Geo-Strategic Trend - 220. page

China Review News (CRN) recently published a commentary on the relationship between China and Russia. The commentary expressed the belief that, although China has had previous issues with Russia, China’s best strategic choice for now is to partner with Russia. The author suggested that, as two neighboring major “BRICS” countries, the two countries’ economies complement each other. Also, the distribution of the two countries’ natural resources are in the same situation. At the same time, both countries are against the “unipolar world” model that the United States is trying to build. Instead, the partnership is the best choice to promote a “multipolar” international environment. However, the commentary suggested that China should maintain control of the initiative and ensure that the partnership benefits China’s needs and its future development.

Source: China Review News, March 28, 2012
http://gb.chinareviewnews.com/doc/1020/5/5/6/102055614.html?coluid=169&kindid=0&docid=102055614&mdate=0328091807

The International Herald Leader, a subsidiary of Xinhua News, recently published a commentary on China’s position on its right to the sea. The commentary mentioned that, in the past two months, the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs officially explained China’s position on the East China Sea and the South China Sea. The author said that China is taking steps to clarify its understanding of its rights to the nearby seas. This is to prevent any ambiguity in expressions, which might result in a strategic misjudgment. China’s traditional position was “putting aside disputes with joint development.” It seems the old fashioned position introduced uncertainty and openings that could be exploited. The commentary expressed the belief that China needs a peaceful international environment in which to grow. However, “a certain country” might find a few military conflicts between China and its neighbors to be just right. At least it would be much better (for that "certain country") than having to negotiate with China once China’s GDP surpasses US$10 trillion.

Source: Xinhua, March 12, 2012
http://news.xinhuanet.com/herald/2012-03/12/c_131454815.htm

According to Kyodonews of Japan, on March 16, 2010, ships from Chinese Marine Surveillance Corps. entered the Japanese area of the Diaoyu Islands (which Japan calls the Senkaku Islands). The Japanese Coast Guard followed with warning signals. The Chinese ships left the area 25 minutes later.

Xinhua reported about the same incident and stated that on March 16, Marine Surveillance Corps. ships No. 50 and 66 entered into the Diaoyu Islands (or Senkaku Islands) region to conduct routine surveillance where they encountered the Japan Coast Guard. According to the Xinhua report, they said, “We immediately called for their attention, displayed our identity, inquired about the situation and declared our position.” Xinhua said that they received no response from the Japan Coast Guard which just simply followed after them.

China’s State Oceanic Administration claimed that the routine surveillance was consistent with China’s position on the ownership of the islands and the nearby region. Chinese Marine Surveillance Corps. is an entity that operates under the supervision of State Oceanic Administration.

There have been continuous conflicts between China and Japan over the ownership of Diaoyu (Senkaku) Islands. In September 2010, the Japanese Coast Guard hit a Chinese fishing boat in the region and arrested the boat captain.

[Ed. Media reported in 2010 that the Chinese fishing boat collided with Japanese vessels, after which the Japanese detained the Chinese captain.]  
Source:
Voice of America, March 16, 2012
http://www.voanews.com/chinese/news/20120316-JAPAN-ISLANDS-DISPUTE-142901005.html
Xinhua, March 16, 2012
http://news.xinhuanet.com/mil/2012-03/16/c_122840287.htm
http://news.xinhuanet.com/mil/2012-03/16/c_122840354.htm
New York Times, September 10, 2010
http://kristof.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/09/10/look-out-for-the-diaoyu-islands/

Global Times recently reported, based on news from the French newspaper the Tribune, that China has decided to cancel its plan to purchase 10 Airbus A380 super-jumbo jetliners and 35 Airbus A330 airplanes. Louis Gallois, Chief Executive of the European Aeronautic Defence & Space Company (EADS), confirmed the cancellation. EADS is the parent company of Airbus. Gallois explained that the decision was based on China’s position of opposing the EU Carbon Tax. He complained that this cancellation was a major setback for Airbus’ business. Airbus already made a request that the European Union cancel the tax. Twenty-six out of the 36 members of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) are against this tax, including China, the United States, and Russia. It is also damaging for Airbus because, according to a report by Bloomberg, Boeing’s commercial aircraft group is hoping to sell 200 737-MAX and a “certain number” of 747-8S airplanes to China this year.

Source: Global Times, March 9, 2012
http://firefox.huanqiu.com/mil/Exclusive/2012-03/2509889.html

Xinhua posted an article that was originally published by People’s Daily (overseas edition), discussing the U.S. and Israel’s positions on Iran’s nuclear issue. The article focused on the February 29, 2012, meeting between U.S. Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta and Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak. The article said, “As Iran’s nuclear issue was becoming more and more pressing, Israel continued to claim, at difference strategic points, that it would launch a military attack against Iran. Recently, the International Atomic Energy Agency reported that Iran’s nuclear development program has made new progress. This news worried Israel. In particular, the U.S. and E.U.’s economic sanctions against Iran’s development of nuclear weapons has seemed not to have had any effect. Israel is becoming even more anxious. "

“Regarding Israel’s continuous claim that its military will strike Iran’s nuclear facilities, the U.S. has been warning Israel to hold back. The U.S. appears to believe that it is not yet the right time to take military action against Iran. The U.S. prefers to wait for the economic sanctions to run their course, or  not to take action until Iran’s Middle East ally (Syria’s Assad) gets into trouble.”

“On Iran’s nuclear issue, both the U.S. and Israel have the same goal—to prevent Iran from having nuclear weapons. Israel is anxiously trying to take action, whereas the U.S. warns it to hold back. This “mutual cooperation” of both sides looks quite interesting.”

Source: Xinhua, March 5, 2012
http://news.xinhuanet.com/world/2012-03/03/c_111596862.htm

On March 3, 2012, Huanqiu (the Chinese edition of Global Times) published an article titled “Being in the Lead Position in Northeast Asian Affairs, China Should Not Be Anxious about Thorny Peninsula (North Korea) Issues.” The article commented on an agreement that the U.S. and North Korea announced on February 29, 2012, that “North Korea will temporarily halt its nuclear tests, long-range missile launches, and Yongbyon uranium enrichment activities in exchange for aid from the United States in the form of food.” The article said that China should not hesitate to continue its special friendship with North Korea, since China has more influence on North Korea than the United States, Russia, and other major powers. Though North Korea will not strictly follow China’s advice, it has much more strategic trust in China than it does in other countries.

The article repeated its emphasis on China’s confidence in China-DPRK relations. China should have confidence in itself because “no matter how close the US-DPRK relationship is, it cannot be closer than the Sino-DPRK relationship. No one can possibly ‘trick China’ in terms of Peninsula affairs.” “Once a crisis occurs, others will panic more than we will.”

Source: Huanqiu, March 3, 2012
http://mil.huanqiu.com/Observation/2012-03/2490580.html

The Shanghai based news network East Day recently republished a report, originally from India’s TV news network IBNLive on work done by an independent Indian research institute. Research revealed that people believe there is a good possibility that China will make a “demand for territory,” and that a “massive military attack” is potentially likely, especially in the Arunachal Pradesh region, which the Chinese call “Southern Tibet.” There is a major difference in the understanding of the location of the “Line of Actual Control” between China and India. The research suggested a “hybrid strategy of defense plus offense” as a response to the potential invasion. The research concluded that, essentially, the best answer to an attack is to have an equivalent strategy.

Source: East Day, March 1, 2012
http://mil.eastday.com/m/20120301/u1a6396894.html

On February 26, 2012, China Review News interviewed Rear Admiral Peng Guangqian, a major general in the People’s Liberation Army and a strategist for China’s Academy of Military Science, about the situation in the Middle East. Peng pointed out that the West’s ultimate goal in attacking Syria is to target Iran, but there are many restrictions keeping the West from sending armed forces against Iran. Peng believes that if the U.S. were to launch a war against Iran, it would be the most difficult decision in U.S. history. Once such a war started, it would be the beginning of the real decline of American hegemonism; the Persian Gulf might well mark the end point of American hegemony. Peng suggested that it may be time for the ancient Persian and the modern American imperialists to come to an end together.

Source: China Review News, February 26, 2012
http://gb.chinareviewnews.com/doc/1020/1/6/6/102016680.html?coluid=148&kindid=7550&docid=102016680&mdate=0226001256