#us warship south china sea

[worldspotlightnews]

Chinese military says US ship ‘warned’ away in South China Sea - SUCH TV

China’s military says it tracked and warned away a United States warship that had illegally entered waters it claims in the South China Sea. The US Navy denied China’s claims, stating that the ship was on a routine operation and left the area of its own accord. In a statement on Thursday, the Southern Theatre Command of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) said the USS Milius, a guided…

[methed-up-marxist]

How have these global dynamics affected politics in the Philippines? 

We are in the middle of a looming theatre of war between the US and China, in which the policy adopted by the previous Rodrigo Duterte regime of favouring the Chinese government’s interests and taking a “soft” stance on the West Philippine issue has been replaced by President Ferdinand Marcos Jr’s shameless subservience to US imperialist interests. 

Under Marcos Jr, patronage to US imperialist interests has been duly restored, with Marcos Jr increasing the number of US military bases in the Philippines from five to nine under the expanded Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement (EDCA). In contrast, Duterte claims that increasing the number of US military bases directed towards China and the South China Sea pose an “imminent threat of war”, one that would inevitably involve the Philippines. 

Aside from its military bases in the Pacific, the US also has many nuclear submarines, hundreds of warships, almost a thousand combat aircraft and more than 300,000 soldiers and personnel patrolling the Pacific and Indian Oceans, including the South China Sea. On the other hand, China has deployed four nuclear submarines to guard the oceans, 350 warships (China is the largest naval power in the world today), thousands of ground-launched missiles capable of retaliating against US bombs (and that can reach the west coast of the US) and air-defence systems scattered across China and its occupied islands and atolls in the South China Sea.

The left and progressive movements in the Philippines oppose these preparations for war by both the US and China. PLM is campaigning for the dismantling of US bases established under the Visiting Forces and EDCA agreements, and for the withdrawal of all troops belonging to the US and its imperialist allies in the Asia-Pacific region. PLM also calls on China to halt its militarisation of the region and its bullying of countries that maintain sovereign rights over specific zones of the South China Sea. We call for the implementation of the Southeast Asia Nuclear Weapon-Free Treaty in order to urgently demilitarise the region, and advocate for a broader Asia-Pacific-wide nuclear-weapon-free zone treaty and regime. 

[zvaigzdelasas]

[RFA is US State Media]

The Philippines will no longer seek financial aid from China for a package of ambitious railway projects, the transportation secretary said, adding that officials were confident the projects could move ahead with funding from interested sources.

China had been slated to build two of the rail lines on the main Philippine island of Luzon and the third on southern Mindanao island, officials said. 

The Marcos administration announced the decision to drop the Chinese loans amid tensions between Manila and Beijing in the South China Sea and days after a pair of minor collisions in disputed waters between ships and boats from both nations. 

Philippine Transportation Secretary Jaime Bautista said the territorial tensions were not tied to this decision.[...]

["]our government is looking for other sources of funding.”[...]

Less than a month after Duterte left office in mid-2022, Ernesto Pernia, who had served as his socioeconomic planning secretary, said the Philippines would be wise to drop the three Chinese-backed projects.

“Much better to deal with ODA with Japan, South Korea, Australia, the U.S. and the E.U.,” Pernia told BenarNews, an RFA-affiliated news outlet, at the time while using an acronym for official development assistance. [...]

Rates through the China-based lending agency Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), were “significantly higher” compared to funding from Japan or South Korean ODAs, Gatchalian said. [...]

Biden criticized Chinese ships for acting “dangerously and unlawfully as our Philippine friends conducted a routine resupply mission within … their own exclusive economic zone in the South China Sea,” according to a transcript from the White House. 

“I want to be very clear: The United States’ defense commitment to the Philippines is ironclad,” Biden said. “Any attack on the Filipino aircraft, vessels, or armed forces will invoke our Mutual Defense Treaty with the Philippines.” 

In an apparent response to Biden, the Chinese Embassy in Manila on Thursday said that the “escalation of activities has been inflated by the U.S. actions.” 

“Since the beginning of this year, the U.S. has been blatantly emboldening the Philippines’ acts of infringing upon China’s sovereignty and inciting and supporting the Philippines’ attempts to repair and reinforce its warship that was deliberately grounded on Ren’ai Jiao,” it said, using the Chinese name for the shoal. 

26 Oct 23

[head-post]

Philippine sailors seriously injured in collision in South China Sea

At least eight Philippine sailors were injured on Monday when the Chinese Coast Guard “searched” a Philippine vessel in the disputed waters of the South China Sea, Philippine media reported on Wednesday.

During a clash between the two countries’ forces in the disputed South China Sea, a member of the armed forces had his finger cut off, the Philippine media outlet Inquirer reported, citing official sources.

The Philippine military confirmed on Tuesday that a navy sailor was “severely injured” after “deliberately ramming at high speed” a Chinese Coast Guard (CCG) ship during a resupply mission.

Philippine officials also claimed that CCG personnel pierced Navy boats with their bolos and also took possession of their weapons.

“We have arms, but we did not use those. We don’t want to start a war,” the media outlet quoted Philippines chief General Romeo Brawner Jr. as saying and added their soldiers fought with bare hands to prevent CCG from hitting them.

Chinese Coast Guard personnel on Monday “blocked, boarded and searched” a Philippine vessel that “trespassed” in waters near Ren’ai, a submerged reef in the Spratly Islands in the South China Sea.

In a new escalation, the CCG forcibly removed the vessel from the disputed waters, where it “attempted to send materials to its illegally grounded warship,” the CCG said.

New Rules for Philippine Ships

It was the first incident since the CCG implemented its new rules of engagement in the vast disputed sea on Saturday. Under the new rules, China can detain suspected trespassers for up to 60 days.

The Philippine vessel was on a resupply mission for the grounded World War II warship BRP Sierra Madre on a shoal claimed by both Beijing and Manila.

Beijing accused Manila of “violating” the International Regulations for the Prevention of Collisions at Sea, while Manila called China’s claims “deceptive and misleading.”

The two maritime neighbours have conflicting claims to the Second Thomas Shoal – also known as Ayungin Shoal, Bai Co May, and Ren’ai Jiao – a submerged reef near the Spratly Islands in the South China Sea.

Read more HERE

[mariacallous]

On the sidelines of July’s NATO summit in Washington, a new industrial alliance quietly came to life. The leaders of the United States, Canada, and Finland announced the Icebreaker Collaboration Effort, or ICE Pact, a trilateral deal on polar icebreaker production. The agreement aims to leverage the technological expertise and production capacity of these three Arctic states to build a modern fleet of icebreaking vessels for NATO countries and their global partners.

The ICE Pact is a response to two strategic challenges facing the United States and its allies. Both are tied to growing competition with China.

First, the United States’ atrophying shipbuilding industry risks being pushed further into irrelevance by China’s sprawling shipbuilding empire; this could also hamstring Washington’s ability to compete with Beijing’s naval modernization efforts. Second, rising geopolitical competition in the Arctic has laid bare the need for deeper coordination among NATO allies and their partners to counter the growing alignment between China and Russia in the region.

The deal remains in its early stages; July’s announcement was merely a public commitment to begin negotiations toward a memorandum of understanding that will be announced by the end of the year. As negotiators shape the pact over the coming months, they will need to overcome considerable political obstacles.

The decline of U.S. shipbuilding is a crisis long in the making. For decades, foreign shipbuilders in Asia took advantage of low input costs and leveraged state subsidies to undercut competitors in the global market. Today, just three countries—China, South Korea, and Japan—build over 90 percent of global tonnage, a metric used to measure shipyard output. The United States accounts for a meager 0.2 percent.

China’s rise as the dominant global producer of both commercial and naval vessels has refocused minds around shipbuilding in Washington. Last year, China alone accounted for over half of the world’s production of civilian and merchant ships.

This surge in commercial production has occurred in dual-use shipyards, which are built not only to construct tankers and container ships for global clients, but also warships for China’s navy. Combining commercial and military production has helped China’s shipbuilders keep their orderbooks full and revenues flowing, turbocharging the country’s naval-industrial development. The practice is common across China’s military production ecosystem, where blurred lines between civilian and defense firms help the People’s Liberation Army access foreign technology and capital that may otherwise be restricted.

The Biden administration has introduced an expansive slate of policies aimed at slowing China’s ongoing military buildup, now including its shipbuilding prowess. In April, the White House announced an investigation into Beijing’s use of non-market industrial practices, including billions of dollars in state subsidies and cheap credit for its shipyards that will likely result in new tariffs on Chinese-built ships in the coming years.

Now, the White House is searching for ways to revitalize the United States’ own battered shipbuilding industry. Taking a cue from the nuclear submarine agreement unveiled between the United States, Australia, and Britain in 2021 known as AUKUS, the ICE Pact seeks to fuse the combined industrial capacity and technological expertise of U.S. allies into a shipbuilding consortium focused on polar icebreakers.

The decision to home in on icebreakers was prompted both by strategic necessity and market opportunity in today’s environmental and geopolitical landscapes. The Arctic has grown in importance as melting sea ice unlocks new sea lanes and access to natural resources. With Moscow and Beijing tightening their military and commercial cooperation in the region, NATO countries must urgently boost their operational capabilities there, too.

China’s growing role in the Arctic is of particular concern. Leaders in Beijing have dubbed the country a “near-Arctic state” and are actively seeking to boost its influence over the region’s governance. More worrying, high-level Chinese strategic documents promote the use of dual-use scientific and economic engagement to make inroads for its military to operate in the Arctic.

The U.S. Department of Defense’s most recent Arctic Strategy, published in July 2024, identifies China’s increased activities in the region as the top strategic challenge, and NATO has taken an increasingly hard rhetorical line against China’s northern advances in recent years. “The increased competition and militarization in the Arctic region, especially by Russia and China, is concerning. … We cannot be naïve and ignore the potentially nefarious intentions of some actors in the region. We must remain vigilant and prepare for the unexpected,” Rob Bauer, the chair of NATO’s Military Committee, said last year.

But there is a widening gap between NATO partners and their competitors in icebreaker production. These highly specialized vessels are crucial for enabling military forces to reach and operate in the Arctic’s frozen waters. Russia alone operates a fleet of over 40 state- and nonstate-owned ice-class vessels, including several nuclear-powered icebreakers. China now has four in operation—two were put to service in the last five years—and has plans to build more.

Meanwhile, Finland has 12 operational icebreakers, Canada boasts nine, and the United States has just two aging hulls in dire need of upgrades. Yearslong delays and cost overruns have plagued an existing plan to build several new heavy polar icebreakers for the U.S. Coast Guard via the Polar Security Cutter program.

Although these dynamics are concerning, they also create opportunities. The expanding strategic importance of the world’s polar regions is expected to spur a demand for 70 to 90 icebreakers among U.S. allies and partners over the next decade, according to U.S. officials. If successful, the ICE Pact will ensure that this demand flows into orderbooks at U.S., Canadian, and Finnish shipyards.

It will take decades of sustained investment to put U.S. shipyards on a viable path to global competitiveness. Yet the ICE Pact serves as a creative first step in chipping away at China’s shipbuilding dominance.

By working with allies, U.S. officials hope to “build economies of scale in American, Finnish, or Canadian shipyards to create polar icebreakers,” according to a White House press briefing, and spur the demand needed to incentivize private and public investment into a shared production ecosystem. If successful, this approach could offer a model for broader collaboration with allies on advanced sectors of the shipbuilding market.

The deal has three components: information and technology exchange, workforce development, and attracting orders from international partners. The ICE Pact’s core wager, however, is that by combining the three countries’ production capacities, it can sufficiently reduce the costs of building each vessel to attract interest from global buyers.

Finland—which officially joined NATO in 2023—will be a critical partner in this effort. Finnish firms lead the world in polar icebreaker development, boasting an 80 percent market share in icebreaker design and 60 percent share in global production. Several Canadian companies are likewise global powerhouses in design and production. The United States, for its part, can take advantage of its thriving high-tech ecosystem to lead on the development of next-generation technologies, such as space-based monitoring systems and unmanned surface, air, and undersea assets optimized to support polar missions.

While the ICE Pact so far shows promise, its path to success will require deft negotiation around several potential sticking points.

First, several top Finnish firms involved in icebreaker design and production have significant operations in China. Aker Arctic, a world leader in ice-class ship design based in Helsinki, played a critical role in design and testing for the development of China’s first domestically produced polar icebreaker, the Xue Long 2. Another major Finnish firm, Wartsila, helped build the ship’s power system.

Security-minded officials from the United States may be hesitant to partner with companies that are actively supporting the buildup of China’s polar capabilities. The risk of sensitive technology transfer to Beijing’s dual-use shipyards will likely prove a particularly strong point of concern.

Another possible stumbling block is the ongoing dispute between the United States and Canada over the latter’s claims to exclusive jurisdiction over vast swaths of Arctic waters along the critical Northwest Passage sea route, which connects the Atlantic and Pacific oceans through the islands of northern Canada. Until recently, the decades-old dispute—rooted in differing interpretations of the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea—had remained on the back burner. It has returned to the fore in recent years as politicians on both sides increasingly turn their attention to the Arctic’s rising importance to global trade and security. Addressing these roadblocks is critical to the ICE Pact’s long-term success.

Looking forward, building collective capabilities to safeguard peace and security in the Arctic must remain one of NATO’s north stars. Maintaining a NATO presence in this remote frontier is key to preserving the alliance’s Arctic influence—and protecting U.S. interests.

[libertariantaoist]

News Roundup 1/28/2024 | The Libertarian Institute

Here is your daily roundup of today's news:

News Roundup 1/28/2024

by Kyle Anzalone

Haiti

White House Restates Support for UN Force in Haiti After Kenyan Court Blocks Deployment Statement 

Kenyan Court Ruling Undercuts Biden Plan to Send UN Force to Haiti BBC

Russia

US Navy Secretary Tells UK to Boost War Speaning Guardian

US to Sell Greece 40 F-35s and Other War Planes Bloomberg

$40 Million Weapons Corruption Scheme Uncovered in Ukraine Reuters

China

Chinese Official Slams NATO as “Walking War Machine” Statement

Taiwan Reports Dozens of Chinese Planes and Warships in ADIZ X

Yemen

Houthis Fire Missile at US Warship in Red Sea X

ICJ Rules Against Israel in Gaza Genocide Case AWC

Palestinians Forced to Eat Animal Feed to Survive MEE

Medical Services Collapse at Gaza’s Largest Functioning Hospital as Israeli Forces Advance in Khan Yunis MSF

White House Doubles Down on Claim that South Africa’s Genocide Case Against Israel Is Meritless After ICJ Ruling Presser

Flooding Adds to the Misery of Palestinians Displaced in Gaza Haaretz

Israeli Intel Says “Significant Number of Weapons Used By Hamas on Oct 7″ Came from Israel NYT

Pelosi Calls for FBI to Investigate Pro-Palestinian Protesters CNN

US Presses China to Pressure Iran to Reduce Middle East Tensions AP

Arab and Muslim Leaders in Battleground State Reject Meeting with Biden Campaign DN

Iraq

US Confirms It’s Entering Talks That Could Lead to US Withdrawal From Iraq

Yemen

Houthi Red Sea Restrictions Boost the Group’s Regional Popularity FT

White House Gives Mixed Answers About US Troop Presence in Yemen The Intercept

UK Warships in Red Sea Unequipped to Hit Ground Targets in Yemen Telegraph

Read More

[xtruss]

Analysis: The China-Russia Axis Takes Shape

The bond has been decades in the making, but Russia’s war in Ukraine has tightened their embrace.

— September 11, 2023 | By Bonny Lin | Foreign Policy

Alex Nabaum Illustration For Foreign Policy

In July, nearly a dozen Chinese and Russian warships conducted 20 combat exercises in the Sea of Japan before beginning a 2,300-nautical-mile joint patrol, including into the waters near Alaska. These two operations, according to the Chinese defense ministry, “reflect the level of the strategic mutual trust” between the two countries and their militaries.

The increasingly close relationship between China and Russia has been decades in the making, but Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has tightened their embrace. Both countries made a clear strategic choice to prioritize relations with each other, given what they perceive as a common threat from the U.S.-led West. The deepening of bilateral ties is accompanied by a joint push for global realignment as the two countries use non-Western multilateral institutions—such as the BRICS forum and the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO)—to expand their influence in the developing world. Although neither Beijing nor Moscow currently has plans to establish a formal military alliance, major shocks, such as a Sino-U.S. conflict over Taiwan, could yet bring it about.

The cover of Foreign Policy's fall 2023 print magazine shows a jack made up of joined hands lifting up the world. Cover text reads: The Alliances That Matter Now: Multilateralism is at a dead end, but powerful blocs are getting things done."

China and Russia’s push for better relations began after the end of the Cold War. Moscow became frustrated with its loss of influence and status, and Beijing saw itself as the victim of Western sanctions after its forceful crackdown of the Tiananmen Square protests in 1989. In the 1990s and 2000s, the two countries upgraded relations, settled their disputed borders, and deepened their arms sales. Russia became the dominant supplier of advanced weapons to China.

When Xi Jinping assumed power in 2012, China was already Russia’s largest trading partner, and the two countries regularly engaged in military exercises. They advocated for each other in international forums; in parallel, they founded the SCO and BRICS grouping to deepen cooperation with neighbors and major developing countries.

When the two countries upgraded their relations again in 2019, the strategic drivers for much closer relations were already present. Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014 damaged its relations with the West and led to a first set of economic sanctions. Similarly, Washington identified Beijing as its most important long-term challenge, redirected military resources to the Pacific, and launched a trade war against Chinese companies. Moscow and Beijing were deeply suspicious of what they saw as Western support for the color revolutions in various countries and worried that they might be targets as well. Just as China refused to condemn Russian military actions in Chechnya, Georgia, Syria, and Ukraine, Russia fully backed Chinese positions on Taiwan, Hong Kong, Tibet, and Xinjiang. The Kremlin also demonstrated tacit support for Chinese territorial claims against its neighbors in the South China Sea and East China Sea.

Since launching its war in Ukraine, Russia has become China’s fastest-growing trading partner. Visiting Moscow in March, Xi declared that deepening ties to Russia was a “strategic choice” that China had made. Even the mutiny in June by Wagner Group leader Yevgeny Prigozhin that took his mercenary army almost to the gates of Moscow did not change China’s overall position toward Russia, though Beijing has embraced tactical adjustments to “de-risk” its dependency on Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Building on their strong relationship, Xi and Putin released a joint statement in February 2022 announcing a “No Limits” strategic partnership between the two countries. The statement expressed a litany of grievances against the United States, while Chinese state media hailed a “new era” of international relations not defined by Washington. Coming only a few weeks before Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, enhanced relations were likely calculated by Moscow to strengthen its overall geopolitical position before the attack.

It’s not clear how much prior detailed knowledge Xi had about Putin’s plans to launch a full-scale war, but their relationship endured the test. If anything, the Western response to Russia’s war reinforced China’s worst fears, further pushing it to align with Russia. Beijing viewed Russian security concerns about NATO expansion as legitimate and expected the West to address them as it sought a way to prevent or stop the war. Instead, the United States, the European Union, and their partners armed Ukraine and tried to paralyze Russia with unprecedented sanctions. Naturally, this has amplified concerns in Beijing that Washington and its allies could be similarly unaccommodating toward Chinese designs on Taiwan.

Against the background of increased mutual threat perceptions, both sides are boosting ties with like-minded countries. On one side, this includes a reenergized, expanded NATO and its growing linkages to the Indo-Pacific, as well as an invigoration of Washington’s bilateral, trilateral, and minilateral arrangements in Asia. Developed Western democracies—with the G-7 in the lead—are also exploring how their experience deterring and sanctioning Russia could be leveraged against China in potential future contingencies.

On the other side, Xi envisions the China-Russia partnership as the foundation for shaping “the global landscape and the future of humanity.” Both countries recognize that while the leading democracies are relatively united, many countries in the global south remain reluctant to align with either the West or China and Russia. In Xi and Putin’s view, winning support in the global south is key to pushing back against what they consider U.S. hegemony.

Alex Nabaum Illustration For Foreign Policy

In the global multilateral institutions, China and Russia are coordinating with each other to block the United States from advancing agendas that do not align with their interests. The U.N. Security Council is often paralyzed by their veto powers, while other institutions have turned into battlegrounds for seeking influence. Beijing and Moscow view the G-20, where their joint weight is relatively greater, as a key forum for cooperation.

But the most promising venues are BRICS and the SCO, established to exclude the developed West and anchor joint Chinese-Russian efforts to reshape the international system. Both are set up for expansion—in terms of scope, membership, and other partnerships. They are the primary means for China and Russia to create a web of influence that increasingly ties strategically important countries to both powers.

The BRICS grouping—initially made up of Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa—is at the heart of Moscow and Beijing’s efforts to build a bloc of economically powerful countries to resist what they call Western “Unilateralism.” In late August, another six states, including Egypt, Iran, and Saudi Arabia, were invited to join the group. With their growing economic power, the BRICS countries are pushing for cooperation on a range of issues, including ways to reduce the dominance of the U.S. dollar and stabilize global supply chains against Western calls for “Decoupling” and “De-risking.” Dozens of other countries have expressed interest in joining BRICS.

The SCO, in contrast, is a Eurasian grouping of Russia, China, and their friends. With the exception of India, all are members of China’s Belt and Road Initiative. The accession of Iran in July and Belarus’s membership application put the SCO on course to bring China’s and Russia’s closest and strongest military partners under one umbrella. If the SCO substantially deepens security cooperation, it could grow into a counterweight against U.S.-led Coalitions.

Both BRICS and the SCO, however, operate by consensus, and it will take time to transform both groups into cohesive, powerful geopolitical actors that can function like the G-7 or NATO. The presence of India in both groups will make it difficult for China and Russia to turn either into a staunchly anti-Western outfit. The diversity of members—which include democracies and autocracies with vastly different cultures—means that China and Russia will have to work hard to ensure significant influence over each organization and its individual members.

What’s next? Continued Sino-Russian convergence is the most likely course. But that is not set in stone—and progress can be accelerated, slowed, or reversed. Absent external shocks, Beijing and Moscow may not need to significantly upgrade their relationship from its current trajectory. Xi and Putin share similar views of a hostile West and recognize the strategic advantages of closer alignment. But they remain wary of each other, with neither wanting to be responsible for or subordinate to the other.

Major changes or shocks, however, could drive them closer at a faster pace. Should Russia suffer a devastating military setback in Ukraine that risks the collapse of Putin’s regime, China might reconsider the question of substantial military aid. If China, in turn, finds itself in a major Taiwan crisis or conflict against the United States, Beijing could lean more on Moscow. During a conflict over Taiwan, Russia could also engage in opportunistic aggression elsewhere that would tie China and Russia together in the eyes of the international community, even if Moscow’s actions were not coordinated with Beijing.

A change in the trajectory toward ever closer Chinese-Russian ties may also be possible, though it is far less likely. Some Chinese experts worry that Russia will always prioritize its own interests over any consideration of bilateral ties. If, for instance, former U.S. President Donald Trump wins another term, he could decrease U.S. support for Ukraine and offer Putin improved relations. This, in turn, could dim the Kremlin’s willingness to support China against the United States. It’s not clear if this worry is shared by top Chinese or Russian leaders, but mutual distrust and skepticism of the other remain in both countries.

— This article appears in the Fall 2023 issue of Foreign Policy. | Bonny Lin, the Director of the China Power Project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

[usafphantom2]

IMAGES: US accuses China of conducting a "centralized and concerted" campaign of harassment of aircraft

U.S. officials claim China's coordinated campaign to disrupt international airspace and waters.

Fernando Valduga By Fernando Valduga 10/19/2023 - 09:04am Interceptions, Military, War Zones

At a press conference held on October 17 at the Pentagon, senior U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) officials raised concerns about a series of unsafe interceptions of U.S. and allied aircraft in international airspace carried out by Chinese military aircraft. The U.S. has released a series of videos and images of these unsafe encounters.

U.S. Department of Defense officials believe that unsafe interceptions of U.S. aircraft and allied aircraft in international airspace are “a centralized and concerted campaign” by Chinese officials to “coerce a change in U.S. legal operational activity,” said Ely Ratner, assistant defense secretary for Indo-Pacific security affairs.

A Chinese fighter approaches a U.S. military plane in the South China Sea. This is one of many images released on Tuesday by the Pentagon documenting Chinese fighters conducting what the Pentagon calls "a coercive and risky interception against a U.S. asset legally operating in the East China Sea, including approaching a distance of only 12 meters before repeatedly flying above and below the U.S. aircraft." (Photo: Department of Defense)

Ratner and Navy Admiral John Aquilino, commander of the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command, spoke at the Pentagon about the dangers that these Chinese interceptions pose to peace in the region.

Chinese interceptions are not limited to the skies of international airspace. Ratner said that this is only part of a broader pattern of behavior of the People's Liberation Army of China (PLA) “ throughout the region, in all domains and in all geographies.”

Chinese ships are harassing U.S. warships and allies in the waters of the East China Sea in the South China Sea. “We are seeing this on land against our Indian partners,” he said. "This is part of a much broader picture."

Ratner predicted some information from the Chinese Military Power Report, which will be released soon, saying that Chinese fighters are increasingly involved in coercive and risky operational behavior.

“Since the fall of 2021, we have seen more than 180 incidents of this type: more in the last two years than in the previous decade,” Ratner said. "There are almost 200 cases in which PLA operators performed reckless maneuvers, or released chaffs, or fired flares, or approached too quickly or too close to U.S. aircraft."

These maneuvers are part of an effort to interfere in the ability of American forces to operate safely “in places where we and all countries in the world have every right to be under international law,” he said. "And when you take into account the cases of coercive and risky interceptions of the PLA against other states, the number increases to almost 300 cases against U.S. aircraft, allies and partners in the last two years."

The Department of Defense released images of some of these interceptions. This includes a PLA jet fighter crossing in front of a U.S. aircraft legally operating at only 100 meters. “In May of this year,... Indo-Pacom released a video of a PLA aircraft accelerating alongside a U.S. aircraft before passing in front of it,” Ratner said. "You can even see the physical effects of the resulting turbulence on the aircraft on the crew."

Meanwhile, Chinese military authorities refuse repeated U.S. requests to open lines of communication between the two countries. "These images and videos speak for themselves," Ratner said. "U.S. planes are operating safely, responsibly and in accordance with international law. In fact, the skill and professionalism of the U.S. military should not be the only thing that separates PLA fighter pilots and a dangerous, even fatal accident."

Aquilino said that these accidents caused by this risk behavior can lead to miscalculation. “Let me be clear: interceptions happen every day around the world, and the vast majority are conducted safely and without incidents,” said the admiral. "There is no reason why the interceptions with China in the Indo-Pacific region should be different."

Aquilino asked to speak to his Chinese counterparts for two and a half years. “I haven't had one of these requests accepted yet,” he said. "I'm looking forward to talking to my counterparts. I think that developing this relationship would be fundamental to maintaining peace and stability in the region."

Chinese behavior is worrying, he said. “What we have seen since 2021 is a set of actions that have brought the planes much closer than it is comfortable for those in the cabin,” Aquilino said. “In other words, flying near my wing at 5 meters for 45 minutes has a lot of chance of causing an accident. We have seen an increase in these interceptions and activities very close to our planes since the fall of 2021.”

There is no need for this behavior. “For decades, the United States has operated in the region safely, responsibly and in accordance with international law and we will continue to do so,” Ratner said. “Our allies and partners welcome our military presence because it promotes our shared vision of a free and open Indo-Pacific.

"This vision is characterized by respect for sovereignty, adherence to international law, belief in transparency and openness, freedom of trade and navigation, equal rights for all crew members and the resolution of disputes through peaceful means, not through coercion or conquest."

(Click here to access the Pentagon page containing all 37 photos and videos released on Tuesday.)

Tags: Military AviationInterceptionsPLAAF - China Air ForceUSAF - United States Air Force / U.S. Air ForceWar Zones - Indo-Asia-Pacific

Sharing

tweet

Fernando Valduga

Fernando Valduga

Aviation photographer and pilot since 1992, has participated in several events and air operations, such as Cruzex, AirVenture, Dayton Airshow and FIDAE. He has work published in specialized aviation magazines in Brazil and abroad. Uses Canon equipment during his photographic work in the world of aviation.

Related news

BRAZILIAN AIR FORCE

VIDEO: FAB's C-130 transports firefighters for firefighting in the Amazon

19/10/2023 - 08:41

A Colombian Air Force C-130H lands at Barksdale Air Base in Louisiana. As part of its Theater Maintenance Partnership Initiative, or TMPI, Southcom will help South American partner and allied nations develop specialized maintenance expertise, from equipment-level maintenance to life cycle management, to better maintain the military equipment they purchased from the United States. (Photo: USAF)

MILITARY

U.S. Southern Command intends to create maintenance partnerships with South American nations

18/10/2023 - 20:31

EMBRAER

Aero Vodochody deepens collaboration with Embraer for the production of C-390 aircraft

18/10/2023 - 19:01

Northrop Grumman's independent design allows ALMDS to be installed on various types of aircraft. (Photo: U.S. Navy)

MILITARY

Northrop Grumman receives contract for mine detection system for the Republic of Korea

18/10/2023 - 17:00

MILITARY

French fighters are deployed in Romania supporting NATO air armor

18/10/2023 - 16:00

HELICOPTERS

Latvia will acquire four MD 530F light helicopters

18/10/2023 - 14:00

[voskhozhdeniye]

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.”

Map of the South China Sea and areas each country claims

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.

Before Khanna’s delegation visited Taiwan, Rep. Rob Wittman (R-VA), another member of the China committee, said members of the panel would be visiting the island soon and acknowledged it would “infuriate” Beijing.

In response, Auchincloss said he didn’t care if the visit angered China. “They’re angry. I don’t care. We’re going to stand with freedom and democracy wherever it is in the world, in Ukraine, in Taiwan, and on the streets of Tehran,” he told the Beast. “We can’t flinch just because the CCP is angry.”

[kneedeepincynade]

No one can be provoked forever, and this is even more true for nations. The United States provocations and adventurism will inevitably cause a conflict with China

The post is machine translated

Translation is at the bottom

The collective is on telegram

⚠️ L'AVVENTURISMO ANTI-CINESE DEGLI IMPERIALISTI AMERICANI PORTERÀ ALLO SCONTRO ⚠️

✈️ Il 26/05, un Caccia Multiruolo J-16 dell'EPL ha intercettato un RC-135V nel Mar Cinese Meridionale. Non è la prima volta che ciò accade, dato che gli Imperialisti USA - nei mesi precedenti - hanno continuato a provocare l'Esercito Popolare di Liberazione con voli di RC-135U, EP-3 Orion e P-8A Poseidon 😡

🤔 Come potete notare dalla mappa, l'RC-135V si è avvicinato, intenzionalmente, nel Territorio della RPC, operando all'incontro tra lo Stretto di Taiwan e il Mar Cinese Meridionale ❗️

🤔 L'RC-135V, come ricorda China Army, possiede un Raggio di Ricognizione di ~ 600/800km. Pericolosamente vicino alla Città di Shantou, il velivolo ha quasi oltrepassato il confine dello Stato, quindi è normale che il Comando - una volta notato - abbia preso contromisure preventive, inviando un Caccia per intercettare l'intruso 🌟

🇨🇳 Ricordate le parole del Colonnello Zhou Bo, che definì il Mar Cinese Meridionale come un possibile Teatro di Scontro Militare tra Cina e USA, a causa di «Navi da Guerra e Aerei USA che continuano a sfidare le rivendicazioni Cinesi alla Sovranità nella Regione» ⚔️

🤔 Tuttavia, è anche fondamentale sottolineare un dettaglio: l'RC-135V, intercettato dal J-16, ha lasciato l'Area dopo le 9:30 UTC, dopo che la Portaerei Shandong è entrata nello Stretto di Taiwan. Ciò significa che l'aereo, probabilmente, è stato inviato dagli imperialisti USA per osservare le sua attività ❗️

🔍 Provocazioni degli USA contro la Cina:

一 24/02: il Comando Orientale dell'EPL intercetta un P-8A nel Mar Cinese Meridionale, e invia un Caccia di Superiorità Aerea J-11, armato con Missili Aria-Aria, per scortare l'Aereo USA al di fuori della Zona Cinese 🔥

二 23/03: gli USA inviano il Cacciatorpediniere Milius nel Mar Cinese Meridionale, nell'Area delle Isole Paracel, al fine di provocare la Cina😡

三 28/04: gli USA inviano un P-8A nello Stretto di Taiwan, per provocare la Pace nella Zona

🌸 Iscriviti 👉 @collettivoshaoshan

⚠️ THE ANTI-CHINESE ADVENTURISM OF AMERICAN IMPERIALISTS WILL LEAD TO CLASH ⚠️

✈️ On 26/05, a PLA J-16 Multirole Fighter intercepted an RC-135V in the South China Sea. This is not the first time this has happened, as the US Imperialists - in the previous months - continued to provoke the People's Liberation Army with flights of RC-135U, EP-3 Orion P-8A Poseidon 😡

🤔 As you can see from the map, the RC-135V intentionally approached the PRC territory, operating at the junction of the Taiwan Strait and the South China Sea ❗️

🤔 The RC-135V, as China Army recalls, has a Reconnaissance Range of ~ 600/800km. Dangerously close to Shantou City, the aircraft almost crossed the state border, so it is normal that the Command - once noticed - took preventive countermeasures, sending a Fighter to intercept the intruder 🌟

🇨🇳 Remember the words of Colonel Zhou Bo, who defined the South China Sea as a possible theater of military confrontation between China and the US, due to «US warships and aircraft that continue to challenge Chinese claims to sovereignty in the region» ⚔️

🤔 However, it is also essential to underline one detail: the RC-135V, intercepted by the J-16, left the area after 9:30 UTC, after the aircraft carrier Shandong entered the Taiwan Strait. This means that the plane was probably sent by the US imperialists to observe its activities ❗️

🔍 US provocations against China:

一 24/02: PLA Eastern Command intercepts a P-8A in the South China Sea, and sends a J-11 Air Superiority Fighter, armed with Air-to-Air Missiles, to escort US aircraft out of the Chinese zone 🔥

二 23/03: US sends Destroyer Milius to South China Sea, Paracel Islands Area in order to provoke China😡

三28/04 US sends a P-8A into the Taiwan Strait, to cause Peace in the Area

🌸 Subscribe 👉 @collettivoshaoshan

[treasures-thegreatwall-china]

Ding Shuo's The mail stamp album "American warships in China during the Republic of China era".Great Wall Treasure Code C2365690356.

This album has selected 12 ships from the United States to visit China to send letters, especially to the heroes of World War II

Since the Qing government signed an unequal treaty with foreign countries, the Qing Dynasty opened a series of ports along the coast of China and along the Yangtze River. From 1854 to 1941, before the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, the fleet of the United States Navy sailed freely in the Yangtze River and coastal ports of China. They patrolled the ports to protect the security and interests of the Americans. Before the War of Resistance against Japan, ocean going freighters could go directly to Wuhan, while ships with small tonnage still went to Chongqing.

In 1937, the Battle of Songhu in Shanghai started, and there was a bloody battle between the Chinese army and the people and the Japanese invaders. On the warship, the Americans, as neutral international military observers, assessed and analyzed the war situation of both sides. On the other hand, the United States is still sending warships to visit ports in the occupied coastal areas of China. With the Pearl Harbor incident in 1941, the Pacific War broke out. The United States immediately declared war on Japan, and these American warships originally patrolling the southeast coast of China joined the anti French camp. Nearly 20000 overseas Chinese have joined the US military, and thousands of them have joined the US Navy.

In countless decisive battles with Japan, the German navy and the air force, the Chinese and American fleets, with their indomitable will and heroic spirit, dealt a heavy blow to the Japanese and German naval and air forces and together destroyed the main force of the French navy. In the battle, many Chinese soldiers died. They and their American comrades in arms, together with their warships, will always sleep in the South China Sea, the Pacific Ocean and other waters.

[fitnessandhealth-22]

Apple Pencil (2nd Generation) https://amzn.to/3HkQjYW

About this item Compatible with iPad mini (6th generation), iPad Air (5th and 4th generation), iPad Pro 12.9-inch (3rd, 4th, and 5th generations), iPad Pro 11-inch (3rd, 2nd, and 1st generations) Apple Pencil (2nd generation) brings your work to life. With imperceptible lag, pixel-perfect precision, and tilt and pressure sensitivity, it transforms into your favorite creative instrument, your paint brush, your charcoal, or your pencil. It makes painting, sketching, doodling, and even note-taking better than ever. It magnetically attaches to iPad mini (6th generation), iPad Pro and iPad Air, charges wirelessly, and lets you change tools with a simple double tap. https://amzn.to/3HkQjYW

[sa7abnews]

US ally says it expects America to intervene if China tries to take a rusting World War II warship in the South China Sea

New Post has been published on Sa7ab News

US ally says it expects America to intervene if China tries to take a rusting World War II warship in the South China Sea

The grounded Philippine warship Sierra Madre marks Manila’s territorial claim near the disputed Second Thomas Shoal in the South China Sea.

... read more !

[darkmaga-retard]

German warships have not passed through the Taiwan Strait in over two decades, but reports are circulating that Berlin plans to defy Bejing by permitting warships to pass through the Strait later this month. Germany is showing solidarity with NATO nations like Canada and the United States who have recently provoked tensions by making their maritime presence in the sensitive area known.

German Rear Admiral Axel Schulz told reporters that such a move would show Germany’s adherence to the world order and plans to “peacefully” resolve disagreements. Yet, China believes it can “peacefully” reunite with Taiwan if there is no interference. China is not concerned with Russia or other conflicts as it attempts to remain as neutral as possible despite being criticized for assisting Moscow. No, the primary issue China has with the West is its insistence on ending the One China policy with Taiwan.

While Germany will not make an official announcement before embarking on the Strait, they are giving China enough time to respond. The stated primary purpose of this military exercise is to remind China that no one has control over the South China Sea or Taiwan Strait. “We are reinforcing the freedom of navigation and stability in a strategically important region for us,” Bundestag member Michael Roth posted on X. “We stand for peace and security in the Taiwan Strait and oppose any unilateral and violent changes to the status quo by China. It is a misconception to think that leniency will lead China to reconsider,” he added while saying the move was not meant to provoke China.

Yet, Roth also said that he is concerned that “China is tightening its grip and changing the status quo daily.” Passing through the Strait will somehow de-escalate tensions and reduce the prospect of war. “A military conflict in the Taiwan Strait would have catastrophic consequences for Germany and the global economy, potentially even worse than the COVID-19 pandemic,” Roth added. True, a large portion of world trade travels through this passage but there could be no war between Taiwan and China unless Taiwan were backed by powerful allies.

[head-post]

US support for Philippines, Japan “ironclad”, Joe Biden says

US President Joe Biden on Thursday reiterated Washington’s readiness to defend the Philippines against any armed attack in the South China Sea at a summit with the leaders of Japan and the Philippines, in what was seen as a warning to Beijing and an attempt to reassure allies worried about China’s actions in disputed waters, Japan Times reports.

At the beginning trilateral talks at the White House with Prime Minister Fumio Kishida and Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. Joe Biden said:

“The United States’ defence commitments to Japan and to the Philippines are ironclad. Any attack on Philippine aircraft, vessels or armed forces in the South China Sea would invoke our mutual defense treaty.”

The three leaders agreed on a number of defence and economic initiatives, including joint naval patrols, increased coast guard cooperation and major infrastructure projects.

The Chinese Coast Guard is trying to prevent Philippine ships from resupplying a garrison stationed on a grounded warship near Second Thomas, an underwater reef. Beijing’s so-called “grey zone” activities in the South China Sea and the East China Sea have raised fears that tensions could escalate into a wider crisis, including one that would involve Washington and perhaps even other US allies such as Japan and Australia.

In a joint policy statement marking the launch of the new US-led multilateral Indo-Pacific Group, the three leaders accused Beijing of “dangerous and destabilising behaviour” by disrupting Second Thomas supply lines and preventing Manila from exercising “freedom of navigation on the high seas”.

Read more HERE

[mariacallous]

Russia escalated its war on Ukraine’s grain exports again this week, sending wheat prices soaring and threatening to exacerbate global hunger as it seeks to blockade one of the world’s foremost breadbaskets.

After withdrawing from a U.N.-brokered grain deal on Monday, which allowed ships carrying grain from Ukrainian ports to reach world markets, the Russian Defense Ministry on Wednesday announced that any vessels en route to Ukrainian ports would be regarded as potentially carrying military cargo—and could be subject to attack in what would amount to a significant escalation of the conflict and a challenge to long-standing U.S. efforts to ensure freedom of navigation around the globe.

The threat came as Ukraine’s port city of Odesa has been subjected to a nightly barrage, for four days straight now, of Russian missile strikes that may have impacted up to 60,000 tons of grain, warehouses, and dock facilities, prompting top U.S. officials to sound the alarm on potential food shortages. On Friday, Ukrainian officials said Moscow’s latest strike had destroyed 100 tons of peas and 20 tons of barley. The White House also warned that U.S. intelligence indicated that Russia had laid sea mines on the approach to Ukrainian ports, intending to blame Kyiv as part of a false-flag operation.

“This is yet another twist and turn by [Russian President Vladimir] Putin and Russia to broaden the war, so to speak, and to include the maritime domain,” said Sebastian Bruns, an expert in maritime strategy and security at the Institute for Security Policy at Kiel University. “He’s looking for other ways to intimidate the West.”

Russia’s threats pose a major test for the international community’s ability to safeguard shipping in the area and freedom of navigation, a cornerstone of maritime law that allows vessels to sail unimpeded through international waters. While Russia has waged war against Ukraine for over a year, an attack on a single commercial vessel could embroil several countries in one fell swoop, given the globalized nature of shipping.

“If somebody attacks those civilian vessels, it’s a throwback to World War I and the sinking of the Lusitania,” said retired Adm. James Foggo, who served as the commander of U.S. naval forces in Europe and Africa, referring to the British passenger ship sunk by a German U-boat in 1915. “It’s a slippery slope to a much more serious conflict.”

The U.S. Navy routinely conducts freedom of navigation operations around the world to preserve the right to access international waters. On Monday, U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin dispatched U.S. fighter jets and the guided-missile destroyer USS Thomas Hudner to the Middle East in response to the Iran’s recent attempts to seize merchant shipping vessels in the region. But in the Black Sea, where Russia and Western powers have vied for influence for centuries, Washington and its NATO allies are constrained by geography, geopolitics, and paperwork.

The Black Sea, which is slightly larger than the U.S. state of California, is ringed by six countries. Half of them—Romania, Turkey, and Bulgaria—are NATO members. The narrow entrance to the sea, the Bosporus, is controlled by Turkey under a 1936 agreement known as the Montreux Convention. In the early days of Russia’s invasion, Ankara invoked the convention to close off the strategic choke point to warships, undercutting Russia’s ability to reinforce its Black Sea Fleet. Washington withdrew its warships from the region shortly before the invasion as it has sought to avoid a direct confrontation with Russia.

“If this was the South China Sea, we would be conducting freedom of navigation operations,” said Kurt Volker, who served as a U.S. ambassador to NATO during the George W. Bush administration. “Because of the unwillingness to confront Russia, we are backing off from this principle, which we have otherwise stood by.”

On Monday, U.S. National Security Council spokesperson John Kirby said there were no plans under consideration to escort commercial shipping in the area in the wake of Russia’s withdrawal from the grain deal. In the late 1980s, the Navy did escort reflagged Kuwaiti oil tankers out of harm’s way in the Persian Gulf during the closing stages of the Iran-Iraq War, a period known as the “Tanker War.”

“The U.S and its allies mustered significant resources to support the free flow of international cargo [during the Tanker War],” Bruns said. “It helped the U.S. Navy, and the U.S. at large, to play a significant role as guardian of the maritime system.”

With three NATO member states on the shores of the Black Sea, a similar operation could be replicated by the alliance, said retired Adm. James Stavridis, who took part in the Navy convoy mission, known as Operation Earnest Will.

“NATO and the U.S. could escort the grain shipments at sea, something they have plenty of capability to do with three major NATO nations in the Black Sea,” he said in an email. “With well stated warnings to the Russian Black Sea fleet, NATO should return fire if a Russian warship were to attack a grain ship, which is essentially a humanitarian vessel operating in international waters.”

After launching a full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, Russia has harnessed the body of water to block Ukraine’s food exports, thereby strangling its agricultural industry and exerting yet another pressure point on Kyiv outside of the battlefield.

Ukraine, for its part, has vowed to continue its grain shipments in lieu of the Black Sea grain deal and warned on Thursday that any vessels traveling to ports in Russia or Russian-occupied Ukraine could also be seen as military targets, directly echoing Moscow’s language in its response. Prior to the collapse of the fragile agreement, the Turkish navy had reportedly also pledged to help ensure the safety of Ukraine’s exports, although its continued involvement remains unclear.

“The Russian Federation has once again brutally violated the universal right to free navigation for the whole world and is deliberately undermining food security,” the Ukrainian Defense Ministry said in a statement. “The Kremlin has turned the Black Sea into a danger zone.”

If Russia began attacking vessels carrying Ukrainian grain, it could mark a sharp escalation in the conflict. Under the law of naval warfare, Moscow has the right to visit and search merchant ships—but not to immediately target them, said James Kraska, a professor of international maritime law at the U.S. Naval War College.

“There’s basic humanitarian principles that apply, and you can’t engage or treat them as a target,” he said. “They’re still civilian objects.”

But even if Moscow does not immediately act on its threats, just the fear of an attack, or the presence of the embargo, is stirring enough uncertainty to spook insurers and international grain markets. Wheat prices have registered double-digit increases in price since Russia left the deal, and maritime insurers are jittery. Prices would have gone higher were it not for bumper crops in big wheat-producing countries, which has cushioned the blow of the blockade. But that’s all part of Russia’s plan to advance outside of the battlefield, where it cannot.

“It just drives up the cost and the risk of sea freight trade with Ukraine through Black Sea ports,” said Christopher Barrett, an agricultural economist at Cornell University. “That’s presumably Russia’s objective: It’s trying to isolate Ukraine and impose pain on Ukraine—and that means also imposing some pain on Ukraine’s trade partners.”

“This is just another way of hurting its enemy in a war,” Barrett added. “The greatest costs of Russia’s action are going to be shouldered by Ukraine, the government and its farmers and its grain traders, because the world has already adapted to the unpredictability of Black Sea exports.”