The China Thread

[CountDeMoney]

You go back along a long enough timeline, everybody in that part of the world is awash in blood. 
Ain't nobody innocent when it comes to crimes against humanity on that side of the planet;  the barking just comes down to who did what to whom last.

[CountDeMoney]

It's only Tuesday, and AEI is freaking the fuck out already.

As Lee Corso would say, "Not so fast, my friend!"

The Day America Lost Asia
By MICHAEL AUSLIN
November 26, 2013

While Washington and the world furiously debated the interim agreement between Iran and the United States over the weekend, Nov. 24, 2013, may go down in history as the day America lost Asia.

Starting this past Sunday, China began air patrols over its newly designated "air defense identification zone" over the East China Sea—home to a chain of islands disputed with Japan—and within 24 hours Beijing turned 80 years of free aerial navigation on its head. China's move is no less dramatic than Iran's potential victory in gaining the right to enrich uranium: Absent an effective U.S. response, China has successfully begun changing the rules of international security in East Asia. And with a whimper, not a bang, Washington may begin losing its influence in Asia, despite its still-preponderant strength.

Here are four things the world should note about China's bold move.

First, let's call it what it is. Beijing has declared an air control zone, not a defense zone. Normally, in air defense zones countries seek to identify aircraft in that are close to or approaching national territory. Think of the analogue with territorial waters. Obviously, airplanes that fly over national territory, such as commercial airliners, must identify themselves. But they are also presumed to be engaging in innocent passage, just like cargo or passenger ships on the seas.

What China has done is very different. In claiming most of the East China Sea as a control zone—within 80 miles of Japanese territory at its closest point—the country is demanding that airplanes flying hundreds of miles from China's actual territory must now identify themselves and declare their flight paths, even if they are not going to China. This is not defense: It is a not-so-subtle form of much wider control. While Chinese spokespersons say the move does not affect the freedom of international flights, the reality is much different. There is no basis for such a wide zone, other than to get foreign countries to accept that they are passing through what are, in essence, Chinese-controlled skies. And if a foreign plane doesn't provide Chinese authorities the information they demand? China will then take "defensive emergency measures," according to the government—in other words, shadow, threaten or shoot down foreign planes.

Second, Beijing's announcement is a direct challenge to Japan and Korea, since China's new control zone overlaps those of both Tokyo and Seoul. This, of course, is the whole idea, at least with respect to Japan: to chip away further at Japanese control of the Senkaku (Diaoyu) Islands, the chain of islands located in the East China Sea to the northeast of Taiwan that Japan and China both claim as theirs. In recent years, Tokyo has grown increasingly concerned about China probing in the waters off the islands, which Japan has administered since 1972 and over which it has claimed ownership since 1895. In an inept move last year, the Japanese government bought three of the disputed islands from their private owner, sparking the most serious crisis in Sino-Japanese relations in decades. In addition to a diplomatic freeze between the two countries and anti-Japanese demonstrations in China, Chinese paramilitary patrol ships have repeatedly entered into the contested waters, and Beijing has started flying patrol planes near their airspace, as well. Each time, the Chinese have been met by Japanese Coast Guard vessels and Air Self-Defense Force planes. Tensions are at a fever pitch, and one accident in the sky or waters could plunge the two into a crisis that nobody really wants.

The move over the weekend to make a legally accepted claim over the airspace of the Senkaku Islands is designed to force the issue. If Japan decides to contest China's claim, then Asia's two most powerful air forces will soon be playing games of aerial chicken at 600 miles per hour. If Japan retreats, then China will have made a huge step forward in getting its claims over the Senkakus and the East China Sea accepted.

Korea, too, is concerned with the overlap of its western air defense zone with China's new claim, but Beijing is wooing Seoul, giving it prior notification and playing on Korean President Park Geun-hye's deep distrust of Japan and desire to build closer relations with China. While Seoul should be just as worried about ceding China the authority to control the skies over the East China Sea, South Korean domestic politics is already giving Beijing a win by default.

The real question is how another country—the United States—will respond. The Pentagon has said U.S. military flights will not respect China's new control zone, and indeed, on Tuesday, two U.S. bombers flew over the sea in what Pentagon officials said was a routine exercise. But heading forward, will the Obama administration give orders to tone down the amount of American flying in the region, so as not to provoke a crisis? What are the rules of engagement for the first time a Chinese air force plane demands that a U.S. military plane identify itself or turn back? Will U.S. forces back up Japanese air force planes that find themselves threatened?

Third, regardless of what the United States does, the danger is that the tide of regional trends is headed in China's favor. Within just 24 hours of the establishment of the control zone, Asian governments and commercial air transport companies hastily announced that they would comply with Beijing's demands. Hong Kong, Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan, and even Japan all said that their commercial planes would identify themselves to Chinese authorities, notify China of their flight plans, and provide transponder information and logos. This effectively ends free aerial passage through international skies over one of the world's busiest air corridors. Millions of Chinese, Japanese, Koreans, Americans, Indians and others transit among the capitals and major cities of Northeast Asia. Now, the lives of those innocent passengers lie in the hands of young Chinese fighter pilots, who have very little experience dealing with civilian airliners or uncertain situations. That is why so many nations have rushed to accept China's demands: fear that the failure to do so will result in tragedy. Such is a world where might makes right.

Fourth, this is just the beginning. Already, the Chinese have said that they will set up other air control zones once the East China Sea area is pacified. That, of course, means the South China Sea, the world's busiest waterways, where China is embroiled in island territorial disputes with Southeast Asian nations like Brunei, the Philippines, Taiwan and Vietnam. If countries as rich and powerful as Japan and South Korea accede to Chinese control of international skies in their area, what hope is there for smaller nations to refuse? By Thanksgiving next year, all of East Asia may well be under a Chinese aerial protectorate, in which all nations fly at the sufferance of Beijing or its regional military commands. Next, the waters of the Yellow Sea, along the Korean littoral, may be similarly covered, thus forcing the United States to decide how it will do air operations off the peninsula.

All this may not come to pass, but Beijing has gambled that the United States is too distracted and too wary of conflict in Asia to oppose the new reality. Moreover, China assumes that smaller nations, even Japan, will ultimately decide to alter their behavior so as not to provoke a clash with their neighbor and largest trading partner. It also makes sense to force the issue before Japan and South Korea get advanced F-35 fighters, which would undoubtedly embolden them to reject Chinese demands. By 2020 or so, when other Asian air forces get next-generation fighters, China's air control precedent could have been in place for more than a half-decade.

Americans are comfortable talking about freedom of the seas, and the U.S. Navy reminds the world regularly that it keeps the oceans open to all comers. Washington isn't likely to brook any threats to freedom of maritime navigation, whether military or civilian. Neither should it accept restrictions on the freedom of aerial navigation. Yet it has already lost half the battle at the first shots. The Obama administration needs to make daily shows of force, flying fighters, more bombers, cargo and reconnaissance planes ostentatiously through the skies that China now claims. It should invite all nations in Asia to join with the U.S. Air Force and U.S. Navy in regular aerial transits, simply for the right of it. U.S. planes should be on alert to come to the aid of any planes, military or civilian, that are threatened by China. And President Barack Obama, or Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel, should publicly urge all Asian nations to reject China's demands and announce that any of them will be protected by U.S. fighter jets.

If the White House shrinks from taking these steps, the Chinese will have won a victory that will change the perception of the balance of power in Asia. And Americans will be flying the unfriendly skies, all alone.

Michael Auslin is resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute.

[Valmy]

If the Japanese were flying a Swastika it would just be odd.

Oh for Godsake

[CountDeMoney]

I bet the below decks refurbishment to meet mandatory feng shui minimum regulations was a bitch. 

Chinese aircraft carrier on move
By: Associated Press
November 26, 2013 10:05 PM EST

BEIJING — China's sole aircraft carrier has departed for its first-ever sea trials in the South China Sea, a mission likely to draw scrutiny amid Beijing's drive to assert its claims to those waters and their island groups.

The official Xinhua News Agency said the cruise aims to test the Admiral Kuznetsov Varyag Liaoning's crew and equipment over long distances and a variety of sea conditions.

It said the ship was accompanied by two destroyers and two missile cruisers - elements of a standard aircraft carrier battle group - when it left its northern home port of Qingdao. The Admiral Kuznetsov Varyag Liaoning has launched and recovered jet fighters but not yet been given its full complement of aircraft.

Since entering service last year, the carrier has conducted several rounds of sea trials in the relatively tranquil waters off China's northeast coast. State media reports Wednesday said the navy wanted to submit it to more trying conditions.

"It is hard to find an ideal area for the mission, except for the South China Sea," the China Daily newspaper quoted Maj. Gen. Yin Zhuo, a frequent spokesman on military affairs, as saying.

China says the South China Sea, its islands and potential mineral wealth belong to it, and has increasingly developed civilian and military outposts there and used its coast guard to confront the ships of other nations that also claim parts of the sea.

Yin said a cruise of up to two months was necessary to conduct proper sea trials, and would include the launching of fighters under difficult weather conditions.

Chinese navy ships on their way to the South China Sea have increasingly transited through the Miyako Strait in Japan's Okinawa island chain. While the strait is an international waterway, Japan's military pays close attention to the Chinese navy's activities in the area.

The Admiral Kuznetsov Varyag Liaoning was bought from Ukraine more than a decade ago and extensively refurbished before entering service last year. At 57,000 tons, the ship is a little over half the size of the U.S. Navy's Nimitz class carriers.

China has described the carrier as an experimental platform but hasn't said whether it will play an active service role. The lengthy refurbishment was seen as a learning exercise for China's own future carriers, now believed to be under construction near Shanghai.

[Josquius]

So, the US flew bombers over the bit of sea China has decided to claim and they didn't tell China. Good on the US for sending a mesage they're supporting Japan for once.

[CountDeMoney]

So, the US flew bombers over the bit of sea China has decided to claim and they didn't tell China. Good on the US for sending a mesage they're supporting Japan for once.

LOL, "for once", he says.

[jimmy olsen]

So, the US flew bombers over the bit of sea China has decided to claim and they didn't tell China. Good on the US for sending a mesage they're supporting Japan for once.

The Secretary of State, the Senate and IIRC the Secretary of Defense have all publicly backed Japan's claim and said that it falls under the American security umbrellas.

[Jacob]

It's only Tuesday, and AEI is freaking the fuck out already.

As Lee Corso would say, "Not so fast, my friend!"

So all it takes to lose Asia is for China to say "we declare this an exclusive flight zone"?

Seems a bit overwrought.

[Josquius]

So, the US flew bombers over the bit of sea China has decided to claim and they didn't tell China. Good on the US for sending a mesage they're supporting Japan for once.

LOL, "for once", he says.

The US has been quite worryingly quiet and neutral on the issue until now.

[jimmy olsen]

So, the US flew bombers over the bit of sea China has decided to claim and they didn't tell China. Good on the US for sending a mesage they're supporting Japan for once.

LOL, "for once", he says.

The US has been quite worryingly quiet and neutral on the issue until now.

Did you ignore everything I said?

Are you going to force me to link to articles proving those assertions?

[CountDeMoney]

So, the US flew bombers over the bit of sea China has decided to claim and they didn't tell China. Good on the US for sending a mesage they're supporting Japan for once.

LOL, "for once", he says.

The US has been quite worryingly quiet and neutral on the issue until now.

What are you going on about?  The ADIZ?  That just happened this weekend, and both statements and actions have been issued accordingly.

Worryingly quiet and neutral, my black ass.

[Josquius]

Did you ignore everything I said?

Are you going to force me to link to articles proving those assertions?

Please do. I've seen little definite from the US supporting Japan on the Senkakus until now. It has been genuinely worrying.

[jimmy olsen]

How much more support can you get from the US government than this?

http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2012/12/01/national/u-s-senate-passes-senkaku-backing/

U.S. Senate passes Senkaku backing
by Eric Johnston

Staff Writer

    Dec 1, 2012
    Article history

OSAKA – The U.S. Senate on Thursday unanimously approved an amendment to the 2013 National Defense Authorization Act that is designed to counter attempts by China to challenge Japan's administration of the Senkaku Islands but sidesteps the question of who has ultimate sovereignty over the disputed territory.

The amendment, offered by Jim Webb, a Virginia Democrat, states U.S. opposition to any efforts to coerce, threaten to use force or use force to resolve territorial issues. It concludes by reaffirming the commitment of the U.S. to the defense of territories under the administration of Japan.

"The peaceful settlement of territorial and jurisdictional disputes in the East China Sea requires the exercise of self-restraint by all parties in the conduct of activities that would complicate or escalate disputes and destabilize the region, and differences should be handled in a constructive manner consistent with universally recognized principles of customary international law," the amendment says.

"While the United States takes no position on the ultimate sovereignty of the Senkaku Islands, the United States acknowledges the administration of Japan over the Senkaku Islands. The unilateral actions of a third party will not affect United States acknowledgement of the administration of Japan over the Senkaku Islands," it adds.

"Over the past several years, China has taken increasingly aggressive actions to assert its claim over the Senkaku Islands in the East China Sea and in a broad expanse of the South China Sea," Webb said.

[CountDeMoney]

Please do. I've seen little definite from the US supporting Japan on the Senkakus until now. It has been genuinely worrying.

The Us and Japan revised the Guidelines for Defense Cooperation last month for the first time since 1997, we've moved the US air defense HQ to Yokota AB, and Hawk Carlisle himself says the USAF and Japan are working tighter on air and missile defense than even 2 years ago.

So relax already.

[jimmy olsen]

Koreans are not happy about this, saw a whole half hour news program on tv yesterday on the situation with grim faced commentators.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/japan-south-korea-military-jets-cross-through-china-air-defense-id-zone/2013/11/28/6285d350-5816-11e3-bdbf-097ab2a3dc2b_story.html

China sends warplanes to new air defense zone after U.S., Japan, S. Korea incursions

BEIJING — China said Thursday that it had sent warplanes to patrol its newly declared maritime air defense identification zone, ratcheting up a dispute over an island chain that has turned into a dangerous standoff in the region.

The move came after Japan and South Korea said Thursday that they had sent surveillance aircraft of their own into the area in the East China Sea. The United States has joined many of China's neighbors in condemning the decision this week to establish the zone and defied Beijing by flying two B-52 bombers through the area Tuesday.

A Chinese air force spokesman, Col. Shen Jinke, said several fighter jets and an early- warning aircraft had been sent on "defensive" air patrols in the zone, to "strengthen the monitoring of aerial targets," the official Xinhua News Agency reported.

Experts say China's decision to establish the zone — bolstered by a threat that any non­commercial aircraft entering it without notice could face "defensive emergency measures" — has inflamed an already tense situation with Japan and raised the possibility of military conflict.

Beijing had initially reacted calmly to the U.S. challenge Tuesday, simply noting that it had identified and monitored the American warplanes. That muted response drew criticism from citizens on Chinese micro-blogging sites, and even from state news media.

The nationalist Global Times newspaper said that the United States had engaged China in a "war of public opinion" and that Beijing had "failed to make a timely and ideal response."

"Beijing needs to reform its information release mechanism to win the psychological battles waged by Washington and Tokyo," the paper said in an editorial.

Shen said the Chinese air force would remain on high alert and would take "relevant measures according to different air threats" to defend the country's airspace, Xinhua reported.

In another editorial, the Global Times said Japan, not the United States, was the target of the new zone and suggested that enforcement of the zone would be selective.

"If the U.S. does not go too far, we will not target it in safeguarding our air defense zone," the newspaper wrote. "What we should do at present is to firmly counter provocative actions from Japan."

The latest flights intensify the game of dare being played above Asia's contested maritime territory. Analysts said China had established the zone to bolster its claims to a chain of tiny, rocky islands administered by Japan and to match a similar air defense identification zone long established by its rival.

But they said the decision could have backfired, uniting several of China's neighbors in condemnation and providing the United States a perfect opportunity to demonstrate its commitment to ensuring stability in the Asia-Pacific region.

A spokesman for the Japanese government said Thursday that its Lockheed Martin-made turboprop patrol planes have been conducting routine flights in China's air defense identification zone since Beijing's declaration. The spokesman did not say specifically when the flights have taken place or how many there have been. Japan has not been notifying China of its activities.

Japan's Defense Ministry did not confirm the flights, but one official, requesting anonymity to describe the situation, said that Japan is "conducting the same monitoring activity as before, and we will not change or restrict such activities."

South Korea's flight took place Wednesday near the area of a South Korean maritime research center, built atop a submerged rock that Seoul and Beijing contest.

The flight marks a "clear sign that Seoul will not recognize the new airspace claim," South Korea's Yonhap news agency said in its report. Yonhap also reported Thursday that China had rejected Seoul's request to redraw its air defense identification zone and eliminate an overlap with the zone of South Korea. The South in turn said it may expand its own zone.

In Asia's waters, territorial disputes go back decades or centuries and draw in nearly every nation in the region. The nastiest dispute of late has been between Japan and China over several uninhabited islets and rocks known as the Senkaku in Japanese and the Diaoyu in Chinese.

Japan infuriated China last year by purchasing several of those islets from a private landowner, and China has since increased its surveillance — both with vessels and aircraft — around those islands. Japan has frequently scrambled its own fighter jets in response.

U.S. officials said China's unilaterally announced air defense identification zone needlessly raised tensions between Asia's two largest economies. In his trip next week through the region, Vice President Biden plans to convey those concerns to China, a senior Obama administration official told reporters Wednesday.

"There is an emerging pattern of behavior by China that is unsettling to China's own neighbors," the official said. Biden will raise questions "about how China operates in international space and how China deals with areas of disagreement with its neighbors."

Harlan reported from Seoul. Li Qi contributed to this report.