On Thursday, the US sailed a warship near the Chinese-controlled Paracel Islands in the South China Sea amid heightened tensions between Washington and Beijing in the region.
China’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA) said it drove away the guided-missile destroyer USS Milius after it “illegally” sailed near the disputed islands. The US Navy’s Seventh Fleet disputed China’s claims and said the Milinus “was not expelled.”
The US doesn’t recognize most of China’s claims to the South China Sea and began challenging them during the Obama administration by sending warships near Chinese-controlled islands, maneuvers dubbed “Freedom of Navigation Operations.”
China and several of its Southeast Asian neighbors have overlapping claims to the South China Sea. The Paracel Islands are claimed by China, Taiwan, and Vietnam.
The dispute has become a major source of tensions between the US and China as Washington has become involved and has increased its military activity in the South China Sea.
The US also backs the Philippines’ claims against China and has been deepening military cooperation with Manila. The US and the Philippines signed a deal last month that will give the US military access to four more bases in the Philippines, including one in Palawan, a Philippine province facing the South China Sea.
China is strongly against the US military expansion in the Philippines and has made that clear to Manila. Beijing is not happy that some of the new bases will be in northern areas of the Philippines, facing Taiwan.
Military bases are relics of the past. They are designed more to control the natives than be used for possible war against a super power that’s extremely close.
Nonstop provovations, because why not, nothing can ever go wrong with these….
“Freedom of Navigation” means freedom for us and no freedom for you. It’s a naval blockade of China. Peace has no chance. Take a look at this 2013 analysis from the Carnegie Endowment for International
PeaceWar: https://carnegieendowment.org/2013/02/12/stranglehold-context-conduct-and-consequences-of-american-naval-blockade-of-china-pub-51135An oil blockade brought about war between Japan and the U.S.
Maybe instead of expanding, it is time for us to contract?…….
And not only militarily. The address to climate change has to be based on a no-growth economy.
Of course neither will happen.
No growth economy will happen when it’s too hot for most people to work outside during growing season. Some think technical fixes like computer operated machines will be able to feed an auto based culture with air conditioned super markets. I doubt this option.
Digitized automation could help in adapting, as one part of a generalized program of redistribution and austerity, no? In any even there is going to be a mass die -off, only immensely greater if the present dispensation and its king rats perdure.
I heard about this. It was the USS Ahole, as I recall. Uncle Sam just can’t resist sticking his erection into every hole in sight, can he.
Don’t forget Japan. They are arming up, signing mutual defense pacts with the Aussies to protect South China sea trade routes and provide Taiwan with it too.
“On 23 December 2022, the Japanese cabinet unveiled its 2023 budget for the Japanese Self-Defense Forces (JSDF), totalling 6.8 trillion yen ($52 billion). The new budget is 26 per cent higher than the JSDF budget for 2022, the largest year-on-year nominal increase in planned military spending since at least 1952.
The 2023 budget is the first under Japan’s new National Security Strategy (NSS), which was also published in December 2022 along with a new National Defense Strategy. The NSS includes a target, announced a few weeks earlier, to bring spending on ‘defence and other outlays’ up to 2 per cent of gross domestic product (GDP) by 2027. This reflects a dramatic shift in Japan’s military policy. Under the post-war senshu boei (officially translated as ‘exclusively defence-oriented policy’), Japan has capped military spending at 1 per cent of GDP and limited its military capabilities to what is needed to repel an armed attack on its territory…..
…..The government has identified the perceived worsening security environment around Japan as the main justification for ramping up the country’s military spending. It considers China’s growing assertiveness; North Korea’s unpredictable military activities; and Russia’s aggressiveness, exemplified by the invasion of Ukraine, as the three major threats in the surrounding region that pose serious security concerns for Japan.
To counter these ‘unilateral changes’ to the rule-based international order and ongoing military modernization campaigns in neighbouring countries (primarily China), the boost to Japan’s military aims to prepare the JSDF to take the primary responsibility for dealing with an invasion of Japan by 2027. The JSDF aims to acquire new weapon systems for counterstrike capabilities, allowing it to target enemy territory following an attack on Japan. Hence, Tokyo plans to invest heavily in updating the JSDF’s maritime and air systems such as aircraft, ships and long-range missiles.
The government also plans to increase self-reliance by encouraging the Japanese arms industry to expand its domestic manufacturing and maintenance capacity. Currently, Japan is capable of producing all of its planned military ships and almost 90 per cent of its planned land systems, but relies on US imports for many aircraft and missiles. This is unlikely to change in the next five years: all the 37 major ships to be procured during 2023–27 are planned to be produced locally, whereas over 80 per cent of the planned aircraft and most of the planned long-range missiles will be procured from US arms producers. Already in 2023, Japan plans to purchase 16 F-35 combat aircraft, part of a much larger package of 65 F-35s it plans to acquire from the USA before 2027.https://www.sipri.org/commentary/topical-backgrounder/2023/proposed-hike-japans-military-expenditure
US war ships will be sitting on the Ocean floor when the HYPER SONIC MISSILES begin to hit them.
Sure, if the Chinese wants to sink US ships they can, but do you think they would – just because they were sailing in what amounts to international waters?
I mean, they might want to provoke a total trade embargo, but I would not think it was in their interest to do so.