South China Sea a win win solution for China and the USA

I wrote this article last week and this morning Today’s frontpage headline flashes this, ‘S China Sea tensions increasing demand for US presence: Pentagon’.  Our local media seem to be very happy to sing the song of the USA. Yes, after raising tensions in the South China Sea, the Americans are drumming up the story that they are needed to bring peace to the region when there was peace before, and some countries are begging them to be here, to increase their military presence in the South China Sea. It is so easily done, to manipulate the silly Asian countries to fight among themselves and to invite the Americans as their guarantor of peace.

Now my article, ‘Was it done by design or things just happened that way, the US provocation in the South China is serving the interests of both the US and China but the silly countries in the region would end up the unthinking and ignorant victims of the power game being played.

What would be the objectives of the US to want to put up a brazen challenge to China by sailing all the way from the land they stole from the Red Indians, across the Pacific Ocean, just to sail a warship outside the 12nm limit of China’s islands? Was it just a show of force to please the Pinoys that big brother is strong and reliable, and it would be better to allow big brother back into Sublc and Clark bases?

The US has bigger concerns. They need to raise tension in the region to make sure they are not driven away. The South Koreans and the Japanese did not want to be semi colonies of the Americans forever. It affects their national pride, to have foreign military bases in their country and to act as if they cannot defend themselves. The Japanese nearly conquered the whole of Asia on their own. They don’t need the Americans to shit, oops, I mean sit in their country like the yakuza and collecting protection money from the Japanese govt. Both Japan and South Korea are getting restless and wanting the Americans out of their countries. Raising tension in the South China Sea would give the Americans the reason to tell these two semi colonies that China is threatening them and they cannot survive without the American troops in their countries.

It would also frighten the shit out of the silly Asean countries. The Americans will tell them, ‘see, the Chinese are expansionist and you need big brother to be around’. And these silly countries will panic and run to America to buy more weapons of war just in case.

The Americans have all to gain and to be patrolling the South China Sea with the consent of the frightened Asean countries like they own the South China Sea. They will become the de facto policeman or gangster in the region, protecting the daft countries with a red herring demon in China. I will post another article on why this is a red herring, China and its neighbours.  The pretentious provocation only cost the Americans some allowances paid to the sailors and burning off some cheap gas.

What about China? China has all the time professed not to militarise the South China Sea. Now with the US provocation, with American warships sailing around their islands, who can tell them not to militarise the islands? They have all the legitimate rights to defend their islands in the face of a military challenge. Now China will conveniently send in all their weapons and turn them into Guam and Gan, military fortresses.  The Americans have given the Chinese the exact excuse to do what they wanted to do but holding back to avoid more accusations from the Asean states.

China must be quietly saying thank you to the Americans for doing them this great favour. Or is this the agreement between Xi Jinping and Obama in Washington during his recent trip? The two super powers putting up a show for all the silly countries in East Asia and South East Asia to see and to panic and to accept a new reality, the militarization of South China Sea and furiously buying more weapons of war from the Americans for a fake security?

The Americans and the Chinese know very well that war between them is beyond comprehension and both would avoid it by all means. Putting up a show to frighten the monkeys and both benefitting from the circus are probably agreed in Washington. The US will get to stay in the region to maintain peace and to ‘balance’ China’s rise while China got to militarise the islands in the South China Sea. And all the silly countries would have to accept American bases and turn themselves into semi American colonies and emptying their pockets to buy more war toys.

What do you think is the truth?


Anonymous said...

"And all the silly countries would have to accept American bases and turn themselves into semi American colonies and emptying their pockets to buy more war toys."

U also talking about Singapore among the silly countries, is it?

But 70% voted for it, u know. Even some of our generals turn ministers eg Chan Chun Sing and Ng Chee Meng, are trained by the US Army, u know. And for the first time, we even have a fighter pilot turn minister.

Anonymous said...

甲午战争 Part 2?

Jiat Lat?

Sinkieland thrives on Globalisation and a world hegemon to police existing world order.

Anonymous said...

City Harvest Church receives a 75% strong mandate.
Only 25% of Church members has left since 2009.
75% continues to support the Church.


Anonymous said...

US the A already seen 2 previous aspiring hegemons challenging its position, one militarily and one in economics.

The Soviet disintegrated into 13 confederation states with a much reduced and weakened Russia still trying to revive its formal Soviet Union era preeminence.

The Japenis went into a huge economics bubble after 老 ah pek's 1985 US Joint Congress address ( to avert a potentially damaging trade war between the 2 WWII foes ) culminating in the ( silly ) Japenis acceding to the signing of the ( self-destructing ) Plaza Accord in 1987 which saw an immediate huge 30% revaluation of the Japenis currency, its gigantic economics bubble and 25 years of deflation ( and on economics life support ) since 1990.

Anonymous said...

City Harvest Church achieves a 75% strong mandate since 2009


Anonymous said...

Now, the current declining hegemon is embarking on countering the latest aspiring hegemon on both the economics and military fronts.

Ever since the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648, the world has witnessed hegemonic powers changing hands several times with tumultuous and destructive transition periods, the most recent being the bloody and devastating 6 years WWII between 1939 to 1945, culminating in the knockout of another aspiring hegemon ( Germany ) to the British Empire and the US of A ascending to the throne through the sly manipulation of the pre-existing world powers pre-WWII to go for each other's throats and only entering towards the end to be the fisherman to net in the feuding crane and clam after both exhausted and fought itself to death.

Sinkieland probably stands no or little chance to survive the transition period of another damaging titanic struggle between an existing and aspiring world hegemons.

Anonymous said...

Just like 1985 when 老 Ah Pek went to the US Joint Congress to deliver his historic speech to avert the premature receding of globalisation, the latest high stake gambit could be Sinkieland's chance of preventing another threat to globalisation going into reverse gear.

Sinkieland's economics formulae premised on a peaceful world with a relatively strong and stable hegemon overseeing world order and the uninterrupted, continuous tide of globalisation.

Applying the principle of MAD ( Mutual Assured Destruction ) as the deterrence to any potential war in the current rising tensions in East and South China SeaThe could be the only efficacious mean to maintain the world stay relatively peaceful especially in this part of the world and globalisation stays in its course.

Anonymous said...

Some joker states with a fleet of fishing warships rattling its sabres and clowning around are but just irritating sideshows to an extremely high stake historically game-changing geo-political event unfolding. .......

Chua Chin Leng aka redbean said...

I always say a war between the US and China is unthinkable and no reasonable man would try that. But some crazy Americans in Washington and the White House think they could fool around with limited warfare and could contain such a limited localised war without letting it blow out into an all out full scale nuclear war.

Between China and US, none would want to lose a local limited conflict and it would just get bigger very quickly and becomes unstoppable. Then MAD will follow.

simple said...

RB's attempt at tea leaf reading is full of holes and amateurish. Have yet to learn from him why he is 110% pro-communist PRC. He thinks he is all-right even though no ASEAN, Asian or other countries and even international laws and court take his point of view, except for a few same isolated nothing-better-to do egghead sympathisers. Sounds like if Singapore back USA more than with PRC, these citizens will turn traitorous?

Seriously, now championing red indians too is your cause when it's a non-issue back home? Red Indians are making loads of money from casinoes sitting on their reservations and most have integrated into mainstream US society and moved on; unlike the many minority groups in China which China is still having unsolved intergration problems with. Who next minorities to champion to back your arguments? Maoris, Australian and Malaysian oborigines???

Anonymous said...

Coming here to post your ignorance again and waiting to be recognised as an empty head? Go and write a blog of your own to show whether you are indeed a simpleton or an intellect.

At least RB got a blog going on for years. What are you trying to prove?

C'mon show us what you are made off, full of mush or shit?

Anonymous said...

RB, what have you done to this simpleton? Kissing his mama?

He has an axe to grind against you. Be careful of simpletons with nothing inside the head.

Anonymous said...

Ya, we did not have light moments for a long time. Let's have some fun with this simpleton.

Boy, can you write your name for us?

Anonymous said...

Hello, let me give you a piece of advice. If you want to come here to have a serious discussion with the adults, you must stick to the point of discussion.

Every time when you post, you start to attack RB personally. This shows that your intent is not discussion or you are incapable of a discussion. No one will take you seriously and you will look like a silly ass.

I can understand why other readers are tickling you and not engaging you seriously. You are so lame.

Anonymous said...

This dud did not come here to discuss. Fuck him.

Anonymous said...

Chua Chin Leng aka redbeanNovember 02, 2015 1:37 p.m.
//I always say a war between the US and China is unthinkable and no reasonable man would try that.//

The decline of US the A maybe inevitable given its huge debt ( abt USD 18 Trillion ) and now fast approaching it's current debt ceiling of USD18.1T, probably before Thanks Giving 2015 or likely latest by Christmas 2015.

China holds about slightly more than 10% of that debt.

Based on projected economics growth and tax revenue trajectory, this debt needs to be serviced and repaid back by another 10 generations of Ah-ma-ricans, assuming it doesn't grow anymore and interest rate stays below 2%.

Anonymous said...

On the other hand, given the experience of 老 AH PEK in Cina especially "输"Zhou, amongst many other nasty surprises and disappointment in doing biz with cina, somehow the conclusion could be the rise of cina as the next ( benign ) global hegemon is NOT to be taken as given and INEVITABLE.

Can sinkieland's place be assured with Ah-ma-rica's hegemonic position globally supplanted by another risen hegemon?

The world may not see another hegemon after the US of A but a global hegemonic vaccum for a prolonged period not dissimilar to the inter-war years between 1919 to 1939. It could very likely be a rather unstable world order with BLOCS, ALLIANCES and PACTS forming not unlike formation of anarchic neighbourhood gangs by members seeking protective umbrella.

Anonymous said...

How much time can be bought with current tactics before the next phase of the development of the world order sets in?

Will cina even be interested to play world hegemon except flexing its muscle to rattle and unnerve neighbouring states into capitulation?

How could or do such developments benefit sinkieland and/ or sinkies?

Chua Chin Leng aka redbean said...

The Americans would destroy itself with the enormous debt though they would try to inflate the debt away. Unfortunately it is not going to be that easy.

The strength of USA is its plurality and cosmopolitan population. But that strength could also be its weakness. They were in high heavens seeing how the USSR broke up and hoping the same would happen to China. They would not see it happening to themselves.

The big question is when the debt burden is too heavy and threatening to sink the mighty empire, the possibility of breaking will be there as each state would want to save itself from servicing the multi generations of debt.

The USA will explode internally and would be worse than the USSR.

Chua Chin Leng aka redbean said...

The history of China is proof that it would not be a hegemon even when it was the most powerful state on earth. The China as a hegemon is a western concept or red herring to frighten the daft Asian and SE Asian countries.

Look at all the financial institutions and initiatives the Chinese are setting up, all financial and nothing military. The South China Sea is a set up piece by the Americans, pushing tiny countries challenge and claim territories the Chinese already claimed. It is the expansionist wet dreams of small countries that are causing trouble in the South China Sea.

I will post another article on this subject.

Anonymous said...

老 AH PEK, in his dying years, trusted the cina no more than he would ever trust the buayaks with his beloved 女人s in his life.

JayF said...

China not a hegemon?

The Viets Koreans Mongols Tibetans and Uighurs will be surprised to hear that.

Why not ask the Dzungars who inhabited Xinjiang before the Uighurs? Oh we cannot because the Qing genocided them in the 18th century.

Anonymous said...

The setting up of AIIB is but one of the many affronts to the hegemony of the current hegemon in the economics dimension.

The international institutions set up after WWII are controlled by the creators in arguably all dimensions.

China is saying no. And she is projecting her power starting from her backyard, the East and South China Seas. China probably can't see much future for themselves in the current world order.

Anonymous said...

Both sides are trying to gain an overwhelming edge over the other.

Until such time, enjoy the plane trips over the South China Sea.

The latest skirmishes maybe an agreed political dance, wayang and opera more for domestic design.

Anonymous said...

But the longer term tussle for supremacy is unmistakable.

The Chinese adage proclaimed "One Mountain NO 2 tigers."

The international anarchic jungle cannot accommodate 2 hegemons.

Anonymous said...

The current world order is not dissimilar to the pre-WW ONE international power balance.

But the equations have altered significantly and the stakes are exceedingly high and tantamount to a "show hand" on a casino table.

The old formula of letting the crane and clam fight to their death cannot be applied in the current context without the fisherman being burnt alive in an ongoing conflict.

Anonymous said...

It took two world wars, a great global depression and a demagogue to deplete all other adversaries and cleared the path for ascendency to the global hegemon throne.

Unfortunately, the principle of nation states international social mobility is not built into the institutions set up after WWII.

Inherently it spawns instability when a new great power emerges as in this case.

Anonymous said...

The world may have progressed materially in the last 200 years but mindsets may not have changed much.

Every progress made technologically maybe one step backwards towards 1776 when "The Wealth of Nations" was published and further earlier into the Mercantilistic era of the 1500 to 1750.

It seems the accumulation of wealth and power by nation states had not changed much since 1492 and subsequently 1648.

Anonymous said...

Thot humans are wise beings.

But, it appears education and
technology have not tame the
Stupidity and Vanity of mankind.

And look at the senseless religious killings
happening when the gods the believers
pray to want them to love fellow beings.

How wild can beings be or could they be ever tamed ?

simple said...

For the umpteenth times, what is it eggheads don't understand that politics is dirty, either USA, China or etc. Who knows their end game, either fixed or evolving. To put in one-sided view and allegiance and say PRC is all good and USA is all bad, or vice versa, is ill-informed and naive. Who does anything without some benefit for themselves? But one undisputable fact is USA's substantial contribution to global law and order since WW2 and before, irrespective of their own motives and agenda in doing so.

Also we are talking of different forms of government, then (imperial) and now (communistic).
Using past history to noblise PRC's foreign policies is a joke. If history showed that the old Cathay did not go overseas to colonise, it was because it was, for military and economic reasons, logistically and strategically untenable because of the long distance and the slow transportation mode of those days by boat, especially for a land-aplenty country like Cathay which had no need to expand overseas. Times and politics have changed now.

The Chinese dynasties of old were financially strapped to finance their luxurious life-style and people were unhappy with taxes levied. Soldiers were needed in the country to maintain order and quell unrest. Where got money to finance extra armies and launch armadas to conquer far foreign countries?

The current PRC regime is not short of show of power and cruelty to its own populace (think Tiananmen massacre and oppression of its minority groups), so why do you think it will be different when it comes to dealing with foreign countries.

It is a probability not to be dismissed that the current military construction in the S China Sea and its use of monetary aid to befriend and beholden less developed countries in Asia and Africa to itself is just the means to an end game of military dominance and, hopefully not, aggression. Only time will tell. Who can really read the tea-leaves? RB and his Eggheads ? Really?

Then let RB project and justify rationally and objectively what he sees as PRC's end game and motives in order to be credible, in the same way he has been commenting on local politics which I think he did a more fairly balanced job. Unbtil he does that there are sane people out here who find his views on PRC radical, hyper-optimistic and unresalistic.

Anonymous said...

What would be the over-arching principle to bind peace in the human race?

Anonymous said...

According to one school of ( tigress ) thoughts, it is none other than fleshy, juicy cockles stringed on a fish ball stick, to the delight of the lovers of cockles?

Anonymous said...

The more noise this simpleton makes, the more empty you can see in his head.

Keep making more noise and see if RB bothers to reply to your silliness.

Anonymous said...

All the dumb Asians treating the westerners like their fathers. Cannot say anything bad about westerners even if the westerners raped their mother and killed their fathers. They did not want to know. Indian was colonised, robbed and raped for centuries and they did not want to know or remember what happened. Probably wanting to invite the westerners to rape India all over again.

China was almost colonised by the westerners and they could not remember or did not want to remember. And if they are Sinkies, they must thank the Japanese for not killing their fathers or grandfathers or they would not be born and be alive today. Their fathers and grandfathers were so lucky to survive the sook ching.

They got no memories.

simple said...

No response from a supposedly "writer" of a book? All I can say is that Silence gives consent (to what I had said). For all we know, the no. of egghead parrots is just a handful few, or even one, repeatedly cowardly using "anonymous" as identity, lacking in civility, giving the blogsphere a bad name. Simply a hard truth. SIMPLE