The U.S. "Military Report" Highlighting the South China Sea Harbors Evil Intentions

Published in Wenweipo
(Hong Kong) on 26 August 2011
by (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Sharon Chiao. Edited by Gillian Palmer.
The U.S. Department of Defense published its 2011 “Military and Security Developments Involving the People’s Republic of China” report. The main point worth mentioning in the report, besides the fact that it continues to support the theory that the Chinese military is a threat, is that it specifically emphasizes China’s naval strategy, making it a “special topic” and claiming that China’s military has a great influence on the situation in the South China Sea. However, China has indisputable sovereignty over the surrounding waters and islands in the South China Sea. The U.S.’s “military report” exposes the U.S.’s intentions of intervening in the South China Sea situation. America is using this South China Sea problem to contain China, which causes problems in the areas around China; this will only complicate matters. In light of the fact that a few countries in the South China Sea are “playing with fire,” the U.S. should not “get involved.”

Since 2010, the U.S. has been intervening and expanding its involvement in the South China Sea problem. First, once the South China Sea problem reached the “America’s interest at stake” level, the U.S. used this as an excuse to intervene. Second, it has been strongly involved in resolving the situation; it has supported the process of multilateral consultations and transparency. The U.S. is attempting to make the bilateral South China Sea problem into a multilateral international problem. Third, it has openly and strongly tried to deter China by repeatedly stressing that it is “opposed to any country using or threatening to use weapons; and is opposed to any country harming U.S. commercial interests in the South China Sea.” This is clearly directed at China.

This year’s U.S. report on China’s military strength highlights the South China Sea; it points out China’s desire to improve naval capabilities, talks about China launching its first aircraft carrier and states that China “will play a bigger role in protecting a wide range of interests.” On Wednesday, Aug. 24, at the Pentagon press conference, U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for East Asia Michael Schieffer said that “the pace and scope of China's sustained military investment have allowed China to pursue capabilities that we believe are potentially destabilizing to regional military balances, increase the risk of misunderstanding and miscalculation and may contribute to regional tensions and anxieties."

However, China’s coastline is more than 18,000 km long. It includes more than 6,500 islands and more than 3,000,000 sq. km of maritime exclusive economic zones; these all require China to have sufficient naval capabilities to defend them. Without an aircraft carrier as a platform for mobile operations, China is unable to effectively defend its territorial sovereignty, maritime rights and interests. Researching modern aircraft carriers and protecting territorial integrity and sovereignty are merely ways for China to consolidate its national defenses; these are necessary requirements for maintaining its own development. Moreover, China’s construction of an aircraft carrier is for defensive purposes. It converted the Kuznetsov-class aircraft carrier, making the defensive and deterrent features more prominent.

The five permanent countries on the UN Security Council, China, the U.S., Russia, the UK and France, all have aircraft carriers. The U.S. currently has as many as 12, which is more active aircraft carriers than the other ountries combined. In 2010, the U.S. spent close to $700 billion on the military, accounting for 40 percent of the total global military expenditure. However, China currently only has one aircraft carrier; it is not nearly enough for China to protect its sovereignty over territorial waters and maritime rights and interests. The U.S.’s military report has irresponsible remarks regarding China’s only aircraft carrier and its maritime aspirations. This is a typical example of a double standard.


美國國防部發佈《中國2011年軍事與安全發展報告》。值得關注的是,報告除了繼續渲染「中國軍事威脅論」之外,還專門增加了中國海上戰略的「特別主題」,聲稱中國軍力對南海局勢影響巨大。但是,中國對南海諸島及其附近海域擁有無可爭辯的主權,美「軍力報告」劍指南海,恰恰暴露了美國介入南海局勢的意圖。美國利用南海問題牽制中國,在中國周邊製造麻煩,只會讓局勢更加複雜。鑒於南海一些國家正在「玩火」,美國不應「引火上身」 

自2010年以來,美國在南海問題上的介入性、擴張性逐漸加強。一是將南海問題上升到「攸關美國國家利益」的高度,以便為美國介入提供借口;二是開始強力介入問題的解決,提出支持多邊磋商和進程透明,企圖將屬於雙邊問題的南海問題變成多邊的國際性問題;三是公開對中國威懾的意味甚濃,反覆強調「反對任何國家使用或威脅使用武力」、「反對任何國家損害美在南海商業利益」,明顯將矛頭對準中國。

美國今年的中國軍力報告劍指南海,「特別關注」中國對於藍水海軍能力的渴望,在談及中國首艘航母時稱,中國「將在保護廣泛利益方面扮演越來越強大的角色」。美國助理國防部長幫辦希弗周三在五角大樓的新聞發布會上稱,中國持續軍事投入的速度和範圍,令美國認為中國尋求的能力可能破壞地區軍事平衡,增加誤解和誤判的風險,並可能造成地區緊張局勢和焦慮情緒云云。

但是,中國海岸線綿延1.8萬多公里,海上島嶼6500多個,海上專屬經濟區300多萬平方公里,這些都需要中國海軍有足夠的能力去保衛。沒有航母的海上機動作戰平台,中國就不能有效地維護領土領海主權完整和海洋權益。研究發展航母,保障領土和主權完整,是中國鞏固國防、維護自身發展的必然要求和選擇。而且,中國建造航母,目的還是防禦性的,以「瓦良格」號改裝的航母,其防禦性、威懾性特點更顯突出。

在聯合國安理會五大常任理事國中,美、俄、英、法均擁有航母,而且美國達12艘之多,比目前全世界其他8個擁有航母國家現役航母數量之和還多。美國2010年軍費高達近7000億美元,佔全球總額的40%。而中國目前只有首艘航母,這與中國保護領海主權完整和海洋權益的需要,是遠遠不夠的。美「軍力報告」對中國首艘航母以及對藍水海軍能力的渴望說三道四,是典型的雙重標準。
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Australia: Donald Trump Just Won the Fight To Remake America in 3 Big Ways

Ukraine: Why Washington Failed To End the Russian Ukrainian War

China: US Visa Policy Policing Students

Nigeria: The Global Fallout of Trump’s Travel Bans

Topics

Turkey: Europe’s Quiet Surrender

Austria: Trump, the Bulldozer of NATO

     

Israel: In Washington, Netanyahu Must Prioritize Bringing Home Hostages before Iran

Ukraine: Why Washington Failed To End the Russian Ukrainian War

United Kingdom: Trump Is Angry with a World That Won’t Give Him Easy Deals

Nigeria: The Global Fallout of Trump’s Travel Bans

Australia: Donald Trump Just Won the Fight To Remake America in 3 Big Ways

Colombia: The Horsemen of the New Cold War

Related Articles

Hong Kong: Foreign Media Warn US Brand Reputation Veering toward ‘Collapse’ under Trump Policy Impact

Hong Kong: The Lessons of World War II: The Real World Importance of Resisting Hegemony

Hong Kong: Can US Tariffs Targeting Hong Kong’s ‘Very Survival’ Really Choke the Life out of It?

Hong Kong: What Makes US Trade War More Dangerous than 2008 Crisis: Trump

Hong Kong: China, Japan, South Korea Pave Way for Summit Talks; Liu Teng-Chung: Responding to Trump