South China Sea oil and gas exploration - Vietnam vs. China, S. China Sea Options

[Banzai]

Is that any different than America who believes that the Pacific Ocean belongs to her and 300 miles form the American coast on the Atlantic is under her jurisdiction? or India believing that the Indian Ocean belongs to her, or Vietnam who believes the whole of the China Seas belongs to her? and so on.

It's very simple. The South China Sea is China's core sovereign interest, and Vietnam does not have the desire, nor capacity to invite foreign powers to counter China with respect to her core sovereign interest, because Vietnam will lose.

Believe me, the South China Sea is a non-issue, and Vietnam should shut up and stop crying like a baby, because it's counterproductive, and practically unnecessary since China has already secured preeminence in the South China Sea.

Why look like a b!tch? Just to annoy China? Pfffst, China has deal with mongrel barbarians like Vietnamese for millenias. These tactics do not work, and will likely result in bad bad things to Vietnam if she actually fights China over the South China Sea, however, you and I already this this ultra-obvious point, so why bother continuing this conversation huh? Vietnamese are not worth China's time. Not a single second of Vietnamese whining is worth responding to by China's military and leadership forces.

This post has been edited by Banzai: Sep 28 2011, 08:24 AM

[elleX0]

It's very simple. The South China Sea is China's core sovereign interest, and Vietnam does not have the desire, nor capacity to invite foreign powers to counter China with respect to her core sovereign interest, because Vietnam will lose.

Believe me, the South China Sea is a non-issue, and Vietnam should shut up and stop crying like a baby, because it's counterproductive, and practically unnecessary since China has already secured preeminence in the South China Sea.

Why look like a b!tch? Just to annoy China? Pfffst, China has deal with mongrel barbarians like Vietnamese for millenias. These tactics do not work, and will likely result in bad bad things to Vietnam if she actually fights China over the South China Sea, however, you and I already this this ultra-obvious point, so why bother continuing this conversation huh? Vietnamese are not worth China's time. Not a single second of Vietnamese whining is worth responding to by China's military and leadership forces.

Maybe China is too soft? Maybe she is not ready yet to get tough?

[chutzpah]

Is that any different than America who believes that the Pacific Ocean belongs to her and 300 miles form the American coast on the Atlantic is under her jurisdiction? or India believing that the Indian Ocean belongs to her, or Vietnam who believes the whole of the China Seas belongs to her? and so on.

Good point.

What Vietanamese culture was there before Chinese came,modern Vietnamese culture is heavily sinofied.

The Viet culture and tradition are but second hand Chinese culture and tradition. The Viet even shamelessly adopted the Chinese Spring Festival or Chinese NY and calls it Viet NY. They adopted Chinese culture then later the French's.

One can see the strong influence of China in Viet pottery and porcelain, architecture, their imperial system, fabric etc.. They are all but poor imitations of China's. Thus it is odd that the Viet is so anti China and back stabbing seems to be a national character of Vietnam.

[elleX0]

Good point.


The Viet culture and tradition are but second hand Chinese culture and tradition. The Viet even shamelessly adopted the Chinese Spring Festival or Chinese NY and calls it Viet NY. They adopted Chinese culture then later the French's.

One can see the strong influence of China in Viet pottery and porcelain, architecture, their imperial system, fabric etc.. They are all but poor imitations of China's. Thus it is odd that the Viet is so anti China and back stabbing seems to be a national character of Vietnam.

THE CHINESE TRIBUTE SYSTEM
China's Ming emperors regarded the conduct of foreign trade as an important facet of political power and prestige. The point of articulation was the Chinese tribute system. Foreign states wanting to trade with China had to pay tribute to the emperor at specified ports of call (Canton being the designated locale for envoys from Southeast Asian states). This tribute was not merely a material gift or donation. Ming emperors regarded it as an act of political submission with feudal overtones. When they established trade relations with China, envoy states acknowledged Ming overlordship. During the 15th century, numerous Southeast Asian rulers, including the kings of Java, Siam and CHAMPA (present-day VIETNAM), sent tribute missions to China. The Ming government regarded private commerce with foreigners as illegal, synonymous with piracy.

The overtly political context of China's trade relations with outsiders had an important cultural impact on countries in Southeast Asia, many of which imported various Chinese customs along with trade goods and theoretical vassal status. Champa, which maintained close contact with China, was sending students to study there by 1371.

The tribute system also encouraged Chinese immigration to envoy states during the 14th and 15th centuries. Cambodia, for example, had a resident Chinese population by the 1300s. The Ming government sent some individuals to foreign countries specifically to act as their official representatives. Other emigrants left China in search of new commercial opportunities in the port towns linked into the ecumenical trading zone. Some of these opportunists became advisers to local Southeast Asian potentates. Others sought their fortunes as pirates and smugglers. As middlemen and cultural brokers, the Chinese trade communities in Southeast Asia continued to prosper even after Europeans began to arrive in the area.

Enthusiastic proponents of the tribute system, the early Ming emperors funded seven massive maritime expeditions into foreign waters between 1405 and 1433. The underlying purposes of the so-called Treasure Ship voyages remain a matter of scholarly debate. One clear reason for mounting the expeditions, however, was to extend the scope of China's political influence by expanding her network of trade ties with foreign states. Like the Portuguese vessels that sailed into the Indian Ocean in the late 15th and 16th centuries, the Ming ships carried both cargoes of trade goods and an impressive armoury of weapons. Unlike the Portuguese, the Chinese were less interested in military conquest than in collecting new tribute states through enticement and intimidation, and in securing and reinforcing Chinese influence in the countries of Southeast Asia.

http://www.ucalgary.ca/applied_history/tut...ts/chinese.html

This post has been edited by elleX0: Sep 29 2011, 09:29 AM

[Banzai]

Vietnam is a Sub-Chinese culture, and is only being annoying to China because China is weak.

It's Vietnam's way of encouraging her big brother to grow stronger. Vietnam will only respect a strong and self-confident China - and we all know this is being realized day in and day out as China grows.

Back when China was strong, Vietnam and Korea were competing among China's neighbors to lick China's butt hole. Vietnam and Korea were competing to be "First among outer vassals" when China was strong.

Now look when China was weak, Japan took over Korea and France took over Vietnam, and now you get bitterly anti-Chinese divided countries that are annoying. Only because China is weak they are annoying. When China is strong, they would not make a peep, but would be competing to lick China's butt hole.

This post has been edited by Banzai: Sep 29 2011, 12:02 PM

[Yerroperil]

Vietnam is a Sub-Chinese culture, and is only being annoying to China because China is weak.

It's Vietnam's way of encouraging her big brother to grow stronger. Vietnam will only respect a strong and self-confident China - and we all know this is being realized day in and day out as China grows.

Back when China was strong, Vietnam and Korea were competing among China's neighbors to lick China's butt hole. Vietnam and Korea were competing to be "First among outer vassals" when China was strong.

Now look when China was weak, Japan took over Korea and France took over Vietnam, and now you get bitterly anti-Chinese divided countries that are annoying. Only because China is weak they are annoying. When China is strong, they would not make a peep, but would be competing to lick China's butt hole.

lol nice explanation.China sent troops to help Korea over Imjin War,and Black flag army for Sino-French war,how come there are no thanks?

[Mid-Night_Sun]

lol i dont like how this thread turned out. this is 'serious' chinese chat. so i took it 'seriously'. if anyone says that i lost the debate with ivy you know they are on drugs.

but now i feel it is tainted. with blatant insults that didnt add much of anything to the discussions at hand. the most nationalistic chinese guy on the internet needs to tone it down here. be as extreme as you want on youtube or chinahush or chinasmack. those places maybe deserve it.

[fireplant]

lol i dont like how this thread turned out. this is 'serious' chinese chat. so i took it 'seriously'. if anyone says that i lost the debate with ivy you know they are on drugs.

but now i feel it is tainted. with blatant insults that didnt add much of anything to the discussions at hand. the most nationalistic chinese guy on the internet needs to tone it down here. be as extreme as you want on youtube or chinahush or chinasmack. those places maybe deserve it.

I would be interested to see a high quality debate from both sides over the SCS issue. I have my own questions about the Chinese position which I admit is pretty murky.

However it's just not possible because every Vietnamese here gets emotional and they don't discuss and acknowledge basic facts.

This post has been edited by fireplant: Sep 30 2011, 01:54 PM

[chutzpah]

http://www.ucalgary.ca/applied_history/tut...ts/chinese.html

Thanks elleXO for the supporting link.

[elleX0]

Thanks elleXO for the supporting link.

Many people forget their ancient history.

[Mauser]

This should be a sticky on the Chinese chat, to end all disputes.

[elleX0]

Many people forget their ancient history.

chutzpah: Is it coincidental that the Chinese commercial success today is because they have based their trading practices on the same basis as the old methods of trading and slowly building up "TRIBUTARY TRADING PARTNERS?" This is very interesting. Old methods still work.

[fireplant]

Chinese traders still entice people rather than conquer people.

[elleX0]

Chinese traders still entice people rather than conquer people.

These are centuries old trading traditions, and it is still effective today.

This post has been edited by elleX0: Oct 9 2011, 09:44 AM

[port19]

I would advocate China should prepare it's military for "contain battle" in South China Sea, as battle preparedness and perhaps a "small invasion" further it's claimant area. The logic is that to gain more grounds as a buffer zone like the Russian did with Georgia. Some parts of Vietnam can be invaded or even certain islands in Philipines to be taken. This would then be use in future trading/negotiation for a return, building pressure points in opponent territory. But China should not do a military first strike but fully "prepare for counter invasion"(with excuse being attack first) so it can start from a strong position of arguing internationaly taking the Georgia senario as case study. This will also put China military into actual practice of combat and test it's build capacity and modernization. However, this is ONLY A LAST RESORT. As military action will destabilize the economic situation of the area. Sometimes diplomacy will fail and planning for military contingency is normal. All senarios has to be planned.

[JazzyQueen]

MAO SAID THAT VIETNAMESE BROTHER FIGHT AMERICAN FOR ME THEN MAO SHAKE HAND WITH AMERICAN IN 1971-1972 THAT IS HOW VIETNAMESE STAB CHINESE IN THE BACK ?
DENG XIAO PING ...GIVE GUNS AND MONEY FOR KHMER ROUGE TO ATTACK VIETNAM THAT IS HOW VIETNAMESE STAB CHINESE IN THE BACK ..KHAHHAHAHA.

ONE WORD..NEVER TRUST CHINESE BRO ..KHAKHAKHA

[jimmyle]

I don't know why you guys laughed at Vietnam for being influenced by Chinese culture. Throughout history, large powerful nations always spread their culture to smaller nations. It is not a reason for Vietnamese to feel shame.

Look at Hong Kong, Taipei, Shanghai and your Chinese way of life in modern day. From the calendar, clothing, buildings, transportation, computer, education, math, Halloween parties, dance clubs. Don't you think at least 90% were copied from Western countries? Should you feel shame and revert back to your traditional Chinese way of life? No. And you shouldn't make fun of Vietnamese for being influenced by Chinese culture either.

[port19]

Might is right! One of these will fly over South China Seas.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gBSYxKDWq6s

[GreaterChina]

A New Era of Gunboat Diplomacy

By Mark Landler
Published: November 12, 2011



Navies Ramping Up: Three Contested Regions

It may seem strange in an era of cyberwarfare and drone attacks, but the newest front in the rivalry between the United States and China is a tropical sea, where the drive to tap rich offshore oil and gas reserves has set off a conflict akin to the gunboat diplomacy of the 19th century.

The Obama administration first waded into the treacherous waters of the South China Sea last year when Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton declared, at a tense meeting of Asian countries in Hanoi, that the United States would join Vietnam, the Philippines and other countries in resisting Beijing’s efforts to dominate the sea. China, predictably, was enraged by what it viewed as American meddling.

For all its echoes of the 1800s, not to mention the cold war, the showdown in the South China Sea augurs a new type of maritime conflict — one that is playing out from the Mediterranean Sea to the Arctic Ocean, where fuel-hungry economic powers, newly accessible undersea energy riches and even changes in the earth’s climate are conspiring to create a 21st-century contest for the seas.

China is not alone in its maritime ambitions. Turkey has clashed with Cyprus and stoked tensions with Greece and Israel over natural-gas fields that lie under the eastern Mediterranean. Several powers, including Russia, Canada and the United States, are eagerly circling the Arctic, where melting polar ice is opening up new shipping routes and the tantalizing possibility of vast oil and gas deposits beneath.

“This hunt for resources is going to consume large bodies of water around the world for at least the next couple of decades,” Mrs. Clinton said in a recent interview, describing a global competition that sounds like a watery Great Game.

Such tensions are sure to shadow President Obama this week, as he meets with leaders from China and other Asian countries in Honolulu and on the Indonesian island of Bali. Administration officials said they expected all sides to tamp down disagreements, though that won’t mask the coming conflicts.

“Underlying all of this is the recognition that an increasing share of oil resources is offshore,” said Daniel Yergin, an energy expert and author of a new book, “The Quest: Energy, Security, and the Remaking of the Modern World.” “When you have energy resources on land,” he said, “you know where things stand. When they’re offshore, things can get murkier.”

Twenty-nine million barrels of oil a day, one-third of global production, now come from offshore fields, Mr. Yergin said, a share that will rise steadily. The South China Sea alone is estimated to have 61 billion barrels of petroleum — oil and gas — plus 54 billion yet to be discovered, while the Arctic is projected to have 238 billion barrels, with possibly twice that in undiscovered sources.

As countries race to erect drilling rigs and send oil exploration vessels to comb the seabed, conflicting maritime claims are helping to fuel a naval arms race. It is no coincidence that the countries with the fastest-growing navies are those with stakes in these energy zones.

China expanded from 2 Soviet-era destroyers in 1990 to 13 modern destroyers in 2010, according to the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London. In its drive for a blue-water navy, one that operates in the deep waters of open oceans, it is also building an aircraft carrier. Malaysia and Vietnam are beefing up their navies with frigates and submarines. India, which wants to make sure it has access to the Far East, is bulking up. And the Israeli Navy is pushing for more vessels to counter Turkish warships circling Israeli drilling rigs.

“Countries want to make sure they have the ability to develop resources and to make sure their trading routes are protected,” said David L. Goldwyn, a former special envoy for international energy affairs at the State Department.

This competition is also behind calls for the United States to bolster its naval strength, even at a time of budget cuts. Mitt Romney, considered by many the Republican front-runner in the presidential race, declared recently he would “reverse the hollowing of our Navy and announce an initiative to increase the shipbuilding rate from 9 per year to 15.” With anemic building rates and tighter maintenance budgets, analysts say, the Navy has been forced to cope with an aging fleet that some say is not up to its challenges.

Even so, the Obama administration has been an active practitioner of gunboat diplomacy, a term that refers to achieving foreign-policy objectives through vivid displays of naval might. Last fall, Mr. Obama sent the aircraft carrier George Washington to the Yellow Sea for joint exercises with South Korea, sending a message to both North Korea and its key backer, China. The move echoed the Clinton administration’s decision in 1996 to send the Seventh Fleet to warn China against attacking Taiwan.

The United States has used gunboat diplomacy in Asia at least since 1853, when Commodore Matthew C. Perry sailed his fleet into Tokyo Bay, intimidating Japan into opening up to foreign trade. But these days, the Chinese are fashioning an Asian version of the Monroe Doctrine to press their imperial ambitions.

FOR Mr. Obama, whose roots in Hawaii and Indonesia have imbued him with a strong Pacific worldview, the drawdown in Iraq and Afghanistan gives him a good pretext to turn his gaze eastward. The United States has worked to shore up its ties to old Asian allies, like Japan and South Korea, as well as new giants like India. The goal, though administration officials are loath to say it publicly, is to assemble a coalition to counterbalance China’s growing power.

On a recent tour of Asia, Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta pledged not to retreat from the region. “If anything,” he said, “we’re going to strengthen our presence in the Pacific.” This week, Mr. Obama is expected to announce an agreement with Australia for a permanent American military presence there.

On land, the race for energy supplies is not new, of course. From the 1950s to the 1970s, the United States maneuvered to keep Russia out of oil-rich Iran. Today, China is busy cutting deals in energy-rich Africa. But technology has changed the equation, putting undersea oil and gas fields into play as never before.

“At root, it’s a question of when and how you will have these conflicts,” said James B. Steinberg, a former deputy secretary of state with experience in all three regions. “Will countries see these as win-win opportunities, or will they see them as zero-sum competitions?”

For China, the South China Sea has long been crucial as a supply route for oil and other raw materials to fuel its economy. China’s claims have deep historical roots, dating from the 1940s, when Chiang Kai-shek’s Nationalists drew a dotted line in the shape of a cow’s tongue extending south of China, embracing most the sea and two disputed island chains, the Paracels and the Spratlys.

Quarrels over these hunks of volcanic rock wouldn’t matter much, except that China, Vietnam and the Philippines are running into one another in the race for oil. Last spring, in two separate incidents, Vietnam accused Chinese vessels of deliberately cutting the seismic survey cables of an oil exploration ship. A former American official said his nightmare scenario would be a Chinese warship’s firing on an Exxon oil-drilling ship.

If the South China Sea is simmering, then the eastern Mediterranean is seething. There, claims to huge natural-gas reserves off the coast of Cyprus and Lebanon have raised tensions with Turkey, which occupies half of Cyprus, as well as with Israel. Cyprus and Israel are drilling for gas, angering Turkey. The militant Islamic group Hezbollah, in Lebanon, has threatened to attack Israeli gas rigs.

Further complicating this is the bitter rift between Turkey and Israel after the deadly Israeli commando interception of a Turkish flotilla trying to transport aid to Palestinians in Gaza last year.

“The Turks are saying, ‘The Israelis humiliated us; what can we do in return?’” said Charles K. Ebinger, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. “Part of it is just the greater assertiveness of Turkey’s foreign policy everywhere.”

Perhaps the least dangerous arena of competition lies in the frigid north, partly because experts believe that many of the Arctic’s mineral deposits lie within one or another of the 200-mile exclusive economic zones of the countries that ring the ocean. But even countries with no Arctic coastline, like China and South Korea, are sending icebreakers there to explore weather patterns and fish migration.

Ironically, the biggest bone of contention there is between two stalwart allies, the United States and Canada. Melting ice has opened up the fabled Northwest Passage, which runs through an archipelago of islands in northern Canada. The United States views the passage as an international waterway, giving American ships unlimited access. The Canadian government insists it is an inland waterway, meaning that foreign ships can use it only with Ottawa’s approval.

Canada and the United States are highly unlikely to go to war, of course, though the wrangling could keep maritime lawyers busy for years. As temperatures climb, officials warn, tempers may follow. “It’s a serious legal dispute,” Mr. Steinberg said. “When it is ice-free, there will be some real issues.”

New York Times

[port19]

What's with South Korea & Japan navy doing in South China Sea???

If you take away those 2, it is clear China overwhelming might compare with Vietnam & Philipines navy in that contested area.

Historically, it is always China's playground.

Modern ambition for oil and $$$, foreign shadow hand is fueling the tension.

If US talk about "freedom of navigation", there is absolutely no problem since merchants been plying that sea for centuries.

What US REALLY wants to talk about is "freedom of OIL exploration"

If I was China, any foreign Oil exploration ship is valid target to be blown out of the water there. It's like you're going into your neighbour house, without invitation and eat all his/her food in the fridge and therefore warrant an agrressive response.

China approach to Vietnam & Phillipines and how they can solve that problem will be a real peace. If any gets ahead of themselve(start to become big headed), feeling they have US 'solid' backing and being prod to confront China will be a big national mistake.

You don't mistaken to rattle & intimidate an 800 pound gorilla and hope to be safe from it, even you assume it is in a 'cage'