Background Briefing:
South China Sea: U.S.
Commences Freedom of
Navigation Patrol - 1
Carlyle A. Thayer
October 27, 2015
[client name deleted]
QUESTION: As you know, the U.S. Navy sent a guided-missile destroyer within 12
nautical miles of artificial islands (Subi and Mischief reefs) in the Spratly archipelago
this morning. The move is said to be in a challenge by the US to China's territorial
claims in the South China Sea.
We request your assessment of this development and what you think the likely
reactions will be from both the US and China.
ANSWER: The US freedom of navigation (FON) patrols are too little too late. The US
should have acted in 2014 when it was clear China was embarking on a major effort
to create artificial islands. US FON patrols will not prevent China from consolidating
its infrastructure on its artificial islands. In the fullness of time China will militarize
these artificial islands when it suits its purposes. China will not confront the US
directly with PLAN warships. China will wage information and legal campaigns to try
and dissuade the US from continuing the patrols, these campaigns will be aimed at
regional states with the aim of stirring up anxieties that the US is destabilising the
region.
The United States should alter its declaratory policy of not taking sides in territorial
disputes. The United States should come out firmly in defense of the status quo and
oppose unilateral actions that have strategic affects. The US should join with the
Philippines to ensure that Filipino fishermen can return to Scarborough Shoals. US
Marines should join their Filipino counterparts at James Shoal claimed by the
Philippines but invested by Chinese paramilitary ships. The US and the Philippines
then should conduct joint resupply missions to the BRP Sierra Madre, beached at the
shoal. In other words the US should adopt cost imposition strategies to restore the
status quo and to confront any Chinese unilateral attempt to alter the status quo.
Suggested citation: Carlyle A. Thayer, “South China Sea: U.S. Commences Freedom of
Navigation Patrol - 1,” Thayer Consultancy Background Brief, October 27, 2015. All
background briefs are posted on Scribd.com (search for Thayer). To remove yourself
from the mailing list type UNSUBSCRIBE in the Subject heading and hit the Reply key.
Thayer Consultancy
ABN # 65 648 097 123
2
Thayer Consultancy provides political analysis of current regional security issues and
other research support to selected clients. Thayer Consultancy was officially
registered as a small business in Australia in 2002.
Background Briefing:
U.S. Commences Freedom of
Navigation Patrol - 2
Carlyle A. Thayer
October 27, 2015
[client name deleted]
Very interesting development happened today. CNN reported that the U.S. Navy
plans to send a destroyer within 12 nautical miles of China's man-made islands in the
South China Sea within the next 24 hours. This was confirmed by a U.S. defense
official. We request your assessment of this development.
ANSWER: China has already begun to respond to the freedom of navigation patrols
by the USS Lassen. China’s foreign ministry will continue to make verbal protests that
US actions are upsetting peace and security in the region. This is typical Chinese
misdirection to take the eyes off its blatant violation of the Declaration of Conduct of
Parties in the South China Sea. It is China that has complicated and escalated
disputes in the South China Sea. Chinese propaganda will print outpourings
denouncing the patrol and retired military commentators will huff and puff calling
for a strong reaction. If China responds at sea it is unlikely that the People’s
Liberation Army Navy will be directly involved. China may stage incidents involving
its Coast Guard and fishing boats. But nothing China can do will alter US resolve to
continue its freedom of navigation patrols. On the other hand, U.S. patrols will not
change China consolidation of infrastructure on its artificial islands.
ADDITIONAL COMMENT:
The US freedom of navigation (FON) patrols are too little too late. The USA should
have acted in 2014 when it was clear China was embarking on a major effort to
create artificial islands. US FON patrols will not prevent China from consolidating its
infrastructure on its artificial islands. In the fullness of time China will militarize these
artificial islands when it suits its purposes. China will not confront the US directly
with PLAN warships. China will wage information and legal warfare campaigns to try
and dissuade the US from continuing the patrols, these campaign will be aimed at
regional states with the aim of stirring up anxieties that the US is destabilising the
region.
The United States should alter its declaratory policy of not taking sides in territorial
disputes. The United States should come out firmly in defense of the status quo and
oppose unilateral actions that have strategic affects. The US should join with the
Philippines to ensure that Filipino fishermen can return to Scarborough Shoals. US
Marines should join their Filipino counterparts at James Shoal claimed by the
Thayer Consultancy
ABN # 65 648 097 123
2
Philippines but invested by Chinese paramilitary ships. The US and the Philippines
then should conduct joint resupply missions to the BRP Sierra Madre, beached at the
shoal. In other words the US should adopt cost imposition strategies to restore the
status quo and to confront any Chinese unilateral attempt to alter the status quo.
Suggested citation: Carlyle A. Thayer, “U.S. Commences Freedom of Navigation
Patrol - 2,” Thayer Consultancy Background Brief, October 27, 2015. All background
briefs are posted on Scribd.com (search for Thayer). To remove yourself from the
mailing list type UNSUBSCRIBE in the Subject heading and hit the Reply key.
Thayer Consultancy provides political analysis of current regional security issues and
other research support to selected clients. Thayer Consultancy was officially
registered as a small business in Australia in 2002.
Background Briefing:
South China Sea: U.S.
Commences Freedom of
Navigation Patrol - 3
Carlyle A. Thayer
October 27, 2015
[client name deleted]
As you might have read in the news the US Navy will deploy the USS Lassen to
conduct a patrol within 24 hours near Subi and Mischief reefs. We request your
assessment of this development.
Q1. The US Navy chooses to deploy the USS Lassen to patrol near Chinese artificial
islands. Some observers point out that the ship has experienced in interactions with
Chinese Navy.Could you elaborate on the decision to deploy the USS Lassen
destroyer?
ANSWER: At long last the United States has finally acted to assert freedom of
navigation (FON) by deploying a major warship, the USS Lassen, a guided missile
destroyer. The deployment of the USS Lassen is the first of many planned FON
patrols. On this occasion the USS Lassen will sail within 12 nautical miles of Subi and
Mischief reefs to demonstrate that these are artificial islands, built on submerged
features, and are not entitled to a maritime zone under international law.
Q2. According to Reuters, the USS Lassen will be accompanied by P-8A and even P-3
surveillance plane. How will the Chinese Navy respond? Will they try to prevent US
ship from intruding near the artificial islands?
ANSWER: The People’s Liberation Army Navy is in no position to challenge seriously
the USS Lassen. The deployment of P-8A aircraft is to give the USS Lassen and other
US naval commanders, a real time picture of Chinese response efforts. China will
make mainly verbal protests through its foreign ministry and by radio from the
artificial islands. China might deploy Coast Guard or even fishing boats. But these
vessels will be mainly for propaganda purposes.
Q3. USS Lassen will sail within 12 n.m. of Subi and Mischief, but it's expected not to
enter the 500-meter safety zone around them. Could you please explain more in
detailed about this 500-meter zone?
ANSWER: Artificial features are entitled to a 500 meter safety zone if they have been
declared in advance. But artificial islands are not entitled to international airspace.
China uses vague expressions like “territorial waters” or “military safety zones” but it
is unclear what it is actually claiming around Subi and Mischief reefs. These features
fall within the Philippines’ 200 nautical mile Exclusive Economic Zone and in
Thayer Consultancy
ABN # 65 648 097 123
2
international law fall within the sovereignty of the Philippines. But this is
hypothetical sovereignty because China actually occupies the reefs.
Q4. The US ship will conduct patrol at Subi and Mischief artificial islands. In your
assesment, why did the US pick these two reefs among seven features where China
has carried out land reclamation?
ANSWER: Both features are at the northern end of the Spratlys and on the periphery
of the island chain (not in the middle), near features currently occupied by the
Philippines. These features are relatively “exposed.” This is just the beginning of US
patrols, I ethe US can be expected to sail by other Chinese-occupied features as well
as features occupied by Vietnam and the Philippines.
Q5. The US move of deploying the US Lassen takes place weeks ahead of many highprofile
events in Asia-Pacific that President Barack Obama and Chinese President Xi
Jinping are expected to attend. How do you expect the Chinese to respond to the US
action?
ANSWER: China’s response will be predictable. It will raise a hue and cry about the
US making trouble out of nothing and negatively affecting peace and security in the
region. China’s response will be like its declaration of an Air Defence Identification
Zone in the East China Sea, it will make propaganda statements but it will be unable
to alter US actions. If China continues to protest this will ensure that the artificial
islands will be the talking point at the East Asia Summit. China will be diplomatically
isolated.
ADDITONAL COMMENT: The US freedom of navigation (FON) patrols are too little
too late. The USA should have acted in 2014 when it was clear China was embarking
on a major effort to create artificial islands. US FON patrols will not prevent China
from consolidating its infrastructure on its artificial islands. In the fullness of time
China will militarize these artificial islands when it suits its purposes. China will not
confront the US directly with PLAN warships. China will wage information and legal
warfare campaigns to try and dissuade the US from continuing the patrols, these
campaigns will be aimed at regional states with the aim of stirring up anxieties that
the US is destabilising the region.
The United States should alter its declaratory policy of not taking sides in territorial
disputes. The United States should come out firmly in defense of the status quo and
oppose unilateral actions that have strategic affects. The US should join with the
Philippines to ensure that Filipino fishermen can return to Scarborough Shoals. US
Marines should join their Filipino counterparts at James Shoal claimed by the
Philippines but invested by Chinese paramilitary ships. The US and the Philippines
then should conduct joint resupply missions to the BRP Sierra Madre, beached at the
shoal. In other words the US should adopt cost imposition strategies to restore the
status quo and to confront any Chinese unilateral attempt to alter the status quo.
Suggested citation: Carlyle A. Thayer, “South China Sea: U.S. Commences Freedom of
Navigation Patrol - 3,” Thayer Consultancy Background Brief, October 27, 2015. All
3
background briefs are posted on Scribd.com (search for Thayer). To remove yourself
from the mailing list type UNSUBSCRIBE in the Subject heading and hit the Reply key.
Thayer Consultancy provides political analysis of current regional security issues and
other research support to selected clients. Thayer Consultancy was officially
registered as a small business in Australia in 2002.
Background Briefing:
South China Sea: U.S.
Commences Freedom of
Navigation Patrol - 4
Carlyle A. Thayer
October 27, 2015
[client name deleted]
QUESTION: What is your assessment of China’s response to the U.S. sending a
warship within 12 nautical miles of Subi reef? The response so far has been
surprisingly muted.
We are interested in your assessment of both the U.S. decision to dispatch the USS
Lassen and China's decision not to more aggressively respond to what it sees as a
violation of its sovereignty.
ANSWER: The US freedom of navigation (FON) patrols are too little too late. The US
should have acted in 2014 when it was clear China was embarking on a major effort
to create artificial islands. US FON patrols will not prevent China from consolidating
its infrastructure on its artificial islands. In the fullness of time China will militarize
these artificial islands when it suits its purposes. China will not confront the US
directly with PLAN warships. China will wage information and legal warfare
campaigns to try and dissuade the US from continuing the patrols, these campaigns
will be aimed at regional states with the aim of stirring up anxieties that the US is
destabilising the region.
The United States should alter its declaratory policy of not taking sides in territorial
disputes. The United States should come out firmly in defense of the status quo and
oppose unilateral actions that have strategic affects. The US should join with the
Philippines to ensure that Filipino fishermen can return to Scarborough Shoals. The
US should patrol with Philippine warships to prevent interference by China. US
Marines should join their Filipino counterparts at James Shoal claimed by the
Philippines but invested by Chinese paramilitary ships. The US and the Philippines
then should conduct joint resupply missions to the BRP Sierra Madre, beached at the
shoal where the Filipino Marines are stationed. In other words the US should adopt
cost imposition strategies to restore the status quo and to confront any Chinese
unilateral attempt to alter the status quo.
QUESTION: If the United States were to take the actions you recommend, what do
you think would be China's response? Do you think there is potential for actual
military conflict if the US and other countries were to truly challenge China?
ANSWER: China does not have the wherewithal – naval warships and aircraft – to
directly respond to the US if it became more assertive in supporting the Philippines.
Thayer Consultancy
ABN # 65 648 097 123
2
China boldly declared an Air Defense Identification Zone over the East China Sea but
stepped back when the US conducted a B52 flight. China’s official position is that
there is no threat so it doesn’t need to challenge. This was a back down. The two
cases I suggested would exploit China’s weaknesses at present and put the onus on
China to escalate or back down. China is not in a position to use the threat of force
to deter the US Navy. The US needs to carefully tailor its response so that China
cannot respond with military force. Nonetheless, challenging China at Scarborough
Reef and James Shoal will not alter China’s consolidation of its presence on its
artificial islands. The US can only confine and hem in China but it can’t overturn
China’s fait accompli.
If the Arbitral Tribunal were to rule in favour of the Philippines, the US could use this
legal basis for more assertive action. The US needs more than the support of the
Philippines, it needs but won’t get ASEAN endorsement. Japan might join the US but
Australia has distanced itself – Canberra supports freedom of navigation but has
backed away from joint patrols with the US at the present time.
In the larger scheme of things, China is promoting a “new model of major country
relations” to convince the US that cooperation on global issues is more important
than “a few rocks” in the South China Sea. The bottom line is that the US is playing
catch up.
Suggested citation: Carlyle A. Thayer, “South China Sea: U.S. Commences Freedom of
Navigation Patrol - 4,” Thayer Consultancy Background Brief, October 27, 2015. All
background briefs are posted on Scribd.com (search for Thayer). To remove yourself
from the mailing list type UNSUBSCRIBE in the Subject heading and hit the Reply key.
Thayer Consultancy provides political analysis of current regional security issues and
other research support to selected clients. Thayer Consultancy was officially
registered as a small business in Australia in 2002.
Background Briefing:
South China Sea: US Commences
Freedom of Navigation Patrol - 5
Carlyle A. Thayer
October 27, 2015
[client name deleted]
QUESTION: Th eUS Navy has sent a guided-missile destroyer within 12 nautical miles
of Subi and Mischief reefs. Can you give us an assessment on this newest
development ? The move of the US is still cautious, is'nt it ? What are the likely
Chinese reactions in the next few days?
ANSWER: The US freedom of navigation (FON) patrols are too little too late. The US
should have acted in 2014 when it was clear China was embarking on a major effort
to create artificial islands. Nonetheless, the US FON patrols are necessary to
challenge China’s claim of maritime jurisdiction from its artificial islands. Failure to
challenge China is tantamount to acquiescing to China’s so-called legal claims.
US FON patrols will not prevent China from consolidating its infrastructure on its
artificial islands. In the fullness of time China will militarize these artificial islands
when it suits its purposes. China’s People’s Liberation Army Navy warships will not
confront the US directly. China will wage information and legal warfare campaigns to
try and dissuade the US from continuing the patrols, these campaign will be aimed at
regional states with the aim of stirring up anxieties that the US is destabilising the
region.
The United States should alter its declaratory policy of not taking sides in territorial
disputes. The United States should come out firmly in defense of the status quo and
oppose unilateral actions that have strategic affects. The US should join with the
Philippines to ensure that Filipino fishermen can return to Scarborough Shoals. US
Marines should join their Filipino counterparts at James Shoal claimed by the
Philippines but invested by Chinese paramilitary ships. The US and the Philippines
then should conduct joint resupply missions to the BRP Sierra Madre, beached at the
shoal. In other words the US should adopt cost imposition strategies to restore the
status quo and to confront any Chinese unilateral attempt to alter the status quo.
Suggested citation: Carlyle A. Thayer, “South China Sea: US Commences Freedom of
Navigation Patrol - 5,” Thayer Consultancy Background Brief, October 27, 2015. All
background briefs are posted on Scribd.com (search for Thayer). To remove yourself
from the mailing list type UNSUBSCRIBE in the Subject heading and hit the Reply key.
Thayer Consultancy
ABN # 65 648 097 123
2
Thayer Consultancy provides political analysis of current regional security issues and
other research support to selected clients. Thayer Consultancy was officially
registered as a small business in Australia in 2002.
Background Briefing:
South China Sea: U.S.
Commences Freedom of
Navigation Patrol - 6
Carlyle A. Thayer
October 27, 2015
[client name deleted]
Q1. Why do you think the US chose Subi (and perhaps Mischief) reefs for its most
recent freedom of navigation patrol?
ANSWER: Subi is a low tide elevation and clearly anything built on it cannot claim any
maritime zone such as a territorial sea. Since Subi is contested it is doubtful that it
can command a 500 metre safety zone. Subi has no claim to airspace under
international law. Subi is at the northern end of and on the periphery of the Spratly
islands in relative uncongested maritime space. The US, however, has given no
explanation why Subi was chosen for the first freedom of navigation patrols in three
years.
Q2. What do you think the USS Lassen actually did — just passed through, or
conducted military operations/exercises to show it was in international waters and
not innocent passage?
ANSWER: The Pentagon has been tight lipped on what the USS Lassen did. I suspect
it merely sailed through with all its sensors alert to any possible threat. Innocent
passage is not an issue as an artificial island built on a low tide elevation is not
entitled to a territorial sea under international law.
Q3. How do you think China will respond in the short and longer term?
ANSWER: China’ response is already a matter of public record. Its foreign ministry
has huffed and puffed about the putative violation of China’s sovereignty and the
provocative nature of the USS Lassen’s activities. China might stage a confrontation
for propaganda purposes but this would be a symbolic show of “defense of
sovereignty” rather than a real attempt to interfere with the USS Lassen. In the
longer term China and the US will settle down to choreographed patrols and
protests. Recall China’s Air Defense Identification Zone, after China’s diplomatic huff
and puff things have settled down.
Q4. What happens next? More U.S. patrols? Joint ones with allies? Or a one-off?
ANSWER: The US will conduct continued Freedom of Navigation patrols through the
Spratlys into the maritime zones putatively claimed by China. At the moment it is
clear Australia will not directly participate in joint patrols with the United States.
Thayer Consultancy
ABN # 65 648 097 123
2
Q5. Do you think the U.S. will/should conduct similar patrols near other claimants’
features in the Spratlys?
ANSWER: Yes, the US should assert freedom of navigation where ever it thinks
regional states are claiming a maritime zone beyond what international law allows.
Neither Vietnam nor the Philippines has made clear what their maritime zones are
and they too could be targets for freedom of navigation (FON) patrols in the future.
OTHER COMMENTS:
The US FON patrols are too little too late. The USA should have acted in 2014 when it
was clear China was embarking on a major effort to create artificial islands. US FON
patrols will not prevent China from consolidating its infrastructure on its artificial
islands. In the fullness of time China will militarize these artificial islands when it suits
its purposes. China will not confront the US directly with PLAN warships. China will
wage information and legal warfare campaigns to try and dissuade the US from
continuing the patrols, these campaign will be aimed at regional states with the aim
of stirring up anxieties that the US is destabilising the region.
The United States should alter its declaratory policy of not taking sides in territorial
disputes. The United States should come out firmly in defense of the status quo and
oppose unilateral actions that have strategic affects. The US should join with the
Philippines to ensure that Filipino fishermen can return to Scarborough Shoals. US
Marines should join their Filipino counterparts at James Shoal claimed by the
Philippines but invested by Chinese paramilitary ships. The US and the Philippines
then should conduct joint resupply missions to the BRP Sierra Madre, beached at the
shoal. In other words the US should adopt cost imposition strategies to restore the
status quo and to confront any Chinese unilateral attempt to alter the status quo.
Q6: One quick follow-up. What do you make of the carrier USS Theodore Roosevelt’s
presence in Singapore at the same time (it’s leaving tomorrow)? Do you think it
could be heading for the South China Sea next, and was it likely brought into the
area just in case things escalated rapidly (or maybe it was coming anyway and they
waited until its arrival to conduct the FON patrol)?
ANSWER: The US would not have planned the USS Lassen deployment without
contingencies related to the level of Chinese response. The P8 would certainly
provide real time maritime domain awareness. If the Chinese mobilised ships and/or
aircraft to respond then the USS Roosevelt would have set to sea. China’s air force
would be operating at extended ranges. Like China’s ADIZ, China cannot enforce a
“no go” area – by sea or land – in the South China Sea at present. The USS Lassen is a
guided missile destroyer more powerful than any Chinese surface ship in the area.
The USS Roosevelt exercises maritime control. China is unlikely to use its PLAN to
interfere with the USS Lassen, the presence of the USS Roosevelt makes it more
unlikely. The US Lassen puts the onus on China ”to put up or shut up”.
Suggested citation: Carlyle A. Thayer, “South China Sea: U.S. Commences Freedom of
Navigation Patrol 6,” Thayer Consultancy Background Brief, October 27, 2015. All
background briefs are posted on Scribd.com (search for Thayer). To remove yourself
from the mailing list type UNSUBSCRIBE in the Subject heading and hit the Reply key.
3
Thayer Consultancy provides political analysis of current regional security issues and
other research support to selected clients. Thayer Consultancy was officially
registered as a small business in Australia in 2002.
Background Briefing:
U.S. Commences Freedom of
Navigation Patrol - 7
Carlyle A. Thayer
October 27, 2015
[client name deleted]
The U.S Navy is sending the USS Lassen within 12 nautical miles of Subi Reef, China's
man-made island, we request your assessment of the following issues:
Q1- What you think are the real US reasons for these patrols?
ANSWER: The real reason for the patrol by the USS LASSEN is to challenge any
Chinese claim to sovereign rights from artificial islands and airspace in the South
China Sea. Artificial islands are not entitled to a territorial sea or airspace.
Q2- What does it mean for the South China Sea dispute?
ANSWER: US naval patrols will alter nothing. China will continue to consolidate its
presence on the artificial islands. The US patrols will come and go and China will
continue to make routine protests. There is a risk of confrontation at sea but both
sides will work hard to prevent this. The real audience is Southeast Asian nations.
They will not want to take sides.
Q3 – At the same time as the U.S is conducting naval patrols to challenge Beijing’s
maritme claims in the South China Sea, Japan’s Ministry of Finance is seeking to cut
host-nation support for the U.S military in Japan. Is this an indication that Japan will
not support the U.S. in the South China Sea?
ANSWER: Japan has a strong interest in freedom of navigation. This is a separate
issue from host nation support for the US military presence in Japan. Japan is more
likely to support the US and perhaps conduct coordinated patrols in the South China
Sea than Australia.
Q4 - China is using its Coast Guard’s patrol boats to assert its claims to South China
Sea. According to a report by Bloomberg, the China Coast Guard vessels do not have
deck guns. This makes is difficult for U.S. naval warships to challenge the China Coast
Guard.
ANSWER: No China Coast Guard vessel is likely to challenge directly a US Naval
guided missile destroyer. The China Coast Guard vessel could be employed in a
stage-managed confrontation for propaganda purposes to show the US warship
engaging a Chinese civilian ship. Some China Coast Guard ships are armed but
Thayer Consultancy
ABN # 65 648 097 123
2
neither they or People’s Liberation Army Navy warships will confront directly US
naval warships.
Q5. What do you think about US freedom of navigation patrols?
ANSWER: The US freedom of navigation (FON) patrols are too little too late. The USA
should have acted in 2014 when it was clear China was embarking on a major effort
to create artificial islands. US FON patrols will not prevent China from consolidating
its infrastructure on its artificial islands. In the fullness of time China will militarize
these artificial islands when it suits its purposes. China will not confront the US
directly with PLAN warships. China will wage information and legal warfare
campaigns to try and dissuade the US from continuing the patrols, these campaigns
will be aimed at regional states with the aim of stirring up anxieties that the US is
destabilising the region.
The United States should alter its declaratory policy of not taking sides in territorial
disputes. The United States should come out firmly in defense of the status quo and
oppose unilateral actions that have strategic affects. The US should join with the
Philippines to ensure that Filipino fishermen can return to Scarborough Shoals. US
Marines should join their Filipino counterparts at James Shoal claimed by the
Philippines but invested by Chinese paramilitary ships. The US and the Philippines
then should conduct joint resupply missions to the BRP Sierra Madre, beached at the
shoal. In other words, the US should adopt cost imposition strategies to restore the
status quo and to confront any Chinese unilateral attempt to alter the status quo.
Suggested citation: Carlyle A. Thayer, “U.S. Commences Freedom of Navigation
Patrol - 7,” Thayer Consultancy Background Brief, October 27, 2015. All background
briefs are posted on Scribd.com (search for Thayer). To remove yourself from the
mailing list type UNSUBSCRIBE in the Subject heading and hit the Reply key.
Thayer Consultancy provides political analysis of current regional security issues and
other research support to selected clients. Thayer Consultancy was officially
registered as a small business in Australia in 2002.
South China Sea: U.S.
Commences Freedom of
Navigation Patrol - 1
Carlyle A. Thayer
October 27, 2015
[client name deleted]
QUESTION: As you know, the U.S. Navy sent a guided-missile destroyer within 12
nautical miles of artificial islands (Subi and Mischief reefs) in the Spratly archipelago
this morning. The move is said to be in a challenge by the US to China's territorial
claims in the South China Sea.
We request your assessment of this development and what you think the likely
reactions will be from both the US and China.
ANSWER: The US freedom of navigation (FON) patrols are too little too late. The US
should have acted in 2014 when it was clear China was embarking on a major effort
to create artificial islands. US FON patrols will not prevent China from consolidating
its infrastructure on its artificial islands. In the fullness of time China will militarize
these artificial islands when it suits its purposes. China will not confront the US
directly with PLAN warships. China will wage information and legal campaigns to try
and dissuade the US from continuing the patrols, these campaigns will be aimed at
regional states with the aim of stirring up anxieties that the US is destabilising the
region.
The United States should alter its declaratory policy of not taking sides in territorial
disputes. The United States should come out firmly in defense of the status quo and
oppose unilateral actions that have strategic affects. The US should join with the
Philippines to ensure that Filipino fishermen can return to Scarborough Shoals. US
Marines should join their Filipino counterparts at James Shoal claimed by the
Philippines but invested by Chinese paramilitary ships. The US and the Philippines
then should conduct joint resupply missions to the BRP Sierra Madre, beached at the
shoal. In other words the US should adopt cost imposition strategies to restore the
status quo and to confront any Chinese unilateral attempt to alter the status quo.
Suggested citation: Carlyle A. Thayer, “South China Sea: U.S. Commences Freedom of
Navigation Patrol - 1,” Thayer Consultancy Background Brief, October 27, 2015. All
background briefs are posted on Scribd.com (search for Thayer). To remove yourself
from the mailing list type UNSUBSCRIBE in the Subject heading and hit the Reply key.
Thayer Consultancy
ABN # 65 648 097 123
2
Thayer Consultancy provides political analysis of current regional security issues and
other research support to selected clients. Thayer Consultancy was officially
registered as a small business in Australia in 2002.
Background Briefing:
U.S. Commences Freedom of
Navigation Patrol - 2
Carlyle A. Thayer
October 27, 2015
[client name deleted]
Very interesting development happened today. CNN reported that the U.S. Navy
plans to send a destroyer within 12 nautical miles of China's man-made islands in the
South China Sea within the next 24 hours. This was confirmed by a U.S. defense
official. We request your assessment of this development.
ANSWER: China has already begun to respond to the freedom of navigation patrols
by the USS Lassen. China’s foreign ministry will continue to make verbal protests that
US actions are upsetting peace and security in the region. This is typical Chinese
misdirection to take the eyes off its blatant violation of the Declaration of Conduct of
Parties in the South China Sea. It is China that has complicated and escalated
disputes in the South China Sea. Chinese propaganda will print outpourings
denouncing the patrol and retired military commentators will huff and puff calling
for a strong reaction. If China responds at sea it is unlikely that the People’s
Liberation Army Navy will be directly involved. China may stage incidents involving
its Coast Guard and fishing boats. But nothing China can do will alter US resolve to
continue its freedom of navigation patrols. On the other hand, U.S. patrols will not
change China consolidation of infrastructure on its artificial islands.
ADDITIONAL COMMENT:
The US freedom of navigation (FON) patrols are too little too late. The USA should
have acted in 2014 when it was clear China was embarking on a major effort to
create artificial islands. US FON patrols will not prevent China from consolidating its
infrastructure on its artificial islands. In the fullness of time China will militarize these
artificial islands when it suits its purposes. China will not confront the US directly
with PLAN warships. China will wage information and legal warfare campaigns to try
and dissuade the US from continuing the patrols, these campaign will be aimed at
regional states with the aim of stirring up anxieties that the US is destabilising the
region.
The United States should alter its declaratory policy of not taking sides in territorial
disputes. The United States should come out firmly in defense of the status quo and
oppose unilateral actions that have strategic affects. The US should join with the
Philippines to ensure that Filipino fishermen can return to Scarborough Shoals. US
Marines should join their Filipino counterparts at James Shoal claimed by the
Thayer Consultancy
ABN # 65 648 097 123
2
Philippines but invested by Chinese paramilitary ships. The US and the Philippines
then should conduct joint resupply missions to the BRP Sierra Madre, beached at the
shoal. In other words the US should adopt cost imposition strategies to restore the
status quo and to confront any Chinese unilateral attempt to alter the status quo.
Suggested citation: Carlyle A. Thayer, “U.S. Commences Freedom of Navigation
Patrol - 2,” Thayer Consultancy Background Brief, October 27, 2015. All background
briefs are posted on Scribd.com (search for Thayer). To remove yourself from the
mailing list type UNSUBSCRIBE in the Subject heading and hit the Reply key.
Thayer Consultancy provides political analysis of current regional security issues and
other research support to selected clients. Thayer Consultancy was officially
registered as a small business in Australia in 2002.
Background Briefing:
South China Sea: U.S.
Commences Freedom of
Navigation Patrol - 3
Carlyle A. Thayer
October 27, 2015
[client name deleted]
As you might have read in the news the US Navy will deploy the USS Lassen to
conduct a patrol within 24 hours near Subi and Mischief reefs. We request your
assessment of this development.
Q1. The US Navy chooses to deploy the USS Lassen to patrol near Chinese artificial
islands. Some observers point out that the ship has experienced in interactions with
Chinese Navy.Could you elaborate on the decision to deploy the USS Lassen
destroyer?
ANSWER: At long last the United States has finally acted to assert freedom of
navigation (FON) by deploying a major warship, the USS Lassen, a guided missile
destroyer. The deployment of the USS Lassen is the first of many planned FON
patrols. On this occasion the USS Lassen will sail within 12 nautical miles of Subi and
Mischief reefs to demonstrate that these are artificial islands, built on submerged
features, and are not entitled to a maritime zone under international law.
Q2. According to Reuters, the USS Lassen will be accompanied by P-8A and even P-3
surveillance plane. How will the Chinese Navy respond? Will they try to prevent US
ship from intruding near the artificial islands?
ANSWER: The People’s Liberation Army Navy is in no position to challenge seriously
the USS Lassen. The deployment of P-8A aircraft is to give the USS Lassen and other
US naval commanders, a real time picture of Chinese response efforts. China will
make mainly verbal protests through its foreign ministry and by radio from the
artificial islands. China might deploy Coast Guard or even fishing boats. But these
vessels will be mainly for propaganda purposes.
Q3. USS Lassen will sail within 12 n.m. of Subi and Mischief, but it's expected not to
enter the 500-meter safety zone around them. Could you please explain more in
detailed about this 500-meter zone?
ANSWER: Artificial features are entitled to a 500 meter safety zone if they have been
declared in advance. But artificial islands are not entitled to international airspace.
China uses vague expressions like “territorial waters” or “military safety zones” but it
is unclear what it is actually claiming around Subi and Mischief reefs. These features
fall within the Philippines’ 200 nautical mile Exclusive Economic Zone and in
Thayer Consultancy
ABN # 65 648 097 123
2
international law fall within the sovereignty of the Philippines. But this is
hypothetical sovereignty because China actually occupies the reefs.
Q4. The US ship will conduct patrol at Subi and Mischief artificial islands. In your
assesment, why did the US pick these two reefs among seven features where China
has carried out land reclamation?
ANSWER: Both features are at the northern end of the Spratlys and on the periphery
of the island chain (not in the middle), near features currently occupied by the
Philippines. These features are relatively “exposed.” This is just the beginning of US
patrols, I ethe US can be expected to sail by other Chinese-occupied features as well
as features occupied by Vietnam and the Philippines.
Q5. The US move of deploying the US Lassen takes place weeks ahead of many highprofile
events in Asia-Pacific that President Barack Obama and Chinese President Xi
Jinping are expected to attend. How do you expect the Chinese to respond to the US
action?
ANSWER: China’s response will be predictable. It will raise a hue and cry about the
US making trouble out of nothing and negatively affecting peace and security in the
region. China’s response will be like its declaration of an Air Defence Identification
Zone in the East China Sea, it will make propaganda statements but it will be unable
to alter US actions. If China continues to protest this will ensure that the artificial
islands will be the talking point at the East Asia Summit. China will be diplomatically
isolated.
ADDITONAL COMMENT: The US freedom of navigation (FON) patrols are too little
too late. The USA should have acted in 2014 when it was clear China was embarking
on a major effort to create artificial islands. US FON patrols will not prevent China
from consolidating its infrastructure on its artificial islands. In the fullness of time
China will militarize these artificial islands when it suits its purposes. China will not
confront the US directly with PLAN warships. China will wage information and legal
warfare campaigns to try and dissuade the US from continuing the patrols, these
campaigns will be aimed at regional states with the aim of stirring up anxieties that
the US is destabilising the region.
The United States should alter its declaratory policy of not taking sides in territorial
disputes. The United States should come out firmly in defense of the status quo and
oppose unilateral actions that have strategic affects. The US should join with the
Philippines to ensure that Filipino fishermen can return to Scarborough Shoals. US
Marines should join their Filipino counterparts at James Shoal claimed by the
Philippines but invested by Chinese paramilitary ships. The US and the Philippines
then should conduct joint resupply missions to the BRP Sierra Madre, beached at the
shoal. In other words the US should adopt cost imposition strategies to restore the
status quo and to confront any Chinese unilateral attempt to alter the status quo.
Suggested citation: Carlyle A. Thayer, “South China Sea: U.S. Commences Freedom of
Navigation Patrol - 3,” Thayer Consultancy Background Brief, October 27, 2015. All
3
background briefs are posted on Scribd.com (search for Thayer). To remove yourself
from the mailing list type UNSUBSCRIBE in the Subject heading and hit the Reply key.
Thayer Consultancy provides political analysis of current regional security issues and
other research support to selected clients. Thayer Consultancy was officially
registered as a small business in Australia in 2002.
Background Briefing:
South China Sea: U.S.
Commences Freedom of
Navigation Patrol - 4
Carlyle A. Thayer
October 27, 2015
[client name deleted]
QUESTION: What is your assessment of China’s response to the U.S. sending a
warship within 12 nautical miles of Subi reef? The response so far has been
surprisingly muted.
We are interested in your assessment of both the U.S. decision to dispatch the USS
Lassen and China's decision not to more aggressively respond to what it sees as a
violation of its sovereignty.
ANSWER: The US freedom of navigation (FON) patrols are too little too late. The US
should have acted in 2014 when it was clear China was embarking on a major effort
to create artificial islands. US FON patrols will not prevent China from consolidating
its infrastructure on its artificial islands. In the fullness of time China will militarize
these artificial islands when it suits its purposes. China will not confront the US
directly with PLAN warships. China will wage information and legal warfare
campaigns to try and dissuade the US from continuing the patrols, these campaigns
will be aimed at regional states with the aim of stirring up anxieties that the US is
destabilising the region.
The United States should alter its declaratory policy of not taking sides in territorial
disputes. The United States should come out firmly in defense of the status quo and
oppose unilateral actions that have strategic affects. The US should join with the
Philippines to ensure that Filipino fishermen can return to Scarborough Shoals. The
US should patrol with Philippine warships to prevent interference by China. US
Marines should join their Filipino counterparts at James Shoal claimed by the
Philippines but invested by Chinese paramilitary ships. The US and the Philippines
then should conduct joint resupply missions to the BRP Sierra Madre, beached at the
shoal where the Filipino Marines are stationed. In other words the US should adopt
cost imposition strategies to restore the status quo and to confront any Chinese
unilateral attempt to alter the status quo.
QUESTION: If the United States were to take the actions you recommend, what do
you think would be China's response? Do you think there is potential for actual
military conflict if the US and other countries were to truly challenge China?
ANSWER: China does not have the wherewithal – naval warships and aircraft – to
directly respond to the US if it became more assertive in supporting the Philippines.
Thayer Consultancy
ABN # 65 648 097 123
2
China boldly declared an Air Defense Identification Zone over the East China Sea but
stepped back when the US conducted a B52 flight. China’s official position is that
there is no threat so it doesn’t need to challenge. This was a back down. The two
cases I suggested would exploit China’s weaknesses at present and put the onus on
China to escalate or back down. China is not in a position to use the threat of force
to deter the US Navy. The US needs to carefully tailor its response so that China
cannot respond with military force. Nonetheless, challenging China at Scarborough
Reef and James Shoal will not alter China’s consolidation of its presence on its
artificial islands. The US can only confine and hem in China but it can’t overturn
China’s fait accompli.
If the Arbitral Tribunal were to rule in favour of the Philippines, the US could use this
legal basis for more assertive action. The US needs more than the support of the
Philippines, it needs but won’t get ASEAN endorsement. Japan might join the US but
Australia has distanced itself – Canberra supports freedom of navigation but has
backed away from joint patrols with the US at the present time.
In the larger scheme of things, China is promoting a “new model of major country
relations” to convince the US that cooperation on global issues is more important
than “a few rocks” in the South China Sea. The bottom line is that the US is playing
catch up.
Suggested citation: Carlyle A. Thayer, “South China Sea: U.S. Commences Freedom of
Navigation Patrol - 4,” Thayer Consultancy Background Brief, October 27, 2015. All
background briefs are posted on Scribd.com (search for Thayer). To remove yourself
from the mailing list type UNSUBSCRIBE in the Subject heading and hit the Reply key.
Thayer Consultancy provides political analysis of current regional security issues and
other research support to selected clients. Thayer Consultancy was officially
registered as a small business in Australia in 2002.
Background Briefing:
South China Sea: US Commences
Freedom of Navigation Patrol - 5
Carlyle A. Thayer
October 27, 2015
[client name deleted]
QUESTION: Th eUS Navy has sent a guided-missile destroyer within 12 nautical miles
of Subi and Mischief reefs. Can you give us an assessment on this newest
development ? The move of the US is still cautious, is'nt it ? What are the likely
Chinese reactions in the next few days?
ANSWER: The US freedom of navigation (FON) patrols are too little too late. The US
should have acted in 2014 when it was clear China was embarking on a major effort
to create artificial islands. Nonetheless, the US FON patrols are necessary to
challenge China’s claim of maritime jurisdiction from its artificial islands. Failure to
challenge China is tantamount to acquiescing to China’s so-called legal claims.
US FON patrols will not prevent China from consolidating its infrastructure on its
artificial islands. In the fullness of time China will militarize these artificial islands
when it suits its purposes. China’s People’s Liberation Army Navy warships will not
confront the US directly. China will wage information and legal warfare campaigns to
try and dissuade the US from continuing the patrols, these campaign will be aimed at
regional states with the aim of stirring up anxieties that the US is destabilising the
region.
The United States should alter its declaratory policy of not taking sides in territorial
disputes. The United States should come out firmly in defense of the status quo and
oppose unilateral actions that have strategic affects. The US should join with the
Philippines to ensure that Filipino fishermen can return to Scarborough Shoals. US
Marines should join their Filipino counterparts at James Shoal claimed by the
Philippines but invested by Chinese paramilitary ships. The US and the Philippines
then should conduct joint resupply missions to the BRP Sierra Madre, beached at the
shoal. In other words the US should adopt cost imposition strategies to restore the
status quo and to confront any Chinese unilateral attempt to alter the status quo.
Suggested citation: Carlyle A. Thayer, “South China Sea: US Commences Freedom of
Navigation Patrol - 5,” Thayer Consultancy Background Brief, October 27, 2015. All
background briefs are posted on Scribd.com (search for Thayer). To remove yourself
from the mailing list type UNSUBSCRIBE in the Subject heading and hit the Reply key.
Thayer Consultancy
ABN # 65 648 097 123
2
Thayer Consultancy provides political analysis of current regional security issues and
other research support to selected clients. Thayer Consultancy was officially
registered as a small business in Australia in 2002.
Background Briefing:
South China Sea: U.S.
Commences Freedom of
Navigation Patrol - 6
Carlyle A. Thayer
October 27, 2015
[client name deleted]
Q1. Why do you think the US chose Subi (and perhaps Mischief) reefs for its most
recent freedom of navigation patrol?
ANSWER: Subi is a low tide elevation and clearly anything built on it cannot claim any
maritime zone such as a territorial sea. Since Subi is contested it is doubtful that it
can command a 500 metre safety zone. Subi has no claim to airspace under
international law. Subi is at the northern end of and on the periphery of the Spratly
islands in relative uncongested maritime space. The US, however, has given no
explanation why Subi was chosen for the first freedom of navigation patrols in three
years.
Q2. What do you think the USS Lassen actually did — just passed through, or
conducted military operations/exercises to show it was in international waters and
not innocent passage?
ANSWER: The Pentagon has been tight lipped on what the USS Lassen did. I suspect
it merely sailed through with all its sensors alert to any possible threat. Innocent
passage is not an issue as an artificial island built on a low tide elevation is not
entitled to a territorial sea under international law.
Q3. How do you think China will respond in the short and longer term?
ANSWER: China’ response is already a matter of public record. Its foreign ministry
has huffed and puffed about the putative violation of China’s sovereignty and the
provocative nature of the USS Lassen’s activities. China might stage a confrontation
for propaganda purposes but this would be a symbolic show of “defense of
sovereignty” rather than a real attempt to interfere with the USS Lassen. In the
longer term China and the US will settle down to choreographed patrols and
protests. Recall China’s Air Defense Identification Zone, after China’s diplomatic huff
and puff things have settled down.
Q4. What happens next? More U.S. patrols? Joint ones with allies? Or a one-off?
ANSWER: The US will conduct continued Freedom of Navigation patrols through the
Spratlys into the maritime zones putatively claimed by China. At the moment it is
clear Australia will not directly participate in joint patrols with the United States.
Thayer Consultancy
ABN # 65 648 097 123
2
Q5. Do you think the U.S. will/should conduct similar patrols near other claimants’
features in the Spratlys?
ANSWER: Yes, the US should assert freedom of navigation where ever it thinks
regional states are claiming a maritime zone beyond what international law allows.
Neither Vietnam nor the Philippines has made clear what their maritime zones are
and they too could be targets for freedom of navigation (FON) patrols in the future.
OTHER COMMENTS:
The US FON patrols are too little too late. The USA should have acted in 2014 when it
was clear China was embarking on a major effort to create artificial islands. US FON
patrols will not prevent China from consolidating its infrastructure on its artificial
islands. In the fullness of time China will militarize these artificial islands when it suits
its purposes. China will not confront the US directly with PLAN warships. China will
wage information and legal warfare campaigns to try and dissuade the US from
continuing the patrols, these campaign will be aimed at regional states with the aim
of stirring up anxieties that the US is destabilising the region.
The United States should alter its declaratory policy of not taking sides in territorial
disputes. The United States should come out firmly in defense of the status quo and
oppose unilateral actions that have strategic affects. The US should join with the
Philippines to ensure that Filipino fishermen can return to Scarborough Shoals. US
Marines should join their Filipino counterparts at James Shoal claimed by the
Philippines but invested by Chinese paramilitary ships. The US and the Philippines
then should conduct joint resupply missions to the BRP Sierra Madre, beached at the
shoal. In other words the US should adopt cost imposition strategies to restore the
status quo and to confront any Chinese unilateral attempt to alter the status quo.
Q6: One quick follow-up. What do you make of the carrier USS Theodore Roosevelt’s
presence in Singapore at the same time (it’s leaving tomorrow)? Do you think it
could be heading for the South China Sea next, and was it likely brought into the
area just in case things escalated rapidly (or maybe it was coming anyway and they
waited until its arrival to conduct the FON patrol)?
ANSWER: The US would not have planned the USS Lassen deployment without
contingencies related to the level of Chinese response. The P8 would certainly
provide real time maritime domain awareness. If the Chinese mobilised ships and/or
aircraft to respond then the USS Roosevelt would have set to sea. China’s air force
would be operating at extended ranges. Like China’s ADIZ, China cannot enforce a
“no go” area – by sea or land – in the South China Sea at present. The USS Lassen is a
guided missile destroyer more powerful than any Chinese surface ship in the area.
The USS Roosevelt exercises maritime control. China is unlikely to use its PLAN to
interfere with the USS Lassen, the presence of the USS Roosevelt makes it more
unlikely. The US Lassen puts the onus on China ”to put up or shut up”.
Suggested citation: Carlyle A. Thayer, “South China Sea: U.S. Commences Freedom of
Navigation Patrol 6,” Thayer Consultancy Background Brief, October 27, 2015. All
background briefs are posted on Scribd.com (search for Thayer). To remove yourself
from the mailing list type UNSUBSCRIBE in the Subject heading and hit the Reply key.
3
Thayer Consultancy provides political analysis of current regional security issues and
other research support to selected clients. Thayer Consultancy was officially
registered as a small business in Australia in 2002.
Background Briefing:
U.S. Commences Freedom of
Navigation Patrol - 7
Carlyle A. Thayer
October 27, 2015
[client name deleted]
The U.S Navy is sending the USS Lassen within 12 nautical miles of Subi Reef, China's
man-made island, we request your assessment of the following issues:
Q1- What you think are the real US reasons for these patrols?
ANSWER: The real reason for the patrol by the USS LASSEN is to challenge any
Chinese claim to sovereign rights from artificial islands and airspace in the South
China Sea. Artificial islands are not entitled to a territorial sea or airspace.
Q2- What does it mean for the South China Sea dispute?
ANSWER: US naval patrols will alter nothing. China will continue to consolidate its
presence on the artificial islands. The US patrols will come and go and China will
continue to make routine protests. There is a risk of confrontation at sea but both
sides will work hard to prevent this. The real audience is Southeast Asian nations.
They will not want to take sides.
Q3 – At the same time as the U.S is conducting naval patrols to challenge Beijing’s
maritme claims in the South China Sea, Japan’s Ministry of Finance is seeking to cut
host-nation support for the U.S military in Japan. Is this an indication that Japan will
not support the U.S. in the South China Sea?
ANSWER: Japan has a strong interest in freedom of navigation. This is a separate
issue from host nation support for the US military presence in Japan. Japan is more
likely to support the US and perhaps conduct coordinated patrols in the South China
Sea than Australia.
Q4 - China is using its Coast Guard’s patrol boats to assert its claims to South China
Sea. According to a report by Bloomberg, the China Coast Guard vessels do not have
deck guns. This makes is difficult for U.S. naval warships to challenge the China Coast
Guard.
ANSWER: No China Coast Guard vessel is likely to challenge directly a US Naval
guided missile destroyer. The China Coast Guard vessel could be employed in a
stage-managed confrontation for propaganda purposes to show the US warship
engaging a Chinese civilian ship. Some China Coast Guard ships are armed but
Thayer Consultancy
ABN # 65 648 097 123
2
neither they or People’s Liberation Army Navy warships will confront directly US
naval warships.
Q5. What do you think about US freedom of navigation patrols?
ANSWER: The US freedom of navigation (FON) patrols are too little too late. The USA
should have acted in 2014 when it was clear China was embarking on a major effort
to create artificial islands. US FON patrols will not prevent China from consolidating
its infrastructure on its artificial islands. In the fullness of time China will militarize
these artificial islands when it suits its purposes. China will not confront the US
directly with PLAN warships. China will wage information and legal warfare
campaigns to try and dissuade the US from continuing the patrols, these campaigns
will be aimed at regional states with the aim of stirring up anxieties that the US is
destabilising the region.
The United States should alter its declaratory policy of not taking sides in territorial
disputes. The United States should come out firmly in defense of the status quo and
oppose unilateral actions that have strategic affects. The US should join with the
Philippines to ensure that Filipino fishermen can return to Scarborough Shoals. US
Marines should join their Filipino counterparts at James Shoal claimed by the
Philippines but invested by Chinese paramilitary ships. The US and the Philippines
then should conduct joint resupply missions to the BRP Sierra Madre, beached at the
shoal. In other words, the US should adopt cost imposition strategies to restore the
status quo and to confront any Chinese unilateral attempt to alter the status quo.
Suggested citation: Carlyle A. Thayer, “U.S. Commences Freedom of Navigation
Patrol - 7,” Thayer Consultancy Background Brief, October 27, 2015. All background
briefs are posted on Scribd.com (search for Thayer). To remove yourself from the
mailing list type UNSUBSCRIBE in the Subject heading and hit the Reply key.
Thayer Consultancy provides political analysis of current regional security issues and
other research support to selected clients. Thayer Consultancy was officially
registered as a small business in Australia in 2002.
No comments:
Post a Comment