Tuesday, November 9, 2010
Korean Peninsular Tension a significant problem for Asia Pacific
clik here to read more: http://www.wfol.tv/analysis/asia/5671-korean-peninsular-tension-a-significant-problem-for-asia-pacific.html
Monday, November 8, 2010
Asia-Pacific Military Dominance: U.S. Makes Waves In South China Sea
-The freedom of navigation which the US claims to protect is actually the freedom of the US military to threaten other countries....In advocating that free and safe navigation in South China Sea is threatened, the US is creating a false impression of a worrying situation of South China Sea to the international community. It boosts the "China threat theory" claimed by some Western politicians, distances the relations between China and Southeast Asian countries and creates new leverage to contain China's development.
Since July, US politicians such as President Barack Obama and Defense Secretary Robert Gates have frequently mentioned on various public occasions the issue of free and safe navigation in South China Sea.
They claim that maintaining free navigation in the South China Sea is in the US national interest and oppose any actions obstructive to free navigation. If one listens to them, the South China Sea no longer seems calm and tranquil.
But there is no threat to free navigation in the South China Sea. Maintaining free navigation and ensuring a smooth trade flow is in line with the globalization era, which has already become an international consensus.
Those who act against free navigation, such as pirates and maritime terrorists, have become the enemy of all, as the traditional legal description of pirates goes, and are opposed by every nation.
The South China Sea is one of the world's busiest shipping channels with more than 40,000 vessels per year passing through.
If there were really problems, how could so many ships sail through the South China Sea frequently, safely and smoothly?
The answer is self-evident. The US is beating the drum on an issue which doesn't really exist.
Behind its high-sounding words, what exactly are US intentions?
The first aim is to maintain US military hegemony in Asia-Pacific region.
The US has been sending a variety of military surveillance ships, observation boats and survey ships to launch probes and collect national information in the South China Sea for years. It seriously threatens the security and interests of surrounding countries and undermines regional peace and stability.
Facing international opposition, the US deliberately altered the concept and then created the pseudo-proposition of free navigation in the South China Sea, trying to shape international public opinion and force littoral countries and regions to accept its increasing military detection activities.
The freedom of navigation which the US claims to protect is actually the freedom of the US military to threaten other countries.
The US is also seeking a fulcrum for its new Asia-Pacific strategy. The US government is pursuing a return to Asia. If it intends to return with a mutually beneficial attitude and open mind, this is fair enough. If it is self-conceited, intolerant to others and trapped in a Cold War mentality, it inevitably will start forming cliques.
The US is also trying to contain China through the use of the South China Sea issue.
The US has acquired many benefits from friendly cooperation with China. But China's goodwill has not received good returns from the US.
Based on a Cold War zero-sum mind-set, the US cannot tolerate the reasonable growth of China's national strength and regional influence.
It falsely claims that China will challenge US global hegemony in the future and believes that China will implement an "Asian Monroe Doctrine" while the US is too busy to look after East Asia.
In advocating that free and safe navigation in South China Sea is threatened, the US is creating a false impression of a worrying situation of South China Sea to the international community. It boosts the "China threat theory" claimed by some Western politicians, distances the relations between China and Southeast Asian countries and creates new leverage to contain China's development.
Thus, the speculation of the US over the issue of free navigation in South China Sea is in the name of a public good but for the sake of private interests. The US has no justifiable reasons to interfere the South China Sea by simply using the free navigation issue.
The author is a member of the China Institute of International Studies. ===========================
http://opinion.globaltimes.cn/
Since July, US politicians such as President Barack Obama and Defense Secretary Robert Gates have frequently mentioned on various public occasions the issue of free and safe navigation in South China Sea.
They claim that maintaining free navigation in the South China Sea is in the US national interest and oppose any actions obstructive to free navigation. If one listens to them, the South China Sea no longer seems calm and tranquil.
But there is no threat to free navigation in the South China Sea. Maintaining free navigation and ensuring a smooth trade flow is in line with the globalization era, which has already become an international consensus.
Those who act against free navigation, such as pirates and maritime terrorists, have become the enemy of all, as the traditional legal description of pirates goes, and are opposed by every nation.
The South China Sea is one of the world's busiest shipping channels with more than 40,000 vessels per year passing through.
If there were really problems, how could so many ships sail through the South China Sea frequently, safely and smoothly?
The answer is self-evident. The US is beating the drum on an issue which doesn't really exist.
Behind its high-sounding words, what exactly are US intentions?
The first aim is to maintain US military hegemony in Asia-Pacific region.
The US has been sending a variety of military surveillance ships, observation boats and survey ships to launch probes and collect national information in the South China Sea for years. It seriously threatens the security and interests of surrounding countries and undermines regional peace and stability.
Facing international opposition, the US deliberately altered the concept and then created the pseudo-proposition of free navigation in the South China Sea, trying to shape international public opinion and force littoral countries and regions to accept its increasing military detection activities.
The freedom of navigation which the US claims to protect is actually the freedom of the US military to threaten other countries.
The US is also seeking a fulcrum for its new Asia-Pacific strategy. The US government is pursuing a return to Asia. If it intends to return with a mutually beneficial attitude and open mind, this is fair enough. If it is self-conceited, intolerant to others and trapped in a Cold War mentality, it inevitably will start forming cliques.
The US is also trying to contain China through the use of the South China Sea issue.
The US has acquired many benefits from friendly cooperation with China. But China's goodwill has not received good returns from the US.
Based on a Cold War zero-sum mind-set, the US cannot tolerate the reasonable growth of China's national strength and regional influence.
It falsely claims that China will challenge US global hegemony in the future and believes that China will implement an "Asian Monroe Doctrine" while the US is too busy to look after East Asia.
In advocating that free and safe navigation in South China Sea is threatened, the US is creating a false impression of a worrying situation of South China Sea to the international community. It boosts the "China threat theory" claimed by some Western politicians, distances the relations between China and Southeast Asian countries and creates new leverage to contain China's development.
Thus, the speculation of the US over the issue of free navigation in South China Sea is in the name of a public good but for the sake of private interests. The US has no justifiable reasons to interfere the South China Sea by simply using the free navigation issue.
The author is a member of the China Institute of International Studies. ===========================
http://opinion.globaltimes.cn/
Saturday, November 6, 2010
New Zealand new ties with Pentagon
WELLINGTON, New Zealand: New Zealand wants closer military relations with the United States, Australia, Britain and Canada, as well as enhanced front-line capabilities, a defense white paper said.
The goal is to improve the country's contributions to U.N. military operations in world trouble zones, with a focus on terrorist activity prevention, the 100-page document said.
The white paper was published just two days before U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton arrived in New Zealand for a three-day visit, prompting one newspaper to suggest it was a perfect gift for her.
Clinton is expected to sign, before the end of her visit this weekend, a declaration confirming closer ties between the two countries. Military relations have been icy since 1986 when New Zealand banned nuclear warships from its waters. The two countries haven't had joint military exercises from that date.
The white paper firmly states New Zealand's desires for closer cooperation, including for military spending, as well as a desire for Wellington to play a bigger role in the Pacific region should the government be called upon for help.
....
On the ground the army will get more front-line soldiers and Special Air Service elite troops, while on the seas the Anzac frigates will be upgraded.
The air force is to replace its Lockheed Martin P-3C Orion, the main maritime patrol aircraft, and C-130H Hercules -- Vietnam-era transport planes -- within the next 15 years.
A program to upgrade the Orions will continue and could include self-protection equipment and anti-submarine sensors, the paper said. But they will be replaced "with an equivalent level of capability, manned or unmanned" by around 2025.
No specific planes were mentioned as an Orion replacement but analysts have said they likely would include the Airbus Military C-295, Embraer EMB-145 MP, Saab 2000 MPA and the Saab 340 MSA. Unmanned options might be the Northrop Grumman RQ-4 Global Hawk.
Upgrading of the five C-130Hs also will continue although they will be replaced by around 2020, the paper said. Equivalent planes on the market are the C-130J, Embraer's KC-390, or even Airbus Military's A400M.
The white paper, the first in 13 years, sidestepped a decision on the air force's two Boeing 757 transport aircraft, saying a study before the next defense review in 2015 will consider replacement options.
A similar review on replacing the Kaman SH-2 Seasprite helicopters will be completed by around 2015, and when they are due for upgrades.
....
Around 45 percent of the defense department's operating spending is on front-line activities. Savings will be sought from backroom operations where up to 1,400 military jobs have been identified as potential civilian jobs.
http://www.upi.com/Business_
The goal is to improve the country's contributions to U.N. military operations in world trouble zones, with a focus on terrorist activity prevention, the 100-page document said.
The white paper was published just two days before U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton arrived in New Zealand for a three-day visit, prompting one newspaper to suggest it was a perfect gift for her.
Clinton is expected to sign, before the end of her visit this weekend, a declaration confirming closer ties between the two countries. Military relations have been icy since 1986 when New Zealand banned nuclear warships from its waters. The two countries haven't had joint military exercises from that date.
The white paper firmly states New Zealand's desires for closer cooperation, including for military spending, as well as a desire for Wellington to play a bigger role in the Pacific region should the government be called upon for help.
....
On the ground the army will get more front-line soldiers and Special Air Service elite troops, while on the seas the Anzac frigates will be upgraded.
The air force is to replace its Lockheed Martin P-3C Orion, the main maritime patrol aircraft, and C-130H Hercules -- Vietnam-era transport planes -- within the next 15 years.
A program to upgrade the Orions will continue and could include self-protection equipment and anti-submarine sensors, the paper said. But they will be replaced "with an equivalent level of capability, manned or unmanned" by around 2025.
No specific planes were mentioned as an Orion replacement but analysts have said they likely would include the Airbus Military C-295, Embraer EMB-145 MP, Saab 2000 MPA and the Saab 340 MSA. Unmanned options might be the Northrop Grumman RQ-4 Global Hawk.
Upgrading of the five C-130Hs also will continue although they will be replaced by around 2020, the paper said. Equivalent planes on the market are the C-130J, Embraer's KC-390, or even Airbus Military's A400M.
The white paper, the first in 13 years, sidestepped a decision on the air force's two Boeing 757 transport aircraft, saying a study before the next defense review in 2015 will consider replacement options.
A similar review on replacing the Kaman SH-2 Seasprite helicopters will be completed by around 2015, and when they are due for upgrades.
....
Around 45 percent of the defense department's operating spending is on front-line activities. Savings will be sought from backroom operations where up to 1,400 military jobs have been identified as potential civilian jobs.
http://www.upi.com/Business_
Friday, November 5, 2010
US Defense Secretary Robert Gates to Australia and Malaysia
US Defense Secretary Robert Gates departs Friday for Australia and Malaysia to bolster defense ties amid concern in the region over China's growing economic and naval power.
Gates will join Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and top US military officer Admiral Mike Mullen at an annual US-Australia conference of ministers in Melbourne next week before heading to Kuala Lumpur on Tuesday, Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morrell told a news conference.
Talks in Melbourne will underscore the strength of the US alliance with Australia and address efforts to help regional partners with "maritime security" in Asia, said Morrell.
US officials often employ the phrase "maritime security" to refer to concerns about China's assertive stance over territorial rights in the Pacific, particularly in the South China Sea.
The meeting would offer a chance to assess "the vital role our military partnership continues to play in Asia's overall security environment," he said.
Both American and Australian officials have voiced worries about China's tough line on territorial disputes with Asian neighbors in the Pacific as well as its increased defense spending.
....
The US defense secretary's discussions in Melbourne would also focus on the war effort in Afghanistan, where Australia has deployed about 1,500 troops mainly in the south, Morrell said.
Gates was due on Tuesday to fly to Malaysia, where he will meet Prime Minister Najib Razak and Defence Minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi, in the latest sign of improving relations after years of strained ties between the two countries.
The talks will address "our strengthening bilateral military ties," following an expansion in joint exercises in recent years, Morrell said.
President Barack Obama's administration has praised Malaysia for its decision this year to deploy a medical unit to Afghanistan and for its cooperation in efforts to secure the Malacca Strait, a vital channel for oil to East Asian countries.
Coming after Clinton's visit to Malaysia this week, Gates' trip marked "yet another signal of our deepening relationship with Malaysia," Morrel said.
© ANP/AFP
Talks in Melbourne will underscore the strength of the US alliance with Australia and address efforts to help regional partners with "maritime security" in Asia, said Morrell.
US officials often employ the phrase "maritime security" to refer to concerns about China's assertive stance over territorial rights in the Pacific, particularly in the South China Sea.
The meeting would offer a chance to assess "the vital role our military partnership continues to play in Asia's overall security environment," he said.
Both American and Australian officials have voiced worries about China's tough line on territorial disputes with Asian neighbors in the Pacific as well as its increased defense spending.
....
The US defense secretary's discussions in Melbourne would also focus on the war effort in Afghanistan, where Australia has deployed about 1,500 troops mainly in the south, Morrell said.
Gates was due on Tuesday to fly to Malaysia, where he will meet Prime Minister Najib Razak and Defence Minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi, in the latest sign of improving relations after years of strained ties between the two countries.
The talks will address "our strengthening bilateral military ties," following an expansion in joint exercises in recent years, Morrell said.
President Barack Obama's administration has praised Malaysia for its decision this year to deploy a medical unit to Afghanistan and for its cooperation in efforts to secure the Malacca Strait, a vital channel for oil to East Asian countries.
Coming after Clinton's visit to Malaysia this week, Gates' trip marked "yet another signal of our deepening relationship with Malaysia," Morrel said.
© ANP/AFP
Wednesday, November 3, 2010
Japan-US sabotaging Kunashiri Island Peace
Amber Chye
The US once again tried to play the role of the police of the World when it unilaterally backed Japan in the recent dispute the former World War 2 aggressor has with Russia.
U.S. State Department spokesman Philip Crowley said on Monday that the United States backs Japan on its islands dispute with Russia.
Russian President Dmitry Medvedev on Monday morning visited Kunashiri Island, one of the Russian-held islands also claimed by Japan. Medvedev becomes the first leader from Russia or the former Soviet Union to travel to any of the disputed islands, which are called the Northern Territories in Japan and the Southern Kurils in Russia.
The visit has sparked strong reaction from Japan. Upon Medvedev 's arrival on the island, Japanese Foreign Minister Seiji Maehara summoned Russian ambassador to lodge a protest against the visit. The four disputed Pacific islands were occupied by the Soviet troops in 1945 and are currently under Russian control.
Russia and Japan have long been at odds due to the territorial dispute over these islands, which has blocked a peace treaty between the two countries since the end of World War II.
Japan was one of the main aggressor's that started World War 2. It committed numerous crimes against the people of the Asia-Pacific rim and was only defeated after the US bombarded it with Atomic bombs, and this while Russian troops landed in the disputed Islands to occupy them until now.
Japan has always followed the American lead in smashing all hopes for a peace treaty with the Russians on the Islands and now with the US beefing up Japan's foreign policy and military power - which is a terrible mistake by the US as Japan can easily be turned into an aggressor nation again with much damage to the world - the Japanese are once again sabotaging all peace efforts.
The US once again tried to play the role of the police of the World when it unilaterally backed Japan in the recent dispute the former World War 2 aggressor has with Russia.
U.S. State Department spokesman Philip Crowley said on Monday that the United States backs Japan on its islands dispute with Russia.
Russian President Dmitry Medvedev on Monday morning visited Kunashiri Island, one of the Russian-held islands also claimed by Japan. Medvedev becomes the first leader from Russia or the former Soviet Union to travel to any of the disputed islands, which are called the Northern Territories in Japan and the Southern Kurils in Russia.
The visit has sparked strong reaction from Japan. Upon Medvedev 's arrival on the island, Japanese Foreign Minister Seiji Maehara summoned Russian ambassador to lodge a protest against the visit. The four disputed Pacific islands were occupied by the Soviet troops in 1945 and are currently under Russian control.
Russia and Japan have long been at odds due to the territorial dispute over these islands, which has blocked a peace treaty between the two countries since the end of World War II.
Japan was one of the main aggressor's that started World War 2. It committed numerous crimes against the people of the Asia-Pacific rim and was only defeated after the US bombarded it with Atomic bombs, and this while Russian troops landed in the disputed Islands to occupy them until now.
Japan has always followed the American lead in smashing all hopes for a peace treaty with the Russians on the Islands and now with the US beefing up Japan's foreign policy and military power - which is a terrible mistake by the US as Japan can easily be turned into an aggressor nation again with much damage to the world - the Japanese are once again sabotaging all peace efforts.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)