Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Generational Dynamics World View
*** 7-Sep-18 World View -- Britain 'provokes' China by sending warship into South China Sea

This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com
  • Britain 'provokes' China by sending warship into South China Sea
  • China's 'nine-dash line map' makes absurd claims to South China Sea

****
**** Britain 'provokes' China by sending warship into South China Sea
****


[Image: g180906b.jpg]
Military vehicles in the loading dock of the HMS Albion (Reuters)

Late last month, the HMS Albion, a British Royal Navy flagship
amphibious assault ship, was traveling through the South China Sea, en
route from Tokyo to Saigon (Ho Chi Minh City) in Vietnam. The 22,000
ton amphibious warship was carrying a contingent of Royal Marines.

On August 31, the ship exercised its "freedom of navigation" rights as
it passed near the Paracel Islands. The Paracel Islands have been
ruled by the courts to be in international waters, but China has used
military force to annex them, in clear violation of international law.

China immediately launched a military challenge of the British ship by
dispatching a frigate and two helicopters. However, both sides
remained calm during the encounter.

In 2016, China claimed "ironclad proof" of the sovereignty of the
Paracel Islands. The proof consisted of a 600 year old handwritten
book by fisherman Su Chengfen, who uses the book as a guide to the
various routes between the islands.

The BBC decided to investigate, and tracked down the fisherman.
As I reported at the time,

the BBC found that the book did not exist, and China's claim
to the Paracel Islands is a hoax.

This didn't stop China's foreign ministry spokesman on Thursday from
saying, "The relevant behavior of the British warship violated Chinese
law and relevant international law and infringed upon China's
sovereignty. China is firmly opposed to this."

This is a lie on several levels. The Chinese think that their
laws are the laws of the world, and they specifically repudiate
international law when it goes against them. The invoke
international law as a kind of word game when they believe it
favors them.

In 2016, China was thoroughly humiliated when all of their activities
in the South China Sea were declared illegal by the United Nations
Permanent Court of Arbitration in the Hague, which ruled that all of
China's activities in the South China Sea are illegal and in violation of international law.

China's response to the court ruling at the time was that it was
"completely a political farce staged under legal pretext," and it was
"plotted and manipulated by certain forces outside the region," which
could mean either the Europeans or the Americans or both. The
spokesman at the time continued, "Its purpose is clearly not to seek
proper settlement of disputes with China, but to violate China’s
territorial sovereignty and maritime rights and interests and put
peace and stability in the South China Sea in jeopardy."

The logic of the Chinese statement is that China's "territorial
sovereignty" over the region are a given, and any challenge puts
"peace and stability in the South China Sea in jeopardy."

That of course is a threat: Any challenge will be met with a military
response. Reuters and China Foreign Ministry (6-Sep-2018) and China Foreign Ministry (13-Jul-2016)

****
**** China's 'nine-dash line map' makes absurd claims to South China Sea
****


[Image: g180906c.jpg]
China's 'nine-dash line' encompasses the entire South China Sea, going as far away as Indonesia's Natuna Island, which is nowhere near China (BBC)

China's "historic" claims to the South China Sea are either hoaxes,
like the claim to the Paracel Islands described above, or worthless,
or challenged by equally valid historic claims from other countries,
including Vietnam, Philippines, Taiwan, Malaysia, Brunei, and
Indonesia.

The arbitrariness of China's claims is shown by its claim to
Indonesia's Natuna Island. In 2016, China sent its coast guard
warships to ram Indonesian vessels in the Natuna Sea.
What's going on here is that the Natuna Sea is
extremely rich in fishing grounds. The Natuna Sea is clearly
Indonesia's territory, since it's very far from China, but
that makes no difference to China. It's amazing in the 21st
century that a country feels it's perfectly OK to steal another
country's assets, and even feels entitled to them.

China's "historic claims" to the South China Sea really
go no farther back than to 1947. According to one
historical analysis:

<QUOTE>"And finally, China’s so-called “historic claims” to
the South China Sea are actually not “centuries old.” They only go
back to 1947, when Chiang Kai-shek’s nationalist government drew
the so-called “eleven-dash line” on Chinese maps of the South
China Sea, enclosing the Spratly Islands and other chains that the
ruling Kuomintang party declared were now under Chinese
sovereignty. Chiang himself, saying he saw German fascism as a
model for China, was fascinated by the Nazi concept of an expanded
Lebensraum (“living space”) for the Chinese nation. He did not
have the opportunity to be expansionist himself because the
Japanese put him on the defensive, but cartographers of the
nationalist regime drew the U-shape of eleven dashes in an attempt
to enlarge China’s “living space” in the South China
Sea. Following the victory of the Chinese Communist Party in the
civil war in 1949, the People’s Republic of China adopted this
cartographic coup, revising Chiang’s notion into a “nine-dash
line” after erasing two dashes in the Gulf of Tonkin in
1953."<END QUOTE>


What's interesting about this analysis is the relationship of
Chiang to Hitler's "Lebensraum" concept, where Hitler felt
entitled to invade and annex larger regions of Russia for
German expansion. In other words, Chiang felt that the Chinese
were the Master Race, just as Hitler's Nazis felt they were
the Master Race, entitled to take anything they wanted.

I've written in the past that Xi Jinping is following in the footsteps
of Hitler, adopting a government similar to Hitler's National
Socialism, and feeling entitled to annex regions that have
historically belonged to other countries. ( "24-Oct-17 World View -- Xi Jinping's 'Socialism with Chinese characteristics' is identical to Hitler's National Socialism"
)

This analysis makes it clear that this attitude is not recent, and
didn't start with Xi Jinping. Apparently the Chinese were quite
impressed with Hitler in World War II, and the 1947 map was meant to
copy Hitler.

Today, China is following exactly the same path that the Nazis
followed. Xi Jinping's "Socialism with Chinese Characteristics" is
the same as Hitler's National Socialism. Like the Nazis, the Chinese
believe that they're a Master Race that will conquer the world.
They'd have to be crazy to believe that they could succeed at that,
but the Chinese are crazy. And they'll do exactly what the Nazis did
-- bring destruction and catastrophe to themselves and the entire
world. World Affairs Journal (June 2013) and CSIS (12-Jun-2015) and Diplomat (21-Jun-2016) and BBC (20-Oct-2014)

Related Articles:



KEYS: Generational Dynamics, Britain, China, South China Sea,
HMS Albion, Japan, Vietnam, Paracel Island,
Su Chengfen, Xi Jinping, Adolf Hitler,
United Nations Permanent Court of Arbitration in the Hague,
Philippines, Taiwan, Malaysia, Brunei, Indonesia, Natuna Island

Permanent web link to this article
Receive daily World View columns by e-mail
Contribute to Generational Dynamics via PayPal

John J. Xenakis
100 Memorial Drive Apt 8-13A
Cambridge, MA 02142
Phone: 617-864-0010
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com
Forum: http://www.gdxforum.com/forum
Subscribe to World View: http://generationaldynamics.com/subscribe
Reply


Messages In This Thread
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by radind - 05-14-2016, 03:21 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by radind - 05-23-2016, 10:31 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by radind - 08-11-2016, 08:59 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by SomeGuy - 01-18-2017, 09:23 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by tg63 - 02-04-2017, 10:08 AM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by Galen - 03-13-2017, 03:33 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by SomeGuy - 03-15-2017, 02:56 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by SomeGuy - 03-15-2017, 03:13 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by Galen - 05-30-2017, 01:04 AM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by Galen - 07-08-2017, 01:34 AM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by tg63 - 08-09-2017, 11:07 AM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by tg63 - 08-10-2017, 02:38 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by Galen - 10-25-2017, 03:07 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by rds - 10-31-2017, 03:35 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by rds - 10-31-2017, 06:33 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by noway2 - 11-20-2017, 04:31 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by Galen - 12-28-2017, 11:00 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by Galen - 12-31-2017, 11:14 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by JDG 66 - 06-22-2018, 02:54 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by JDG 66 - 07-11-2018, 01:42 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by JDG 66 - 07-11-2018, 01:54 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by JDG 66 - 07-19-2018, 12:43 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by JDG 66 - 07-25-2018, 02:18 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by JDG 66 - 07-11-2018, 01:58 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by Galen - 08-18-2018, 03:42 AM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by Galen - 08-19-2018, 04:39 AM
7-Sep-18 World View -- Britain 'provokes' China by sending warship into South China S - by John J. Xenakis - 09-06-2018, 10:35 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by tg63 - 09-25-2019, 11:12 AM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by JDG 66 - 03-09-2020, 02:11 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by Camz - 03-10-2020, 10:10 AM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by tg63 - 03-12-2020, 11:11 AM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by JDG 66 - 03-16-2020, 03:21 PM
RE: 58 year rule - by Tim Randal Walker - 04-01-2020, 11:17 AM
RE: 58 year rule - by John J. Xenakis - 04-02-2020, 12:25 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by Isoko - 05-04-2020, 02:51 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by tg63 - 01-04-2021, 12:13 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by CH86 - 01-05-2021, 11:17 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by mamabug - 01-10-2021, 06:16 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by mamabug - 01-11-2021, 09:06 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by mamabug - 01-12-2021, 02:53 AM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by mamabug - 01-13-2021, 03:58 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by mamabug - 01-13-2021, 04:16 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by mamabug - 01-15-2021, 03:36 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by galaxy - 08-19-2021, 03:03 AM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by galaxy - 08-21-2021, 01:41 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by galaxy - 02-27-2022, 06:06 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by galaxy - 02-27-2022, 10:42 PM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by galaxy - 02-28-2022, 12:26 AM
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - by galaxy - 02-28-2022, 04:08 PM

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Why the social dynamics viewpoint to the Strauss-Howe generational theory is wrong Ldr 5 4,826 06-05-2020, 10:55 PM
Last Post: pbrower2a
  Theory: cyclical generational hormone levels behind the four turnings and archetypes Ldr 2 3,408 03-16-2020, 06:17 AM
Last Post: Ldr
  The Fall of Cities of the Ancient World (42 Years) The Sacred Name of God 42 Letters Mark40 5 4,693 01-08-2020, 08:37 PM
Last Post: Eric the Green
  Generational cycle research Mikebert 15 16,284 02-08-2018, 10:06 AM
Last Post: pbrower2a
Video Styxhexenhammer666 and his view of historical cycles. Kinser79 0 3,340 08-27-2017, 06:31 PM
Last Post: Kinser79

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 7 Guest(s)