Konflikti Kiinan merellä

[ak.tied]

Chinese jets intercept US aircraft over East China Sea, US says

Two Chinese Sukhoi Su-30 jets have conducted an "unprofessional" intercept of a US aircraft, the US military said.

The US says the plane was on a mission to detect radiation in international airspace over the East China Sea.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-39971267

 

[ctg]

Beijing and its Southeast Asian neighbors have agreed to a framework for a code of conduct in the South China Sea, a move that could reduce the risk of clashes in one of the world's busiest waterways.

Along with the framework, rival claimants China and the Philippines will start talks today over their competing claims in the sea, according to senior diplomats from both sides.

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/05/18/chin...draft-code-of-conduct-in-south-china-sea.html

Hong Kong (CNN)Manila and Beijing are to hold direct talks on the South China Sea for the first time Friday, a move that may strengthen Beijing's hand in the festering dispute.

By agreeing to bilateral negotiations, analysts say the Philippines weakens the position of other countries involved, impedes efforts for a multilateral solution, and lays bare China's ability to control the agenda in the South China Sea and US unwillingness to antagonize Beijing over the dispute.
"China is winning the argument here and others will have to move accordingly," says Mathew Davies, head of the International Relations Department at the Australian National University, who specializes in Southeast Asian politics.

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/05/18/asia/china-philippines-south-china-sea/

 

[Fencer]

Chinese jets intercept US aircraft over East China Sea, US says

Two Chinese Sukhoi Su-30 jets have conducted an "unprofessional" intercept of a US aircraft, the US military said.

The US says the plane was on a mission to detect radiation in international airspace over the East China Sea.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-39971267

Näyttäisi uutisten mukaan lentäneen USA:n koneen päällä ylösalaisin. Se tässä kohtaamisessa pistää silmään, että se on hyvin samanlaista kuin mitä venäläiset tekevät: röyhkeästi iholle, normien vastaisesti liian lähelle/läheltä ja kaikki tämä kansainvälisessä ilmatilassa.

"Chinese fighter flies inverted over US Air Force jet
http://edition.cnn.com/2017/05/18/politics/china-us-jets-intercept/index.html
Updated 0158 GMT (0958 HKT) May 19, 2017

(CNN) Two Chinese Su-30 fighter jets intercepted a US Air Force radiation detection plane over the East China Sea Wednesday, according to the US Pacific Air Forces. The US crew aboard the US Air Force WC-135 characterized the move as "unprofessional," according to the statement from Air Force Lt. Col. Hodge.

"While we are still investigating the incident, initial reports from the U.S. aircrew characterized the intercept as unprofessional. The issue is being addressed with China through appropriate diplomatic and military channels," Hodge said.

Earlier, a US official told CNN the Chinese jets came within 150 feet of the US plane, with one of the Su-30s flying inverted, or upside down, directly above the American plane. Dubbed the "Constant Phoenix," the four-engine WC-135 jet looks for distinctive elements a nuclear test of any type would emit into the air. The collected samples can be analyzed to determine exactly what occurred.

The WC-135 has been regularly deployed on routine missions in Northeast Asia, according to the US official. The planes have been used in the past to gather evidence of possible nuclear tests by North Korea. The Air Force has two of the WC-135 jets that operate out of Offutt Air Force Base in Nebraska.

Wednesday's incident was the second between US and Chinese planes this year. In February, US defense officials said there was an "unsafe" close encounter between a US Navy P-3 Orion aircraft and a Chinese surveillance aircraft over the South China Sea.
In that incident, a US official told CNN the US Navy plane had to alter course to ensure there wasn't a collision with what one official said was a People's Liberation Army Air Force KJ-200. The planes came within 1,000 feet of each other, US officials said.
After the February incident, US officials said close encounters between US and Chinese forces are extremely rare, with no such incidents in 2015 and two in 2016."

 

[ctg]

China has denied US allegations that two of its fighter jets intercepted an American “radiation-sniffing” plane earlier this week, saying that its aircraft were acting “in accordance with the law”.

“Related remarks from the US side are inconsistent with fact,” the Chinese defence ministry said in a statement posted to its website late on Friday.

“On 17 May, a US reconnaissance aircraft was carrying out an operation in airspace over the Chinese Yellow Sea (the northern part of the East China sea), and Chinese aircraft acted to identify and investigate in accordance with the law,” the statement said, calling the action “professional” and “safe”.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...intercepting-us-sniffer-plane-over-yellow-sea

 

[ctg]

A US navy warship sailed within 12 nautical miles of an artificial island built up by China in the South China Sea, US officials have said, the first such challenge to Beijing in the strategic waterway since Donald Trump became president.

The officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the USS Dewey had travelled close to Mischief reef in the Spratly Islands, among a string of islets, reefs and shoals over which China has territorial disputes with its neighbors.

The so-called “freedom of navigation operation” by the destroyer, which is equipped with guided missiles, is sure to anger China. It comes as Trump is seeking Beijing’s cooperation to rein in ally North Korea’s nuclear and missile programs.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...p-sails-within-12-miles-of-china-claimed-reef

 

[ctg]

It’s been 26 years since the Cold War.

Few sailors or naval aviators now in uniform have known anything except American maritime supremacy. Such a historical interlude can give rise to triumphalism that taints assessments of rising challengers.

Last month, for instance, erstwhile PACOM commander Adm. Dennis Blair told a naval conference that China’s military has failed to amass “maritime and air superiority” and thus cannot degrade American deterrence or treaty commitments in the Far East. Around the same time, testifying before the House Armed Services Committee, current PACOM supremo, Adm. Harry Harris, likened comparing PLAN and U.S. Navy submarines to “comparing a Model T with a Corvette.”

The impression conveyed in both instances—nothing to worry about here, move along.

Fanell takes exception to these statements on two grounds.

First, that disparaging the PLAN flouts the reality of mounting Chinese martial prowess and material capability. And second, that insinuating the PLAN isn’t battleworthy betrays a political tin ear. Pooh-poohing the challenge damps congressional and popular support for the larger U.S. Navy that the Trump administration and Navy leaders have been pushing. Thus, the admirals convey a false impression of China’s navy and then compound that error by sapping political support for rebuilding the U.S. Navy.

This amounts to self-defeating conduct on naval potentates’ part. After all, if China’s navy remains little more than a nuisance, as not just admirals but learned commentators sometimes say, why should lawmakers fund a pricey naval buildup to counter it?

http://warisboring.com/america-has-turned-a-blind-eye-to-chinas-growing-naval-power/

 

[ctg]

China is planning to build a massive underwater observation system across the disputed East and South China seas, that experts say could be used to detect the movement of foreign ships and diminish the stealth capabilities of US submarines.

According to state-run broadcaster CCTV, the monitoring networks will cost two billion yuan ($290 million) and "serve as a platform to provide long-term observation data and support experiments in the research of the maritime environments of the two seas."

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/05/29/asia/south-china-sea-underwater-observation-system/

China is 'strongly dissatisfied' with the mention of the East and South China Sea issues in a Group of Seven statement, and the G7 allies should stop making irresponsible remarks, a Chinese foreign ministry spokesman says.

China is committed to properly resolving disputes with all nations involved through negotiations while maintaining peace and stability in the East China Sea and South China Sea, spokesman Lu Kang said in a statement on Sunday.

China hoped the G7 and other nations would refrain from taking positions, fully respect the efforts of countries in the region in handling the disputes, and stop making irresponsible remarks, Lu said.

In their communique on Saturday, G7 leaders said they were concerned by the situation in the South China Sea and East China Sea. They also called for a demilitarisation of 'disputed features'.

http://www.skynews.com.au/news/worl...-dissatisfied-with-g7-on-south-china-sea.html

 

[John Hilly]

On se kyllä kumma, kuinka Kiina härskisti liittää itseensä valtavia merialueita. Mutta mitä sille muu maailma voisi tehdä? Tarjolla on vain huonoja vaihtoehtoja ja Kiina pelaa hyvin Yhdysvaltoja kohtaan, esim. Pohjois-Korea kysymyksessä.

 

[ctg]

Mutta mitä sille muu maailma voisi tehdä?

Juuri tämä. Diplomaattiset keinot ei pure, mutta ei ne välttämättä pure myöskään Jenkkeihin heidän vallattuaan Tyynen Valtameren saaret toisen maailmanpalon jälkeen. Monista on luovuttu, mutta ne stragisesti tärkeät ovat säilyneet armeijan tukikohtina ympäri maailmaa.

Kiina on suurvalta. Ei sille voi mitään muuta kuin antaa tunnustusta. Toivottavasti nämä saaret eivät ole maailman valtauksen takia tehtyjä, vaan antavat heille taktista syvyyttä vihollista vastaan. Jos vallatut alueet otetaan laskuun niin Kiina on kaksinkertaistanut alueensa viimeisen viiden vuoden aikana. Osa niistä on vain valitettavasti syvää merta, tuliperäisine alueineen.

Laitan nämä tänne antamaan osviittaa mikä heillä on meininki.

Spoiler

http://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-G...rge-150-As-Tech-Giants-Battle-For-Supply.html

 

[ctg]

The United States continues to escalate pressure on China over the twin issues of the South China Sea and North Korea, telling Beijing that with growing global influence comes increased responsibilities that it is failing to live up to.

Three delegations of high-profile US leaders – the vice president, Mike Pence, senior GOP senator John McCain, and now secretaries of state and defence Rex Tillerson and James Mattis – have visited the Asia Pacific region in the past six weeks, with China’s role in the region their highest public priority.

The US is trenchantly opposed to China’s island-building and militarisation in the South China Sea, and increasingly frustrated by China’s inaction on reining in the nuclear ambitions of neighbour North Korea.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...on-china-over-south-china-sea-and-north-korea

SINGAPORE — Speakers at an Asian security summit have called for a continuation of U.S. Navy freedom of navigation patrols in the South China Sea, with the dispute still on participants’ minds even as other regional security challenges have made the news in recent weeks.

In their respective speeches, the defense ministers of Australia and Japan have supported U.S. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis’ assertion that the U.S. military will continue to operate in spaces allowed by international law in their respective speeches at the annual Shangri La Dialogue in Singapore.

Organized by the International Institute of Strategic Studies or IISS (Asia), the event brings together government and non-governmental defense and security professionals from Asia and around the world to discuss regional events, and is the biggest such summit in the region.

In his speech at the first plenary session on Saturday, Mattis said the U.S. military “ will continue to fly, sail, and operate wherever international law allows and demonstrate resolve through operational presence in the South China Sea and beyond,” adding that “our operations throughout the region are an expression of our willingness to defend both our interests and the freedoms enshrined in international law."

http://www.defensenews.com/articles/global-allies-call-for-continued-us-patrols-in-south-china-sea

 

[ctg]

WASHINGTON – China was constructing 24 fighter-sized hangars, fixed-weapons positions and other military-related infrastructure on each of three major Chinese-occupied features in the disputed South China Sea as of late last year, the U.S. Defense Department said Tuesday.

“China’s Spratly Islands outpost expansion effort is currently focused on building out the land-based capabilities of its three largest outposts — Fiery Cross, Subi and Mischief Reefs — after completion of its four smaller outposts early in 2016,” the Pentagon said in an annual report to Congress on military and security developments involving China.

“Once all these facilities are complete, China will have the capacity to house up to three regiments of fighters in the Spratly Islands,” whose ownership is disputed between Beijing and its smaller neighbors such as the Philippines and Vietnam, the report said.

No substantial land has been reclaimed at any of the seven Chinese-held outposts since Beijing ended its artificial island creation in the Spratlys in late 2015, according to the report.

http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/20...er-size-hangars-south-china-sea-outposts-u-s/

BEIJING, June 4 (Xinhua) -- China on Sunday expressed strong dissatisfaction with and firm opposition to "irresponsible remarks" made by the U.S. Secretary of Defense James Mattis and Japanese Defense Minister Tomomi Inada on the South China Sea and Taiwan issues during the just concluded Shangri-La Dialogue.

Stressing China has indisputable sovereignty over the Nansha islands and their adjacent waters, spokesperson Hua Chunying said China has always been committed to peacefully solving disputes through consultation and negotiation with countries directly concerned.

China has always respected and maintained the freedom of navigation and overflight in the South China Sea in accordance with international law. Meanwhile, China firmly opposes certain countries' sabre-rattling in the region under the excuse of that freedom, which threatens China's sovereignty and security, Hua said.

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2017-06/04/c_136339495.htm LOL

 

[Mustaruuti]

Laitetaan vaikka tänne. Jenkkejä huolestuttaa.

Pentagon: China Is 'Closing the Gap' in Air Power with U.S.
http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/defense/2017-06-08/pentagon-china-closing-gap-air-power-us

 

[ctg]

 

[ctg]

China is not only constructing China-Pakistan Economic Corridor on land passing through the India’s J&K which is under illegal occupation of Pakistan but is also constructing a secret underwater observation system in the disputed East and South China Sea, which may have far reaching consequences. The $400 million project has already sparked concerns that it could be used to detect the movement of foreign ships and feed information back to China. While building the system may take some time, its intention needs to be analysed on the security environment.

http://blogs.timesofindia.indiatime...ion-system-in-the-disputed-south-china-sea-2/

China itself has stated that the network, which will be built in the East China Sea and South China Sea, will “conduct around-the-clock, real-time, high-definition, multiple interface, and three-dimensional observations.” The experts assess that the system would be like a spy hub undersea. A noted analyst Carl Thayer has said that China in all probability would place sensors underwater to detect the movement of warships and submarines of other countries. Thus this move has two-fold objective- first to strengthen its oceanic claims and second to enhance its surveillance system to take steps whenever it desires against the ships of other countries.

China on Sunday reacted guardedly to India's plans to establish a tsunami warning system in the South China Sea, saying the proposal can be a part of the existing mechanism being operated by it since last year.

"Strengthening the tsunami early warning research conforms to the interests of all parties," the Chinese Foreign Ministry said in response to a question.

"China and the relevant countries in the region in accordance with the requirements of the United Nations agencies, in the South China sea, have established the related facilities and systems," it said.

http://www.business-standard.com/ar...system-in-south-china-sea-117061100501_1.html

 

[Torrakko]

Mitähän se vaatii, että Kiina niiltä saarilta lähtisi kuten USA toivoo. Jos sotilaallinen tapa valitaan niin USA:lla on hyökkääjän rooli ja Kiina puolustaa. Puolustajalla on aina helpompaa kuin hyökkääjällä. Kiina kuroo kiinni kaluston määrässä ja ei missään rynkkyjen määrässä vaan lentokoneissa ja merialuksissa. Juuri sillä alueella jolla USA:lla on suurin ylivoima. Jos rähinä saarista syttyisi niin pysyykö Kiinan anti-satelliitti ohjukset varastoissaan? Satelliitien tuottamissa tiedoissa se nykysodan voima piilee. Kiinalaiset tuntee myös internetsodankäynnin. Nämäkin asioita joilla tasoittaa jenkkien ylivoimaa.

Kiinalaisille annetaan kaikki aika tulla sotilaallisesti voimakkaaksi.

 

[ctg]

Mitähän se vaatii, että Kiina niiltä saarilta lähtisi kuten USA toivoo.

Kait se vaatii Kiinalta sen luokan kämmiä että kasvot menettää maailman edessä. En usko että sellaista päästävät tapahtumaan. Siihen kuitenkin uskon että tämä uusi kasvava sukupolvi ei tule koskaan olemaan tietoinen ettei noita saaria ollut kymmenen vuotta sitten.

Jos rähinä saarista syttyisi niin pysyykö Kiinan anti-satelliitti ohjukset varastoissaan?

Ongelma satelliittien tuhoamisessa on se tajuton määrä avaruusromua mikä pääsee valloilleen. Sodan jälkeen joutuu odottamaan vuosikymmeniä että se romu tulee ilmakehään. Jossain tapauksissa kuten korkealla pysyvällä radalla olevat romupilvet tulevat olemaan siellä iäisyyden. Joten jos olisit ameriikan taikka kiinan presidentti antaisitko tuhoamiskäskyn tämän tiedon perusteella?

 

[Torrakko]

Kait se vaatii Kiinalta sen luokan kämmiä että kasvot menettää maailman edessä. En usko että sellaista päästävät tapahtumaan. Siihen kuitenkin uskon että tämä uusi kasvava sukupolvi ei tule koskaan olemaan tietoinen ettei noita saaria ollut kymmenen vuotta sitten.



Ongelma satelliittien tuhoamisessa on se tajuton määrä avaruusromua mikä pääsee valloilleen. Sodan jälkeen joutuu odottamaan vuosikymmeniä että se romu tulee ilmakehään. Jossain tapauksissa kuten korkealla pysyvällä radalla olevat romupilvet tulevat olemaan siellä iäisyyden. Joten jos olisit ameriikan taikka kiinan presidentti antaisitko tuhoamiskäskyn tämän tiedon perusteella?

Kasvojen menetys on hankale asia. Kuuban ohjuskriisin sovittelun tapainen kompromissi voisi olla paras tapa. Mutta mitä Kiinalle voisi antaa ja mitä Kiina voisi antaa takaisin? Neuvostoliitolla oli tukikohtia siellä täällä, kuten myös USA:lla oli. Tässä kuitenkin hankalin on että Kiina tuntee tarvitsevansa noita saaria turvaamaan tuota aluetta. Viiden triljoonan dollarin liikenne tekee siitä melkoisen rahavaltimon. Oisimpa kärpäsenä katossa kuuntelemassa kun näitä suunnitelmia on tehty. Silloin tietäisi mitä varten saaria varustetaan. Mitä Kiina näkee tulevaisuudessa joka pakottaa tuohon liikkeeseen. Ei siellä vaan yhtäkkiä päätetty, että hei tehdään saaria.

Satelliittien tuhoamiseen ei taideta ryhtyä.

 

[ctg]

Beijing: A Chinese drilling mission assisted by an advanced US vessel in the resource-rich South China Sea will lead to a breakthrough in gas, oil and methane exploration besides providing a new insight into the continental shelf break-up, experts have said.

With the help of the US’ JOIDES Resolution, one of the world’s most advanced ocean-drilling vessels, scientists have logged three sites at some 2,000 meters deep and completed a four-month research mission in the South China Sea, China Youth Daily reported.

China claims almost all of the South China Sea. Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia, Brunei and Taiwan have counter claims.

Tongji University marine geologist Jian Zhimin, a co-leader of the Integrated Ocean Drilling Program (IODP) mission, said that the scientists collected samples, including sedimentary and volcanic rocks.

A study of the rocks indicates the South China Sea and the Atlantic Ocean were formed differently. Jian said the findings were so unique that they might have to rewrite textbooks on continental shelf break-up and ocean formation.

“The discovery is not only academically historic but also economically significant for the region,” Liu Feng, an expert on South China Sea studies, told China’s state run Global Times on Tuesday.

http://www.livemint.com/Politics/RG...inese-experts-hopeful-of-breakthrough-in.html

Handwritten, often illegible, pre-1959 filings from the Department of External Affairs (a forerunner to the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade) offer one of the first Australian accounts of concern over territorial disputes in the South China Sea. The declassified memos and documents, many marked Secret, record Australia’s strategic concern over the islands and reveal Canberra’s long-running desire to see a peaceful resolution to the disputes. Among the documents is a briefing on the military significance of the disputed islands from Australia’s Joint Intelligence Committee in 1959. It read:

On 27th April 1950, in connection with the formation of a draft peace treaty with Japan, the Defense Committee agreed that it was in Australia’s strategic interests to work for U.S. Trusteeship of the Spratly Islands. In fact, the Peace Treaty left the question of sovereignty unsettled.

It continued:

In May 1950, Australia was concerned, for strategic reasons, that the Spratly Islands might fall into Chinese Communist hands. In an attempt to forestall this, the United Kingdom was sounded out about accepting trusteeship of the islands. The United Kingdom replied that they would probably be unwilling to do anything which would embarrass them in relations with the Communist Chinese. They foresaw the danger their occupation of the islands might be resisted.

The briefing demonstrated a clarity on the strategic importance of the islands and potential avenues for resolution. Australia’s eagerness for the U.K., which has a sound basis as a potential claimant of the Spratly Islands (outlined here), to take an active role in trusteeship of the islands fell on deaf ears. Instead the U.K. deflected, suggesting instead that France may be better placed in their claim given they had not yet recognized China.

Yet more prophetically the briefing noted that:

If, in the longer term, the Communist Chinese were to develop the islands militarily, they could make a nuisance out of themselves on the international shipping and air routes on the pretext of infringements of territorial waters and air space and might even shoot down an aircraft occasionally. Again, there is little the West is likely to do, except protest.

The briefing showed a depth of thought on the South China Sea far exceeding the small-Australia views of the day. This “nuisance” factor was explained further, with the briefing suggesting the possible construction of airfields, radar and radio intercept stations, as well as surface-to-surface and surface-to-air missiles on the islands, but the document questioned the efficacy of such new facilities.

The 1959 Australian declassified document noted:

Although it would be possible to build airfields on the larger islands, these would only be of limited value because of restrictions on the length of runways (maximum length would be about 5000’ on Itu Aba) and the direction of the prevailing winds. However, looking further ahead to vertical take-off fighters and surface-to-air and surface-to-surface missiles the islands could become more useful, provided, of course, the occupying power was able to guarantee adequate logistic support.

And continues:

If air warning radars or radio intercept stations were erected in the Paracels it would extend considerably the cover which the Communist Chinese now enjoy from stations on Hainan and in North Vietnam. Bases in those islands would probably also have similar advantage to the West.

In conclusion, it noted:

Provided the United States maintains its present air and sea supremacy in the area, it could, if it wished, quickly neutralize any Communist Chinese Military bases on the islands.

After the briefing had been circulated in Australia’s policy community, the briefing was forwarded to the Australian Embassy in Washington for discussion with the U.S. State Department. The response from U.S. officials left a lot to be desired. A cable (SAV.489; Secret; 30th August 1959) from the Australian Embassy quoted the Deputy Director of Chinese Affairs as saying that on the island disputes in the South China Sea, the “United States policy was one of ‘let sleeping dogs lie’.” As a scribbled note from an Australian official on an archived copy of the cable recorded, “Politically, this is not a very satisfactory outcome.”

http://thediplomat.com/2017/06/australias-60-year-old-south-china-sea-prophecy-comes-true/

 

[ctg]

Kiina jatkaa valloitusta

Initial media reports from Hanoi and Beijing reflected discussions held on June 18 between Fan and Lich, Party Secretary General Nguyen Phu Trong, President Tran Dai Quang and Prime Minister Nguyen Xuan Phuc. Media commentary published by both sides was upbeat and positive. For example, Xinhua quoted Trong as observing “Vietnam and China are friendly socialist neighbors, and relations between the two countries and two parties have maintained good momentum with deepening cooperation and exchanges in various fields.”

According to Xinhua, Quang said “closer friendly cooperation between the two militaries will help deepen the mutual trust between the two countries and two parties, and facilitate their fruitful collaboration.”

Vietnam News Agency reported the two sides “agreed upon the contents and measures of cooperation in the time ahead.” Vietnam’s People’s Army Newspaper, wrote that Lich considered Fan’s visit “an important political event and a new development step in cooperative relations between the people and armies of the two nations.”

Nhan Dan, the organ of the Vietnam Communist Party, reported that Lich said Fan’s “ongoing visit is vivid evidence of close relations between the two parties, states and armies.” The paper noted that Lich and Fan “will co-chair activities within the fourth Vietnam-China border defense friendship exchange program” from June 20-22.

Xinhua quoted Lich as observing, “ties between the two militaries have made substantial progress in recent years, with sound cooperation in border defense, peacekeeping, and search and rescue.” According to Xinhua, Fan responded, “Thanks to the promotion of the leaders of both countries, the China-Vietnam relations are developing with good momentum and their cooperation has yielded results in various fields.”

Fan even suggested that China align its One Belt, One Road Initiative “with Vietnam’s Two Corridors and One Economic Circle plan, and push forward pragmatic cooperation in all fields for mutual development.”

Both Vietnamese and Chinese media reported that the South China Sea issue was raised in discussions between Fan and Vietnam’s leaders. Xinhua quoted Phuc as stating, “Vietnam is ready to make joint efforts with China to fully and effectively implement the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea and reach agreement on a code of conduct in the South China Sea through consultations at an early date.”

Xinhua quoted Fan’s view that “the South China Sea islands have been China’s territory since ancient times… [and] that the current situation in the South China Sea has been stabilized and is turning positive…” Fan also called on “both sides to abide by the important consensus reached by the leaders of the two countries and the two parties. The two sides should enhance their strategic communications and properly manage and control their differences so as to maintain their overall relations as well as the peace and stability of the South China Sea.”

http://thediplomat.com/2017/06/is-a...ritime-crisis-brewing-in-the-south-china-sea/

It soon became clear, however, that differences emerged over Vietnam’s renewed oil drilling in the South China Sea and these differences led to the cancellation of the planned border defense exchange activities.

It is unclear whether Fan spoke in general terms about Vietnam’s oil and gas exploration in disputed waters or specifically mentioned particular exploration blocks by name.

One Vietnamese source reported in a private email that Fan “raised the question to Vietnamese leaders, including PM [Nguyen Xuan Phuc], and asked Vietnam to stop drilling oil in block 136/03.” Block 136/03 is located in the Vanguard Bank. Other analysts reported that Fan mentioned block 118, also known as the Blue Whale, where Exxon Mobile is currently operating off Vietnam’s central coast.

Vietnamese sources say the unidentified leader to whom Fan spoke responded by strongly defending Vietnam’s sovereignty. It was this verbal exchange that reportedly led Fan to withdraw China’s participation in the 4th Border Defense Friendly Exchange and to return to China abruptly.

It is unclear whether General Fan left Hanoi immediately on the night of June 18 or on the morning of next day. The 2017 border exchange was scheduled to commence on June 20.

It should be noted that a year ago the arbitral tribunal that heard the case against China brought by the Philippines ruled that China’s nine-dash line claim to the South China Sea had no basis in international law. The tribunal also ruled that China’s claim to sovereignty based on historic rights had been extinguished when China ratified the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).

Fan’s reported remarks on the South China Sea could be read as insinuating that Vietnam was not abiding by the “consensus reached by the leaders of the two countries and the two parties.” His reported intervention would have been inflammatory to Vietnam’s leaders for two reasons: first, because it was delivered by a military general and not a foreign ministry diplomat, and second, because it represented a reassertion of China’s nine-dash line and China’s claim to “indisputable sovereignty” over waters in Vietnam’s exclusive economic zone, over which Vietnam has sovereign jurisdiction.

 

[ctg]

China's military on Wednesday launched a new type of domestically-built destroyer, state media said, the latest addition to the country's rapidly expanding navy.

The 10,000-tonne warship was launched at the Jiangnan Shipyard in Shanghai, the official Xinhua news agency said, making it the first of the People's Liberation Army Navy's "new generation" destroyers.

"It is equipped with new air defence, anti-missile, anti-ship and anti-submarine weapons," Xinhua said, without giving further details.

http://www.newsweek.com/chinas-newest-toy-10000-ton-anti-missile-anti-submarine-warship-629543