6 ms·

The building to convert reef to island is one of the first steps to claim the entire Southeast-Asia sea by China. It will then have the self-declared ownership

The building to convert reef to island is one of the first steps to claim the entire Southeast-Asia sea by China. It will then have the self-declared ownership right to block all sea/air traffics through this region and bully other neighboring countries. Besides having a huge oil/gas reserve and fishes, in term of economic impact, this sea is as important as or more than Panama Canal or Suez Canal. A country with the right to block or own it will harm the rest of the world. Currently, the allies have been formed with a group of countries Japan, Philippine, Viet Nam, America and others trying to stop China but they have not found any solution nor success yet. Here is the map that China wants to claim: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Territorial_disputes_in_the_South_China_Sea#/media/File:South_China_Sea_vector.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Territorial_disputes_in_the_So...

smcl 11y ago
My word the southern reaches of the Chinese claim are extremely grabby! Is this just similar to haggling in a bazaar for an item listed at $30, which you personally value at $20 so you open with a lowballed offer of $10?
- adventured 11y ago
  You're being generous. China is annexing territory that belongs to Vietnam, Malaysia, Indonesia, and the Philippines. The same thing that Russia is doing in Ukraine. It's an act of war, the issue is that the world is very afraid of China (both militarily and economically).
  - AnimalMuppet 11y ago
    No, it's a territorial claim - so far. It's not yet an act of war. Trying to enforce the claim will be an act of war. Building the islands... well, everybody else who claims that area also seems to be building there. That could, arguably, be considered an act of war, but so far everybody's doing it and we do not yet have a war.
  - tellthetruth 11y ago
    Get some education unadventured! The territory doesn't belong to Vietnam, Malaysia, Indonesia, and the Philippines.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
- ihsw 11y ago
  You're implying ASEAN members all act in unison -- they do not. They fight amongst each-other almost as much as they do with China. And while they fight amongst each-other, China voices support for one while undermining that support in another fashion. Pitting them against each-other is common.
sharetea 11y ago
It really sounds like the fascist/autocratic states in Asia (Russia/China) with its economy failing, is slowly resorting to territorial aggression against neighboring countries in order to claim more resources. With Russia bumping against all of europe, and China bumping against Japan/Korea/Taiwan/Vietnam/Malaysia/Indonesia/Phillipines, this is boding ill for global stability.
- qiqing 11y ago
  Why is it moral for the U.S. and U.K. to build bases on random little islands in Asia, but not China and other Asian countries? Edit: Clarification, since so many of the smaller uninhabited islands have been claimed by the UK, US, and other Western nations, how is it wrong to build some uninhabited islands of your own?
  - noir_lord 11y ago
    Because in recent times building a base isn't used to justify ownership of all the surrounding sea's (and where that is done it's because we/they previously owned that island, like the Falklands). Creating an island out of thin air and then claiming the territory around it is 1 step short of Sealand. That said no we aren't perfect and we did stuff like this as well but two wrongs in this case don't make a right, this is nothing but a very destabilising move.
    - tellthetruth 11y ago
      Yeah we aren't perfect. But after we did it no one else should (except our allies) and we are gonna keep it.
      - noir_lord 11y ago
        In fairness how far back do we apply this, should the Italians be censored for what the Romans did in the North of England, or the Mongols for what they did to most of Europe or the Spanish for what they did in South America or what we (the British) did to...well basically everybody. If you hold that no past behaviour is considered expired then pretty much every country on the planet or the people who live there before it was that country is responsible for something. African tribes have warred for millenia, European tribes have warred for millenia, South America, Middle East, Far East pretty much everyone has at some point beaten up their neighbours and not so near neighbours.
yc1010 11y ago
If China block ships from the area it wont be too hard to block their ships from Panama and Suez canals and deny access to Americas Watch their economy crumble if they are prevented from selling this cheap knacks to the rest of the world. It be a stupid move and the Chinese are far from stupid unlike the the Russians who are doing their best to tick every checkbox on a rogue criminal state chalkboard
- zorked 11y ago
  Why would Panama or Egypt want to block China?
  - JupiterMoon 11y ago
    I think that the other guys point is that the US has enough influence in both these countries to cause them to block their canals to Chinese trade.
    - jckt 11y ago
      Would that not be against the interests of the US neoliberal elite, who in turn have enormous influence on the USG?
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
- rosser 11y ago
  In theory, China could build islands across the pacific and setup bases and missiles along the US west coast. The average depth of the Pacific Ocean is over 14,000 ft (almost exactly 4.3 km). That's a lot of dredging.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
- qiqing 11y ago
  But the U.S. builds some bases pretty close to China's coasts... To be fair, some of those island bases in Asia are used for the CIA torture program, so its purported purpose is probably not aggression towards China.
AnimalMuppet 11y ago
> It will then have the self-declared ownership right to block all sea/air traffics through this region and bully other neighboring countries. It already has the self-declared ownership right. The point is, it will have the infrastructure to carry it out.
lambdasquirrel 11y ago
Can I call horseshit on HN again? The Strait of Malacca (which is close by) would be on par with the Panama Canal or Suez. The South China Sea is not a transit point for goods in the same manner, and is not as important. When you look at China's claims in comparison with everyone else's claims, (especially Vietnam's), it does not look that outlandish, and everyone in the region effectively wants to be able to say "these are our waters you're passing through." The actors in this region are not as innocent as you would think they are. http://pages.stolaf.edu/asiaforecast2014/portfolio/sino-vietnam-relations/ http://pages.stolaf.edu/asiaforecast2014/portfolio/sino-viet... You have to trace back to Japanese actions before WWII and look at the geopolitical insecurity of these countries in order to understand these motivations, and then recognize that China does what it does because it does not think that the powers-that-be will be able or willing to defend its economic interests in the future. The only reason why China seems scary is because it would appear as if it can actually build up and defend its claims, unlike everyone else, but even then, it doesn't have a blue water navy like the United States. They can't instigate an area denial attack on these claims without strangling their own economy either, so it's kind of a tempest in a teapot.
- qiqing 11y ago
  This. Thank you for being a voice of reason. Historical context is so important here, especially the lessons China learned the hard way. Like just what the U.S., U.K., France, and other countries can do to you if you show weakness.
- cowardlydragon 11y ago
  Our blue water navy would be at the bottom of the ocean in the first day if any of them are in ICBM range of China in a war. The navy has zero defenses that can stop a 1970s ballistic antiship missle.
  - greedo 11y ago
    Well, considering the range of an ICBM is by definition "intercontinental," your caution is a bit misplaced. First, the DF-21d isn't an ICBM, it's approx unclassified range is 900 miles. And of course the USN has defenses. First are soft defenses like ECM, followed by AEGIS and SM3. Not only are there defenses against the missile themselves, but it's not like the navy would just sit idle while being targeted. They'd work the entire kill chain, and most of this is assuming that the DF-21 can even find the carriers...

smcl 11y ago

My word the southern reaches of the Chinese claim are extremely grabby! Is this just similar to haggling in a bazaar for an item listed at $30, which you personally value at $20 so you open with a lowballed offer of $10?

adventured 11y ago
You're being generous. China is annexing territory that belongs to Vietnam, Malaysia, Indonesia, and the Philippines. The same thing that Russia is doing in Ukraine. It's an act of war, the issue is that the world is very afraid of China (both militarily and economically).
- AnimalMuppet 11y ago
  No, it's a territorial claim - so far. It's not yet an act of war. Trying to enforce the claim will be an act of war. Building the islands... well, everybody else who claims that area also seems to be building there. That could, arguably, be considered an act of war, but so far everybody's doing it and we do not yet have a war.
- tellthetruth 11y ago
  Get some education unadventured! The territory doesn't belong to Vietnam, Malaysia, Indonesia, and the Philippines.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
ihsw 11y ago
You're implying ASEAN members all act in unison -- they do not. They fight amongst each-other almost as much as they do with China. And while they fight amongst each-other, China voices support for one while undermining that support in another fashion. Pitting them against each-other is common.

sharetea 11y ago

It really sounds like the fascist/autocratic states in Asia (Russia/China) with its economy failing, is slowly resorting to territorial aggression against neighboring countries in order to claim more resources. With Russia bumping against all of europe, and China bumping against Japan/Korea/Taiwan/Vietnam/Malaysia/Indonesia/Phillipines, this is boding ill for global stability.

qiqing 11y ago
Why is it moral for the U.S. and U.K. to build bases on random little islands in Asia, but not China and other Asian countries? Edit: Clarification, since so many of the smaller uninhabited islands have been claimed by the UK, US, and other Western nations, how is it wrong to build some uninhabited islands of your own?
- noir_lord 11y ago
  Because in recent times building a base isn't used to justify ownership of all the surrounding sea's (and where that is done it's because we/they previously owned that island, like the Falklands). Creating an island out of thin air and then claiming the territory around it is 1 step short of Sealand. That said no we aren't perfect and we did stuff like this as well but two wrongs in this case don't make a right, this is nothing but a very destabilising move.
  - tellthetruth 11y ago
    Yeah we aren't perfect. But after we did it no one else should (except our allies) and we are gonna keep it.
    - noir_lord 11y ago
      In fairness how far back do we apply this, should the Italians be censored for what the Romans did in the North of England, or the Mongols for what they did to most of Europe or the Spanish for what they did in South America or what we (the British) did to...well basically everybody. If you hold that no past behaviour is considered expired then pretty much every country on the planet or the people who live there before it was that country is responsible for something. African tribes have warred for millenia, European tribes have warred for millenia, South America, Middle East, Far East pretty much everyone has at some point beaten up their neighbours and not so near neighbours.

yc1010 11y ago

If China block ships from the area it wont be too hard to block their ships from Panama and Suez canals and deny access to Americas Watch their economy crumble if they are prevented from selling this cheap knacks to the rest of the world. It be a stupid move and the Chinese are far from stupid unlike the the Russians who are doing their best to tick every checkbox on a rogue criminal state chalkboard

zorked 11y ago
Why would Panama or Egypt want to block China?
- JupiterMoon 11y ago
  I think that the other guys point is that the US has enough influence in both these countries to cause them to block their canals to Chinese trade.
  - jckt 11y ago
    Would that not be against the interests of the US neoliberal elite, who in turn have enormous influence on the USG?

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

rosser 11y ago
In theory, China could build islands across the pacific and setup bases and missiles along the US west coast. The average depth of the Pacific Ocean is over 14,000 ft (almost exactly 4.3 km). That's a lot of dredging.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
qiqing 11y ago
But the U.S. builds some bases pretty close to China's coasts... To be fair, some of those island bases in Asia are used for the CIA torture program, so its purported purpose is probably not aggression towards China.

AnimalMuppet 11y ago

> It will then have the self-declared ownership right to block all sea/air traffics through this region and bully other neighboring countries. It already has the self-declared ownership right. The point is, it will have the infrastructure to carry it out.

lambdasquirrel 11y ago

Can I call horseshit on HN again? The Strait of Malacca (which is close by) would be on par with the Panama Canal or Suez. The South China Sea is not a transit point for goods in the same manner, and is not as important. When you look at China's claims in comparison with everyone else's claims, (especially Vietnam's), it does not look that outlandish, and everyone in the region effectively wants to be able to say "these are our waters you're passing through." The actors in this region are not as innocent as you would think they are. http://pages.stolaf.edu/asiaforecast2014/portfolio/sino-vietnam-relations/ http://pages.stolaf.edu/asiaforecast2014/portfolio/sino-viet... You have to trace back to Japanese actions before WWII and look at the geopolitical insecurity of these countries in order to understand these motivations, and then recognize that China does what it does because it does not think that the powers-that-be will be able or willing to defend its economic interests in the future. The only reason why China seems scary is because it would appear as if it can actually build up and defend its claims, unlike everyone else, but even then, it doesn't have a blue water navy like the United States. They can't instigate an area denial attack on these claims without strangling their own economy either, so it's kind of a tempest in a teapot.

qiqing 11y ago
This. Thank you for being a voice of reason. Historical context is so important here, especially the lessons China learned the hard way. Like just what the U.S., U.K., France, and other countries can do to you if you show weakness.
cowardlydragon 11y ago
Our blue water navy would be at the bottom of the ocean in the first day if any of them are in ICBM range of China in a war. The navy has zero defenses that can stop a 1970s ballistic antiship missle.
- greedo 11y ago
  Well, considering the range of an ICBM is by definition "intercontinental," your caution is a bit misplaced. First, the DF-21d isn't an ICBM, it's approx unclassified range is 900 miles. And of course the USN has defenses. First are soft defenses like ECM, followed by AEGIS and SM3. Not only are there defenses against the missile themselves, but it's not like the navy would just sit idle while being targeted. They'd work the entire kill chain, and most of this is assuming that the DF-21 can even find the carriers...