China Rhetoric Run Wild Asserts US South China Sea Ops "solely at the pleasure of the PLA"

Chinese state media warns US warships of 'carrier killer missiles'; US Navy 'not intimidated' reads the American Military News headline.

The actual quote from the Chinese propaganda source "Global Times" is

Beijing-based military expert Li Jie told the Global Times that the US is attempting to show off its military capability to the world, threaten China and enforce its hegemonic policies.

The South China Sea is fully within the grasp of the Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA), and any US aircraft carrier movement in the region is solely at the pleasure of the PLA, which has a wide selection of anti-aircraft carrier weapons like the DF-21D and DF-26 "aircraft carrier killer" missiles, analysts noted.

In response to the Pentagon's statement, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Zhao Lijian said at a regular press conference on Friday that Xisha Islands are indisputably China's inherent territory. China's military exercises in the seas off Xisha Islands are within our sovereignty and beyond reproach. The fundamental cause of instability in the South China Sea is the large-scale military activities and flexing of muscles by some non-regional country that lies tens of thousands of miles away.

Since the phrase "global commons" seems to be one that the Chinese government needs to learn, here's one from a UN document -

the global commons – those resource domains that do not fall within the jurisdiction of any one particular country, and to which all nations have access

More specifically, from the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) regarding the "High Seas:"

Article 86

Application of the provisions of this Part

The provisions of this Part apply to all parts of the sea that are not included in the exclusive economic zone, in the territorial sea or in the internal waters of a State, or in the archipelagic waters of an archipelagic State. This article does not entail any abridgement of the freedoms enjoyed by all States in the exclusive economic zone in accordance with article 58.


Article 87

Freedom of the high seas

1. The high seas are open to all States, whether coastal or land-locked. Freedom of the high seas is exercised under the conditions laid down by this Convention and by other rules of international law. It comprises, inter alia, both for coastal and land-locked States:

(a) freedom of navigation;

(b) freedom of overflight;

(c) freedom to lay submarine cables and pipelines, subject to Part VI;

(d) freedom to construct artificial islands and other installations permitted under international law, subject to Part VI;

(e) freedom of fishing, subject to the conditions laid down in section 2;

(f) freedom of scientific research, subject to Parts VI and XIII.

2. These freedoms shall be exercised by all States with due regard for the interests of other States in their exercise of the freedom of the high seas, and also with due regard for the rights under this Convention with respect to activities in the Area.


Article 88

Reservation of the high seas for peaceful purposes

The high seas shall be reserved for peaceful purposes.


Article 89

Invalidity of claims of sovereignty over the high seas

No State may validly purport to subject any part of the high seas to its sovereignty.

Further, China's efforts to assert sovereignty over the area enclosed by its magical "9 Dashed Line" map has been rejected, as set out here:

An international tribunal in The Hague delivered a sweeping rebuke on Tuesday of China’s behavior in the South China Sea, including its construction of artificial islands, and found that its expansive claim to sovereignty over the waters had no legal basis.

The landmark case, brought by the Philippines, was seen as an important crossroads in China’s rise as a global power and in its rivalry with the United States, and it could force Beijing to reconsider its assertive tactics in the region or risk being labeled an international outlaw. It was the first time the Chinese government had been summoned before the international justice system.

In its most significant finding, the tribunal rejected China’s argument that it enjoys historic rights over most of the South China Sea. That could give the governments of Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, Taiwan and Vietnam more leverage in their own maritime disputes with Beijing.

The tribunal also said that China had violated international law by causing “irreparable harm” to the marine environment, endangering Philippine ships and interfering with Philippine fishing and oil exploration.
***
The main issue before the panel was the legality of China’s claim to waters within a “nine-dash line” that appears on official Chinese maps and encircles as much as 90 percent of the South China Sea, an area the size of Mexico. The Philippines had asked the tribunal to find the claim to be in violation of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, which both China and the Philippines have ratified.

In its decision, the tribunal said any historic rights to the sea that China had previously enjoyed “were extinguished” by the treaty, which lays out rules for drawing zones of control over the world’s oceans based on distances to coastlines. The panel added that while China had used islands in the sea in the past, it had never exercised exclusive authority over the waters.

The panel also concluded that several disputed rocks and reefs in the South China Sea were too small for China to claim control of economic activities in the waters around them. As a result, it found, China was engaged in unlawful behavior in Philippine waters, including activities that had aggravated the dispute

As noted in that article, there is no enforcement mechanism for the ruling - except, it would seem, for all the other responsible nations of the world to continue to treat the Chinese claims as bogus and keep treating the bulk of the South China Sea as "high seas" over which China has no sovereign

Ronald Reagan and Nimitz Carrier Strike Groups steam in formation in the South China Sea,  demonstrating peaceful use of the "high seas" (U.S. Navy/MC3 Jason Tarleton)

rights.

Recently, India, has stated, according to the Times of India the South China Sea is an international waterway and part of the "global commons:"

Responding to questions on the security situation in South China Sea (SCS), the government on Thursday said its position had been clear and consistent the SCS was a part of global commons and India had an abiding interest in peace and stability in the region.

“We firmly stand for the freedom of navigation and overflight and unimpeded lawful commerce in these international waterways, in accordance with international law, notably UNCLOS,” said the MEA spokesperson.

China may or may not have the capability to do damage to U.S. and other forces operating in the South China Sea, but their blunt force approach to trying to enforce an illegal claim of sovereignty over big portions of the "high seas" by their smarmy threat of violence simply indicates the true nature of their corrupt government.

China's Outlaw Government

I keep thinking that these words could be forced to work with that awful "Pina Colada Song"

"If you like brutal dictators
And getting sent off to camps
If you're not into freedom
If you like being controlled
If you like being
In the ruins of fate
Then the CCP is what you've looked for
And it's too late to escape"

Or, as someone else put it:

America’s relations with China should proceed from the recognition that the Chinese government is lawless. China flouts the rule of law, not occasionally or incidentally but characteristically, because the government understands itself as the source of law and unconstrained by it. The problem of China reminds us of the deeper laws that all nations must respect and that determine whether or not our positive laws are legally just.

The list of CCP outrages grows daily. Let me put a few down just to get started:

1. All its claims to anything based on "historical use" are complete and utter garbage, especially those involving the South China Sea;
2. Its claims that their "man-made islands" in the South China Sea extending China's territorial lists in completely bogus;
3. Its treatment of its own minorities, especially but not limited to the Uighurs, is unconscionable;
4. Its treatment of Hong Kong and those there brave to seek freedom is purely tyrannical;
5. Its bullying concerning the ships, fishing fleets, and territories of the other nations abutting the South China Sea, including the use of its para-maritime forces, military grade "coast guard," and other assets borders on warring on those neighbors and often includes intrusion for unlawful purposes into the internationally recognized sovereign waters of those states;
6. Its persistent efforts to corrupt the governments of other nations through bribery, threats, and outright infiltration of research facilities to steal research;
7. China's government lies about everything all the time and then punishes those who would tell the truth;
8. Its Orwellian "social credit system" is an offense to freedom

More to follow and links will be provided.

New Ambitions? Chinese claiming Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan part of China

From an Indian news source Now, Chinese websites claim Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan part of China; draws ire of Central Asia

After claiming large portions of the South China Sea and Mt Everest, two Chinese

websites have been claiming that central Asian countries like Kyrgystan and Kazakhstan have been part of China and with Kazakhstan even "eager to return back to China".

Tuotiao.com headquartered in Beijing in a recently published article titled "Why didn't Kyrgyzstan return to China after gaining Independence?". It elaborated that under the Khan dynasty, 510,000 square kilometre of Kyrgystan, which means the entire country was part of Chinese lands but the Russian empire took over the territory.

The article explained that like Mongolia, Kyrgystan has been part of the Chinese territory.

Toutiao.com has a readership of 750 million and is China's largest mobile platform of content creation.

Meanwhile, Sohu.com, another major Chinese internet company headquartered in Beijing published an article which said: "Kazakhstan is located on territories that historically belong to China". This prompted an immediate summoning of the Chinese envoy to the country Zhang Xiao April 14 over the article.

Of course, China would like to have the territory through which its energy needs could be met and doesn't involve vulnerable sea routes. Kazakhstan does sit on an estimated 30 billion barrels of oil.

China is not into playing well with others.

South China Sea Political Mess Summed Up

What the South China Sea tells us about the new geopolitics of Southeast Asia from ASEAN Today

Beijing’s actions in the South China Sea, on the other hand, already offer key indications

of what this next stage of geopolitics in Southeast Asia will look like. As China projects its power amid the pandemic, Southeast Asian governments will increasingly see their economies and development defined by how they embrace or contest Beijing’s agenda.
***
China asserts rights to 90% of the land, water and seabed that falls within a boundary known as the nine-dash line, which stretches 2,000 kilometres from the Chinese mainland and comes within a few hundred kilometres of the Philippines, Malaysia and Vietnam. To support China’s claims, its military has also built over 3,000 acres of artificial islands over the past 10 years.

The Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague declared the claim illegal in 2016 after the Philippines brought a case under the 1982 Law of the Sea Convention. The court also determined that China’s moves to build artificial islands, still ongoing, are illegal under international law, due in part to their extremely detrimental environmental impacts.

Last week’s incident shows that China is doing all it can to pursue its geopolitical and economic agenda during the pandemic. Beijing isn’t waiting to see how the effects of COVID-19 play out. In cases where it can pursue “face mask diplomacy,” China is stepping into a new role as benefactor—sometimes at a cost, but without all the debt attached to Belt and Road projects.

China is using the time to turn its claims to the energy-rich territory into geopolitical realities. In late March, China’s Ministry of Natural Resources announced that it had extracted a world record-breaking amount of natural gas from gas hydrates in the South China Sea.

In the days prior to the incident last Thursday, Radio Free Asia reported that another Chinese coast guard ship was patrolling in an area of the South China Sea near the Philippines, inside the country’s exclusive economic zone (EEZ).

“As countries look inward or are distracted [by the COVID-19 pandemic], like the U.S. and Japan, China has taken advantage of that by increasing its activities in the South China Sea,” said Jose Antonio Custodio, defense analyst at the Institute of Policy, Strategy and Developmental Studies in Manila. “We may soon see more unilateral exploitation of our EEZ.”

Southeast Asian governments are already seeking support from one another as well as China to combat COVID-19—both in terms of the virus and its economic and development impacts. As ASEAN or as individual states, they’re unable to challenge Beijing’s aggression in the South China Sea.

This is indicative of how COVID-19 is cementing a geopolitics in which Southeast Asia’s prospects for development, security and trade are dictated by how its leaders support or reject Beijing’s goals. However long the pandemic lasts, ASEAN’s options for the future will be increasingly defined by how well governments balance domestic and Chinese interests and how well they partner with Beijing.

China apparently has a motto: "What we say is ours - is ours. What you say is yours - is ours."

In contrast to China, which seeks to shut off access to the South China Sea, even (or perhaps especially) to its neighbors, the U.S. and its allies have tried to keep the sea lines of commerce open and free. If there is any doubt that China is seeking to upset several hundred years of history, you don't have to look too far.