US Navy sails near reefs claimed by China

[Pakboong]

Don't underestimate the Chinese. It took Nazi Germany less than 20 years despite being hamstrung by the Treaty of Versailles after its WWI loss, to rebuild into the World's top military force of the time. China has made similar leaps and we act as if that does not matter. Believe me, it matters. We do not need another World War and it seems as if we are hell bent on one.

"The times they are a changin", we must keep current. If for whatever reason we can't keep current, we must avoid conflict at any cost.

[slipperylobster]

doubt seriously than war is what they want.

They can barely keep their economy afloat, as it is...let alone a fleet of ships.

[Synoptic 12]

Don't underestimate the Chinese. It took Nazi Germany less than 20 years despite being hamstrung by the Treaty of Versailles after its WWI loss, to rebuild into the World's top military force of the time. China has made similar leaps and we act as if that does not matter. Believe me, it matters. We do not need another World War and it seems as if we are hell bent on one.

"The times they are a changin", we must keep current. If for whatever reason we can't keep current, we must avoid conflict at any cost.

China has their hands full at this point by being called to the floor by the Hague, in which China is refusing. Multi nations are gathering against China for the right to claim 'waters'; if any can believe that. In terms of war, these things must come to pass, so there is no need to worry. The U.S. is well equipped to defer any enemy. Pride is the dangerous weapon, whereas nations do not like to lose face or appear weak. The clock is already set, there is not anything any can do to stop that which is coming down the road. In this respect, again; there is no need to be concerned.

[Synoptic 12]

My personal opinion to alleviate this issue would be to deploy 'fishing' vessels daily to the disputed waters by the many nations opposed to China's doctrine. Then let us see who may be provocative.

[hawker9000]

The mistake was made by not doing anything about it back when the construction started. That "acceptance" is going to prove costly. Now it's going to be much more difficult for the Chinese to "climb down". And that translates into a higher risk of escalation into something more than a war of words.

What happens when China decides to deploy, say, a defensive missile battery to this place?

Edited October 30, 2015 by hawker9000

[Publicus]

Some interesting accounts of what triggered the US decision to initiate its plan drawn up in June to patrol within the 12 mile area of the islands built on reefs.

Obama runs out of patience with Beijing

Hoping to coax Xi into talking openly and honestly, Obama organized an informal dinner meeting on Sept. 24, the day before the Chinese leader was honored at an official state dinner.

This informal dinner meeting between U.S. President Barack Obama, Chinese President Xi Jinping and their close advisers on Sept. 24 was a catalyst for a harder White House line on Beijing's territorial claims. © Xinhua/Kyodo

Obama talked about the issue at length and urged Xi to halt construction of military installations. He got nowhere: According to U.S. government sources, Xi stonewalled him.

Right after the meeting, an incensed Obama ordered a close aide to contact Admiral Harry Harris, head of the U.S. Pacific Command. Then and there, the president authorized the U.S. Navy to move ahead with an operation in the South China Sea.

http://asia.nikkei.com/Politics-Economy/International-Relations/Obama-runs-out-of-patience-with-Beijing

Last call.....

Obama seeks meeting with Xi on South China Sea

WASHINGTON -- U.S. President Barack Obama will invite Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping to meet again in November to urge an end to island-building in disputed South China Sea waters, even as American warships defy Beijing's territorial claims there.

Obama and Xi are both scheduled to attend the Group of 20 summit in Turkey on Nov. 15-16 and a subsequent meeting of Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation leaders in Manila. The U.S. side will try to arrange a one-on-one meeting on either occasion.

Obama's ordering of the U.S. destroyer into the area during the Chinese Communist Party's fifth plenary session of the central committee is also significant. It is easy to imagine this as an affront at an event where the Chinese leadership, including Xi, need to maintain face.

http://asia.nikkei.com/Politics-Economy/International-Relations/Obama-seeks-meeting-with-Xi-on-South-China-Sea

Allies support US patrols in disputed waters

http://asia.nikkei.com/Politics-Economy/International-Relations/Allies-support-US-patrols-in-disputed-waters

Edited October 30, 2015 by Publicus

[Publicus]

The mistake was made by not doing anything about it back when the construction started. That "acceptance" is going to prove costly. Now it's going to be much more difficult for the Chinese to "climb down". And that translates into a higher risk of escalation into something more than a war of words.

What happens when China decides to deploy, say, a defensive missile battery to this place?

Yes but it isn't always the best approach to act at the instant of a provocation. De-escalate unless and until one has to respond in kind then escalate accordingly.

Acting in 2012 on this was the right time, which is when the Philippines took a strong stand over Scarborough Reef with only US logistics support. The Phils however had to stand down after several months due to the CCP Boyz overwhelming the Phils limited resources. There were no naval vessels involved so the US was limited in what it could do, but it could have done more.

So now we have this, which is fine because this presents the Boyz with a more harsh lesson and consequence to their ancient thinking.

If the CCP Boyz believe they can prevail in confrontations without ever firing a shot they are in the process of finding out they were wrong. If the Boyz think they can prevail going in to a situation firing shots they will find out and very quickly they were wrong, and decidedly so.

Either way the CCP Boyz in Beijing are realizing they've stuck themselves with a loser in these artificial islands constructed on reefs that, because they are below the surface during high tide, are not in any way islands with a territorial zone. A submerged reef or rock has a 50 meter radius of protective space and that's it. Anything built on it is a nothing after 50 meters according to the ICLOS.

A legal ghost on the waves.

[willyumiii]

China has recently sent some of their vessels to the Aleutian Islands off the coast of Alaska, being joined by Russian ships. China cannot dictate as to what is relevant for them but does not apply to others. If they wish to challenge the U.S. fleet, they're welcome.

Edited October 30, 2015 by willyumiii

[SiSePuede419]

Let's hope they start shooting at each other soon.

Don't worry. The Chinese Admirals doing the saber rattling are almost certainly drunk.

They'll sober up in the morning. No way will they be brave enough to be on the "reef" and say that...

[Scott]

Off-topic, inflammatory, baiting posts and replies removed.

[sgtsabai]

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/11/02/china-s-dangerous-war-talk-about-the-south-china-sea.html?via=newsletter&source=DDAfternoon China is not yet ready to take on the US, but it may think it is. There will be shooting in the "China" Seas. If the US does not show the "big stick" while talking softly, China will continue to push.

[Publicus]

Don't underestimate the Chinese. It took Nazi Germany less than 20 years despite being hamstrung by the Treaty of Versailles after its WWI loss, to rebuild into the World's top military force of the time. China has made similar leaps and we act as if that does not matter. Believe me, it matters. We do not need another World War and it seems as if we are hell bent on one.

"The times they are a changin", we must keep current. If for whatever reason we can't keep current, we must avoid conflict at any cost.

CCP decades ago began its thorough and comprehensive study of Nazi Germany and drew many conclusions about its ultimate failure, i.e., defeat in WW2. The basic conclusion is that Germany probably was a superior race, but that even that was not enough, because Nazi Germany was too small a nation to conquer the world or even half of it. Hitler taking on the then USSR especially, but also arbitrarily declaring war against the United States were huge mistakes for such a small country.

However the CCP Boyz like just about everything else about Nazi Germany, lebenstraum especially and in particular, and China is a zillion times more populous than Germany ever was, is, will be. CCP absolutely forbids using the word lebenstraum publicly, i.e., outside of the inside party circles.

CCP lebenstraum is but a part of it, so read all about the whole of it, cause the South China Sea is only the beginning as far as the CCP Boyz have been concerned for 12 years now. Deng Xiaopeng cautioned a much greater patience, but the rich and powerful post--Deng CCP are not a patient bunch:

The following speech by a Chinese crackpot Defense Minister and full general is one of the many transcripts and documents that over time have been snaked out of the CCP China, translated and published in the West, the USA in particular.

http://rense.com/general85/China%27sPlanToConquer.htm

Enjoy.

Edited November 3, 2015 by Publicus

[hawker9000]

Actually and truth be told, in characterizing Lassen's transist of the waters around this reef as "innocent passage", the Organizer-in-Chief has added to his already impressive list of foreign policy blunders.''

"Innocent passage" refers to the transit of a vessel through a nation's territorial waters, the requirement being that said transit must be done in a "non-confrontational" manner, which means, no flight ops, training of weapons, military exercises, etc., during the transit. To BE "innocent passage", the waters in question have to be SOMEONE's territorial waters to begin with! By having Lassen carry out this transit adhering to the non-confrontational standard and by referring to it officially as innocent passage, Obama has implicitly recognized China's claims to the waters around the reef as its territorial waters. Just a matter of time until the Boys in Beijing start making hay with this.

Obama should simply have had the transit take place with some sort of military exercise involved, and referred to it as routine "steaming in international waters".

Most people would expect more from a Harvard-trained lawyer, but I guess there must've been a reason why Obama was less than "transparent" with his transcripts.

Edited November 5, 2015 by hawker9000

[Publicus]

Actually and truth be told, in characterizing Lassen's transist of the waters around this reef as "innocent passage", the Organizer-in-Chief has added to his already impressive list of foreign policy blunders.''

"Innocent passage" refers to the transit of a vessel through a nation's territorial waters, the requirement being that said transit must be done in a "non-confrontational" manner, which means, no flight ops, training of weapons, military exercises, etc., during the transit. To BE "innocent passage", the waters in question have to be SOMEONE's territorial waters to begin with! By having Lassen carry out this transit adhering to the non-confrontational standard and by referring to it officially as innocent passage, Obama has implicitly recognized China's claims to the waters around the reef as its territorial waters. Just a matter of time until the Boys in Beijing start making hay with this.

Obama should simply have had the transit take place with some sort of military exercise involved, and referred to it as routine "steaming in international waters".

Most people would expect more from a Harvard-trained lawyer, but I guess there must've been a reason why Obama was less than "transparent" with his transcripts.

SecDef Ashton Carter said yesterday the USN on sea and in the air will conduct at least two FoN (freedom of navigation) patrols each quarter. Patrols, not innocent passage cruises. The legal issues have only just begun. The US concern is excessive territorial claims, not sovereignty. Washington has said for years it takes no position on claims of sovereignty in the SCS, that that is for the claimants to decide, settle.

Excessive territorial claims by the CCP Boyz in Being is the issue.

So let's look at the significant factors the United States accomplished by this one patrol by the USS Lassen during its 114 km view within the 12 mile area of the artificial island constructed on Zubi reef. But let's also look at what did not happen in Beijing especially.

1) Beijing has not admitted nor has Beijing confirmed the Lassen traveled within 12 nautical miles of the Subi Reef. The CCP Boyz Foreign Ministry restricted its loud complaint to say "waters near relevant islands and reefs of China's Nansha Islands." (Spratley Islands.)

2) The Boyz' Foreign Ministry consciously did not say "territorial waters" in discussing the presence of the Lassen vis-a-vis Zubi Reef. The FM said instead "nearby waters" and also said "neighboring" waters [of Subi reef]. FM never used the word "zone" nor "jurisdiction" nor "limit." FM never used the word "exclusive" nor did it use the word "economic." Never said "kilometers' (or "miles").

3) While the FM hollered a lot about CCP sovereignty, it never used the word "violated." FM rather said "harmed" and FM said "threatened," and the FM used the word "illegal," but the CCP FM never said the USN mission executed by the USS Lassen "violated" Chinese sovereignty.

There are other points of great significance in terms that are legal, diplomatic, military, regional, national and the like, but these are the principal and primary points in what Beijing did (and did not) say about the event.

The bottom line is that the United States has backed the CCP Boyz into a corner in which they found themselves unable to take a clear legal or diplomatic position on their activities on the reef. Which also means other reefs and other artificial islands currently under their construction.

The Boyz were unable to say Subi Reef actually has or does not have a 12 nautical mile territorial sea under the UN ICLOS treaty the Boyz signed. Or on any basis at all, whatsoever.

The Boyz are thereby unable to make any allegation or charge of any kind the US violated CCP sovereignty. The Boyz are further at a loss to try to specify what maritime sites of the area they claim sovereignty over. The Boyz FM hollered a lot about sovereignty but specified nothing, alleged nothing in particular, charged nothing in law or diplomacy.

The result of the Lassen event is that the Boyz were unable (or unwilling) to make any claim based in international law or diplomatic history. Which leaves the Boyz out there on these artificial islands and their submerged reefs with no legal or diplomatic basis of any kind.

The full five paragraph statement in English by the CCP Foreign Ministry on the Lassen Event:

http://www.fmprc.gov.../t1309567.shtml

U.S. Department of Defense Freedom of Navigation Program Fact Sheet

http://policy.defense.gov/Portals/11/Documents/gsa/cwmd/DoD%20FON%20Program%20--%20Fact%20Sheet%20(March%202015).pdf

In all likelihood, this FONOP marks the beginning of more regular navigational assertions in the South China Sea. We look forward to interpreting the legal signals as these operations unfold.

https://www.lawfareblog.com/after-freedom-navigation-exercise-what-did-us-signal

[sgtsabai]

Actually I would hope the US and other nations involved would do a show of force and call it such. Of course it was. Then again as most of you can tell, I'm really not much of a diplomat. Here is a little reading from a more diplomatic source: http://thediplomat.com/2015/10/why-us-fon-operations-in-the-south-china-sea-make-sense/

http://thediplomat.com/2015/11/a-legal-analysis-of-the-philippine-china-arbitration-ruling/

[hawker9000]

Actually and truth be told, in characterizing Lassen's transist of the waters around this reef as "innocent passage", the Organizer-in-Chief has added to his already impressive list of foreign policy blunders.''

"Innocent passage" refers to the transit of a vessel through a nation's territorial waters, the requirement being that said transit must be done in a "non-confrontational" manner, which means, no flight ops, training of weapons, military exercises, etc., during the transit. To BE "innocent passage", the waters in question have to be SOMEONE's territorial waters to begin with! By having Lassen carry out this transit adhering to the non-confrontational standard and by referring to it officially as innocent passage, Obama has implicitly recognized China's claims to the waters around the reef as its territorial waters. Just a matter of time until the Boys in Beijing start making hay with this.

Obama should simply have had the transit take place with some sort of military exercise involved, and referred to it as routine "steaming in international waters".

Most people would expect more from a Harvard-trained lawyer, but I guess there must've been a reason why Obama was less than "transparent" with his transcripts.

SecDef Ashton Carter said yesterday the USN on sea and in the air will conduct at least two FoN (freedom of navigation) patrols each quarter. Patrols, not innocent passage cruises. The legal issues have only just begun. The US concern is excessive territorial claims, not sovereignty. Washington has said for years it takes no position on claims of sovereignty in the SCS, that that is for the claimants to decide, settle.

Excessive territorial claims by the CCP Boyz in Being is the issue.

So let's look at the significant factors the United States accomplished by this one patrol by the USS Lassen during its 114 km view within the 12 mile area of the artificial island constructed on Zubi reef. But let's also look at what did not happen in Beijing especially.

1) Beijing has not admitted nor has Beijing confirmed the Lassen traveled within 12 nautical miles of the Subi Reef. The CCP Boyz Foreign Ministry restricted its loud complaint to say "waters near relevant islands and reefs of China's Nansha Islands." (Spratley Islands.)

2) The Boyz' Foreign Ministry consciously did not say "territorial waters" in discussing the presence of the Lassen vis-a-vis Zubi Reef. The FM said instead "nearby waters" and also said "neighboring" waters [of Subi reef]. FM never used the word "zone" nor "jurisdiction" nor "limit." FM never used the word "exclusive" nor did it use the word "economic." Never said "kilometers' (or "miles").

3) While the FM hollered a lot about CCP sovereignty, it never used the word "violated." FM rather said "harmed" and FM said "threatened," and the FM used the word "illegal," but the CCP FM never said the USN mission executed by the USS Lassen "violated" Chinese sovereignty.

There are other points of great significance in terms that are legal, diplomatic, military, regional, national and the like, but these are the principal and primary points in what Beijing did (and did not) say about the event.

The bottom line is that the United States has backed the CCP Boyz into a corner in which they found themselves unable to take a clear legal or diplomatic position on their activities on the reef. Which also means other reefs and other artificial islands currently under their construction.

The Boyz were unable to say Subi Reef actually has or does not have a 12 nautical mile territorial sea under the UN ICLOS treaty the Boyz signed. Or on any basis at all, whatsoever.

The Boyz are thereby unable to make any allegation or charge of any kind the US violated CCP sovereignty. The Boyz are further at a loss to try to specify what maritime sites of the area they claim sovereignty over. The Boyz FM hollered a lot about sovereignty but specified nothing, alleged nothing in particular, charged nothing in law or diplomacy.

The result of the Lassen event is that the Boyz were unable (or unwilling) to make any claim based in international law or diplomatic history. Which leaves the Boyz out there on these artificial islands and their submerged reefs with no legal or diplomatic basis of any kind.

The full five paragraph statement in English by the CCP Foreign Ministry on the Lassen Event:

http://www.fmprc.gov.../t1309567.shtml

U.S. Department of Defense Freedom of Navigation Program Fact Sheet

http://policy.defense.gov/Portals/11/Documents/gsa/cwmd/DoD%20FON%20Program%20--%20Fact%20Sheet%20(March%202015).pdf

In all likelihood, this FONOP marks the beginning of more regular navigational assertions in the South China Sea. We look forward to interpreting the legal signals as these operations unfold.

https://www.lawfareblog.com/after-freedom-navigation-exercise-what-did-us-signal

Read here: http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/11/05/washingtons-muddled-message-in-the-south-china-sea-lassen-fon-subi/ No, actually the confusion over Obama's latest blunder is growing.

[hansgruber]

I've simple really.

U.S want war with China just to clear it's mounting debt with them and once exports are halted it will bring China to its knees. The islands are just their "weapons of mass destruction"

It's all about world power and money.

[craigt3365]

I've simple really.

U.S want war with China just to clear it's mounting debt with them and once exports are halted it will bring China to its knees. The islands are just their "weapons of mass destruction"

It's all about world power and money.

Ummm...could it possibly be the US is trying to keep international waters open and free for transit by all? I know it would be shocking for some to think a country would actually do something to help others out, not only themselves.

And yes, money comes along with free transit. For all countries. Yours included.

[Publicus]

Actually and truth be told, in characterizing Lassen's transist of the waters around this reef as "innocent passage", the Organizer-in-Chief has added to his already impressive list of foreign policy blunders.''

"Innocent passage" refers to the transit of a vessel through a nation's territorial waters, the requirement being that said transit must be done in a "non-confrontational" manner, which means, no flight ops, training of weapons, military exercises, etc., during the transit. To BE "innocent passage", the waters in question have to be SOMEONE's territorial waters to begin with! By having Lassen carry out this transit adhering to the non-confrontational standard and by referring to it officially as innocent passage, Obama has implicitly recognized China's claims to the waters around the reef as its territorial waters. Just a matter of time until the Boys in Beijing start making hay with this.

Obama should simply have had the transit take place with some sort of military exercise involved, and referred to it as routine "steaming in international waters".

Most people would expect more from a Harvard-trained lawyer, but I guess there must've been a reason why Obama was less than "transparent" with his transcripts.

SecDef Ashton Carter said yesterday the USN on sea and in the air will conduct at least two FoN (freedom of navigation) patrols each quarter. Patrols, not innocent passage cruises. The legal issues have only just begun. The US concern is excessive territorial claims, not sovereignty. Washington has said for years it takes no position on claims of sovereignty in the SCS, that that is for the claimants to decide, settle.

Excessive territorial claims by the CCP Boyz in Being is the issue.

So let's look at the significant factors the United States accomplished by this one patrol by the USS Lassen during its 114 km view within the 12 mile area of the artificial island constructed on Zubi reef. But let's also look at what did not happen in Beijing especially.

1) Beijing has not admitted nor has Beijing confirmed the Lassen traveled within 12 nautical miles of the Subi Reef. The CCP Boyz Foreign Ministry restricted its loud complaint to say "waters near relevant islands and reefs of China's Nansha Islands." (Spratley Islands.)

2) The Boyz' Foreign Ministry consciously did not say "territorial waters" in discussing the presence of the Lassen vis-a-vis Zubi Reef. The FM said instead "nearby waters" and also said "neighboring" waters [of Subi reef]. FM never used the word "zone" nor "jurisdiction" nor "limit." FM never used the word "exclusive" nor did it use the word "economic." Never said "kilometers' (or "miles").

3) While the FM hollered a lot about CCP sovereignty, it never used the word "violated." FM rather said "harmed" and FM said "threatened," and the FM used the word "illegal," but the CCP FM never said the USN mission executed by the USS Lassen "violated" Chinese sovereignty.

There are other points of great significance in terms that are legal, diplomatic, military, regional, national and the like, but these are the principal and primary points in what Beijing did (and did not) say about the event.

The bottom line is that the United States has backed the CCP Boyz into a corner in which they found themselves unable to take a clear legal or diplomatic position on their activities on the reef. Which also means other reefs and other artificial islands currently under their construction.

The Boyz were unable to say Subi Reef actually has or does not have a 12 nautical mile territorial sea under the UN ICLOS treaty the Boyz signed. Or on any basis at all, whatsoever.

The Boyz are thereby unable to make any allegation or charge of any kind the US violated CCP sovereignty. The Boyz are further at a loss to try to specify what maritime sites of the area they claim sovereignty over. The Boyz FM hollered a lot about sovereignty but specified nothing, alleged nothing in particular, charged nothing in law or diplomacy.

The result of the Lassen event is that the Boyz were unable (or unwilling) to make any claim based in international law or diplomatic history. Which leaves the Boyz out there on these artificial islands and their submerged reefs with no legal or diplomatic basis of any kind.

The full five paragraph statement in English by the CCP Foreign Ministry on the Lassen Event:

http://www.fmprc.gov.../t1309567.shtml

U.S. Department of Defense Freedom of Navigation Program Fact Sheet

http://policy.defense.gov/Portals/11/Documents/gsa/cwmd/DoD%20FON%20Program%20--%20Fact%20Sheet%20(March%202015).pdf

In all likelihood, this FONOP marks the beginning of more regular navigational assertions in the South China Sea. We look forward to interpreting the legal signals as these operations unfold.

https://www.lawfareblog.com/after-freedom-navigation-exercise-what-did-us-signal

Read here: http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/11/05/washingtons-muddled-message-in-the-south-china-sea-lassen-fon-subi/ No, actually the confusion over Obama's latest blunder is growing.

FP magazine has been one of my sources for a good number of years so I respect it but I also know it was founded by the late Prof Samuel Huntington, author of the famous Clash of Civilizations book and original magazine article. FP is a pretty aggressive zine for which I have a certain respect.

Yet the new noise around here about the USS Lassen in the SCS vs the CCP Boyz of Beijing comes from the usual Obama bashers. So far this isn't Benghazi but if the Obama bashers end up having their way, it will be 50x worse than Behghazi ever was.

As long as reading material is being suggested and cited, give this a go.....

Writing on the website of The National Interest magazine, Bonnie Tyler, senior adviser for Asia at CSIS and Peter Dutton, director of the China Maritime Studies Institute at the U.S. Naval War College, offered an explanation for the mixed messages.

The first U.S. official argued that China - which described the U.S. patrol as "illegal" - was not seizing on the absence of military activities as a sign that Washington now accepted its sovereignty over the artificial islands.

"It didn't change anything in the way it was received. What the Chinese took away was that we steamed through what they believe is their waters," the official said.

http://www.firstpost.com/world/u-s-patrol-sought-to-avoid-provocation-not-reinforce-china-island-claim-officials-reuters-2498476.html

USS Lassen was ordered not to do anything provocative except to patrol the area up to within 6-8 miles of Subic Reef, which is how close it did come (Pentagon will not be exactly precise on the proximity). The Lassen's ship captain, Commander Robert C. Francis Jr. and his officers and crew are highly trained for peacetime incidents at sea, which is why they were selected to conduct the patrol.

Cdr Francis reported that throughout the destroyer's radar was operating normally and that the ship conducted both a freedom of navigation and a transit operation.

The few posts attacking Prez Obama in the matter present an esoteric legal discussion among people who count legal gremlins on the heads of pins or by the usual Obama basher suspects. Mostly the latter.

The CCP Boyz in Beijing are ticked to the high heavens by what happened. The Boyz are insulted, offended, furious. The Boyz see nothing in the operations of the USS Lassen that is good, or that helps them in law, diplomacy, militarily or in any other way.

Here's from the report of it in Xinhua, beginning with a quote from the general commanding the PLA, Gen. Chang Wanchuan...

Chang expressed strong opposition to recent U.S. actions of sending a navy vessel near related islands and reefs of China's Nansha Islands in the South China Sea, urging the United States to respect China's sovereignty and security concerns.

In its latest muscle-flexing move in the South China Sea in late October, the U.S. warship USS Lassen entered waters near Zhubi Reef without the permission of the Chinese government.

(emphasis added)

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2015-11/06/c_134791240.htm

The CCP Boyz seem not to have any doubt whatsoever about what happened or concerning the implications and the meaning of any of it.

Edited November 7, 2015 by Publicus

[hawker9000]

All the blather and lengthy dissertation doesn't change the facts, which simply and succinctly are that Lassen conducted an "innocent passage" which implicitly recognizes the territoriality of the waters that were transited. The Freedom of Navigation terminology is neither here nor there, as it's completely ambiguous with respect to "innocent passage" vs "underway in international waters".

This should have been so simple. But count on Obama to screw the pooch. It's Obama that's sort of in a corner. If he should now send a ship through those same waters being sure to NOT act in accordance with "innocent passage" requirements, the Chinese would instantly find themselves in a position to leverage the inconsistency and spin that into an "American provocation".

I understand the CO is trying to recharacterize the transit as NOT in accordance with the innocent passage standard, but in doing this he's actually contradicting the White House and probably not doing his career any favors.

It's a mess. Business as usual.

[Publicus]

All the blather and lengthy dissertation doesn't change the facts, which simply and succinctly are that Lassen conducted an "innocent passage" which implicitly recognizes the territoriality of the waters that were transited. The Freedom of Navigation terminology is neither here nor there, as it's completely ambiguous with respect to "innocent passage" vs "underway in international waters".

This should have been so simple. But count on Obama to screw the pooch. It's Obama that's sort of in a corner. If he should now send a ship through those same waters being sure to NOT act in accordance with "innocent passage" requirements, the Chinese would instantly find themselves in a position to leverage the inconsistency and spin that into an "American provocation".

I understand the CO is trying to recharacterize the transit as NOT in accordance with the innocent passage standard, but in doing this he's actually contradicting the White House and probably not doing his career any favors.

It's a mess. Business as usual.

The record on this is clear except to a couple of the usual suspect Obama bashers (not all of 'em in this instance).

The USS Lassen traveled for 114 km inside a 12 nautical mile area of Zubic Reef. The patrol included the Lassen travelling within 6-8 miles of the reef, as it was ordered to do by Washington..

Beijing said this is illegal and hollered a lot about its sovereignty but Beijing never specifically said the US violated any CCP sovereignty in this instance. The specific complaint by the CCP is that the USS Lassen travelled near the Reef without obtaining the permission of the Chinese government in Beijing.

If commercial shipping in the nearby heavily travelled sealanes have to get the permission of the Chinese government to transit those closeby lanes, then what? Navy ships too of various navies. Aircraft of various countries. The permission of the Chinese government.

The Lassen's mission was accomplished as ordered and the CCP Boyz in Beijing are both hopping mad and stuck between international law and a hard place. Zubic Reef specifically. Beijing will never take any SCS issue to an international court on the law of the sea or on the law of anything else.

USS Lassen gets a congrats for its successful mission as ordered by the Pentagon and US Pacific Command at Pearl Harbor in Hawaii. There's more of such missions to come, which means the CCP Boyz are going up walls at the present. The Boyz are going to have to do something outside of the law and everybody around here and that is generally involved knows it.

[hawker9000]

Okay. You say the Beijing squatters are hopping mad and in some kind of a fix. I say they're busily planning how best to leverage an obvious blunder. Time will tell the tale. My guess is that as soon as a logistics train can be devised, air resources will begin to appear on this place.

Edited November 7, 2015 by hawker9000

[Publicus]

Okay. You say the Beijing squatters are hopping mad and in some kind of a fix. I say they're busily planning how best to leverage an obvious blunder. Time will tell the tale. My guess is that as soon as a logistics train can be devised, air resources will begin to appear on this place.

Yes, yes indeed.

The islands natural and artificial will be naval and air forces bases throughout the South China Sea. Everyone in Asean and the Asia-Pacific-Indian Ocean region knows it and so do the commercial shipping companies of the world know it, most of which are in Europe.

The PLA Navy South Fleet is based on Hainan Island in the north center of the SCS. So why bother with aircraft carriers in your own back yard when the CCP Boyz know they can make numerous island bases of naval and air forces to include submarines throughout the SCS from east to west, north to south. Then to declare an Air Defense Identification Zone over and within the entire 9 dash line.

No matter what some say about Prez Obama. The United States will not accept this no matter who is president. The Washington talkers are all talked out so now the hawks are in charge. SecDef Ashton Carter was put there at the current time by Prez Obama because the CnC knew what he had to do.

Current goings on in the SCS are the undercard, as it were, the preliminaries. Next the Boyz need to show their hand, how far they will go to see their grand design to a successful conclusion. Washington and Nato countries to include Japan, India, Asean will not accept this. No, No way.Not ever.

[Publicus]

The PLA Navy destroyer that 'shadowed' the USS Larsen during its journey past five islands in the Sprately Islands, to include Zubic Reef, told the Lassen ship captain, Commander Robert C. Francis Jr. "You are in Chinese waters."

Where Conflict, Convention Meet: USS Lassen Commander Discusses South China Sea Dispute

ABOARD THE USS THEODORE ROOSEVELT IN THE SOUTH CHINA SEA

Cmdr. Robert Francis Jr., skipper of the USS Lassen, pictured on Nov. 5 Associated Press

Cmdr. Francis described the interaction he had with a Chinese vessel during the patrol last week. A Chinese destroyer had “shadowed” his ship for almost two weeks, including during the five hours or so during the patrol the Lassen conducted around five islands among the Spratlys, including Subi Reef.

The Chinese vessel conveyed a number of “queries” during the patrol, repeatedly telling the Lassen that it was in Chinese waters and asking the Lassen’s crew what was their intention. Cmdr. Francis said his crew repeatedly told the other ship that they were operating in accordance with international law. The Chinese ship made queries “a lot” during the transit around Subi Reef, but never did the U.S. crew feel threatened, he said

(emphasis added)

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2015/11/06/where-conflict-convention-meet-uss-lassen-commander-discusses-south-china-sea-dispute/

Carter sends message to China with USS Roosevelt visit

Secretary of Defense Ash Carter, center walking, arrives on the deck of the aircraft carrier USS Theodore Roosevelt CVN 71 on

Thursday, Nov. 5, 2015. Carter is accompanied at his right by Malaysian Defense Minister Hishammuddin Hussein. The two flew

to the carrier aboard a V-22 Osprey US Naval aircfaft from the east Malaysian state of Sabah after the conclusion of the Asean

defense ministers meeting in Kuala Lumpur.

TARA COPP/STARS AND STRIPES

Edited November 8, 2015 by Publicus

[sgtsabai]

Frankly, this show of force, and yes that is what it was, was a day late and a dollar short. But, I'm glad it happened. The US for once really needs to flex it muscle. I'm sure the Chinese knew where our carrier was, well within stricking distance. Kudos to the men and women that made the passage. The illegal Chinese expansion needs to be stopped before it becomes out of control, bordering that now. For once in a very long time, the US is stepping up to the right plate and ASIAN will respect the needed help.

[Publicus]

The CCP Dictators in Beijing are absolutely certain they can command, boss and walk all over everybody and anybody they want to. The Dictators in Beijing seem to have learned nothing from the action earlier this year by the Indonesian Navy to seize a 300 ton iron hull Chinese "fishing boat," take it to Natuna Island and burn it in flames.

The inability of Asean defense ministers at their meeting in Kuala Lumpur last week to issue a unified statement on the CCP Dictators in the SCS has precipitated Indonesia to act on its own to defend its own interests against the CCP Dictators. One can expect Indonesia is in fact not acting alone, nor is it acting without the support or understanding of the United States, Japan, South Korea, Australia, Malaysia, Singapore, Vietnam, Philippines, Brunei, India (and before too much longer, Taiwan)..

The CCP Dictators in Beijing present during the defense ministers meeting prevented a unified statement due to their objections supported by Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, while Thailand which is not directly affected remained indifferent.

Indonesia deploys seven warships to Natuna Island in the South China Sea

Minggu, 8 November 2015

Indonesian Navy warships deploy to Natuna Island in the South China Sea.Recently elected President Joko Widodo has ordered expansion of its Naval and Air Force base in the Sea a short distance south of China's 9-dash line of claimed sovereign territorial sea.China's claims include Natuna Islands territorial waters that are a part of Indonesia under the International Law of the Sea. (archaive/ANTARA FOTO/Basri Marzuki)

Is Indonesia Beijing’s Next Target in the South China Sea?

Until recently, Indonesia seemed immune to the maritime disputes. That could be changing.

http://thediplomat.com/2014/10/is-indonesia-beijings-next-target-in-the-south-china-sea/

Map of Natuna Archipelago in the southern area of the South China Sea and a part of Indonesia.

The Indonesian Navy is concentrating some 40 warships in the southern region of the South China Sea, to include 20 at the Strait of Malacca.

China includes part of Natuna waters in its map

"China has claimed Natuna waters as their territorial waters," assistant deputy to the Indonesia chief security minister for defense strategic doctrine Commodore Fahru Zaini stated. "This arbitrary claim is related to the dispute over Spratly and Paracel Islands between China and the Philippines. This dispute will have a large impact on the security of Natuna waters," he noted here on Wednesday.

Navy chief of staff Admiral Ade Supandi also confirmed that the deployment of the ships in Natuna was only for patrol purposes.

"It is a routine operation. We conduct patrols for 365 days to safeguard borders as well as for sea justice enforcement in Natuna waters, Sulawesi or Indian Ocean including coordination patrols carried out in cooperation with neighboring countries," he said.

http://www.antaranews.com/en/news/93178/china-includes-part-of-natuna-waters-in-its-map

Edited November 9, 2015 by Publicus

[hawker9000]

These guys are definitely not short on audacity. (No, I'll spare you all the old chestnut...) But it's not that which worries me nearly as much as the lack of an appropriate and unified response to it.

[Publicus]

These guys are definitely not short on audacity. (No, I'll spare you all the old chestnut...) But it's not that which worries me nearly as much as the lack of an appropriate and unified response to it.

Asean cannot unify on this issue due to the direct alignment of three of its members with the CCP Dictators in Beijing: Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar which since 2012 have openly supported the CCP Dictators when it comes to SCS issues at Asean meetings. Thailand seems to be getting a pass due to its domestic sensitivities, to include the CCP Boyz who aren't pressing Bangkok too hard on the issue of territorial seas. Thailand does however remain a US formal treaty defense ally and partner.

However, the six Asean countries being continually shat on by the CCP Dictators are hanging together in their refusal to meet the Dictators' demand that each country negotiate the territorial seas issues individually and separately with the Dictator Boyz. The six countries have insisted absolutely to negotiate as one: Indonesia, Philippines, Brunei, Malaysia, Vietnam, Singapore. The Dictator Boyz can divide which is easy to do but to divide and conquer remains beyond the ugly reach of the gangster Boyz.

The United States is the lynchpin of it anyway. The six navies of the Asean targets of the CCP Dictators have had maneuvers with USN ships in recent years. The Six have also had exercises with the navies of Australia, India, Japan. Navies of India and Japan have had exercises in the SCS and India has signed strategic support agreements with Vietnam and Malaysia but, most importantly, Japan.

The SCS as a vital international transit sea goes beyond Asean or the immediate region, as indicated for the past 20 years in the biannual Operation Pacific Rim off Hawaii organised by the United States.

In last year's exercises, 22 countries participated in Pacific Ocean strategic defense exercises :: Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Colombia, France, India, Indonesia, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Peru, the Republic of Korea, the Republic of the Philippines, Singapore, Tonga, the United Kingdom and the United States.

Operation Pacific Rim, Pacific Ocean, August 1, 2014

The world’s largest international maritime exercise, Rim of the Pacific (RIMPAC) 2014, concluded with the participation of 22 nations, 49 surface ships, six submarines, more than 200 aircraft and 25,000 personnel in and around the Hawaiian Islands and Southern California, August 1, 2014.

The more everyone gets into this increasingly intensifying contest/conflict, the closer and more unified the directly affected nations become in the region. As international law becomes ever more threatened by the CCP Dictators in Beijing, the more allied and partner navies and other countries' forces become involved.

We just can't be sure any more about the UK because Cameron begged Obama not to send a ship to the Zubi Reef and Cameron did the begging at the behest of his apparent new boss, Xi Jinping. Unity is an illusion which means it is always better to have geographic allies, coalitions, partners in specific tasks, such as the specific task in the South China Sea.

Unity is tough anywhere and trying to get all these East Asian-Pacific-Indian Ocean government and peoples to fill in the dance card of the other is a bit much indeed. Cooperation, coalition, partnership toward a common specific goal and purpose is the realistic approach.

Edited November 10, 2015 by Publicus

[Publicus]

These guys are definitely not short on audacity. (No, I'll spare you all the old chestnut...) But it's not that which worries me nearly as much as the lack of an appropriate and unified response to it.

Need to mention also that Nato countries have a trade and economics interest in open navigation in the SCS as well as anywhere else it would be jeopardised or placed at a direct risk.

The CCP Dictators in Beijing in their massive territorial claims on the land and over the seas, which go far beyond the SCS alone, will find out their designs to make the SCS into a CCP lake is a guaranteed loser. The CCP Boyz y'know claim the entire northern area of India as Chinese lands and even had a war over it back in 1962. There's another conflict coming but according to the planned out schedule of five year plans of the CCP Boyz, or so they believe.

The CCP Dictators are not Russia and his area is not Europe. Nor are the CCP Boyz Iran and his region is not Israel or dominated by Islamic nutters, suicide bombers, missiles. The CCP Boyz are up against other Asians who are also fierce and unyielding, from Japan to Taiwan, to Vietnam to Singapore to India. Joined with the United States and its Navy and Air Forces, the CCP Dictators are headed for a hard time.

It won't be a lesson nor will it be any kind of learning experience because the CCP Boyz do not learn. They either stride forward or they pull back, depending on who has the knife at whose throat. So sooner or later the CCP Dictators are going to go under the knife.

Edited November 11, 2015 by Publicus