Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Philippines Defense Forces Forum. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Locked Topic
The Kalayaan, Panatag & other disputed islands; Future conflict zones?
Topic Started: Feb 2 2005, 08:00 PM (155,984 Views)
Parastriker
Member Avatar
Member
[ *  *  * ]
Well, at least we are taking actions to the extreme. This is good.
Success through information, victory through disinformation.

"Good leaders make efficient followers. Great leaders make good followers. But true leaders make leaders out of mere followers."

"Measuring the intelligence of a common internet user is as easy as looking at his/her grammar."
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
astro_boy2005
Member Avatar
Member
[ *  *  * ]
Parastriker
Apr 6 2012, 10:09 AM
Well, at least we are taking actions to the extreme. This is good.

We should start the construction ASAP, I reckon that come middle of the year where monsoon season starts we will find it difficult. The earlier the better.

Sec. Gazmin is correct, the Chinese knows we are weakest that's why we are the ones being bullied. If we acquire one more Hamilton coupled with few more ships (with ASW and missile) either from Italy or SK and 6 Lift plus a squadron of refurbished jets then this will be a different ball game (I guess).

All eyes and ears to the upcoming visit of Pnoy to the USA and the deadline set by the DND for the modernization this middle of the year :salute:
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
icefrog
Member Avatar


AZKALS
Apr 6 2012, 09:15 AM
It looks like Russia has finally joined Vietnam for oil hunt and possible drilling in the disputed areas , I wonder what would be China'a reaction now ... :armycool:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-04-05/g...-blocks-1-.html

LoL to China!!
Sign up for the Philippines' first E-wallet via this referral and get PHP 24.00 as a gift credited to your account:
https://coins.ph/invite/gphUpV
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
shoot_to_kill
Member
[ *  *  * ]
hehehehehe vietnam's reply: daz vidania chicoms
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
fernandez705
Member
[ *  *  * ]
shall we do the same to increase relations so we can get better equipment from them and maybe ask to help us jump start our srdp.
hopefully america dosent mind (i think)
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
matrix
Member Avatar
Member
[ *  *  * ]
Chinese war strategy...


Small wars loom large on China's horizon

By Jens Kastner

TAIPEI - Broad hints have been coming out of China that the country might start small-scale military strikes over disputed waters that are believed to hold rich energy reserves. The consequences of such endeavors would be tolerable to Beijing, international experts say.

Bitter territorial disputes China has with neighbors in the East and South China Seas have long grabbed media headlines. Virtually all countries in the region are involved in spats with China, from South Korea and Japan to the Philippines and Vietnam. In March alone, Beijing had verbal clashes with Seoul over a submerged rock; with Manila over the Philippines' plan to build a ferry pier; and with Hanoi over China's biggest offshore oil explorer's moves to develop oil and gas fields.

But it wasn't only words: Vietnamese fishing boats were also seized by China and their crews detained. What all the disputed zones, islands and rocks have in common is that they actually are much nearer to the shores of the rival claimants than to China's.

When strategists speak of the "Malacca Dilemma", they mean that Beijing's sea lines of communications are highly vulnerable. In times of conflict between the US and China, the supply of crude and iron ore needed to keep the Chinese economy alive and kicking could be relatively easily cut off in the straits that connect the Indian Ocean with the Pacific.

As such, a move would force the Chinese leadership rather quickly to the negotiation tables on the enemy's terms - and as it becomes clearer that the western Pacific holds vast untapped reserves of oil and natural gas - Beijing naturally sees control over the areas as a way out of its precarious situation. (According to Chinese estimates, oil and gas reserves in the western Pacific could meet Chinese demand for more than 60 years.)

With official defense spending to top US$100 billion in 2012, and the actual amount estimated to be much higher, China's People's Liberation Army (PLA) seems on course towards building the strength needed to ensure all goes smoothly in China's quest for energy security.

New ballistic anti-ship missiles will make Washington think twice about ordering US forces into the region to come to their allies' rescue, as will a growing arsenal of land-based tactical aircraft and anti-ship cruise missiles, not to mention a fleet heavy on missile-firing warships and submarines. Making access to this part of the world even dicier for US forces, China's ongoing military modernization has also seen an easing of past detection, tracking and targeting problems for Chinese gunners.

If Beijing is confident that Washington would not want to intervene, rival armed forces in the region could be taken on with J-15 fighters to be stationed on China's first aircraft carrier likely to be commissioned in August, a rapidly increasing number of naval destroyers, as well as brand-new amphibious landing ships and helicopter-carriers that can carry thousands of marines quickly to disputed islands.

That the political will exists for such operations has been signaled more than once. In commentaries run in China's state media, most notably in the Global Times, the concept of "small-scale wars" has increasingly been propagated since 2011. In early March, Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao emphasized that the PLA needed to be better prepared to fight "local wars".

Experts interviewed by Asia Times Online agreed that China would likely meet future objectives with limited military strikes.

According to Steve Tsang, director of the University of Nottingham's China Policy Institute, much will depend on what the small war is about, how it is conducted and against which country. Tsang believes the South Koreans won't be the target despite a recent war of words that erupted after the chief of China's State Oceanic Administration claimed that Leodo Reef, a submerged rock off South Korea's resort island of Jeju, is almost certainly part of China's "jurisdictional waters". Beijing refers to the rock as Suyan Reef.

"China starting even a limited military operation against South Korea would be too serious to be tolerated by anyone," Tsang said. "The US would have to take a strong position and immediate action at the United Nations Security Council to impose a ceasefire," he added.

However, a minor military confrontation against Vietnam or the Philippines over the disputed atolls in the South China Sea was a very different matter, Tsang argued. "Although China couldn't take an easy victory against Vietnam for granted, and such wars will be gravely disturbing in Southeast Asia and the rest of East Asia, they will be manageable. If the confrontation would be short and limited, the immediate impact wouldn't be very significant."

Tsang warned, however, that a Chinese attack on Vietnam or the Philippines would strengthen the willingness of countries in Southeast Asia cooperate with the United States.

"But fundamentally there is not much those countries can do to counter an assertive China."

Tsang then took on the notion that the existing mutual defense treaty between the Philippines and the US leaves the Southeast Asian country "immune" to a brief Chinese attack.

"You need to check the terms of the treaty. The US government needs to consider [a military attack against the Philippines] as a serious security matter for which it needs to respond, for which time is required to deliberate an appropriate response," Tsang said. "Nothing will happen if the incident is over before the matter reaches congress for a serious debate."

James Holmes, an associate professor of strategy at the US Naval War College, says Beijing would likely get away with it if the PLA were to attack the Philippines or Vietnam.

"Beijing would keep any small war as small and out-of-sight as possible. The superiority of its fleet vis-a-vis Southeast Asian militaries, and the advent of new shore-based weaponry like the anti-ship ballistic missile, give China a strong 'recessed deterrent' in times of conflict," Holmes said.

He explained that China could hold its major combat platforms in reserve while seeking its goals with relatively innocuous, lightly armed vessels from its maritime security services, which are its equivalents to a coast guard.

"Southeast Asian navies might challenge these ships, but they would do so in full knowledge that People's Liberation Army could deploy vastly superior sea power should they try it," Holmes said.
Economists also don't see too many obstacles for a small energy war against one China's Southeast Asian neighbors.

"Stock markets would overreact around the world in the short term - say a few days," said Ronald A Edwards, an expert on China's political economy at Tamkang University in Taiwan.

"But there would be little if any effect in terms of affecting this year's inflation, employment or output of any country other than the one attacked by China."

Edwards concluded on a disturbing note. He argued that the outcome of the nine-day-long Russian-Georgian war in 2008, in which Russia used overwhelming force to push Georgia out of South Ossetia, earning Western condemnation, could be taken as an indicator on whether China's economy would pay dearly for the PLA's military adventures.

"The brief Russian war with Georgia comes to mind as a very good example for comparison," Edwards said. "While the news coverage of this was headlines everywhere for a couple weeks, there were no major economic effects in countries other than Georgia in August of 2008 or thereafter."

Jens Kastner is a Taipei-based journalist.

(Copyright 2012 Asia Times Online (Holdings) Ltd. All rights reserved. Please contact us about sales, syndication and republishing.)

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/ND06Ad02.html
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Parastriker
Member Avatar
Member
[ *  *  * ]
astro_boy2005
Apr 6 2012, 11:52 AM
We should start the construction ASAP, I reckon that come middle of the year where monsoon season starts we will find it difficult. The earlier the better.

Sec. Gazmin is correct, the Chinese knows we are weakest that's why we are the ones being bullied. If we acquire one more Hamilton coupled with few more ships (with ASW and missile) either from Italy or SK and 6 Lift plus a squadron of refurbished jets then this will be a different ball game (I guess).

All eyes and ears to the upcoming visit of Pnoy to the USA and the deadline set by the DND for the modernization this middle of the year :salute:

Even if we are to acquire those, the correlation of powers are still the same. Even if we have another Hamilton-class vessel, the Chinese would still pick on us, because it doesn't shift the balance of powers. Even if we have F-16s, we could still have PLAN subs lurking around in the WPS.
Success through information, victory through disinformation.

"Good leaders make efficient followers. Great leaders make good followers. But true leaders make leaders out of mere followers."

"Measuring the intelligence of a common internet user is as easy as looking at his/her grammar."
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
alexu
Member Avatar
Trainee
[ *  * ]
So what do you suggest parastriker, any idea or plan?
we just sit or acquire some Military hardware.
Practice Hard, Fight Easy...
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Santi Kampilan
Member Avatar
Member
[ *  *  * ]
Philippines' response is very good. We are stirring the pot. It snuffs out and belittles China's claim to the Spratly's.
First the beaching ramp. Pretty soon bring in commercial establishments to make it a tourist destination. Then bring in tourists including foreigners. After that start expanding the airport. Then start developing other islands for island hopping, snorkeling, fishing and diving expeditions. There are only a few islands in the Spratly's big enough to make it as such.

Start it now. China can't do anything. They threaten everything happening in the South China Sea. They just threatened India for starting explorations in Vietnam's EEZ but India just brushed them aside.

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/south-ch...-india/933485/0

Let us keep arming ourselves. Bring in the Maestrale's/Soldati's. Even the Georges Leygues' or UK's Type 22's (4 batch 3's with lots of life left) could be expensive to maintain but the Brits are having a fire sale let alone the learning curve to operate them but it could be had for good price as evidence by their previous dealings (like their type 42's was sold for 40 million only a few years back). We can strike a deal with them to allow them to develop some of the oil/gas tracts and in return give us a good deal for those decomm ships. The mere fact that we have them sitting in the ports and could be used at a given notice is a strong deterrence and we can diplomatically say no and disagree with any of China's threats.
"The lion when it hunts a pack of Gnu's, it searches for the weakest and goes after it for its dinner". We are currently the weakest among claimant countries.
This should buy us time until we fully develop our gas and oil resources. Then we can build our own and stand on our own.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Mckoyzzz
Member Avatar
Ipsa Scientia Potestas Est
PDFF Mod Group
P-Noy: Phl should be more assertive on Spratly issue
By Aurea Calica (The Philippine Star) Updated April 08, 2012 12:00 AM

MANILA, Philippines - The Philippines should be more assertive in defending its maritime territories especially in the light of China’s more aggressive claims in the West Philippine Sea.

This was stressed by President Aquino in a speech he delivered shortly after coming back from the Association of Southeast Asian Nations summit in Cambodia on April 4. Maritime disputes involving some ASEAN countries and China were discussed in the summit.

Aquino said he deemed it best during the summit to stress the importance of the 2002 Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea (DOC) given the multilateral claims in the West Philippine Sea that could affect regional stability.

He said it was important for ASEAN to come up with a fair and just agreement on the matter before inviting China to the dialogues.

Aquino said the essence of ASEAN centrality is to give priority to the concerns of its members.

This would be an instrument for promoting peace in the West Philippine Sea and ensuring Philippine sovereignty, he said.

Aquino added there were talks on disaster risk reduction and management and on an ASEAN Coordinating Centre for Humanitarian Assistance and Disaster Management to speed up and strengthen cooperation during disasters.

He said a rice reserve mechanism was also tackled during the summit to ensure supply in case of a shortage.

China has come up with a nine-dash theory that virtually claimed the whole of the West Philippine Sea, including Recto Bank merely 80 miles off Palawan.

Based on reports, Beijing will also release a new map showing its expanded territory.

Cambodia reportedly wanted to bring its diplomatic ally China into the drafting process for the Code but the Philippines, Thailand and Vietnam said the bloc should draft it themselves before presenting it to Beijing.

China said the dispute should be resolved peacefully and bilaterally among the countries involved and suggested a regional organization like ASEAN should not take a stance on the dispute.

But the Philippines insisted on a multilateral solution and presented a clear stance that disputed areas and non-disputed areas must be identified and that only disputed areas could be jointly developed.

Aquino said he was optimistic that the Philippines would be heard in the international community.

He said China’s claims had become closer and closer and “what’s next?’

“If you don’t say ‘oops, we have a 200-mile economic zone, you’re already claiming something from our coastline.” What’s the next thing they’ll claim? The other side of Palawan?… I’m a bit being flippant about the response but there really is the expansion of the dispute,” Aquino said.

Aquino said countries must abide by the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea and that the Philippines could not enter into joint service contracts to explore the West Philippine Sea without clear determination of its sovereign rights over certain areas.

“How does one access the resource? Whose laws apply, what are dispute mechanisms, dispute-resolving mechanism if you don’t settle the sovereignty issue first? Who gets the royalties, who is responsible for the environment, etcetera, etcetera? So that has to be spelled out.

“And we want to be as reasonable as possible but we cannot accede to something that says, be reasonable by giving everything that’s ours. Giving up everything that’s ours. I think that’s wrong and I am not empowered to do that,” Aquino said.

philstar.com
Posted Image
"Do not condemn the judgment of another because it differs from your own. You may both be wrong -- Dandemis"
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
2 users reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · West Philippine Sea · Next Topic »
Locked Topic