Tagarchief: China

Do you know what a SLOC is?

Well it stands for Sea Lines of Communications (SLOC) and it’s more important than you may think. in this age of digital worldwide web, we (and our governments) seem to have forgotten how we get our stuff and all the things we need to live from A to B. Yes you may order your things on Internet, through Ebay, Amazon or some fancy Chinese webstores. But the next thing will be to ship it from A(sia) to B (or Europe:) ofcourse most of these goods come to Europe through our Dutch Main port of Rotterdam. Yes im proud of that.

Well just see and observe this visualization of the world’s shipping routes

“Just remember what DutchForce21 is all about. A maritime focus to (Dutch) armed forces, just because this is the reality.”

About 11 billion tons of stuff gets carried around the world every year by large ships. Clothes, flat-screen TVs, grain, cars, oil — transporting these goods from port to port is what makes the global economy go ‘round.

And now there’s a great way to visualize this entire process, through this stunning interactive map from the UCL Energy Institute

Some previous articles:

Solutions:

Nederlandse toevoeging:

Iedereen die dit fimpje ziet, begrijpt hopelijk direct waarom Dutchforce21 de krijgsmacht een maritieme focus wil geven! En ook waarom dit op een expeditionaire manier zal moeten… en dus de JSF totaal ongeschikt is!!

Lees de serie:

 

 

Advertenties

The Gripen: Most approriate fighter for the Phillippine Armed Forces

Interesting move of the Philippine Air Force. It is a very good article with correct arguments. The Gripen is the most affordable real fighter (instead of a trainer with missiles like the FA-50 Golden Eagle or M346) with good range and performance. Also a very broad array of weapons which are already integrated or are optional. From Meteor (the most modern Beyond Visual Range Anti Aircraft Missile (BVRAAM) to RBS-15MKIII anti Ship missile.

air_jas-39_weapons_options_eskil_nyholm_lg

Below some comments:

The C/D aircraft which has an estimated price tag of US$61 million can be converted to the more advanced E/F models, according to a senior company representative.

They can be converted but It wouldn’t be necessary to do that, there is also a Gripen C/D+ road-map where the smaller Gripen C/D takes some of the qualified E/F systems.. but not the Engine and new wing etc. The conversion story in Sweden was a kind of way to convince people they spend their money wisely to re-use the older airframes. But since a couple of years – since the increased hostilities with Russia – they plan to build totally new aircraft for the Swedish Air Force.

“C/D frames is still, and will continue to be, a very capable aircraft which will be in continuous development. It really doesn’t matter if the Philippines operates the C/D or with the new generation E/F, there will always be a way for us to grow its capability through incremental upgrades,” he said.

Totally true from the beginning the Gripen has been designed with this incremental upgrade path, a total contrast to all other aircraft where incidental upgrades will be applied.Goal: To break Augustine’s Law nr. 16..

Law Number XVI: In the year 2054, the entire defense budget will purchase just one aircraft. This aircraft will have to be shared by the Air Force and Navy 3-1/2 days each per week except for leap year, when it will be made available to the Marines for the extra day.

The Western armed forces are all on track to meet this Law, nr. 16. Wy? because there MIC want’s to. nothing more, nothing less. The commercial goals of these companies are more important than the security of the countries concerned. The affordability and keeping the Operation & Sustainment cost as low as possible aren’t objectives even though governments balk with comments like… we have to be very precise with this money.. it taxpayers money this,,, and taxpayers money that…

breakingthecostcurve_Eng_700
London-based IHS Jane’s has compiled an independent report in March 2012 on a cost per flight hour of selected aircraft, which includes Lockheed Martin F-16, Boeing F-18 E / F Super Hornet, Lockheed Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, Saab Gripen, Dassault Rafale and EuroFighter Typhoon, and the report concluded that the Saab Gripen was the least expensive of the aircraft under study in terms of cost per flight hour.
Janes Graph_700

The aircraft is also the only jet fighter capable of landing in Philippine controlled Rancudo airstrip in the disputed Spratly Islands.

Saab Gripen reported that a possible government-to-government negotiations between Sweden and the Philippines is under way after it has submitted proposals to the Philippine government which include training and lease options of Gripen fighters, hinting the Philippines interest on a similar deal offered to Hungary and the Czech Republic and to recent offers made to Malaysia. The terms of the offer however remains confidential up to this date.

A senior Defence official of the Philippines has confirmed yesterday that they are currently in talks with Sweden for the country’s first Multi Role Fighters. Defence Secretary Voltaire Gazmin however refused to comment on the deal.

But sources inside Malacanang Palace disclosed that President Benigno Aquino has plans to visit Sweden before his term ends in 2016 and the date of his visit is set tentatively suggesting that finer details are currently being ironed out prior to formal announcement like the ones they entered with South Korea and Japan. President Aquino went to Korea and Japan to announced major defence related acquisitions.

oh0patGripenFARP

The Gripen is also the only western fighter with good STOL landing capabilities to directly support the ground forces on remote islands. besides that to support such an operation the Ground Support Equipment for the Gripen can be transported in a quarter of the cargo bay of a C-130 Hercules. (enough to support 8 Gripen on an expeditionary operation) there are 5/6 people needed in the ground crew. I totally support this. A dispersed operational capability for the PAF would be needed in my opinion because the Chinese can fire barrages of land-attack missiles to wipe out all main operating bases. They have also overwhelming majority in the air (even when the Americans are there…This would be the most wise thing to do for the Philippine government to pursue. One more thing… the Gripen C/D uses the same GE F404 engine (except some modifications by the Swedish) like the KAI-FA-50 Golden Eagle. so also a partial common logistical support (and training of ground crews) advantage.

Short and sharp: Australian MP Dennis Jensen about JSF and Military Industrial Complex

Sometimes if I follow the Parliamentary discussions, and monologues in the Dutch Parliament about defense matters, especially the JSF question, i recognize some things… they all start with “a lack of”:

  • interest,
  • responsibility,
  • knowledge.
  • urgency

Up to a couple of years, there was only one person in Dutch parliament who was fully aware of the problems, the technical issues and was reading through all the “BS” arguments used by the Defense ministry JSF lobbyists. It was Ms. Eijsink. She still is fully into this air vehicle, but I personally I think that party politics within the PvdA / Labour party has stopped her from doing what she is supposed to do. There have been numerous changes to tackle the JSF and there lobbyists from within the Parliament (CDA, VVD, SGP) the Government: Ministry of Defence, Economical affairs, and from within the Dutch Military complex. I understand Ms. Eijsinks position, she was the only one in the Labour group (as far as I can see it, who was willing to go for the truth!) The leader of the Labour group, Diedederik Samsom looks like the real bad Genius here. personal / party political goals are more important than the truth and the fate of the whole country.. The total defence capability will diminish.

Move on too this particular Australian MP: Dr. Dennis Jensen. This was the man who came out in the open with the RAND report.. A report about the performance of US Air Forces consisting of F22, JSF, Super Hornets, many  tankers and some other high value targets like AWACS. vs the Chinese Air Forces who had (in the game simulation!) attacked Taiwan. and the US went to the…… rescue…!

In the mock battle, the JSF, F22 and Super Hornets were dubbed the blue team and had to defend an attack by a red team, made up of Russian built Sukhoi fighters.

The results are classified, but Lateline has obtained an email from a former RAAF flight test engineer who says he has been briefed on the exercise.

Look at the presentation of the results here: 2008 RAND Pacific View Air Combat Briefing

  • assessment of the RAND simulation page 40 – 52,
  • conclusions page 53/64
  • Also interesting back-up slides:
    • Stealth and radar + alternative measures too catch the “bird” page 62 – 65,
    • Air base distribution (in the Pacific. capable of operating the JSF/F22 because high tech infrastructure is needed) page 66/67
    • big What iF 1?: what if the Chinese decide to launch a preemptive strike on US airbases in Japan…. page  70 – 74
    • big What iF 2?: What if the Chinese (thanks to the small number of US AAM missiles on-board JSF and F22 will get in close range of the surviving US aircraft, including tankers, AWACS and very expensive JSF and F22 aircraft? (who have lost all their AMRAAM missiles in the first waves? page 75 – 81
    • Fuel consumption of missions from Kadena in Japan to Taiwan / China: Slide 88 – 90

PETER GOON (except from email to Dr Steve Gumley, August 28, 2008): Red Force dominated the exercise going up against two versions of Blue Force, both of which were roundly defeated. One way the Red Force summation of events has been described is that ‘… it was like clubbing baby seals’.

“In addition to this rather blunt Red Force summation, the war gaming exercise demonstrated the JSF aircraft were next to useless while the Super Hornets of both Blue forces were seriously and significantly overmatched (a.k.a. ‘useless’).

“Hundreds of Blue Force aircraft were lost in the first twenty minutes.”

Well this is the same Australian MP who warned about this report, which was kept secret by all governments including the Dutch. When it came out, they denied it was an “official” study. But one of the Australian Air Force members who participated in this study has been sacked.

Well lets have a look what this very well informed MP has to say: Youtube: The JSF Program and its Failures

Lets finish with a good description of Ms. Eijsink herself about the un democratic way the Dutch people are informed about the JSF and husled into a project which will definitely destroy all (independent) fighting capability of the whole Dutch Armed forces:

The hook is inn!

Lees verder

No strings attached?

BjFkumUCMAEPIVi

The recent news about Russia’s handling of the Crimean crisis – The annexation of the Crimean peninsula, threats towards the rest of Ukraine and several other EU and NATO member states (with “Russian related minorities”) – looks like a well planned and easy executed plan.  Strangely enough just weeks after the fantastic and “joyful” Olympic games just a couple of km over the border… It almost looks like an enormous cover- up operation. Keeping the west busy, preoccupied mainly with the Antigay laws in Russia. But not so much with human rights in general, Howe come? LGBT and other Liberal western (US + EU) where trying to do their utmost to raise attention for their “personal” interest. LGBT propaganda

Double standards?
Here a fragment of Dutch television program the “world turns through” (DWDD) where Paul de Leeuw told that every Dutch person going to the Olympic games should (MUST) be against this and protest there! He said: “I want respect!” the next thing he did was: change the text of Y.M.C.A of the Village People into ‘It’s fun to stay at the I am so gay’. Followed by the number ‘I Want to break free’ from Queen. The third number was: Putin? Who the fuck is Putin?.. not really sounding respectful isn’t it?   In other countries we see the same things. Demanding respect.. While not respecting others or other opinions… but all related to LGBT…

According to available statistics, the most frequent victims of group-biased hate speech violence in the EU are the Catholic Church and its faithful. With this I do not refer to “normal” cases of theft or vandalism, but to incidents in which anti-Christian hatred is the primary motivation.

In many cases, the perpetrators of such crimes are self-styled women’s rights or gay rights activists. For them, such incidents are an easy way to gain public attention. The risk of criminal prosecution, let alone meaningful sanctions, appears to be very small. Besides the incident in Bologna, recent cases in the EU include the assault of gay rights activists against the Archbishop of Brussels and the desecration of a Church in Rome. In Latin America, similar incidents were recently reported fromSantiago de Chile and from the Argentinian cities of Buenos AiresLa PlataSan Juan del Cuyo andPosadas.

The answer to the question: “Putin? Who the fuck is Putin?” is very obvious: Putin is one hell of a chess player!

1517560_672546266121469_718952749_n

No to Violence!
Of course I’m against all forms of violence. Violence from Rusian government or anti gay organizations, against certain people (in this case LGBT) nor violence by LGBT protesters against other minded people like elderly priests….

What I am against is that some people tell “us” that one issue ((LGBT) is more important than others.. e.g.:

  1. Syrian refugee’s,
  2. Killing of Christians in Nigeria by Boko Haram,
  3. keeping North Korean people  imprisoned and brainwashed. (btw also killing people when they supposed to be Christians),
  4. Suppressing Kurdish people by Turkish government (isn’t that the same thing they say Israël is doing?)
  5. Turkey number two: unlawful annexation of Northern Cyprus.
  6. China: annexation and “using” Tibet… and several other area’s contested..
  7. China, again: Bullying and suppressing smaller ASEAN countries n the SE Chinese Sea?
  8. Attacking/invading of a sovereign nation (Ukraine)?

Yes to Human rights – ALL Human Rights!
A prime-minister of Turkey who puts away an international well respected (NATO and EU collegues) military officer-corps of some 320 officers incl (retired) generals without a personal trial, based on unclear “proof” the same for critical Journalists in the same country… And yet we see our (LGBT-loving minister of Foreign Affairs Frans Timmermans saying wonderfull things about Turkey joining the EU.. and the fantastic progress it has made to reach “EU” standards…)

The same minister Timmermans wrote a new Human Rights whitepaper to lay down a new Foreign Policy on Human Rights. All human rights used to be equally important but not for our FM Timmermans. No he prioritizes the rights of some over others. The title of the whitepaper therefore is strange to say the least: Human rights policy – Justice and respect for allJoel Voordewind MP of the Christian Union wrote an opinion article (GT) on this matter. I quote this fragment:

“The right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion is probably the most precious of all human rights.” This statement is Arcot Krishnaswami, the UN Special Protractor on the prevention of discrimination and protection of minorities.

The Human Rights whitepaper of Minister Timmermans is thus at odds, as evidenced by the headline ” Freedom of religion is no longer a priority . ” According to the press release of the Minister, the protection of human rights defenders, those who stand up for the  rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people and standing up for equal rights for women will be a priority. Freedom of religion is lacking in that list. The paper thus seems to suggest that you can shop within the whole catalog of human rights.

Just compare the ammount of attention in the document between LGBT, Women-rights, SRHR compared to : Freedom of religion and belief…while it looks to me that it is factual proven that there are far more people who suffer disrespect, mistreatment and even murder because they believe different that they supposed to believe.. and realy read the “chapter about this freedom of religion and belief… its more about having the right NOT to believe at all.. and look at the first sentence.. people are  severely restricted… well in fact people are killed for their believes, they are taken in prisson, they are murdered by their familymembers. Just ask Open Doors International and these are only prosecuted Christians, let alone all other beliefs..

3.6 Freedom of religion and belief

Three-quarters of the world population live in countries in which freedom of religion and belief is severely restricted by state or non-state actors. The Netherlands stands by the principle that every individual must have the freedom to express his or her identity, as informed by religious or other beliefs: this includes the right to hold theist, non-theist or atheist convicti­ons and the right to change one’s faith. The Netherlands champions the separation of church and state, and opposes any restrictions imposed on the rights of children, LGBT people or women in the name of religious or traditional values. The government holds fast to an inclusive approach to human rights, without the exclusion of any specific group. After all, human rights apply to all, and excluding a particular group can undermine the universality of human rights. (Editorial: Isn’t this a Contradictio in terminis?)

• In multilateral forums, the Netherlands seeks to promote freedom of religion and belief and opposes any action that could undermine it.

• The Netherlands pursues a bilateral enhanced policy focus in the sphere of freedom of religion in certain countries: China, Egypt, India and Kazakhstan (since 2009), and Armenia, Nigeria, North Korea, Pakistan and Sudan (since 2012)

This is the FULL Chapter on Freedom of religion and belief, page 35, a half page; compare it to the rest. Who wrote this paper? looks like. sponsored by…..!

Lees verder

The Future of China’s Expeditionary Operations

Originally posted on the site Seidlers Sicherheitspolitik“. This article was published there at first. Written by Felix F. Seidler. Felix is a fellow at the Institute for Security Policy, University of Kiel, Germany and runs the site Seidlers Sicherheitspolitik“.

China’s maritime top priorities will remain in the East and South China Seas. Nevertheless, extended expeditionary ambitions are real. However, more assertive Chinese behavior on blue-waters does not mean that great power conflict is inevitable. Coming East Asia Summits may be a forum for finding solutions.

Soviet_Navy_Bases_1984-e1392589207263

Global Soviet naval presence in the 1980s

Back to the USSR?
China does not seek an overseas presence as the Soviets did in the 1980s. They simply cannot do it, yet. The USSR needed decades to establish a global naval presence. For China, it would not be different. However, the world is watching how China is on the march to reach the status of a ‘medium global force projection navy’, comparable to the British and French. In terms of numbers, but not in terms of quality, Beijing’s navy has already surpassed Paris’ and London’s and the naval armament goes on:

During 2013 alone, over fifty naval ships were laid down, launched, or commissioned, with a similar number expected in 2014. Major qualitative improvements are occurring within naval aviation and the submarine force, which are increasingly capable of striking targets hundreds of miles from the Chinese mainland. — Jesse L. Karotkin, “Trends in China’s naval modernization – US China economic and security review commission testimony“, p. 1.

Moreover, ‘medium global force projection navy’ does not necessarily mean, that there are warships in all oceans. It means that China could globally project power on one or two theaters simultaneously, if its’ political masters so decide. Besides the question, whether a Chinese naval presence outside the Pacific really would have a serious impact, political prestige must be taken into account. Britain’s Indian Ocean presence does not make a difference. However, London decides to go there, just because they can and to pretend that Britain is still a global power. Beijing’s political and military elites might feel the same way. Often criticized is China’s military bureaucracy and corruption. However, for naval power projection, it does not matter, whether Chinese officers in Xingjang or Tibet are corrupt Maoist bureaucrats.

The People’s Liberation Army Navy’s (PLAN) second aircraft carrier is under construction. Given a six years construction time, the new carrier will be commissioned in the early 2020s. Present reports say, moreover, that China aims to build in total at least four carriers. However, except a research program for nuclear-propulsion, there is yet no credible evidence that one of the carriers will be nuclear-powered.

liaoning-003-e1392763566795

PLAN carrier strike group

PLAN carrier strike groups
Accompanied by two destroyers, two frigates and two submarines, China’s carrier has been deployed for the first time to the South China Sea. Militarily, Liaoning’s trip may just have been an exercise. Politically, however, it was a clear message from Beijing: Our carrier can go to the South China Sea and we are there to stay. This has been the first “show of force” by a Chinese carrier strike group. More will follow. Simple exercises could have been done in closer home waters.

However, the more China invests in carriers, the less money will be available for other capabilities, like cruise missiles or submarines. Criticism on carrier acquisition often ignores that, after World War II, carriers have not been used in open sea-battle between major powers. Instead, carrier operations were always targeted on weaker countries or the support of land operations. Due to the lack of combat experience, the Chinese would never act that irrational that they would try to take on a US carrier strike group in open battle. If they would, it would end up in a slaughter. Chinese carriers would primarily go for show-of-missions targeted on inferior Indo-Pacific states, like Vietnam or the Philippines.

Moreover, in the earthquake, typhoon and volcano plagued Indo-Pacific, Chinese carriers are much more likely to go for disaster relief, rather than combat. Rather than fighting them, Chinese carriers will join their US counterparts in delivering water, food and medical care. Naval diplomacy and outreach to partners like Brazil will come along, too. However, wherever China’s carriers go, they will have ‘close friends’: US attack submarines.

Indian Ocean deployments
Since 2008, the PLAN has a permanent naval presence in the Indian Ocean. Officially, to fight piracy. However, side effect is the build-up of a new overseas presence. To understand what China could (not) do in the Indian Ocean it makes sense to look back what the Soviets did. Their naval presence in the Indian Ocean (late 1960s – 1991) was normally between 5-10 surface warships and a few submarines. However, there were no Soviet carrier operations, just due to the lack of carriers. Moscow’s intention were show of force, surveillance of US activities (like the SIGINT station on Diego Garcia) and, in case of war, open up an additional naval front to bind US capabilities, raid US supply lines and prevent US SSBN from striking Central Asia.

Changbaishan-e1392764228933 

An undated Chinese amphibious warship Changbaishan. Chinese state media claimed the ship was part a three ship flotilla that patrolled off the shore of Malaysia (Photo: Chinese Ministry of Defense).

China faces the same challenges as the Soviets did: Access through vulnerable choke points; no direct supply line by land and therefore the need for bases or port access; no air bases for immediate air support. In consequence, China’s approach would not be too different from the Soviet’s. Even though the Somali pirates are in retreat and international counter-piracy operations will be downsized, China is likely to somehow keep an Indian Ocean presence out of its national interests.

The recent Indian Ocean exercises of the Chinese LPD Changbaishan accompanied by two destroyers underline Beijing’s extended expeditionary ambitions. That one of the PLAN’s most sophisticated vessels was sent, henceforth, means that further intentions exist. However, for a real deployment such a squadron would need supply ships and tankers.

Nevertheless, in India China’s exercises caused concern about the Andaman and Nicobar Islands. Beyond India, weaker Indo-Pacific countries like Sri Lanka, the Maldives, the Philippines and Vietnam were psychological targets of this show-of-force. In Australia, Changbaishan’s Indian Ocean tour led to the perception of a change its strategic environment. Although a quick and limited tour, the PLAN’s Indian Ocean exercises obviously already matter.

Thus, we will see at least one, probably two PLAN frigates or destroyers in the Indian Ocean accompanied by a supply ship, maybe even an LPD. Port access may be granted by Pakistan, Yemen, Sri Lanka or Kenya. Thereafter, the PLAN could increase its presence gradually based on the gained experience, e.g. ship refueling on open waters. However, that does not mean that China will start fighting in the Indian Ocean. The most likely missions are counter-piracy, military diplomacy, disaster relief, evacuation of Chinese citizens and contribution to other international operations.

094-Jin-Class-SSBN-e1392765660773

There are three 094 Jin Class SSBN parked at Hainan (Photo: China Defense Blog).

PLAN submarines, due to their operational range probably only SSN, will continue to operate in the Indian Ocean. However, different to the Soviets there will no Chinese SSBN west of Malacca Strait. Why send them straight into the range of Indian and US anti-submarine warfare capabilities? In home waters, the Chinese can protect their second strike capability with surface warships and air forces.

However, the good news is that China is not going to freeride on stability in Indian Ocean provided by others, namely the US. Beyond the discussions about conflict, China`s presence will contribute to safe and secure sea lanes and to stability in the wider Indian Ocean area. Simply because it is in China’s national interest.

Beyond the Indo-Pacific
After numerous friendly visits and an evacuation operation in Libya 2011, the PLAN is now engaged in a real operation in the Mediterranean. Together with Danish, Norwegian, British and Russian warships, one PLAN frigate is protecting Danish and Norwegian freighters transporting Syria’s chemical weapons to an US vessel for the c-weapons’ destruction. China’s Mediterranean deployment is hardly motivated by altruism to what Europeans call “international responsibility”. Instead, the Chinese are just taking any opportunity they get to gain more operational experience.

In addition, China was only be able to deploy to the Mediterranean due to its Indian Ocean presence. Nevertheless, it is remarkable that the PLAN operates in European homewaters from Cyprus, an EU member state. Interestingly, a Greek follower commented on Seidlers Sicherheitspolitik that EU is almost irrelevant in the Eastern Mediterranean. Given his’ perspective is right, China stepped into a vaccuum provided by Europe. That is how maritime power shifts become real. However, once Syria’s chemical weapons are destroyed, probably in late 2014 or early 2015, China’s Mediterranean presence will end.

Moreover, we have seen Brazilian-Chinese exercises in the South Atlantic. Brasilia and Beijing seem to be happy with their naval cooperation, which makes its extension very likely. However, except the cooperation will Brazil and some friendly port visits, the debate about a Chinese presence in the Atlantic has remained purely hypothetical – and it will remain so for long.

houbei-e1392762989770

Several People’s Liberation Army Navy Houbei missile boats.

Win wars without fighting
If Peaceful Rise ever was real, it is definitely over. China’s latest Defence White Paper said clearly that China aims to win local wars under the conditions of informationization. Moreover, the White Paper outlined that China would not attack first, but, if attacked, it would strike back. However, the White Paper left open what China considers an attack. An attack does not have to be kinetical strike, but rather China could consider other states’ activities in waters claimed by China as an attack on its national sovereignty.

After China’s soft power was ruined by not immediately responding to the need for disaster relief at the Philippines (they send their hospital ship very late and only after harsh criticism from abroad), China lets hard power speak. Obviously, Beijing came to the conclusion that it is time to openly pursue a more assertive track, including the use of military power, which does not necessarily mean the use of force.

While talking about Chinas’s military rise, many observers mistake the use of military power for use of military force. Using force is always is always inefficient, due to the costs involved. However, as Sun Tzu outlined, the most efficient way to win a war is not to fight it, but rather allocate military means in a way to enforce one’s will on the other side without firing a shot. That is what China is trying to do. They do not follow the Clausewitzi’an dictum of open war as politics by other means.

China’s recently established Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) can be considered as a test of this approach. They extended their sphere of influence also by the use of military power, but without the use of force. As the test worked quite well from Beijing’s perspective, an ADIZ in the South China Sea could follow. However, therefore China would need much more tanker aircraft for aerial refueling and aircraft carriers for enforcing an ADIZ in the southern South China Sea.

China is now actively seeking, with the use of military power as a mean among others, control over areas it has not controlled before. More assertive Chinese behavior and Japanese responses increase the likelihood of unintended conflicts. The US, Japan and South Korea will have to react on everything China is doing, because they have to save their faces. For that reason, maritime Asia needs a collective system of conflict prevention.

East Asia Summit: Forum for solutions
Maritime security will be a geopolitical top priority through this decade and beyond. In the 2020s, China and India, both with at least three aircraft carriers, will operate sophisticated blue-water navies. China will project power in the Indian Ocean, while India in response will demonstrate political will in the Western Pacific. Great power conflicts, with or without the use of military force, looms on the horizon, but is not inevitable. Therefore, maritime security will remain on forthcoming East Asia Summit’s (EAS) agendas.

Asian countries, in particular China and Japan, should agree to establish military-to-military hotlines for the opportunity to de-escalate unintended naval incidents. In case of conflict prevention mechanisms, formal treaties are unlikely, because they would be hard to ratify in all states involved. However, by programs for mutual trust building and collective eschewal from un-announced unilateral measures, the EAS could establish a consensus for an informal modus vivendi in maritime Asia. An informal modus vivendi’s greatest plus would be that such an approach would allow all sides to save their faces.

Moreover, resource exploration (oil, gas, fish, minerals) have to be put on the EAS’ agenda. With ongoing globalization, increasing population, rising wealth and economic growth, sea-borne trade will grow even further, making these global economic lifelines even more vital for everyone. Now under research, deep-sea mining in the Indian and Pacific Ocean is likely to start in the 2020s. Competition about these resources will lead to the necessity to discuss how conflict can be prevented and how these resources can be used in a way that all party’s interests are suited. If Asia manages to increase maritime interdependence in trade and resources among all countries and for mutual benefit, this makes armed conflict less likely. No country will strike its own lifelines.

China to build South China Sea military base in waters claimed by Philippines and Vietnam

Dit zet wel aan tot denken, nietwaar? Ik ga hier in de toekomst meer aandacht aan besteden. Hou je vast!

China Daily Mail

Planned artificial island in South China Sea Planned artificial island in South China Sea

The following article was translated from Chinese media.

Sources say due to changes in the international situation and the need to resolve South China Sea issues, Chinese military have recently drawn up a plan to conduct reclamation at Mischief and Fiery Cross Reefs. The construction of the two artificial islands will serve the same purpose as a stationary aircraft carrier, but the strategic gains will be very big.

Mischief reef will be a fishery centre at the South China Sea to provide fishing and fish farming income enough to recover the construction costs so that the construction of the artificial islands will not be a financial burden on the state.

The artificial island at Fiery Cross Reef will be an unreplaceable military base with great strategic significance due to its location and size. Such a base will realise the value of the…

View original post 231 woorden meer

Maritieme krijgsmacht: van levensbelang!

Onze historie en onze toekomst
Alle studies die de afgelopen jaren zijn uitgevoerd naar het nut en noodzaak van Defensie zijn het er wel zo’n beetje over eens: Nederland is de 16e handelsmacht in de wereld. We zijn dat voornamelijk omdat wij als geen ander land de wereldzeeën bevaren, goed zijn in het bouwen van havens en andere infrastructuren en gewoon goede handelaren zijn.  Dat zijn we altijd al geweest….

Eendraghtdereu_10

Dit kenmerk heeft ook een groot nadeel (want ieder voordeel heb zijn nadeel….) onze afhankelijkheid van de zee, van vrije handel overzee over grote afstand is zeer groot. Wij verdienen voor meer dan 80% onze boterham in afhankelijkheid van de zee.. één blik op het bijgevoegde kaartje zou al voldoende realiteitszin kunnen geven en besef van wat dat voor ons als land betekend.

international-maritime-route

In dit kaartje zijn de Sea Lines of Communication (SLOC) heel duidelijk zichtbaar, inclusief de zogenaamde choking points. Deze locaties zijn van fundamenteel belang voor de wereldwijde doorvoer van goederen. Dit zijn plekken als Gibraltar, Rotterdam, Suez, Hormuz en Malacca (strait). Als er op die plekken opstoppingen komen, of er is piraterij – of nog erger – sprake van oorlogshandelingen. Dan heeft dat voor ons als land direct gevolgen. Niet alleen financieel. Er zal dan sprake kunnen zijn van het niet langer beschikbaar zijn van brandstoffen, grondstoffen, voedsel schaarste, Maar ook belangrijke onderdelen voor machines en voertuigen zullen beperkter beschikbaar zijn, puur omdat wij die dingen niet meer zelf kunnen (of eigenlijk willen) maken.

Lees verder