Source: http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/kyodo-news-international/140522/kishida-visit-vietnam-late-june-eyes-ties-maritime-sec
Japanese Foreign Minister Fumio Kishida is planning to visit
Vietnam from late June to early July to promote cooperation in ensuring
maritime security in the East and South China seas, government sources
said Thursday.
In a planned meeting in Hanoi, Kishida and
Vietnamese Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minster Pham Binh Minh are
likely to agree to speed up consultations on Japan's provision of patrol
ships for Vietnam to better cope with China's rising maritime
assertiveness in the South China Sea, the sources said.
China
has increased tensions in the sea by deploying an oil rig off the
Paracel Islands that are disputed with Vietnam, leading to clashes
between Chinese and Vietnamese vessels.
In the East China
Sea, China has repeatedly sent patrol ships into territorial waters
around the Japanese-controlled Senkaku Islands, a group of uninhibited
islets it claims.
In reference to China's muscle-flexing in
the East and South China seas, Kishida and Minh are expected to affirm
that Tokyo and Hanoi will never tolerate any attempt to alter the status
quo through coercion or force, according to the sources.
The
two ministers are also likely to agree to increase communications with
the Philippines and other members of the Association of Southeast Asian
Nations to keep Beijing's territorial ambitions in check, they said.
Claiming the South China Sea almost entirely, Beijing has been
asserting control over the land features and waters encompassed by its
U-shaped "nine-dash line" in territorial disputes with Brunei, Malaysia,
the Philippines, Taiwan and Vietnam.
Kishida and Minh are
likely to agree to urge the 10-member ASEAN and other regional powers at
a regional security forum slated for early August in Myanmar to act in
unison over such moves by China.
Kishida is considering visiting Cambodia before or after the planned trip to Vietnam, according to the sources.
==Kyodo
Thursday, May 22, 2014
[Asia Pacific] Vietnam PM says considering legal action against China over disputed waters
Source: http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/05/22/us-vietnam-china-idUSBREA4K1AK20140522
(Reuters) - Vietnamese Prime Minister Nguyen Tan Dung said his government was considering various "defense options" against China, including legal action, following the deployment of a Chinese oil rig to waters in the South China Sea that Hanoi also claims.
Dung's comments, given in a written response to questions from Reuters, were the first time he has suggested Vietnam would take legal measures, and drew an angry response from China, which insisted the rig was in its sovereign waters.
"Vietnam is considering various defense options, including legal actions in accordance with international law," Dung said in an email sent late on Wednesday, while on a visit to Manila. He did not elaborate on the other options being considered.
"I wish to underscore that Vietnam will resolutely defend its sovereignty and legitimate interests because territorial sovereignty, including sovereignty of its maritime zones and islands, is sacred," he said.
China accused Vietnam of stoking regional tensions.
"Now they are distorting the facts, conflating right and wrong on the global stage, blackening China and making unreasonable accusations against China," foreign ministry spokesman Hong Lei told a regular news briefing.
"Just who is the one who is repeatedly challenging other countries' sovereignty? Who is the one who is causing tensions in the seas? Who on earth is destroying peace and stability in the South China Sea? Facts speak louder than words."
In March, the Philippines submitted a case to an arbitration tribunal in The Hague, challenging China's claims to the South China Sea. It was the first time Beijing has been subjected to international legal scrutiny over the waters.
Beijing has refused to participate in the case and warned Manila that its submission would seriously damage ties.
Anti-Chinese violence flared in Vietnam last week after a $1 billion deepwater rig owned by China's state-run CNOOC oil company was parked 240 km (150 miles) off the coast of Vietnam.
Hanoi says the rig is in its 200-nautical mile exclusive economic zone and on its continental shelf.
China has said the rig was operating completely within its waters.
The spat is the worst breakdown in ties between the two Communist states since a brief border war in 1979.
"My own sense is that if the Vietnamese government start to ratchet up their tactics, the Chinese probably are not going to blink," said Christopher Johnson, a former senior China analyst at the CIA, now at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington. "So you could have a very difficult situation."
SHARPENED RHETORIC
The rig move was the latest in a series of confrontations between China and some of its neighbours. Washington has sharpened rhetoric towards Beijing, describing a pattern of "provocative" actions by China.
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry discussed the situation by telephone with Vietnamese Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Pham Binh Minh on Wednesday, the two governments said. Kerry also invited Minh to visit Washington, U.S. State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki said.
Dung, in some of his strongest comments yet on the breakdown in ties with Beijing, said that while Vietnam had sought to use dialogue to settle the situation, the response from China had been an increase in force and intimidation.
"There is a vast gap between the words and deeds of China," he said.
He followed up those remarks in a speech at the World Economic Forum on East Asia in which he warned the maritime territorial tensions could endanger global trade.
"The risk of conflict will disrupt these huge flows of goods, and have unforeseeable impact on regional and world economies," he said. "It may even reverse the trend of global economic recovery."
Both sides have traded accusations over who was to blame for a series of collisions between Vietnamese and Chinese vessels in waters near the oil rig earlier this month.
China claims about 90 percent of the South China Sea, displaying its reach on official maps with a so-called nine-dash line that stretches deep into the maritime heart of Southeast Asia. The Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei and Taiwan also have claims to parts of the potentially energy-rich waters.
HANOI WEIGHS OPTIONS
Vietnamese Deputy Prime Minister Vu Duc Dam told Reuters on Thursday that Hanoi had been staying well-briefed on the progress of Manila's arbitration case.
"We have followed this case very closely and would like to use all measures provided by international law to protect our legitimate interests," he said in an interview in Tokyo.
Diplomatic sources in Vietnam have previously told Reuters that China put pressure on Hanoi over joining the Philippine case.
Manila is seeking a ruling to confirm its right to exploit the waters in its exclusive economic zone as allowed under the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).
A ruling against China could prompt other claimants to challenge Beijing, experts say, although Manila has said it does not expect the tribunal to reach a decision before the end of 2015.
Any ruling would be unenforceable because there is no body under UNCLOS to police such decisions, legal experts say.
CHINA "BROUGHT US TOGETHER"
To try to keep up pressure on Beijing, diplomats said Vietnam might host a meeting with Philippine and Malaysian officials at the end of the month to discuss how to respond to China, underscoring the nascent coordination among the three countries. Meetings in February and March had discussed the Philippine legal case.
A senior Malaysian diplomatic source told Reuters last week that China's assertiveness had given momentum to the three-way talks and "brought us together", but he played down the discussions as little more than "chit chat" at this stage.
Malaysia had no intention of filing a legal case against China, the source added.
The growing Manila-Hanoi co-operation was a potential turning point in the tensions over the South China Sea that have intensified over the last five years said Carl Thayer of the Australian Defence Force Academy in Canberra.
"Vietnam may be siding up to the U.S. via the Philippines," he said. "A joint or two separate legal challenges would really put China on the spot, and outside international law."
(Reuters) - Vietnamese Prime Minister Nguyen Tan Dung said his government was considering various "defense options" against China, including legal action, following the deployment of a Chinese oil rig to waters in the South China Sea that Hanoi also claims.
Dung's comments, given in a written response to questions from Reuters, were the first time he has suggested Vietnam would take legal measures, and drew an angry response from China, which insisted the rig was in its sovereign waters.
"Vietnam is considering various defense options, including legal actions in accordance with international law," Dung said in an email sent late on Wednesday, while on a visit to Manila. He did not elaborate on the other options being considered.
"I wish to underscore that Vietnam will resolutely defend its sovereignty and legitimate interests because territorial sovereignty, including sovereignty of its maritime zones and islands, is sacred," he said.
China accused Vietnam of stoking regional tensions.
"Now they are distorting the facts, conflating right and wrong on the global stage, blackening China and making unreasonable accusations against China," foreign ministry spokesman Hong Lei told a regular news briefing.
"Just who is the one who is repeatedly challenging other countries' sovereignty? Who is the one who is causing tensions in the seas? Who on earth is destroying peace and stability in the South China Sea? Facts speak louder than words."
In March, the Philippines submitted a case to an arbitration tribunal in The Hague, challenging China's claims to the South China Sea. It was the first time Beijing has been subjected to international legal scrutiny over the waters.
Beijing has refused to participate in the case and warned Manila that its submission would seriously damage ties.
Anti-Chinese violence flared in Vietnam last week after a $1 billion deepwater rig owned by China's state-run CNOOC oil company was parked 240 km (150 miles) off the coast of Vietnam.
Hanoi says the rig is in its 200-nautical mile exclusive economic zone and on its continental shelf.
China has said the rig was operating completely within its waters.
The spat is the worst breakdown in ties between the two Communist states since a brief border war in 1979.
"My own sense is that if the Vietnamese government start to ratchet up their tactics, the Chinese probably are not going to blink," said Christopher Johnson, a former senior China analyst at the CIA, now at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington. "So you could have a very difficult situation."
SHARPENED RHETORIC
The rig move was the latest in a series of confrontations between China and some of its neighbours. Washington has sharpened rhetoric towards Beijing, describing a pattern of "provocative" actions by China.
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry discussed the situation by telephone with Vietnamese Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Pham Binh Minh on Wednesday, the two governments said. Kerry also invited Minh to visit Washington, U.S. State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki said.
Dung, in some of his strongest comments yet on the breakdown in ties with Beijing, said that while Vietnam had sought to use dialogue to settle the situation, the response from China had been an increase in force and intimidation.
"There is a vast gap between the words and deeds of China," he said.
He followed up those remarks in a speech at the World Economic Forum on East Asia in which he warned the maritime territorial tensions could endanger global trade.
"The risk of conflict will disrupt these huge flows of goods, and have unforeseeable impact on regional and world economies," he said. "It may even reverse the trend of global economic recovery."
Both sides have traded accusations over who was to blame for a series of collisions between Vietnamese and Chinese vessels in waters near the oil rig earlier this month.
China claims about 90 percent of the South China Sea, displaying its reach on official maps with a so-called nine-dash line that stretches deep into the maritime heart of Southeast Asia. The Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei and Taiwan also have claims to parts of the potentially energy-rich waters.
HANOI WEIGHS OPTIONS
Vietnamese Deputy Prime Minister Vu Duc Dam told Reuters on Thursday that Hanoi had been staying well-briefed on the progress of Manila's arbitration case.
"We have followed this case very closely and would like to use all measures provided by international law to protect our legitimate interests," he said in an interview in Tokyo.
Diplomatic sources in Vietnam have previously told Reuters that China put pressure on Hanoi over joining the Philippine case.
Manila is seeking a ruling to confirm its right to exploit the waters in its exclusive economic zone as allowed under the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).
A ruling against China could prompt other claimants to challenge Beijing, experts say, although Manila has said it does not expect the tribunal to reach a decision before the end of 2015.
Any ruling would be unenforceable because there is no body under UNCLOS to police such decisions, legal experts say.
CHINA "BROUGHT US TOGETHER"
To try to keep up pressure on Beijing, diplomats said Vietnam might host a meeting with Philippine and Malaysian officials at the end of the month to discuss how to respond to China, underscoring the nascent coordination among the three countries. Meetings in February and March had discussed the Philippine legal case.
A senior Malaysian diplomatic source told Reuters last week that China's assertiveness had given momentum to the three-way talks and "brought us together", but he played down the discussions as little more than "chit chat" at this stage.
Malaysia had no intention of filing a legal case against China, the source added.
The growing Manila-Hanoi co-operation was a potential turning point in the tensions over the South China Sea that have intensified over the last five years said Carl Thayer of the Australian Defence Force Academy in Canberra.
"Vietnam may be siding up to the U.S. via the Philippines," he said. "A joint or two separate legal challenges would really put China on the spot, and outside international law."
Wednesday, May 21, 2014
[NA] 21-5-2014 Invite Codes
Source:
http://www.mmorpg.com/giveaways.cfm/offer/519/World-of-Tanks-Gift-Key-Giveaway.html
For The Record
Hello everyone,
on the MMORPG.com site, there is a giveaway of invite codes, that contain:
- Premium T2LT Tank
- 3 Days Premium Time
- 500 Gold
http://www.mmorpg.com/giveaways.cfm/offer/519/World-of-Tanks-Gift-Key-Giveaway.html
For The Record
Hello everyone,
on the MMORPG.com site, there is a giveaway of invite codes, that contain:
- Premium T2LT Tank
- 3 Days Premium Time
- 500 Gold
[Asia Pacific] We Petition The Obama Administration to: Put Sanctions on China for Invading Vietnam Territory with The Deployment of Oil Rig Haiyang 981
Link: https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/put-sanctions-china-invading-vietnam-territory-deployment-oil-rig-haiyang-981/p2b7Rnnv
Request the US government of China immediately withdraw its HD-981 oil rig and other vessels out of Vietnam's EEZ
China has been using the unfounded nine-dashed line to claim ownership over the entire East Sea (South China Sea), which has absolutely no legal basis. China has been ignoring the international law and the world community and using that nine-dashed line to harass smaller countries in the region. On May 02, 2014, China placed oil rig HD-981 in Vietnam’s Exclusive Economic Zone with a flotilla of 80 military ships to ships, attacking Vietnamese patrol vessels working in the area.The world needs peace in the East Sea, and the United States has great interest in freedom of navigation in the East Sea. Peace will have a better chance to survive in the East Sea if the President of the United States weighs in the East Sea problem and requests that China stop its provocative and belligerent acts.
We need 100.000 signatures by June 19th, 2014. Let's share to your family, friends and peace lovers in all over the world to stop Aggressive China.
World of Warships – Interview with Ivan Morozov
Source: For The Record
This is the exclusive Wot-News interview with Ivan Morozov, one of the World of Warships developers. Please note that I tried to translate everything correctly, but I don’t know the naval terms even in English. Also, if you are confused by some of the answers (like “what did he mean by that”) – well, so am I. Here’s what he said:
Do you publish a lot of info about World of Warships?
We publish several entries per week on our blog, we do tell about the game and its development. There, you can find out about the game mechanics, get an idea about the state of the game from fresh screenshots or read regular reports from alphatest either from tester reports or from the infographics. Apart from various kinds of content posting, the developers simply talk directly to the blog readers, answering their questions using videos or interviews online. So, to answer your question – yes, we publish a lot about World of Warships. Especially given the fact that the project is still in the alpha testing stage.
Can you tell us what the WoWs ship classes will look like?
We can tell, but you have to see it with your own eyes. Of course a tanker will get the associations immediately: battleship – that’s a heavy tank, destroyer – that’s a “scout”, aircraft carrier is “artillery and cruiser is like a tank destroyer. But after even a few battles in WoWs, it becomes clear that using WoT tactics will surely lead to defeat.
Sea battles were fought according to their own rules, which were used for the core of WoWs game mechanics. That’s why there is no principles matching with World of Tanks mechanics apart from the general rules. The role of “scouts” is fulfilled by scout planes and destroyers can completely destroy a huge battleship with one good torpedo salvo. Interaction between classes of ships and effective set of tactics are also implemented completely differently. For example, traditional TD tactic – hide and snipe – is principially impossible in WoWs. Firstly – because a ship staying on one spot will be quickly destroyed and secondly, because of the difference in damage dealing system, that is described below. All these differences might seem unusual,but they will certainly not disappoint the tankers.The possibility to deploy smoke screens, deploy air attacks or cover your teammates with AA fire screen mean that the strategists will find their room to maneuver.
How big will the teams and maps be?
We are currently experimenting with team sizes, we are considering variants in range from 12 to 18 players. The optimal solution is tied to the map size – in our case, they will be 50km x 50km big.
Will the maps differ from the WoT ones, or will the islands play the role of “cover”?
They will be different – our map settings will be gorgeous. Generally, design of the game maps for WoWs is a separate topic, complicated and interesting. Just like in World of Tanks are the elements of landscape supposed to help the player, to determine the tactics and to decide the dynamics of the battle. In our case, they stimulate the player to maneuver actively and to react instantaneously. For example, tropical maps with a lot of small islands and shallow water force the heavy ships to pick their route very carefully, so they don’t get stuck in narrow straits much to the amusement of the enemy. But light ships have a sort of an advantage here: they can maneuver freely, sail through shoals and even fire torpedos through them.
The situation then changes on another map and those who had the advantage before will be forced to
be much more careful.
There are no camo bushes on open sea. How will the ships mask themselves? How will the visibility system different from the tank one?
Spotting and visibility mechanics as a whole will depend a lot on the design location. A player can hides behind islands, rocks and hills, but this kind of camo system, as I said before, is different from the one in WoT. You can’t just hide and stop the engines – a static ship is a dead ship. You also have to consider ballistics. Since the shell flies through a sharp ballistic curve (SS: not sure about the proper naval term, basically a high-angle shot like the arty uses in WoT), the closer to the land the player is, the better he is protected. By the way, I already mentioned smokescreen, that’s in fact also a landscape element. Setting it on the right spot, the player creates an artificial cover for his team and in fact he changes the layout of the map according to his needs. Other game possibilities, that affect the visibility system, are currently being developed.
What’s the current WoWs status? When will it enter closed beta stage?
Currently, WoWs is in closed alpha stage. That means that the game is now available to a small group of players, which help us to polish the main elements of the gameplay before we can open the door to all who want to try.
How can we now get into the alpha test?
There are several ways. You can leave your request on the forum, but in order for it to be considered, you have to post 50 and more posts on the WoWs forums. There are other options as well however. We are constantly running lotteries for alpha access on the forums, the blog and the WoWs VK group. Be active on our sites, that increases your chance of getting in compared to others.
What nations are available on alpha-test? What nations are planned in general?
Currently the players are testing the ships of two nations: Japan and USA. These will be implemented when the game is released. This answer can hardly raise eyebrows: at the beginning of WW2, these countries were rightfully considered foremost naval military powers. After the game is released, we will add other nations into the game. What definitely has to appear in WoWs are the branches of Great Britain, Germany, Russian Empire/Soviet Union, France and Italy. There is also an idea of a “small nations” tree. Many countries in those years couldn’t boast with an advanced fleet, but they had very unusual projects. By bringing together the ships of Holland, Spain, Sweden, Norway, Austrian-Hungary and Greece, we can get a very interesting and well balanced development tree.
Will there be “dings”? How will the damage system work? Will the ships have weakspots such as the KV-5 miniturret?
The damage system in WoWs considers many factors such as thickness of the armor, its slope, the point where the shell meets the obstacle, angle of impact, velocity and penetration capability of the shell. The difference from tanks is that the armor of the ship is not homogenous and is different on various parts of the ship, so in order to destroy the ship engine, you will have to penetrate 3-4 layers of armor of various thicknesses. Naturally, vital parts and equipment such as engine, ammunition storage and command center are protected by the thickest armor, but hitting them will cause significantly more damage than hitting for example the rear of the ship. That means that “oneshots” in WoWs are possible, but difficult to achieve. If you achieve a direct hit on the ammunition storage, consider the enemy already sunk.
The “didn’t penetrate their armor” situation can occur in a few cases. For example when picking a shell with penetration poorer than what is needed to beating your opponent:
Or when you choose the attack range poorly. Every ship has its “zone of free maneuver” – that’s the distance on which it is practically invulnerable to enemy shells. We described this mechanic in detail on our blog earlier.
How will the battle dynamic be compared to other WG projects? Will there be “hugging”?
It’s possible to say that the WoWs gameplay will go at slower pace, when compared to the other games of the “World of” series. But it won’t be boring! Even when playing on a relatively small destroyer, you will have to successfully keep switching between main guns and torpedos, while creating smokescreens and shooting enemy planes with your AA guns (AI helps with that) while not forgetting to maneuver actively, evading enemy fire. As you can see, it will be very important in the game to reach the right pace and keep it until the end of the match.
“Hugging” in classical sense will be impossible. First, the enemy can carry torpedos and cut it short by one click. Second, by assuming static position you become a perfect target. But when it comes to ships, there is the interesting concept of free maneuver range – within that distance range, causing significant damage to your ship gets a lot harder. That can be used as much as military ethics and shell reload time allow you.
How will ramming work?
Just like the common sense tells you: the rammed ship will sink! By the way, for many players the ramming became the first way to destroy the enemy (and sometimes a teammate). These pieces of info and many others can be learned when you subscribe to the World of Warships developer blog. Stay tuned!
This is the exclusive Wot-News interview with Ivan Morozov, one of the World of Warships developers. Please note that I tried to translate everything correctly, but I don’t know the naval terms even in English. Also, if you are confused by some of the answers (like “what did he mean by that”) – well, so am I. Here’s what he said:
Do you publish a lot of info about World of Warships?
We publish several entries per week on our blog, we do tell about the game and its development. There, you can find out about the game mechanics, get an idea about the state of the game from fresh screenshots or read regular reports from alphatest either from tester reports or from the infographics. Apart from various kinds of content posting, the developers simply talk directly to the blog readers, answering their questions using videos or interviews online. So, to answer your question – yes, we publish a lot about World of Warships. Especially given the fact that the project is still in the alpha testing stage.
Can you tell us what the WoWs ship classes will look like?
We can tell, but you have to see it with your own eyes. Of course a tanker will get the associations immediately: battleship – that’s a heavy tank, destroyer – that’s a “scout”, aircraft carrier is “artillery and cruiser is like a tank destroyer. But after even a few battles in WoWs, it becomes clear that using WoT tactics will surely lead to defeat.
Sea battles were fought according to their own rules, which were used for the core of WoWs game mechanics. That’s why there is no principles matching with World of Tanks mechanics apart from the general rules. The role of “scouts” is fulfilled by scout planes and destroyers can completely destroy a huge battleship with one good torpedo salvo. Interaction between classes of ships and effective set of tactics are also implemented completely differently. For example, traditional TD tactic – hide and snipe – is principially impossible in WoWs. Firstly – because a ship staying on one spot will be quickly destroyed and secondly, because of the difference in damage dealing system, that is described below. All these differences might seem unusual,but they will certainly not disappoint the tankers.The possibility to deploy smoke screens, deploy air attacks or cover your teammates with AA fire screen mean that the strategists will find their room to maneuver.
How big will the teams and maps be?
We are currently experimenting with team sizes, we are considering variants in range from 12 to 18 players. The optimal solution is tied to the map size – in our case, they will be 50km x 50km big.
Will the maps differ from the WoT ones, or will the islands play the role of “cover”?
They will be different – our map settings will be gorgeous. Generally, design of the game maps for WoWs is a separate topic, complicated and interesting. Just like in World of Tanks are the elements of landscape supposed to help the player, to determine the tactics and to decide the dynamics of the battle. In our case, they stimulate the player to maneuver actively and to react instantaneously. For example, tropical maps with a lot of small islands and shallow water force the heavy ships to pick their route very carefully, so they don’t get stuck in narrow straits much to the amusement of the enemy. But light ships have a sort of an advantage here: they can maneuver freely, sail through shoals and even fire torpedos through them.
The situation then changes on another map and those who had the advantage before will be forced to
be much more careful.
There are no camo bushes on open sea. How will the ships mask themselves? How will the visibility system different from the tank one?
Spotting and visibility mechanics as a whole will depend a lot on the design location. A player can hides behind islands, rocks and hills, but this kind of camo system, as I said before, is different from the one in WoT. You can’t just hide and stop the engines – a static ship is a dead ship. You also have to consider ballistics. Since the shell flies through a sharp ballistic curve (SS: not sure about the proper naval term, basically a high-angle shot like the arty uses in WoT), the closer to the land the player is, the better he is protected. By the way, I already mentioned smokescreen, that’s in fact also a landscape element. Setting it on the right spot, the player creates an artificial cover for his team and in fact he changes the layout of the map according to his needs. Other game possibilities, that affect the visibility system, are currently being developed.
What’s the current WoWs status? When will it enter closed beta stage?
Currently, WoWs is in closed alpha stage. That means that the game is now available to a small group of players, which help us to polish the main elements of the gameplay before we can open the door to all who want to try.
How can we now get into the alpha test?
There are several ways. You can leave your request on the forum, but in order for it to be considered, you have to post 50 and more posts on the WoWs forums. There are other options as well however. We are constantly running lotteries for alpha access on the forums, the blog and the WoWs VK group. Be active on our sites, that increases your chance of getting in compared to others.
What nations are available on alpha-test? What nations are planned in general?
Currently the players are testing the ships of two nations: Japan and USA. These will be implemented when the game is released. This answer can hardly raise eyebrows: at the beginning of WW2, these countries were rightfully considered foremost naval military powers. After the game is released, we will add other nations into the game. What definitely has to appear in WoWs are the branches of Great Britain, Germany, Russian Empire/Soviet Union, France and Italy. There is also an idea of a “small nations” tree. Many countries in those years couldn’t boast with an advanced fleet, but they had very unusual projects. By bringing together the ships of Holland, Spain, Sweden, Norway, Austrian-Hungary and Greece, we can get a very interesting and well balanced development tree.
Will there be “dings”? How will the damage system work? Will the ships have weakspots such as the KV-5 miniturret?
The damage system in WoWs considers many factors such as thickness of the armor, its slope, the point where the shell meets the obstacle, angle of impact, velocity and penetration capability of the shell. The difference from tanks is that the armor of the ship is not homogenous and is different on various parts of the ship, so in order to destroy the ship engine, you will have to penetrate 3-4 layers of armor of various thicknesses. Naturally, vital parts and equipment such as engine, ammunition storage and command center are protected by the thickest armor, but hitting them will cause significantly more damage than hitting for example the rear of the ship. That means that “oneshots” in WoWs are possible, but difficult to achieve. If you achieve a direct hit on the ammunition storage, consider the enemy already sunk.
The “didn’t penetrate their armor” situation can occur in a few cases. For example when picking a shell with penetration poorer than what is needed to beating your opponent:
Or when you choose the attack range poorly. Every ship has its “zone of free maneuver” – that’s the distance on which it is practically invulnerable to enemy shells. We described this mechanic in detail on our blog earlier.
How will the battle dynamic be compared to other WG projects? Will there be “hugging”?
It’s possible to say that the WoWs gameplay will go at slower pace, when compared to the other games of the “World of” series. But it won’t be boring! Even when playing on a relatively small destroyer, you will have to successfully keep switching between main guns and torpedos, while creating smokescreens and shooting enemy planes with your AA guns (AI helps with that) while not forgetting to maneuver actively, evading enemy fire. As you can see, it will be very important in the game to reach the right pace and keep it until the end of the match.
“Hugging” in classical sense will be impossible. First, the enemy can carry torpedos and cut it short by one click. Second, by assuming static position you become a perfect target. But when it comes to ships, there is the interesting concept of free maneuver range – within that distance range, causing significant damage to your ship gets a lot harder. That can be used as much as military ethics and shell reload time allow you.
How will ramming work?
Just like the common sense tells you: the rammed ship will sink! By the way, for many players the ramming became the first way to destroy the enemy (and sometimes a teammate). These pieces of info and many others can be learned when you subscribe to the World of Warships developer blog. Stay tuned!
Tuesday, May 20, 2014
[Asia Pacific] Vietnam should show the world why it’s worthy of support: Expert
Source: http://tuoitrenews.vn/international/19755/vietnam-should-show-the-world-why-its-worthy-of-support-expert
Dr. Jonathan D. London, a professor in the Department of Asian and International Studies and a Core Member of the Southeast Asia Research Center at the City University of Hong Kong, told Tuoi Tre (Youth) newspaper in a recent interview that he believes it is essential Vietnam show the world why it is worthy of support.
The interview was conducted on Saturday after China illicitly stationed an oil rig in Vietnamese waters on May 1 and dispatched ships and planes to ram, intimidate, and fire water cannons at Vietnam’s vessels tasked with asking the Chinese side to leave the area.
Dr. Jonathan D. London: The warming relations between Vietnam and the Philippines are intriguing. Certainly the countries have similar concerns. Vietnam needs to show that it is more serious about forging ties with other regions affected by Beijing’s aggressive claims, including Indonesia and Malaysia. It is one thing to be friends with everybody. It is another to have friends that will stand by you, shoulder to shoulder.
With respect to the U.S. support, the situation is of course complex. Vietnam-U.S. relations should be and could be much further along than they are now. As a scholar of comparative political economy, I do believe all countries should be careful in forging links with the U.S. (even South Korea recognized that), or for that matter other countries. The current crisis certainly gives both Vietnam and the U.S. a reason to deepen ties and new reasons to overcome various obstacles to deeper ties. Still, any deepening of relations with the U.S. should be driven by the need to create a stable region. A protracted cold war would be costly, dangerous, and a massive diversion from pressing challenges of the day.
* What are the main purposes behind Beijing’s deployment of oil rig Haiyang Shiyou 981 to Vietnam’s exclusive economic zone and continental shelf in the East Vietnam Sea?
Dr. Jonathan D. London: Internationally, there is a general agreement that the purposes of deploying the oil rig are mainly political, serving at least three distinct but related purposes: changing the status quo; testing the reaction of other states, principally Vietnam and the U.S.; and engaging in coercive diplomacy.
* Why did China take this step this time? Is it true that China deployed the rig to cause conflict overseas, aiming to cover up domestic governance problems including Xinjiang, Tibet, economic slowdown, environmental issues, and corruption among local officials?
Dr. Jonathan D. London: Like any country, China has no shortage of problems at home. One of the unfortunate byproducts of Beijing’s outsized and legally basely sovereignty claims and its attempts to enforce them is that it will tend to fuel a regional arms race, which is already underway owing in part to China’s rapid military expansion.
If peaceful solutions to regional disputes can be arranged, all states, including China and Vietnam, can focus their resources on serving the needs of their respective populations. Attempts to enforce legally baseless sovereignty claims by military means will be unfortunate as it will lead all countries in the region to divert resources away from where they are most needed. By contrast, a peaceful resolution of the conflict would allow both countries to focus resources on where they are most needed.
* What should Vietnam do to prevent aggressive acts from the Chinese side in the oil rig tension? Is there any possible peaceful solution to the Vietnam-China stand-off to which both sides would agree? Or will it lead to military confrontations?
Dr. Jonathan D. London: The most promising way to address aggression is to prevail on Beijing that it would be in its own best interest to cease and desist from aggressive acts, provocations, and efforts to change the status quo through force.
Yes, there is a range of peaceful solutions, but none of these are prefabricated and all of these will require an order of imagination. Across the region, from Japan to China to Vietnam, a new approach to diplomacy is needed; one that goes beyond hyper-nationalism and the ‘politics of face’ (e.g. rigid stances based on nationalistic pride and machismo). Vietnam has seen too much military conflict. So has the region and the world. A military conflict must be avoided by all possible means and Vietnam must engage the community of nations with greater energy and depth than it is accustomed to doing. This is why I believe it is essential that Vietnam show the world why it is worthy of support. This, in turn, will require energetically implementing the sorts of reforms outlined in the PM’s New Year address.
* Up to now, Washington has only called Beijing’s recent actions in the East Vietnam Sea “provocative” as well as called on both sides to deal with friction through diplomatic means and to observe freedom of navigation in the sea. They said they are not in favor of any side. However, in recent days, some U.S. officials have sent messages that they want to build military cooperation with Vietnam. Did you realize that?
Dr. Jonathan D. London: Yes, I have read of this, and greater military would seem logical, given regional power imbalances. However, military cooperation with the U.S. on any significant scale will carry with it certain ramifications. In a recent email exchange, the noted U.S.-based intellectual Amitai Etzioni, a prominent advocate of “mutually assured restraint” in U.S.-China relations, has warned of the risk of treating the dispute with China as a potential military conflict. So I think it is sensible that the U.S. explores the deepening of military cooperation with Vietnam, but that these decisions be made in view of the broader regional strategic calculus and with minimizing the likelihood of militarizing the region. Vietnam needs to balance the imperatives of self-defense with the need for a peaceful order. Ultimately, relations between Vietnam and China must be stable. But they cannot be stable if the overriding principles in the region follow the laws of the jungle.
* In your opinion, is it a good idea for Vietnam to file a lawsuit to an international tribunal against China over its illegitimate territorial claims in the East Vietnam Sea?
Dr. Jonathan D. London: Barring any significant changes in Beijing’s position, very possibly yes. With respect to international norms, it’s worth noting that the U.S.’s own failure to support the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) over several decades is extremely regrettable. Having the U.S. as a signatory to UNCLOS would likely give it even greater significance than it has today.
Unfortunately, saying that does not help Vietnam. So what about the international tribunal? Beijing has indicated that it would ignore any judgments against it, which is unfortunate and one would hope this position might change. The aim should not be to antagonize Beijing but to have a neutral body adjudicate between competing sovereignty claims on the basis of available evidence. If there is no change in Beijing’s position and diplomacy fails, the tribunal would at least provide an opportunity to make the world aware of how each country’s aims stand up.
That said, if there are alternatives to an international tribunal, those should be actively explored or created where none exist.
* Did the current tensions in the East Vietnam Sea affect the U.S. pivot to Asia?
Dr. Jonathan D. London: They certainly pose dilemmas for Washington. While some have voiced concern that the U.S. has not taken a more forceful stance, I believe the U.S. response to the tensions remain to be seen. One would expect these tensions to change the tenor of discussions between Hanoi and the U.S. with respect to military intervention. It is still unclear what exactly the pivot means now and will mean in practical terms going forward. But if one aim of the U.S.’s Pacific presence is to ensure a stable maritime environment conducive to the development of international commerce and supportive of security, we would expect the present tensions to add, and not diminish, attention to these goals. No one wants to see the region descend into a tense never-ending contest for hegemony. The region would be much better served by diplomatic measures. The so-called pivot is not and should not be mainly about military issues. It should be about promoting prosperity through cooperation.
Dr. Jonathan D. London, a professor in the Department of Asian and International Studies and a Core Member of the Southeast Asia Research Center at the City University of Hong Kong, told Tuoi Tre (Youth) newspaper in a recent interview that he believes it is essential Vietnam show the world why it is worthy of support.
The interview was conducted on Saturday after China illicitly stationed an oil rig in Vietnamese waters on May 1 and dispatched ships and planes to ram, intimidate, and fire water cannons at Vietnam’s vessels tasked with asking the Chinese side to leave the area.
Dr. Jonathan D. London
* In a recent interview with Deutsche Welle (DW), Southeast Asia expert Gerhard Will said that Beijing is testing the solidarity of members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) with Vietnam and examining how much U.S. support Hanoi can rely upon. He added that after realizing the latest move has brought Hanoi and Manila closer together, China is now starting to backtrack. This is proof that China is not following a totally consistent strategy in the East Vietnam Sea. Do you think it is too early to jump to such a conclusion?Dr. Jonathan D. London: The warming relations between Vietnam and the Philippines are intriguing. Certainly the countries have similar concerns. Vietnam needs to show that it is more serious about forging ties with other regions affected by Beijing’s aggressive claims, including Indonesia and Malaysia. It is one thing to be friends with everybody. It is another to have friends that will stand by you, shoulder to shoulder.
With respect to the U.S. support, the situation is of course complex. Vietnam-U.S. relations should be and could be much further along than they are now. As a scholar of comparative political economy, I do believe all countries should be careful in forging links with the U.S. (even South Korea recognized that), or for that matter other countries. The current crisis certainly gives both Vietnam and the U.S. a reason to deepen ties and new reasons to overcome various obstacles to deeper ties. Still, any deepening of relations with the U.S. should be driven by the need to create a stable region. A protracted cold war would be costly, dangerous, and a massive diversion from pressing challenges of the day.
* What are the main purposes behind Beijing’s deployment of oil rig Haiyang Shiyou 981 to Vietnam’s exclusive economic zone and continental shelf in the East Vietnam Sea?
Dr. Jonathan D. London: Internationally, there is a general agreement that the purposes of deploying the oil rig are mainly political, serving at least three distinct but related purposes: changing the status quo; testing the reaction of other states, principally Vietnam and the U.S.; and engaging in coercive diplomacy.
* Why did China take this step this time? Is it true that China deployed the rig to cause conflict overseas, aiming to cover up domestic governance problems including Xinjiang, Tibet, economic slowdown, environmental issues, and corruption among local officials?
Dr. Jonathan D. London: Like any country, China has no shortage of problems at home. One of the unfortunate byproducts of Beijing’s outsized and legally basely sovereignty claims and its attempts to enforce them is that it will tend to fuel a regional arms race, which is already underway owing in part to China’s rapid military expansion.
If peaceful solutions to regional disputes can be arranged, all states, including China and Vietnam, can focus their resources on serving the needs of their respective populations. Attempts to enforce legally baseless sovereignty claims by military means will be unfortunate as it will lead all countries in the region to divert resources away from where they are most needed. By contrast, a peaceful resolution of the conflict would allow both countries to focus resources on where they are most needed.
* What should Vietnam do to prevent aggressive acts from the Chinese side in the oil rig tension? Is there any possible peaceful solution to the Vietnam-China stand-off to which both sides would agree? Or will it lead to military confrontations?
Dr. Jonathan D. London: The most promising way to address aggression is to prevail on Beijing that it would be in its own best interest to cease and desist from aggressive acts, provocations, and efforts to change the status quo through force.
Yes, there is a range of peaceful solutions, but none of these are prefabricated and all of these will require an order of imagination. Across the region, from Japan to China to Vietnam, a new approach to diplomacy is needed; one that goes beyond hyper-nationalism and the ‘politics of face’ (e.g. rigid stances based on nationalistic pride and machismo). Vietnam has seen too much military conflict. So has the region and the world. A military conflict must be avoided by all possible means and Vietnam must engage the community of nations with greater energy and depth than it is accustomed to doing. This is why I believe it is essential that Vietnam show the world why it is worthy of support. This, in turn, will require energetically implementing the sorts of reforms outlined in the PM’s New Year address.
* Up to now, Washington has only called Beijing’s recent actions in the East Vietnam Sea “provocative” as well as called on both sides to deal with friction through diplomatic means and to observe freedom of navigation in the sea. They said they are not in favor of any side. However, in recent days, some U.S. officials have sent messages that they want to build military cooperation with Vietnam. Did you realize that?
Dr. Jonathan D. London: Yes, I have read of this, and greater military would seem logical, given regional power imbalances. However, military cooperation with the U.S. on any significant scale will carry with it certain ramifications. In a recent email exchange, the noted U.S.-based intellectual Amitai Etzioni, a prominent advocate of “mutually assured restraint” in U.S.-China relations, has warned of the risk of treating the dispute with China as a potential military conflict. So I think it is sensible that the U.S. explores the deepening of military cooperation with Vietnam, but that these decisions be made in view of the broader regional strategic calculus and with minimizing the likelihood of militarizing the region. Vietnam needs to balance the imperatives of self-defense with the need for a peaceful order. Ultimately, relations between Vietnam and China must be stable. But they cannot be stable if the overriding principles in the region follow the laws of the jungle.
* In your opinion, is it a good idea for Vietnam to file a lawsuit to an international tribunal against China over its illegitimate territorial claims in the East Vietnam Sea?
Dr. Jonathan D. London: Barring any significant changes in Beijing’s position, very possibly yes. With respect to international norms, it’s worth noting that the U.S.’s own failure to support the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) over several decades is extremely regrettable. Having the U.S. as a signatory to UNCLOS would likely give it even greater significance than it has today.
Unfortunately, saying that does not help Vietnam. So what about the international tribunal? Beijing has indicated that it would ignore any judgments against it, which is unfortunate and one would hope this position might change. The aim should not be to antagonize Beijing but to have a neutral body adjudicate between competing sovereignty claims on the basis of available evidence. If there is no change in Beijing’s position and diplomacy fails, the tribunal would at least provide an opportunity to make the world aware of how each country’s aims stand up.
That said, if there are alternatives to an international tribunal, those should be actively explored or created where none exist.
* Did the current tensions in the East Vietnam Sea affect the U.S. pivot to Asia?
Dr. Jonathan D. London: They certainly pose dilemmas for Washington. While some have voiced concern that the U.S. has not taken a more forceful stance, I believe the U.S. response to the tensions remain to be seen. One would expect these tensions to change the tenor of discussions between Hanoi and the U.S. with respect to military intervention. It is still unclear what exactly the pivot means now and will mean in practical terms going forward. But if one aim of the U.S.’s Pacific presence is to ensure a stable maritime environment conducive to the development of international commerce and supportive of security, we would expect the present tensions to add, and not diminish, attention to these goals. No one wants to see the region descend into a tense never-ending contest for hegemony. The region would be much better served by diplomatic measures. The so-called pivot is not and should not be mainly about military issues. It should be about promoting prosperity through cooperation.
Monday, May 19, 2014
[Asia Pacific] Toasts Turn to Water Cannons in China, Vietnam Sea Spat
Source: http://www.businessweek.com/news/2014-05-18/vietnam-china-shared-patrols-turn-to-south-china-sea-standoff
The crews from the
Vietnamese and Chinese coast guards shook hands and took photos as they
met last month, sharing platters of fruit and raising their glasses for a
toast. Now, they are in a tense standoff in the South China Sea.
“The
two sides were very happy and united,” Lt. Colonel Phan Duy Cuong, the
operations assistant of Vietnam’s Coast Guard Command, said of the April
15 ceremony. “We toasted each other with wine. They went on our boat
and we went on theirs.” Ships No. 8003 and 2007 sailed alongside two Chinese coast guard vessels for three days in the Gulf of Tonkin. A month later, at least one of those Chinese boats has been spotted helping guard an oil rig that Vietnam is demanding be removed from contested waters about 140 miles (225 kilometers) off its coast, according to Cuong.
The dispute over the rig near the Paracel Islands reflects a renewed chill between the two Communist nations after efforts to draw them closer together, including a flurry of official visits last year. Both China and the U.S. have targeted Vietnam as a potential partner to bolster their influence in the region.
“We were working together just days before, but now there is a line dividing us,” Cuong said on board boat 8003, which carried a crew of 50 plus 100 live chickens in a pen on the stern. “I’m very sad.” While on the joint patrol in April, the boats together inspected Chinese and Vietnamese fishing boats.
Water Cannons
Cuong has been assigned to boat 8003 since it left Hai Phong port May 5 to patrol the waters west of the Paracel Islands. Over three days last week, the ship was chased by the Chinese coast guard five times as it attempted to break through a perimeter around the rig. The Chinese ships got as close as 400 meters to the Vietnamese craft, blasting their horns and ordering it to retreat. Other ships were rammed, Cuong said. Both sides have said they used water cannons.The cooling in ties is less about China picking a fight with Vietnam and more about it warning off the U.S., according to Tan See Seng, an associate professor at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies in Singapore.
“The reason for the schizophrenic quality of Chinese behavior, I suspect, has to do with what China thinks U.S. intention and strategy toward it might be,” Tan said by e-mail. “China’s big worry is the U.S. and its partners will block China’s access to strategic trade routes through the South China Sea.”.
China and Vietnam fought a border war in 1979, with China having forcibly taken the Paracel Islands from Vietnam five years earlier. In 1988, a Chinese naval attack in the Spratly Islands, which Vietnam also lays claims to, killed 64 Vietnamese border guards as China seized seven atolls. In 2007, Chinese naval patrol vessels fired on a Vietnamese fishing boat, killing one sailor.
‘City’ Lights
Out on the South China Sea last week, boat 8003’s radar screen showed about 60 Chinese ships facing off against half a dozen Vietnamese boats. Cuong’s ship got within three nautical miles of the oil rig on May 6 before being turned away and hasn’t been that close since.“The first day we got there we saw all these ships turn on their lights,” said Bui Son, a crew member in charge of artillery. “It looked like a city. We were so surprised to see such a heavy presence of Chinese ships in Vietnam’s territorial waters. We were shocked.”
As he spoke, in the distance the rig rose from the sea like a giant tower, with a platform on a red base holding several cranes. At night it glows and can be seen as far away as 12 nautical miles.
Low-flying Aircraft
The crew of boat 8003 has seen two Chinese missile-launching ships in the area, while Chinese aircraft have flown over at low altitude. Vietnam state media reported a Chinese submarine in the area.Colonel Luu Tien Thang, deputy director of the political division of the Coast Guard Command, said Vietnam has coast guard and fishing surveillance craft in the vicinity of the rig.
“We
do not use the navy to show our willingness to resolve this
peacefully,” he said on May 15 on boat 8003. “If we deployed the navy,
it would escalate the situation.”
Anti-China protests in Vietnam
last week morphed into attacks on factories operated by companies from
Taiwan and Singapore, leaving two Chinese dead and scores of businesses
damaged. That prompted Prime Minister Nguyen Tan Dung to instruct
provincial governments and security forces to take “quick actions” to
stop the violence and prevent protests. The Binh Duong government will exempt protest-damaged companies from land rental charges, Vietnam’s official state television reported yesterday, citing Le Thanh Cung, chairman of the provincial People’s Committee.
China said yesterday it was sending five ships to Vietnam to evacuate its citizens, with more than 3,000 Chinese nationals leaving as of May 17. An additional 3,000 Chinese workers are expected to leave on the ships from the central province of Ha Tinh today and tomorrow, according to Tran Dac Hoa, the province’s Labor Federation vice president.
China’s ‘Family’
Things had appeared on a more positive footing last year, as China’s President Xi Jinping and Premier Li Keqiang made a series of visits to Southeast Asian nations, pledging investment and bolstering trade ties. Xi said in October “the Asia-Pacific is a big family and China is a member of this family.”Vietnam and China last June set up a hot-line between their leaders, and expanded a 2006 agreement to jointly explore for oil in the Gulf of Tonkin. Li visited Vietnam in October, where he and Dung pledged to boost “political trust,” signing a memorandum of understanding for a cross-border economic cooperation zone and agreeing to open trade promotion offices.
Vietnam President Truong Tan Sang visited Beijing last June, where he had a three-hour meeting with Xi and they agreed to push “pragmatic cooperation” on areas such as defense, the official Xinhua News Agency reported.
China says the rig is in its territorial waters, and has accused Vietnam of ramming its ships. The attacks on workers in Vietnam prompted Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying on May 15 to criticize the Vietnamese government for “indulgence and connivance toward domestic anti-China forces and criminals.”
‘Normal Behavior’
The rig’s presence off Vietnam’s coast is “very normal behavior,” General Fang Fenghui, chief of the People’s Liberation Army General Staff, said in the U.S. on May 15. Vietnam dispatched ships to disrupt the drilling operations, “and that’s something we aren’t able to accept,” he said.China’s growing self-confidence on the international stage, coupled with Xi’s “tough” style, means the relationship with Vietnam could stay tense, according to Arthur Ding, a research fellow at the China politics division of the Institute of International Relations in Taipei.
“I don’t think you’re going to see it escalate into a war,” Ding said by phone. “China and Vietnam are still self-restrained.”
While Vietnam has confronted China in the waters it “also realizes that it’s quite impossible to confront China in a very sustainable way,” he said. “China has become the No. 2 power.”
Fading Friendship
Out on boat 8003, Son said he’s not afraid of the larger Chinese ships.“What I do worry about is that our friendship is fading and we are losing trust in each other,” he said. “That’s the bigger loss for the two countries.”
“When we said goodbye, we promised we’d see each other again. Now we see each other in this very difficult situation.”
"Girls und Panzer" Voice Pack No. 2 - Yukari Akiyama
Source: http://worldoftanks.asia/en/news/21/announce-gupmod-02/
"World of Tanks" Meets "Girls und Panzer" Voice Pack Part 2 is released!The second Voice Pack will feature Anglerfish Team's loader and a diehard tank enthusiast, Yukari Akiyama !
By installing this Voice Pack, the crew voices during your World of Tanks battles will be changed to Yukari 's voice.
The new character voice for this Voice Pack are all newly recorded and exclusive to this Voice Pack. Also, the Voice Pack is free for everyone to use, so everyone can enjoy Sensha-do with Yukari.
"Character Voice Pack No. 2 - Yukari Akiyama" can be downloaded from the World of Tanks Official Forum.Download here:
http://cdn-frm-sg.wargaming.net/wot/sg/uploads/monthly_05_2014/post-138-0-36118000-1400488005.zip
Saturday, May 17, 2014
[Asia Pacific] China - The Last Empire Expands
Source: https://medium.com/china-and-the-world/49025a8aa648
Written by
The
world’s last remaining empire is expanding. More than fifty years after
the European, Japanese, and American colonial powers largely abandoned
their holds on far-flung territories, and more than twenty years after
the Soviet collapse, one colonial power remains: China. To its portfolio
of Tibet, Xinjiang and Inner Mongolia, Beijing has now added the
near-entirety of the South China Sea. Why? Because it can. How? By
simply announcing it.
The U.S. and the nations
bordering the South China Sea are simply too hobbled or militarily weak
to stand up to China’s bald territory grab.
The Obama
administration appears, in public at least, not to hear the
announcement, continuing to refer instead to amorphous needs for freedom
of navigation and codes of conduct. But here is the crystalline
statement by China’s Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi in early September:
“China has sovereignty over the islands in the South China Sea and the
adjacent waters.”
If that isn’t clear enough, an
earlier statement by China’s state news agency Xinhua in July was more
precise; a newly announced Chinese prefecture called Sansha, the Chinese
name for one of the Paracel Islands, will administer “2 million square
kilometers of water” in addition to the hundreds of islets and shoals
within the sea. That adds up to an expanse almost equal to the
Mediterranean.
It is no longer possible to pretend
that this annexation is something nuanced or limited, especially in
light of China’s recent printing of passports that include a map showing
the South China Sea as belonging to China, and the recent announcement
by the foreign affairs office of China’s Hainan Province that Chinese
ships would be allowed to search and deny transit to foreign vessels if
they were engaged in any “illegal activities” within the
12-nautical-mile zone surrounding any of the hundreds of islands claimed
by China.
How could the “peaceful rise” of an
inwardly focused China possibly lead to strident hegemony over other
territories? For decades, Western Sinologists and China’s communist
party leaders have framed the middle kingdom as a self-centered entity,
never on the hunt for foreign properties. If you lived in Boston or
Berkeley, the argument was more credible than if you lived in Lhasa,
Kashgar or Hohhot (or Vietnam in 1979, when Chinese forces invaded).
Beijing’s latest imperial move will bury the illusion of a self-occupied
benevolence.
The Chinese Communist Party and the
People’s Liberation Army Navy have been biding their time for this
moment. The South China Sea has long been a backwater of unresolved
borders, disputed exclusive economic zones, and competing claims on
fishing and petroleum rights. In addition to China, Vietnam, Malaysia,
Taiwan, the Philippines, and Brunei all have long-standing overlapping
claims. Why is it not still a sleepy backwater?
Two reasons: The muscling-up of China’s navy, and America’s epic military diversion to Iraq and Afghanistan.
Despite
its history of having a mostly ground-based military with marine
capabilities limited to its shores, over the past twenty years China has
built a major naval force with “blue water” reach, anchored by
substantial submarine bases at Ningbo, Qingdao (which U.S. Defense
Secretary Leon Panetta visited in September) and Sanya, the latter two
bases having underground sub facilities. The assortment of submarines is
complemented by 13 destroyers and 65 frigates, as well as
precision-guided ballistic and cruise missiles that the U.S. worries
could disable its aircraft carriers and bases in the region. Measured
against these advanced weapons, China’s recently launched relic of a
small aircraft carrier, the Varyag (renamed Liaoning), is nothing more
than a photo-op.
China’s newly expressed territorial
ambitions find support beyond the leadership of the Chinese Communist
Party, extending well into the national psyche. The CEO of China’s
state-controlled oil company Cnooc announced in August, vis-à-vis the
South China Sea, that “deep-water [oil] rigs are our mobile national
territory and a strategic weapon.”
In recent weeks the
South China Sea story has been overshadowed by heated frictions between
China and Japan regarding the Diaoyu/Senkaku islands in the East China
Sea. In this dispute China has a claim of ambiguous validity that can be
used to harness long-standing anti-Japan and nationalist sentiment, to
the benefit of a Chinese Communist Party that must legitimize itself.
This tussle provides two other benefits to Beijing—it keeps attention
off the South China Sea grab, and provides a robust warning to Vietnam,
Malaysia, Brunei, Taiwan and the Philippines of the consequences of
resisting.
What a difference a decade makes.
China’s
neighboring countries on the South China Sea have sailed through the
past decade with inadequate defense preparations, lulled by the
dissipating notion of a U.S. security umbrella.
The
Philippine government’s announcement in August that it is negotiating
with Italy to acquire two used Maestrale-class anti-sub cruisers,
possibly a year from now, illustrates the feebleness of its maritime
position. Two decommissioned coastguard cutters—stripped of weapons—that
have been recently transferred from the U.S. to the Philippine navy are
Manila’s most advanced ships.
The Scorpène-class
submarine sighted at dock by this observer in September at Malaysia’s
Sabah naval base still requires French naval personnel to operate
properly, according to a well-informed individual in Malaysia. (The
country received its first two submarines in 2009-2010, a procurement
that is now the subject of a corruption investigation in France.) One of
the submarines was deemed unable to submerge by the country’s defense
minister shortly after its delivery; the government now claims it can
dive.
Belatedly, Vietnam has begun a serious naval
rebuilding, deploying in 2011 its first two Gepard-class light frigates.
More significantly, in 2009 Vietnam ordered six Russian-built
kilo-class submarines, the first of which was launched for initial sea
trials four months ago at St. Petersburg. With their stealth
capabilities, extended combat range, and weapons for land and sea
strikes, these subs will markedly complicate Beijing’s regional naval
posture. But deliveries of the vessels are not likely to be completed
before 2016, which is all the more reason for an assertive Beijing to
make its South China Sea move now.
The nations in the
neighborhood are obviously weak compared to Beijing’s forces, so what
about the historical protector and stabilizer, the United States? Its
draining wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have created a decade-long vacuum
in East Asia. Beijing has likely calibrated its latest imperial move to
occur just prior to the U.S. military’s final extraction from
Afghanistan, after which the U.S. will theoretically have more
capabilities to deploy elsewhere.
Now the U.S. is
urgently trying to fill in the vacuum with a loudly broadcast “pivot”
that so far is more talk than substance. Will it be sufficient to deter
Beijing from taking a bite out of mineral-rich Mongolia on its northern
border, or colonizing rickety Myanmar to the south, with its
hydroelectric potential and Indian Ocean access? These questions are
open for consideration only because of the self-injurious actions of the
world’s current superpower over the past ten years.
An
overused phrase of officials in the administration that launched the
U.S. into the bog of Iraq was “Weakness is provocative.” With painful
irony, it is the debilitating lost decade in Iraq and Afghanistan that
enabled Beijing’s recent nimble territory grab. It is time to see the
Beijing Empire for what it is: a hegemon that has been emboldened by
America’s folly and is expanding.
Victor Robert Lee is the author of the debut spy novel Performance Anomalies, released by Perimeter Six Press in January 2013.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)