China says it's ready if US ‘stirs up any conflict’

[humble3d]

China says it's ready if US ‘stirs up any conflict’

 in The South China Sea...

 

[ASIDE: Some of the world's largest known
oil reserves lie under the South China Sea, NOT just

in Russia and Venezuela]

 

BEIJING — China's attempts to claim a nearly 1.4-million-square-mile swathe of open ocean are without precedent and probably without legal merit, but Beijing continues to assert its right to the economically critical zone — and increasingly puts its claims in military terms.

 

Speaking to a small group of reporters in Beijing on Thursday, a high-ranking Chinese official made his warning clear: The United States should not provoke China in the South China Sea without expecting retaliation.

 

"The Chinese people do not want to have war, so we will be opposed to [the] U.S. if it stirs up any conflict," said Liu Zhenmin, vice minister of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. "Of course, if the Korean War or Vietnam War are replayed, then we will have to defend ourselves."

 

 

The so-called "nine-dash line" that China has drawn over most of the South China Sea — a gargantuan territorial claim that stretches about 1,200 miles from its shores — would give Beijing control over a zone that's estimated to handle about half of global merchant shipping, a third of the planet's oil shipping, two-thirds of global liquid natural gas shipments, and more than a 10th of Earth's fish catch. The Obama administration, backed by several Asian governments and entities such as the Brookings Institution, argues that such massive ocean claims at great distance from land are "inconsistent with international law."

 

China has a growing military presence in the region, including the wholesale raising of islands and construction of airfields on what were once atolls. The U.S. Navy operates there as well, increasingly in concert with regional powers such as the Philippines. Two Chinese fighter jets on Tuesday intercepted and passed within 50 feet of a U.S. military reconnaissance plane.

 

DigitalGlobe imagery of the nearly completed construction within the Fiery Cross Reef located in the South China Sea. Fiery Cross is located in the western part of the Spratly Islands group.
Beijing's real strategy in the South China Sea

 

"We rely heavily on the South China Sea [for] transportation of resources and energy and the South China Sea is an important trading group for us. We attach great importance to peace and stability in the South China Sea," said Liu, who warned the United States that it "cannot circle China by building military bases — we cannot do so 30 years ago, or even now."

 

"Chinese people and the government feel like we haven't been treated fairly because the U.S. is blaming China for rising tensions in the South China Sea," said Liu, who added that "what matters is that the U.S. government has recognized that times have changed, [and the U.S.] can gain much more through cooperation than going to war."

 

China is party to the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea, and that framework provides "no legal basis" for China to claim its "nine-dash" area, said Alessio Patalano, senior lecturer in Naval History and East Asian Security at King's College London.

 

DigitalGlobe imagery of the nearly completed construction within the Fiery Cross Reef located in the South China Sea. Fiery Cross is located in the western part of the Spratly Islands group.

 

But beyond that, Patalano said, China's actions have no historical precedent.

 

"There is not a precedent of this kind, and this is for two reasons," Patalano told CNBC. "First until recently, technology didn't allow nation states to project power over the oceans as it is possible today. Second, today's degree of interdependence has no precedent in history, therefore issues over the ability of shipping to move through this basin has potential impact on the international system in a way that was not possible previously."

 

The South China Sea for years has been a point of contention for bordering nations besides China, including Vietnam, Malaysia and the Philippines, but in recent years has become a larger nexus of disagreement as China has unilaterally declared the region its own. China's fishing fleet, the world's biggest, operates increasingly within the legally exclusive zones of Vietnam, Indonesia, Thailand and other countries.

 

A tribunal at the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague is expected to rule in the next couple months on China's expansive territorial claims, though China has already rejected those proceedings.

 

As the dispute festers, experts see a higher chance of an unintended conflict between U.S. and Chinese vessels or aircraft, something that was witnessed in 2001 when a Chinese and a U.S. plane collided. China watchers say if a collision were to happen in 2016, a strong response from both sides could be possible.

 

"China attaches far greater importance to peace in the South China Sea — much greater than the U.S. and Japan. No one should doubt our sincerity in this subject," Liu said. "The Chinese government will uphold peace in Southeast Asia even for the sake of our own survival. In this sense we are actively against any moves that will jeopardize peace in the South China Sea."

 

Liu warned that a conflict between China and the United States would have wide repercussions for the global economy.

 

"No country would want to see confrontations between [the] U.S. and China," he said, "because [the] Chinese and U.S. economy will be hurt, and impacts will be felt across the world."

 

 

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/05/19/china-says-its-ready-if-us-stirs-up-any-conflict-in-south-china-sea.html

 

[dMog]

this is China dipping their proverbial toe into the waters of what and how they will be able to do now and into the future with the mere threat of involving their military into political matters... if they end up getting what they want...look for them to dip their foot, leg and soon their whole body into the fray and expand their influence in other areas of the world in the same manner

[Batu69]

Moved from The Chat Bar forum.

[CODYQX4]

.

[dMog]

9 minutes ago, CODYQX4 said:

Alternatively, WW3 ensues.

Nah...they will only go as far as they will be allowed by the other major powers...and none including china wants a major or even a minor conflagration...just to flex their muscles and gain influence power and cash... wars take that away from too many of the power brokers in today's  modern times

[Xionic]

11 minutes ago, CODYQX4 said:

WW3 ensues.

Came to say your comment and u beat to it 

 

People shouldn't hope for for no WW3 thinking that there leaders learned from the past and the bloodshed

there will be a Worldwar..One last one

 

[davmil]

Blatant, balls out land grab of natural resources over weak territories.  A simple, good bet that no one's got the guts to stand up to them.  They could care less about Western Laws restricting them - Asia is ruled by power, not law... that's the oldest story in history... not that the West is that much different.

[vibranium]

No one's thinking of anybody PLANNING to start a regional conflict. It's the accidental escalation (e.g. some idiot pressing a button by mistake) that scares people.

[Sylence]

How many WW III(s) are gonna be? following the news titles, first it was expected the war against ISIS (which is widely believed they're backed by U.S) is WW III, then the possible conflict between Russia and US due to deployment of anti ballistic missile bases in eastern Europe is gonna be the WW III, now conflict between China and US over the island is gonna be WW III. 

(notice U.S is always part of the conflicts? as a troublemaker) 

 

damn this is confusing 

 

 

[pc71520]

5 hours ago, saeed_dc said:

How many WW III(s) are gonna be?

Yeah, how many? 

[Ghazi]

Actually Armageddon is referred to as World War III. It will be the bloodiest of all the Wars as described in Major Ibrahimic Faiths

[Sylence]

2 hours ago, Ghazi said:

Actually Armageddon is referred to as World War III. It will be the bloodiest of all the Wars as described in Major Ibrahimic Faiths

 

What do they even mean..Ibrahimic faiths?

[youarefinished]

Came to say your comment and u beat to it [emoji5]

 

People shouldn't hope for for no WW3 thinking that there leaders learned from the past and the bloodshed

there will be a Worldwar..One last one

 

As long as there is this race exist for power, there is no true end of these wars.

Sent from my "i9300/1+2" powered by Carbon/RR

Fueled by 7000mAh ZeroLemon Battery

[CODYQX4]

.

[Ghazi]

Just now, saeed_dc said:

What do they even mean..Ibrahimic faiths?

It means the religions like Judaism, Christianity and Islam. In Bible Armageddon is mentioned in the the book of Revelation and in Islam the Hadith tell about it as"Al-Malhamat-ul-uzma".

[Sylence]

4 hours ago, CODYQX4 said:

I know a lot of people sadly subscribe to the "US is Evil Source of All Conflict", but what China means by "stirs up trouble", means not lie down as they stake a claim to valuable resources that aren't rightly theirs.

Should we "not stir up conflict" if they stake a claim to all the oceans and the resources within them? Slippery Slope indeed...

 

Have you asked yourself this question that among 200 countries why US is only supposed to react to this issue? who or which organization granted them the permission for this?

 

1 hour ago, Ghazi said:

It means the religions like Judaism, Christianity and Islam. In Bible Armageddon is mentioned in the the book of Revelation and in Islam the Hadith tell about it as"Al-Malhamat-ul-uzma".

 

Hadith is not reliable, it's literary B.S everybody can tell and quote from imams, can you point me to any verse in Bible or Quran please specifically for this subject?

[lurch234]

Interpreting the book of Revelations is by no means an easy task. Fortunately in this day and age certain events have shed some light on the final battle of Armageddon. Armageddon is not the name of the battle itself but rather its location. The Hebrew meaning of Armageddon is the "Mount of Megiddo" or Tel Megiddo as it is known today. It is only mentioned in Revelations chapter 16 vs 16. Vs 12-14 of chapter 16 (Revelations) gives a partial description on who will be present on that fateful day.The kings of the East which are accepted as being the Chinese empire and the coalition of all the kings of the earth led by the Beast.Him being the political leader of the new roman empire. Which is accepted as being the European Union.

And Armageddon is not, to my knowledge, referred to as World War III among most of the Christian faith. But simply as the Battle of Armageddon.

[mikie]

China being a bully to those other smaller nations gives the small countries advantages with marketing product to the rest of the world.  

Who wants to buy goods from the bully china,  when they can help out the little guys being bullied buying goods & increasing trade from them.

[CODYQX4]

.

[jbleck]

just to be clear... USA is there as a peacekeeper...

 

[flitox]

1 hour ago, CODYQX4 said:

Because as much as other nations bitch and whine about USA being the "World Police", they want absolutely no part of any of it yet they want action on certain situations. They want to let USA get their hands dirty so they don't have to. Let us spend trillions on military bases and aircraft carriers and fight to keep the oil flowing.

 

Some nations have effectively signed USA to be their sole defender, then cry when USA is too involved in world affairs.

 

It's why all you hear about is NSA/CIA when every country barely above 3rd world has their own agencies doing the exact same thing. You think we're the only ones dropping bombs right now?

 

Every government is making the same bad economic choices as well, bankrupting their own country and putting more power into the hands of the banksters for a few of their table scraps.

the only place where the USA keeps to save the word is in hollywood movies, in real life they are only in for their little economical interests.

this is why they have so many military bases around the world.

of course they keep saying this is for defending Freedom but this is definitively not the case.

 

we are still waiting for them to declare an embargo on china like they did with russia(and have forced their allied to do so... very easy to do, you wanna make business with us, then you have to do this otherwise, we'll ruin your economy)!

 

and speaking of russia, i read very recently that the usa via nato fear that russia invade poland! hahaha what a joke, didn't they know that staline already took the land that was considered russian off the poles back in 1945 and this land is now part of bielorussia or ukraine. but hey they need to put russia down cuz they go against their interests in the middle east by supporting assad.

 

normally the UN, rather than the USA should said something, but unfortunatly like the league of nation, it's a useless tool as it was made defective by design by letting the 5 superpower have a veto vote!! yes democratic nations do not like democracy if it can goes against their economical interest.

 

 

[CODYQX4]

.

[pc71520]

21 hours ago, jbleck said:

just to be clear... USA is there as a peacekeeper...

The One & Only Peace-Keeper...