
Chinese troops to seize Zhongye Island back from the Philippines in 2014 - kshatrea
http://chinadailymail.com/2014/01/11/chinese-troops-to-seize-zhongye-island-back-from-the-philippines-in-2014/
======
sandGorgon
Interesting - over the past couple of months, Chinese troops have occupied
land in the Ladakh region of India. This is infact one of the largest
political issues in the scheduled Indian general elections in April.

Looks like its happening all over Asia.

[1] [http://www.firstpost.com/india/why-india-needs-to-be-more-
wa...](http://www.firstpost.com/india/why-india-needs-to-be-more-wary-of-
china-after-the-ladakh-incursion-1005467.html) [2]
[http://www.livemint.com/Politics/fHAd0H2KBmVMcJW0HvC75H/Indi...](http://www.livemint.com/Politics/fHAd0H2KBmVMcJW0HvC75H/India-
raises-troop-incursion-issue-with-China.html)

~~~
allochthon
I think the Chinese military is somewhat autonomous and pursues a different
agenda than the civilian government. It's a source of concern.

~~~
etrevino
The military answers directly to the Communist Party, making it autonomous
from the civil government but not from the state's rulers.

------
yaix
They are called the Pagasa Island by everybody but the Chinese propaganda
ministry.

Anyway, I think this is all more Chinese interior policy, to divert public
attention in China from the many problems the CCP currently has to maintain
itself in power. As any government, the need a "foreign enemy". Or, in China's
case, a handfull of foreign enemies: Japan, Korea, Philippines, Vietnam, maybe
Malaysia.

~~~
AllenKids
I'm sorry, but Chinese people do not consider Philippines a proper enemy. Do
consider another possibility though, that China now is really confident in its
military power that taking back the islands by force become a realistic
possibility. And the hawk posture is not only for internal diversion but also
a display of global ambition.

~~~
ihsw
> display of global ambition

Ding ding ding! China is slowly but very noisily attempting to tighten it's
grip along her Pacific coastline, and it's a _very_ wide grip that stretches
from the far north to the far south.

The regional hegemony is very murky and relationship-of-convenience is the
norm, especially since there is a lot of very dark history between major
regional powers (China, Korea, Japan) and minor ones (Vietnam,
Thailand/Cambodia, Philippines, Indonesia, Malaysia). I'm not even going to
attempt a short analysis of China's reunification policies towards Taiwan,
other than both sides would prefer to remain amicable.

------
raldi
At some point prior to WWI, the Chinese built a small temple on the island.
It's doubtful they ever inhabited it. Then, in the 1940s, a private fishing
magnate claimed the island and declared it (and some other nearby islands) an
independent micronation. Nearby Vietnam, China, and Taiwan all objected but
were too busy to do anything about it. He later found himself arrested by the
Philipines and "sold" it to them for one peso. They built an landfill airstrip
there later.

Source:
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomás_Cloma#Free_Territory_of_F...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomás_Cloma#Free_Territory_of_Freedomland)

~~~
somedudeyouknow
_At some point prior to WWI, the Chinese built a small temple on the island._

The temple/s you mentioned was built on the Paracel Group of islands, which is
an entirely different group of islands from the one China intends to invade.

Pag-asa island is part of the Spratly group of islands, which is much further
south than the Paracel group of islands. The Philippines has never claimed the
Paracel group. It is much nearer to Vietnam, although China is claiming the
Paracels as well.

Below is a map indicating both groups of islands, as well as the surrounding
countries and their exclusive economic zones (EEZs).

[http://tiananmenstremendousachievements.files.wordpress.com/...](http://tiananmenstremendousachievements.files.wordpress.com/2014/01/map-
of-the-island.jpg)

EDIT: for italics

------
willvarfar
I don't find the bit where they say they will do it.

The militrary make plans all the time, so they are ready if the politicians
demand action. This doesn't mean they execute them.

~~~
arethuza
Exactly, some good examples:

Churchill's plans to attack the Soviet Union (again):
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Unthinkable](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Unthinkable)

US plans for war with British Empire:
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Plan_Red](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Plan_Red)

Edit: In case anyone was wondering what the "(again)" was about, it is a
reference to the intervention in the Russian Civil war against the Soviets by
Britain, the United States and a number of other powers - Churchill was a
proponent of this action.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allied_intervention_in_the_Russ...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allied_intervention_in_the_Russian_Civil_War)

------
Udo
Holy crap. On the other hand, China can do pretty much whatever it wants. Even
if China was actively crazy _all the time_ , it's doubtful anyone would be
willing or able to stop them. Which, incidentally, might be a theory _they_
are testing on the world right now.

For everyone involved, I sincerely hope the Philippines does the right thing
and avoids a hopeless military standoff, any outcome of which will only
strengthen China further in a myriad ways.

~~~
EliRivers
_On the other hand, China can do pretty much whatever it wants._

Within a remarkably short distance of China. It does not have the equipment or
expertise to globally project serious power for extended periods.

~~~
imrehg
Well, living in Taiwan, I feel that "remarkably short distance" is too large
for me already.

~~~
EliRivers
On the plus-side, China's current lack of a serious anti-submarine capability
means any seaborne invasion of Taiwan can essentially only happen with the
permission of the US. It's not so far from China to Taiwan on the map, but
it's a hell of a long way in a warship :)

~~~
a8da6b0c91d
I doubt the US has the nerve to risk all out war for Taiwan. Tens or hundreds
of thousands of American dead for what?

~~~
myrandomcomment
It is not a matter of risk. If the USA fails to liveup to its obligations we
are done as a world power, period. There is no calculation here in which we
would back down.

~~~
jsun
Of course there is. We need to separate intent from action. There's myriads of
different actions to achieve the same result.

Imagine this scenario: China postures for military action, the U.S does not
intent to interfere. Rather than "abandon it's ally" the U.S puts on a show of
strength, joint military exercises, recommitting to the defense of Taiwan, the
whole 9 yards. Quietly however, the U.S. withdraws support for secessionist
factions within Taiwan, shifting the fragile equilibrium. pro-china factions
gain power quickly, the weakening direct U.S support combined with China's
military posturing drives moderates and anti-war secessionists towards the
pro-china faction. With the balance of power now in their favor, mainland +
the pro-china factions ramp up propaganda efforts, strengthening ties,
eventually setting the stage for reunification. The U.S of course, while
"extremely disappointed", won't oppose the popular will of the Taiwanese
people.

And that's how the U.S abandons its ally without abandoning its ally, and
China takes Taiwan by force without ever firing a single shot.

Of course, that's just one possible scenario out of thousands. The question
here is intent - if the U.S intends to fight China it will for its own
purposes. if the U.S doesn't intent to fight China it won't for its own
purposes. Countries aren't as beholden to their public image as people think,
because there's a million ways to spin anything.

~~~
myrandomcomment
Staying within the story, the Chinese occupation of this island in the
Philippines is not an act that could be solved with a show of force. That
action is very much a boots on the ground end game.

To your other point: I have traveled to Taiwan 6 times in the last year (going
again in Feb.) It is quite clear there is close to zero support in the
population for reunification under current Chinese (mainland) system. This is
not to say there is no support for being part of China again - just not as it
is today. If the government of mainland China became an full Democracy however
it is clear this would happen.

------
TeMPOraL
> _It will be an intolerable insult to China_

Like little kids...

~~~
ithkuil
Yes, I fully agree with that comment.

But, I can easily imagine press in other countries (including in the US) using
this kind of arguments in similar circumstances.

~~~
TeMPOraL
I can imagine it too, and I would say the same thing whether this was a
statement from US or from my own country.

This kind of language suggest to me the framework of thinking of small kids or
proud idiots, not of even remotely rational people. This saddens me.

------
myrandomcomment
The USA might get into a war over this with China. It hopefully would end in a
quick backdown and sanity on both sides. However the USA not standing up to
China on this will lead to WW3 as Japan, S. Korea, Vietnam, Taiwan, et.al. all
make a run for a nuclear deterrent because the USA could no longer be resided
on. The USA standing up to China is less of a risk then not doing so.

~~~
myrandomcomment
Fixed typo: (seems you cannot edit after a comment has been replied to.)

"run for a nuclear deterrent because the USA could no longer be relied on."

s/resided/relied

------
dpina
Is this for real or just a propaganda bluff?

What's next, capture the Japanese Islands in the south that China is
disputing?

Really hope this is just sensationalist news, as there are always plenty of
them around. But there's also been a stream of weird updates on this region
for the last years, and it's not just about rogue state North Korea.

------
Fuxy
It seems to me the Chinese are getting cocky and their using god old Chinese
ego to fuel their propaganda.

I hate to say this but with all the military activity a full blown war is
bound to happen soon.

Their picking fights left and right or taking strategic military points
preparing for a war.

Neither sounds good to me.

~~~
ihsw
I prefer to see it in a bit more relaxed light -- they're checking to see who
will pick sides, and which side they will pick, when the shit hits the fan. So
they're poking and prodding mainly from a curiosity's standpoint.

It's nasty and nobody likes to be pushed around, but nowadays there's a very
large difference between what you say and what you do.

------
Gravityloss
This is what the UN was founded for, to handle disputes of territory in a
civilized way.

Even the league of nations has managed to do it.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%85land_Islands#History](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%85land_Islands#History)

------
raldi
Map:
[http://tiananmenstremendousachievements.files.wordpress.com/...](http://tiananmenstremendousachievements.files.wordpress.com/2014/01/map-
of-the-island.jpg)

------
dnqthao
and 19/1/2014 is the 40th year anniversary of the Battle Of Paracel Islands
between China and the then Republic of Vietnam (South Vietnam).

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Paracel_Islands](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Paracel_Islands)

------
jalayir
Sounds eminently blusterous.

------
perlpimp
Just a crazy thought, if due to some chain of events of this or similar events
China devalues Dollar - can a backup currency like cryptocoin(s) be used in
result of such emergency?

Also I strongly disapprove of imperialist move by China, Filipinos are nice
people and no need to be an aggressor against such a small country.

my 2c

