5 ms·

US calls for land reclamation 'halt' in South China Sea

12 points by FatalLogic 11y ago

FatalLogic 11y ago
This story has so many fascinating aspects to it: Firstly, that coastal land territory, a kind of currency of nationhood, with immense value, can just be created from nothing. Next, that the faraway US is almost demanding that China stop, while most of the APAC nations whose sphere of influence is being encroached upon, Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia, seem to only make some barely audible sounds of displeasure. Vietnam and the Philippines have raised more significant objections, I think. Of course, apart from those issues, there is also the interesting question of the assumed rise of Chinese power, assumed weakening of US (and Western) power.
- bilbo0s 11y ago
  It goes a bit further than that though. Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia and Taiwan have all been running reclamation projects for some time in the very same disputed areas. The US now decides, since China has started doing so, that China should stop ??? Why, on EARTH, did we not get out in front of this problem and put the smack down on Vietnam, the Philippines, and Taiwan when they initially started down this road ??? It just makes our foreign policy look overtly transparent to third parties. I mean, the average EU citizen or South American probably looks at that and says... "Are you shitting me ???"
  - melling 11y ago
    Nah, it's not too difficult to understand why it's a problem now. Did you read the article? "China claims almost the whole of the South China Sea, resulting in overlapping claims with its neighbours."
    - bilbo0s 11y ago
      ??? The thing is ... ALL of the claims overlap with the claims of neighbors. That's the entire problem. The claims of Vietnam overlap with the claims of Malaysia. The claims of the Philippines overlap with Taiwanese claims. (In fact, Taiwan's official position is that the entirety of the South China Sea falls under their sovereignty.) The fact is... this is a mess that we should have either refused to wade into... or been unmistakeably strict in enforcing our view. This is no place for waffling.
      - tzs 11y ago
        Did you look at the map in the article? China is overextending far beyond what any of the other countries are attempting. In some places there almost isn't any water left between the boundary of China's claim and the shores of the other country!
    - est 11y ago
      it was Republic of China claimed them first, back when most ASEAN countries didn't exist
    - mcintyre1994 11y ago
      It could be to do with a bigger push in the Spratlys too, that lands a long way from China and accepting them being there seems really close to accepting their claimed maritime border.
  - yincrash 11y ago
    I suspect that the average EU citizen or South American would say as long as it's NIMBY, why should I care.
  - jameshart 11y ago
    South China Sea economic rights has been a rumbling 'outstanding issue' in international politics for decades, this isn't particularly a new or significant shift in the geopolitical landscape. All the players are pushing at the boundaries of what they can get away with and the only constraint on that is the occasional international diplomatic objection.
- ChuckMcM 11y ago
  The APAC nations have actually made somewhat more than 'barely audible sounds of displeasure' but they aren't in a position to actually do anything about it. It is an excellent foreign policy problem set for doing analysis though. If you would like to develop more insight into nation-state politics this provides a great starting point. For suggested reading look over the south china sea disputes for the last 30 years and what others have said and what China has said, and actions various parties have taken. There are interesting side inputs as well, which is that this has been "disputed" for a long time but this sort of explicit action only started after Russia successfully annexed Crimea. As the US has been the 'big kid' on the block for a while which kept the bullies in line, and they have been distracted lately, and unwilling to commit seriously. Nation states are out testing just how safe it is to come out and oppress their neighbors again. At this point everyone should realize its going to get ugly until there is a single planetary political body, but nobody wants the 'other' system to be the basis for that. Interesting times indeed.
  - FatalLogic 11y ago
    It's an interesting question, why aren't they in a position to do anything about it? An important part of the answer seems to be that they are incapable of working together, maybe because their internal decision-making is dominated by domestic political issues, which prevents strategic long-term planning. The other countries which have a reasonable claim within the area claimed by China have a total population of over 600 million, so collectively, they are not small fry (Vietnam, Indonesia, Philippines, Taiwan, Malaysia, Brunei, Singapore). But there's little sign of concerted action from them. If we also consider the countries which have an interest in safe and unrestricted passage through those waters, such as Japan, then the total population concerned would easily surpass 1 billion.
    - ChuckMcM 11y ago
      > why aren't they in a position to do anything about it? From what I have read, most of these nations are too economically tied to China, in that they are supplying goods into the factories (sub-assemblies) or otherwise part of the chain of value between manufacturing and market. That gives China the ability to economically depress them just by changing the rules by which they can import/export goods through China. From a foreign policy point of view the US could provide trade incentives with India, to boost manufacturing there for US and European markets which would give those APAC countries another "path" to market and blunt the economic threat of China cutting itself off. When looking at the world as a chess board each player has three 'heads', one is ideology, one is economic force, and one is military force. Complete power over an opponent is achieved when you have and advantage in all three, but sometimes any two is enough.
peterkelly 11y ago
Building new land where none previously exists seems like the absolute least harmful way of obtaining resources - the only bad part being that it's in a part of the ocean subject to disputed ownership. Compare that to the invasion of countries in the Middle East or the overthrowing of democratically-elected governments. The US doesn't exactly have the moral high ground here.
- guard-of-terra 11y ago
  All of the top 3 comments make sense, but seeing them together makes me contemplate bot factory assault.
- themodelplumber 11y ago
  Moral high ground or medium ground or low ground matters little when your partners in the area are asking for your help right now, today. You've got to do something, and the entire U.S. is part of that process.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
JesperRavn 11y ago
The US has engaged in half a dozen wars in the last two decades. It has incited military coups in South America for the last century. It claims the Northwest Passage through Canada is an international strait. Big powers will try to exert dominance over smaller countries, both for the material gain, and to show their power. China is much less aggressive than the US, and yet gets much more attention.
- perfTerm 11y ago
  Gets much more attention in the US, but is that true abroad? Probably true at least in allies of the US but maybe not in China? I'm not sure at all
- themodelplumber 11y ago
  So China just gets to overrule every nation adjoining the Spratlys because you think they are less aggressive than the US? Doesn't make sense.
  - JesperRavn 11y ago
    No I never said that. My point is that articles like this are written and promoted for ulterior reasons. The right wing believe that the US must maintain an iron grip on the world. Even left wing newspapers like the New York Times have an anti-China bias, because they think that a battle between superpowers is a healthier expression of outgroup-hatred than domestic racism.
atlantic 11y ago
This is a dispute in which only the direct stakeholders (countries whose territorial waters adjoin this area) or international institutions such as the United Nations should get involved. That the US thinks it has the right to barge in is actually the most worrying aspect of this whole situation.
- themodelplumber 11y ago
  > This is a dispute in which only the direct stakeholders (countries whose territorial waters adjoin this area) or international institutions such as the United Nations should get involved I disagree. If you have a military base in or a military or economic cooperation agreement with any of the adjoining nations, or if part of your economy transits the adjoining area, you should feel free to get involved at any time. You take the risk, but really, in a case like this it'd be dumb not to get involved when you are so deeply integrated.
- thebmax 11y ago
  what's actually happening is the Chinese have started harassing neighboring countries in an area 600 miles offshore China and within 100 miles from other countries like Vietnam and other south East Asian countries. By harassing I mean arresting fisherman, cutting seismic cables from oil exploration companies and getting aggressive with any other ships. All these countries want the U.S. to assist in protecting their sovereignty and are asking for help. The UN won't help and no other sea power aside from the U.S. has the ability to help. Look at a map of the red line area China is assuming control over and you will see where some of these areas are. It would be like the U.S. Building artificial islands 100 miles from Spain, building airstrips and arresting any Spanish ships the come nearby. This is not US imperialism it is Chinese expansionism and other countries are asking for our help. It's clear the Chinese wants control of south east Asia and they are acting aggressively to take it.
- nesu 11y ago
  There is a pending UNCLOS case filed against China not only over the Spratly's, but on China's "nine-dash line" claim. China refuses to participate in the arbitration, despite ratifying UNCLOS.
jacquesm 11y ago
Good thing we got NL finished before this became policy.
sandstrom 11y ago
Looking at the map, China's claim on these waters seems pretty wild. Sort of like Portugal claiming ownership of parts of the Mediterranean Sea.
- jacquesm 11y ago
  No wilder than Greece and Cyprus or the UK and the Falklands.
  - sandstrom 11y ago
    Interesting, I didn't know! Is it this red area you are referring to [Greek claims]? http://www.guidopicchetti.it/Il%20CPPM%20di%20Pnt/News%202010/image/121006_UNEP_Med-1.jpg http://www.guidopicchetti.it/Il%20CPPM%20di%20Pnt/News%20201... Though, that doesn't make it less wild :)

12 points by FatalLogic 11y ago

This story has so many fascinating aspects to it: Firstly, that coastal land territory, a kind of currency of nationhood, with immense value, can just be created from nothing. Next, that the faraway US is almost demanding that China stop, while most of the APAC nations whose sphere of influence is being encroached upon, Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia, seem to only make some barely audible sounds of displeasure. Vietnam and the Philippines have raised more significant objections, I think. Of course, apart from those issues, there is also the interesting question of the assumed rise of Chinese power, assumed weakening of US (and Western) power.

bilbo0s 11y ago
It goes a bit further than that though. Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia and Taiwan have all been running reclamation projects for some time in the very same disputed areas. The US now decides, since China has started doing so, that China should stop ??? Why, on EARTH, did we not get out in front of this problem and put the smack down on Vietnam, the Philippines, and Taiwan when they initially started down this road ??? It just makes our foreign policy look overtly transparent to third parties. I mean, the average EU citizen or South American probably looks at that and says... "Are you shitting me ???"
- melling 11y ago
  Nah, it's not too difficult to understand why it's a problem now. Did you read the article? "China claims almost the whole of the South China Sea, resulting in overlapping claims with its neighbours."
  - bilbo0s 11y ago
    ??? The thing is ... ALL of the claims overlap with the claims of neighbors. That's the entire problem. The claims of Vietnam overlap with the claims of Malaysia. The claims of the Philippines overlap with Taiwanese claims. (In fact, Taiwan's official position is that the entirety of the South China Sea falls under their sovereignty.) The fact is... this is a mess that we should have either refused to wade into... or been unmistakeably strict in enforcing our view. This is no place for waffling.
    - tzs 11y ago
      Did you look at the map in the article? China is overextending far beyond what any of the other countries are attempting. In some places there almost isn't any water left between the boundary of China's claim and the shores of the other country!
  - est 11y ago
    it was Republic of China claimed them first, back when most ASEAN countries didn't exist
  - mcintyre1994 11y ago
    It could be to do with a bigger push in the Spratlys too, that lands a long way from China and accepting them being there seems really close to accepting their claimed maritime border.
- yincrash 11y ago
  I suspect that the average EU citizen or South American would say as long as it's NIMBY, why should I care.
- jameshart 11y ago
  South China Sea economic rights has been a rumbling 'outstanding issue' in international politics for decades, this isn't particularly a new or significant shift in the geopolitical landscape. All the players are pushing at the boundaries of what they can get away with and the only constraint on that is the occasional international diplomatic objection.
ChuckMcM 11y ago
The APAC nations have actually made somewhat more than 'barely audible sounds of displeasure' but they aren't in a position to actually do anything about it. It is an excellent foreign policy problem set for doing analysis though. If you would like to develop more insight into nation-state politics this provides a great starting point. For suggested reading look over the south china sea disputes for the last 30 years and what others have said and what China has said, and actions various parties have taken. There are interesting side inputs as well, which is that this has been "disputed" for a long time but this sort of explicit action only started after Russia successfully annexed Crimea. As the US has been the 'big kid' on the block for a while which kept the bullies in line, and they have been distracted lately, and unwilling to commit seriously. Nation states are out testing just how safe it is to come out and oppress their neighbors again. At this point everyone should realize its going to get ugly until there is a single planetary political body, but nobody wants the 'other' system to be the basis for that. Interesting times indeed.
- FatalLogic 11y ago
  It's an interesting question, why aren't they in a position to do anything about it? An important part of the answer seems to be that they are incapable of working together, maybe because their internal decision-making is dominated by domestic political issues, which prevents strategic long-term planning. The other countries which have a reasonable claim within the area claimed by China have a total population of over 600 million, so collectively, they are not small fry (Vietnam, Indonesia, Philippines, Taiwan, Malaysia, Brunei, Singapore). But there's little sign of concerted action from them. If we also consider the countries which have an interest in safe and unrestricted passage through those waters, such as Japan, then the total population concerned would easily surpass 1 billion.
  - ChuckMcM 11y ago
    > why aren't they in a position to do anything about it? From what I have read, most of these nations are too economically tied to China, in that they are supplying goods into the factories (sub-assemblies) or otherwise part of the chain of value between manufacturing and market. That gives China the ability to economically depress them just by changing the rules by which they can import/export goods through China. From a foreign policy point of view the US could provide trade incentives with India, to boost manufacturing there for US and European markets which would give those APAC countries another "path" to market and blunt the economic threat of China cutting itself off. When looking at the world as a chess board each player has three 'heads', one is ideology, one is economic force, and one is military force. Complete power over an opponent is achieved when you have and advantage in all three, but sometimes any two is enough.

peterkelly 11y ago

Building new land where none previously exists seems like the absolute least harmful way of obtaining resources - the only bad part being that it's in a part of the ocean subject to disputed ownership. Compare that to the invasion of countries in the Middle East or the overthrowing of democratically-elected governments. The US doesn't exactly have the moral high ground here.

guard-of-terra 11y ago
All of the top 3 comments make sense, but seeing them together makes me contemplate bot factory assault.
themodelplumber 11y ago
Moral high ground or medium ground or low ground matters little when your partners in the area are asking for your help right now, today. You've got to do something, and the entire U.S. is part of that process.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

JesperRavn 11y ago

The US has engaged in half a dozen wars in the last two decades. It has incited military coups in South America for the last century. It claims the Northwest Passage through Canada is an international strait. Big powers will try to exert dominance over smaller countries, both for the material gain, and to show their power. China is much less aggressive than the US, and yet gets much more attention.

perfTerm 11y ago
Gets much more attention in the US, but is that true abroad? Probably true at least in allies of the US but maybe not in China? I'm not sure at all
themodelplumber 11y ago
So China just gets to overrule every nation adjoining the Spratlys because you think they are less aggressive than the US? Doesn't make sense.
- JesperRavn 11y ago
  No I never said that. My point is that articles like this are written and promoted for ulterior reasons. The right wing believe that the US must maintain an iron grip on the world. Even left wing newspapers like the New York Times have an anti-China bias, because they think that a battle between superpowers is a healthier expression of outgroup-hatred than domestic racism.

atlantic 11y ago

This is a dispute in which only the direct stakeholders (countries whose territorial waters adjoin this area) or international institutions such as the United Nations should get involved. That the US thinks it has the right to barge in is actually the most worrying aspect of this whole situation.

themodelplumber 11y ago
> This is a dispute in which only the direct stakeholders (countries whose territorial waters adjoin this area) or international institutions such as the United Nations should get involved I disagree. If you have a military base in or a military or economic cooperation agreement with any of the adjoining nations, or if part of your economy transits the adjoining area, you should feel free to get involved at any time. You take the risk, but really, in a case like this it'd be dumb not to get involved when you are so deeply integrated.
thebmax 11y ago
what's actually happening is the Chinese have started harassing neighboring countries in an area 600 miles offshore China and within 100 miles from other countries like Vietnam and other south East Asian countries. By harassing I mean arresting fisherman, cutting seismic cables from oil exploration companies and getting aggressive with any other ships. All these countries want the U.S. to assist in protecting their sovereignty and are asking for help. The UN won't help and no other sea power aside from the U.S. has the ability to help. Look at a map of the red line area China is assuming control over and you will see where some of these areas are. It would be like the U.S. Building artificial islands 100 miles from Spain, building airstrips and arresting any Spanish ships the come nearby. This is not US imperialism it is Chinese expansionism and other countries are asking for our help. It's clear the Chinese wants control of south east Asia and they are acting aggressively to take it.
nesu 11y ago
There is a pending UNCLOS case filed against China not only over the Spratly's, but on China's "nine-dash line" claim. China refuses to participate in the arbitration, despite ratifying UNCLOS.

jacquesm 11y ago

Good thing we got NL finished before this became policy.

sandstrom 11y ago

Looking at the map, China's claim on these waters seems pretty wild. Sort of like Portugal claiming ownership of parts of the Mediterranean Sea.

jacquesm 11y ago
No wilder than Greece and Cyprus or the UK and the Falklands.
- sandstrom 11y ago
  Interesting, I didn't know! Is it this red area you are referring to [Greek claims]? http://www.guidopicchetti.it/Il%20CPPM%20di%20Pnt/News%202010/image/121006_UNEP_Med-1.jpg http://www.guidopicchetti.it/Il%20CPPM%20di%20Pnt/News%20201... Though, that doesn't make it less wild :)