 

China claims virtually all of the South China Sea, which is rich in natural resources and crisscrossed by some of the world's busiest sea lanes. That has brought it into dispute with other neighbors, including the Philippines, a U.S. ally.

 

___

 

Associated Press writer Tran Van Minh in Hanoi, Vietnam, contributed to this report.

 

 

 

[kisshmet]

^you really dont expect us to shoot at the chinese in the event that china decides to hit vietnam

Edited June 19, 2014 by kisshmet

[maxiev]

I have nothing but the highest admiration for the Vietnamese people as they slug it out with vastly superior Chinese military.

 

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-06-24/vietnam-vows-stand-against-china-as-sea-collisions-continue.html?cmpid=yhoo

 

Vietnam Vows Stand Against China as Sea Collisions Continue

 

By John Boudreau and Nguyen Dieu Tu Uyen Jun 24, 2014

2:55 PM GMT+0800

 

Vietnam accused Chinese ships of ramming one of its fishing boats yesterday, saying relations between the two countries have been “deeply damaged” by the their standoff over a disputed oil rig in the South China Sea.

 

Vietnam’s sovereignty and security as well as regional peace are “threatened” by China’s decision to place an oil rig off Vietnam’s coast on May 2, National Assembly Chairman Nguyen Sinh Hung told legislators in Hanoi. The friction at sea, which has led to collisions, the sinking of a Vietnamese fishing boat on May 26 and anti-China riots in Vietnam, is hurting ties between the two communist countries, Hung said in his address.

 

A high-level meeting between Vietnamese leaders and China’s top foreign policy official on June 18 failed to ease the daily sea skirmishes near the oil rig. The dispute is fraying ties between the communist countries and adding to regional tensions even as leaders from both sides promised to manage disagreements ‘‘using peaceful measures.’’

 

The sea strife poses the most serious foreign policy crisis for Vietnam’s leaders in decades, said Ha Hoang Hop, visiting senior fellow at the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies in Singapore.

 

“Vietnam’s politburo is torn about their policy on Vietnam’s relationship with China,” he said in a phone interview. “The fear is China won’t compromise. The last chance for sitting down and trying to resolve the dispute in the South China Sea is this summer. Otherwise, Vietnam will bring the case to an international tribunal.”

 

‘Bitter Fruit’

 

Yang Jiechi, China’s top foreign policy official, said in Beijing on June 21 that his country “will never trade our core interests or swallow the bitter fruits that undermine our sovereignty, security and development interests.” China says Vietnam has sent armed vessels to disrupt its oil operation.

 

China claims about 90 percent of the South China Sea under a 1940s-era map, including the Paracel Islands off Vietnam’s coast and the Spratly Islands to the south. Vietnam and China on June 18 held their first high-level meeting on the rig issue after Yang visited Hanoi under the auspices of the annual China-Vietnam Steering Committee on Bilateral Relations.

 

In an interview posted on the government website June 21, Vietnamese President Truong Tan Sang said his country “always treasures” its relationship with China. He also said Vietnam will “defend our land and sea.”

 

Sang quoted Vietnamese King Le Thanh Tong, “If you dare to concede even a single inch of the land of our ancestors to the enemy, it will be a crime deserving of death.”

[oscartamaguchiblackface]

I have nothing but the highest admiration for the Vietnamese people as they slug it out with vastly superior Chinese military.

 

http://www.bloomberg...html?cmpid=yhoo

 

Vietnam Vows Stand Against China as Sea Collisions Continue

 

By John Boudreau and Nguyen Dieu Tu Uyen Jun 24, 2014

2:55 PM GMT+0800

 

Vietnam accused Chinese ships of ramming one of its fishing boats yesterday, saying relations between the two countries have been "deeply damaged" by the their standoff over a disputed oil rig in the South China Sea.

 

Vietnam's sovereignty and security as well as regional peace are "threatened" by China's decision to place an oil rig off Vietnam's coast on May 2, National Assembly Chairman Nguyen Sinh Hung told legislators in Hanoi. The friction at sea, which has led to collisions, the sinking of a Vietnamese fishing boat on May 26 and anti-China riots in Vietnam, is hurting ties between the two communist countries, Hung said in his address.

 

A high-level meeting between Vietnamese leaders and China's top foreign policy official on June 18 failed to ease the daily sea skirmishes near the oil rig. The dispute is fraying ties between the communist countries and adding to regional tensions even as leaders from both sides promised to manage disagreements ''using peaceful measures.''

 

The sea strife poses the most serious foreign policy crisis for Vietnam's leaders in decades, said Ha Hoang Hop, visiting senior fellow at the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies in Singapore.

 

"Vietnam's politburo is torn about their policy on Vietnam's relationship with China," he said in a phone interview. "The fear is China won't compromise. The last chance for sitting down and trying to resolve the dispute in the South China Sea is this summer. Otherwise, Vietnam will bring the case to an international tribunal."

 

'Bitter Fruit'

 

Yang Jiechi, China's top foreign policy official, said in Beijing on June 21 that his country "will never trade our core interests or swallow the bitter fruits that undermine our sovereignty, security and development interests." China says Vietnam has sent armed vessels to disrupt its oil operation.

 

China claims about 90 percent of the South China Sea under a 1940s-era map, including the Paracel Islands off Vietnam's coast and the Spratly Islands to the south. Vietnam and China on June 18 held their first high-level meeting on the rig issue after Yang visited Hanoi under the auspices of the annual China-Vietnam Steering Committee on Bilateral Relations.

 

In an interview posted on the government website June 21, Vietnamese President Truong Tan Sang said his country "always treasures" its relationship with China. He also said Vietnam will "defend our land and sea."

 

Sang quoted Vietnamese King Le Thanh Tong, "If you dare to concede even a single inch of the land of our ancestors to the enemy, it will be a crime deserving of death."

When it comes to guerilla style tactics, nobody beats the Vietnamese.