A couple of months ago the ONI (Office of Naval Intelligence) reported that many of the military installations being built by the PLA in the disputed Paracel and Spratly islands seem to be defensive. That the chi-coms plan to use their military to defend them. China seems to be doing what Imperial Japan did back during the 1920's and 1930's when they were given a war prize of the former German territory in the Central Pacific the "Mandate Islands" aka Micronesian Islands where most of the fighting took place during WW ll from 1943 to 1945. The Japanese spent twenty years militarizing the Central Pacific Mandate Islands. May explain why the Marine Corps said they are going back to their roots and for the past few years have been conducting WW ll era type amphibious exercises in the Mariana Islands.
Update: Breaking News. And the Chinese military buildup continues in the South China Sea. Janes is reporting the same story. -> China deploys HQ-9 surface-to-air missiles to Woody Island http://www.janes.com/article/58071/china-deploys-hq-9-surface-to-air-missiles-to-woody-island The Chi-Coms HQ-9 family of missiles are clearly derived from the Russian S-300PMU / SA-10C Grumble and S-300PMU1 / SA-20A Gargoyle family of SAMs, but with numerous unique design changes. Cited kinematic performance typically falls in between the SA-10C and SA-20A, making the HQ-9 systems credible equivalents to various MIM-104 Patriot variants. Like its Russian ancestors, the HQ-9 is designed from the outset for “hide, shoot and scoot” operations, with high mobility vehicles employed for all critical battery components. In operational planning terms, the HQ-9 should be treated as equivalent to early model SA-20 variants, with the caveat that the different acquisition radar package will impose unique planning requirements, especially in terms of EWSP and SOJ requirements. The possibility of FT-2000 antiradiation rounds being mixed into HQ-9/FD-2000 TEL payloads presents a series of operational risks all of its own. The high mobility of the HQ-9 family of weapons will present similar SEAD/DEAD challenges as seen with late model SA-10, SA-20 and SA-21 variants, especially if a disciplined “hide, shoot and scoot” doctrine is followed by HQ-9 operators. Chinese sources claim that the HQ-9 family of systems employ much newer computing technology than imported Russian S-300PMU/PMU1/PMU2 systems. This suggests a equal or superior computing capability for signal processing, data processing and guidance support. The HQ-9 family of systems should not be underestimated - they will be credible equivalents to the SA-20 family of systems. It's all here -> http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-HQ-9-FD-FT-2000.html
Woody Islands is one of the islands of the contested Paracel Islands that both Vietnam and Taiwan claim sovereignty over.
The Paracels are a whole series of islands spread out over a few thousand square miles. This particular island is squarely inside China's EEZ as recognized by international treaty.
A maritime economic zone isn't the same as territorial waters. China or the ruskies could put a thousand war ships 13 miles off shore of California and we couldn't do jack (*)(*)(*)(*) about it even though our EEZ extends 100 miles from our low tide shore line.
So I guess it would be okay if they put military forces on say Johnston Atoll or Midway then, right? Because EEZ's don't matter...
Johnston Atoll and Midway are U.S. territory. I've been to Johnston Atoll. Never set foot on it but sailed pass it. The Navy sent out a patrol boat to see what we were doing in the area. This was back in 75 I think. The island was being used to store some nasty (*)(*)(*)(*) back then. You could see the igloo type bunkers from sea. The last I have heard, Johnston Atoll was up for sale.
And Woody Island is Chinese territory and has been recognized as such by international treaty for years.
Who is this treaty between, couldn't be with Vietnam. Is it with Mexico and Niger ? Can you provide that treaty ? The sovereignty of the islands are in dispute. The RVN contested the chi-coms when their navy was hanging around the Parcels islands during the Vietnam War and a little naval battle was fought and the RVN Navy technically withdrew. Since the chi-coms are now actually occupying the islands and no one is willing to fight for them except maybe the chi-coms themselves, under the Law of Nations, the Parcels should be recognized as commie Chinese territory. Big win for China, a whole lot of oil and fish. But China militarizing the islands and that isn't a good thing.
The Paracel Islands are hundreds of islands spread across thousands of square miles. Not all the islands are in dispute. Woody Island lies clearly inside waters designated by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea as being within the Chinese EEZ and therefore are Chinese territory.
What if Vietnam were allowed to claim Diamond Island in the Parcels, wouldn't Vietnam's EEZ overlap China's EEZ ?
Yes it would. Which is why Vietnam's traditional claim has been to the Western Crescent Islands in the Paracels. Seriously, China has controlled Woody Island since the 50's. They had a sole claim on it until Taiwan and Vietnam claimed it later.
The French claimed the islands before WW ll as being part of French Indochina. Vietnam has a good argument with that one.
There was no sovereign Vietnam, Laos or Cambodia before 1954, just French Indochina. -> https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/40/Indochine_française_(1913).jpg
and china can claim base on history dating back several hundreds year. this tic tac can go both ways, you know what they say control is 90% of possession. also by your argument the east china sea dispute between japan/china/Taiwan, they all has good argument, specially Taiwan/china
In 1944, a top-secret military operation code named "Project Seal," involved setting up explosives to destroy coral reefs around Pacific islands would often generate large waves. This idea of creating large man-made waves was later referred to as the tsunami bomb. (From another thread about a SAM missile base) Given these Chinese based missile batteries are set up on what amounts to man-made sand bars.. I suppose it might be feasible to create an artificial tsunami capable of reaching 33' in height. Never underestimate the destructive power of water. Although the tsunami bomb idea from 1944 was never used against the enemy, tests conducted around the coastal areas of New Zealand (with their permission) indicated this was feasible. Something worth evaluating anyway, given the technology existing in 1944 to create a tsunami bomb, has advanced much further today. .
That true. Vattel's "Law of Nation" says to have legal claim on territory a sovereign must occupy and either cultivate or extract it's natural resources. China has been fishing in the Paracels and Spratly's for hundreds of years. And the chi-coms do plan to extract the oil from these islands. But militarizing the islands is a red flag. China is doing the same thing that Imperial Japan did during the 1920's and 30's militarizing the Mandate Islands.
I'm more worry about militarizing Spartly island rather than paracel islands, since the latter is 200 miles from china, and its under their control since 50's, they also has a lot history to back up the claim. Also 250mile north of paracel is a major china naval base, so they want something secure near south. spartly on the other hand is Hundreds-thousand mile from china and its much closer to phillippine/malasia etc, china has less argument on those.
I saw the radar stuff, not much we can do there, especially if they claim radar use for commercial purpose in peace time. also do we want a conflict in ScS that we don't even have claim on it, to help Vietnam or phillippine, who each also claim half of ScS. short of china invading phillippine main land I don't want us risk live in ScS for Vietnam claim. as for freedom of navigation china never has issue with it, consider $5T good go through ScS, majority are head to or from china, they are more interest in open sea lane in that region than us, their economy depend on it via trade in ScS.
