|
20 July 2010 By Rick Rozoff Delayed until after the United States achieved a
United Nations Security Council statement on July 9
condemning the sinking of a South Korean warship in
March, Washington’s plans for naval maneuvers in the
Yellow Sea near Chinese territorial waters are forging
ahead. The joint exercises with South Korea, as news
sources from the latter nation have recently
disclosed, will be conducted on both sides of the
Korean Peninsula, not only in the Yellow Sea as
previously planned but also in the Sea of Japan.
(Referred to in the Korean press as the West and East
Seas, respectively.) Confirmation that the U.S.
nuclear-powered aircraft carrier USS George Washington
will participate has further exacerbated concerns in
Northeast Asia and raised alarms over American
intentions not only vis-a-vis North Korea but China as
well. An exact date for the war games has not yet been
announced, but is expected to be formalized no later
than when U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and
Secretary of Defense Robert Gates arrive in the South
Korean capital of Seoul on July 21. For weeks now leading Chinese foreign ministry and
military officials have condemned the U.S.-led naval
exercises, branding them a threat to Chinese national
sovereignty and to peace and stability in the region. China’s influential Global Times wrote on July 12
that “The eventuality that Beijing has to prepare for
is close at hand. The delayed US-South Korean naval
exercise in the Yellow Sea is now slated for mid-July.
According to media reports, a nuclear-powered US
aircraft carrier has left its Japanese base and is
headed for the drill area.” [1] Permanently based in Yokosuka, Japan, the USS
George Washington is an almost 100,000-ton
supercarrier: “The nuclear carrier, commissioned in
1992, is the sixth Nimitz-class vessel, carrying some
6,250 crew and about 80 aircraft, including FA-18
fighter jets and E-2C Hawkeye airborne early warning
aircraft.” [2] The F/A-18 Hornet is a supersonic, multirole jet
fighter (F/A is for Fighter/Attack) and one of its
primary roles is destroying an adversary’s air
defenses. The E-2C Hawkeye has been described as the
“eyes and ears” of American carrier strike groups,
being equipped with long-range surveillance radar. In addition to the nuclear aircraft carrier, “an
Aegis-equipped destroyer, an amphibious assault ship,
about four 4,500-ton KDX-II-class destroyers, the
1,800-ton Son Won-il-class submarine and F-15K fighter
jets are expected to join the exercise.” [3] U.S.
Aegis class warships (destroyers and cruisers) are
equipped for Standard Missile-3 anti-ballistic
interceptor missiles, part of a U.S.-led Asia-Pacific
(to date, along with the U.S., Japan, South Korea,
Taiwan and Australia) and ultimately international
interceptor missile system. The F-15K (“Slam Eagle”) is a state-of-the-art
multirole (used for both aerial combat and ground
attack) jet fighter supplied to South Korea by the
U.S. The presence of a U.S. nuclear aircraft carrier and
scores of advanced American and South Korean warplanes
off the coast of China in the Yellow Sea – and near
Russia’s shore in the Sea of Japan if the Washington
is deployed there – qualitatively and precariously
raises the level of brinkmanship in Northeast Asia. The drumbeat of confrontation has been steadily
increasing in volume and tempo since the sinking of a
South Korean corvette, the Cheonan, on March 26 with
the resultant death of 46 crew members. An investigation into the incident was organized by
the U.S. and included experts from the U.S., South
Korea, Britain, Australia and Sweden, but not from
China and Russia which both border the Korean
Peninsula. On May 20 the five-nation team released a
report blaming a North Korean torpedo for the sinking
of the Cheonan. North Korea denied the accusation and
neither Russia nor China, excluded from the
investigation, have concurred with the U.S.
accusation. American provocations escalated dramatically at the
Group of 20 (G20) summit in Toronto on June 27 when
U.S. President Barack Obama (in his own words) held a
“blunt” conversation with China’s President Hu Jintao,
accusing him and his nation of “willful blindness” in
relation to North Korea’s “belligerent behavior.”
Upbraiding his Chinese counterpart, Obama stated, “I
think there’s a difference between restraint and
willful blindness to consistent problems.” (On the
same occasion Obama praised South Korea’s President
Lee Myung-bak for his “extraordinary restraint.”) “My hope is that president Hu will recognise as
well that this is an example of Pyongyang going over
the line.” President Hu and the Chinese government as a whole
would be fully justified in suspecting that mounting
U.S. threats are aimed not only (and perhaps not so
much) against North Korea as against China itself. Beijing is not alone in entertaining suspicions
that Washington is employing the sinking of the
Cheonan as the pretext for achieving broader
geopolitical objectives. On July 14 Russia’s Foreign
Minister Sergei Lavrov, in speaking of the Cheonan
incident and its aftermath, pleaded: “I believe that
the most important [concern] at the present time is to
ease the situation, avoid agitation, escalation of
emotions and start preparing conditions for the
resumption of the six-party [North Korea, South Korea,
China, Russia, the U.S. and Japan] talks.” [4] Portraying the UN Security Council statement on the
matter last week (which was not the harsh condemnation
of North Korea Washington had pushed for) as being a
balanced one, he also said, “It is important that
nobody tries to distort the evaluations given.” In addition, referring to North Korea’s latest
reaffirmation of its willingness to jointly
investigate the Cheonan’s sinking with South Korea,
Lavrov said: “This statement is not new. From the very
beginning the DPRK confirmed it wanted to participate
in the investigation. “I hear, the sides were to agree on some format of
interaction.” [5] When on June 27 President Obama stated “our main
focus right now is in the U.N. Security Council making
sure that there is a crystal-clear acknowledgement
that North Korea engaged in belligerent behavior that
is unacceptable to the international community” [6],
his characterization of the latter entity excluded not
only North Korea but China and Russia as well. The severity and urgency of mounting U.S. threats
is illustrated in a recent column by Shen Dingli,
executive dean of the Institute of International
Studies and director of the Center for American
Studies at Fudan University in Shanghai. His comments
end with a frightening parallel and a dire warning: “The US and South Korea are implementing joint
military exercises this month in the Yellow Sea, with
the possibility of deploying the US aircraft carrier
George Washington. “The running of such exercises so close to China’s
waters has left China strongly, and rightfully,
dissatisfied. “The US and South Korea may argue that the exercise
is not in China’s territorial waters, so China has no
right to comment. “However, even if the joint exercises are not in
Chinese sovereign waters, they may take place in the
waters of China’s interests as the international
waters [in the] Yellow Sea near China’s exclusive
economic zone are extremely important to China’s
interests. “Given the sophisticated equipment it carries, the
George Washington poses a real potential threat to
Chinese territory. “Even if the US-South Korea military exercises are
outside China’s territory, the striking power of the
US nuclear-powered aircraft carrier also poses a
serious threat to neighboring countries. “The US and South Korea have said the military
exercises are being held in order to deter North Korea
because of the sinking of the South Korean Cheonan
corvette and the death of 46 South Korean sailors. “But the case for the possible North Korean sinking
of the Cheonan has not been thoroughly established. “South Korea refused to let North Korean officials
present their case against the evidence for their
supposed complicity in the sinking. “When South Korea launched the so-called
international survey, it refused the participation of
China and other countries, which did not increase the
credibility of the so-called findings. “These exercises are needlessly provocative, and
will eventually backfire on the US and South Korea. “During the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962, when the
Soviet Union established nuclear missile bases on the
island, the US objected to the close proximity of the
Soviet weaponry even though they traveled only through
international waters to reach Cuba, and the US set up
a blockade to stop them being deployed. “When the US ponders the idea of deploying its
nuclear aircraft carrier in the Yellow Sea, very close
to China, shouldn’t China have the same feeling as the
US did when the Soviet Union deployed missiles in
Cuba? “China may not have the military strength to
forcibly prevent such exercises now, but it may do so
in response to such provocative actions in the
future.” [7] The only surviving head of state involved in the
Cuban Missile Crisis, former Cuban president Fidel
Castro, has issued several warnings lately that a U.S.
and allied attack on North Korea (and Iran) could
result in regional conflagration and even nuclear war. A Chinese commentary last week provided more
details of the threat that a U.S. nuclear aircraft
carrier off its shore will pose to the nation and also
contained a blunt warning, stating “the anxiety on the
Chinese side will be huge if a US aircraft carrier
enters the sea connecting the Korean Peninsula and
China – it would mean that major cities like Dalian,
Qingdao, Tianjin and even Beijing are within US attack
range. “At this stage, China may not react through a show
of force to the US fleet cruising into the
international waters of the Yellow Sea. But it does
not mean that the Chinese people will tolerate it.
Whatever harm the US military maneuver may inflict
upon the mind of the Chinese, the United States will
have to pay for it, sooner or later.” [8] Washington’s recent deployment of two
nuclear-powered guided missile submarines to China’s
neighborhood – the USS Michigan to South Korea and the
USS Ohio to the Philippines [9] – only add to China’s
concerns. As do the ongoing U.S.-led Angkor Sentinel
exercises in Cambodia with over 1,000 troops from 26
nations, including American and NATO and Asian NATO
partners like Britain, France, Germany and Italy
(along with the U.S., the NATO Quint) and Australia,
India, Indonesia, Japan and Mongolia. The last
country, wedged between China and Russia, is being
integrated into the American global military network,
even supplying troops to serve under NATO in
Afghanistan. [10] “This is the first time in the history of the
Cambodian military that we are hosting [exercises]
with the participation of many countries…which
encompasses such a multi-national military basis,” a
Cambodian general said of the training. [11] “Addressing the ceremony, US Ambassador Carol
Rodley said Washington remained committed to enhancing
its military relationship with Cambodia. She added
that Angkor Sentinel provided a ‘unique opportunity’
to deepen the two countries’ friendship.” [12] Cambodia is only once removed from China, the two
nations connected by both Laos and Vietnam. An Agence France-Presse dispatch reported “The
United States and Laos pledged to step up cooperation
after their highest-level talks since the Vietnam War,
the latest country in a renewed US effort to engage
Southeast Asia,” after Secretary of State Hillary
Clinton met with Laotian Foreign Minister Thongloun Sisoulith
in Washington, D.C. on July 13. Sisoulith, also his country’s deputy prime
minister, is the first major Laotian official to visit
the U.S. since before 1975. State Department spokesman Philip Crowley told
reporters “The United States is committed to building
our relationship with Laos as part of our broader
efforts to expand engagement with Southeast Asia,” and
Agence France-Presse added “President Barack Obama’s
administration has put a new focus on Southeast Asia,
saying the region was overlooked as George W. Bush’s
former administration became preoccupied with wars in
Iraq and Afghanistan.” [13] Next week Clinton will visit Afghanistan, Pakistan,
Vietnam and South Korea. The first three countries
border China and South Korea faces it across the
Yellow Sea. The Pentagon and NATO have ensconced
themselves in Afghanistan, Pakistan and the Central
Asian nations of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and
Tajikistan, all five of which border western China.
[14] Clinton will visit Vietnam to attend meetings of
the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and
the Lower Mekong Initiative (consisting of Cambodia,
Laos, Thailand and Vietnam). The State Department’s Vietnam hand, Joe Yun, said
that it will be part of “Secretary Clinton’s fourth
trip to East Asia in the past year. “Her engagement in this region demonstrates the
vital importance of the Asia-Pacific region, and
especially Southeast Asia, to the future of the United
States.” Fellow Southeast Asian nation Malaysia has just
announced the deployment of its first military
contingent to assist NATO’s war in Afghanistan, “as
ties with the United States deepen.” “In an April meeting between Malaysian Prime
Minister Najib Razak and US President Barack Obama,
the two leaders agreed to cooperate on key security
issues to create a stronger relationship.” [15] Singapore’s Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong recently
toured the Mountain Home Air Base in the American
state of Idaho where 400 of his country’s pilots and
other service members and their families are now
stationed. “The Singapore military personnel will be
at the US base for the next 20 years or so.” [16]
Singapore troops have been assigned to NATO in
Afghanistan and are facing a long stay there also. Malaysia and Singapore are currently participating
for the first time in the mammoth U.S.-led Rim of the
Pacific (RIMPAC) war games in the Pacific which will
continue into August. To indicate to what purpose the U.S. is “expanding
engagement” with Vietnam in particular and Southeast
Asia in general, the aforementioned Yun revealed that
“we also look to Vietnam as ASEAN’s Chair to exercise
leadership, including in sensitive areas such as North
Korea’s attack on the South Korean naval vessel, the
Cheonan. We would like to see Vietnam exercise its
influence to press for a genuine dialogue so that the
people of Burma can work with the existing government
to move forward, and to press Burma on the need to
fully implement UN Security Council Resolutions 1718
and 1874. Burma ought to be transparent with the
international community in its dealings with North
Korea.” [17] North Korea and Burma (Myanmar) are, like Vietnam,
southern neighbors of China’s and along with the
seclusive kingdom of Bhutan are the only nations near
China with which the U.S. is not cultivating closer
military ties. Also to China’s south, its giant neighbor India has
been pulled deeper into the Pentagon’s orbit since the
New Framework For The U.S.-India Defense Relationship
was signed in June of 2005, including hosting U.S.
warships, warplanes and troops for annual Malabar war
games off its coasts. Last December U.S. Pacific
Command chief Admiral Robert Willard stated that the
Pentagon and India “are in talks to convert their
bilateral Malabar series of naval exercises into a
joint services war game involving their navies, air
forces and marine commandos.” [18) This year's Malabar
2010 included a U.S. guided missile cruiser and
frigate and two destroyers as well as a fast attack
submarine. Last October over 1,000 U.S. and Indian troops
participated in the Yudh Abhyas 2009 military
exercises in India, which was the first time the
Pentagon deployed a Stryker armored combat brigade
outside the Iraqi and Afghan war theaters. "The size
and scope of this combined exercise is unparalleled"
[19], stated an American commander present for the war
games. President Obama is scheduled to visit India in
November and his trip there will “result in some 5
billion dollars worth of American arms sales to
India….Observers point out that the role of India’s
biggest arms supplier is shifting from Russia to the
United States.” [20] The arms transactions are reported to include
Patriot interceptor missiles, thus complementing
comparable missile shield arrangements the U.S. has
with Japan, Taiwan, South Korea and Australia in the
Asia-Pacific area. The projected deal also includes Washington
supplying Delhi with 10 Boeing C-17 military transport
planes: “Once India gets the C-17 transport aircraft,
the mobility of its forces stationed along the border
with China will be improved….[The] arms sales will
improve ties between Washington and New Delhi, and,
intentionally or not, will have the effect of
containing China’s influence in the region.” [21] The U.S. has also lately led joint military
exercises in Bangladesh and East Timor, and the annual
U.S.-organized Khaan Quest military exercises in
Mongolia are to start next month. A recent article in the China Times by an
unidentified researcher with the Chinese navy’s
military academy observed that “the US has seemingly
become less restrained in its move to push forward an
Asian version of the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization with its allies in the region. “In so doing, Washington has harbored the obvious
strategic intention of containing China – whose
economic and strategic influence has kept increasing
in the international arena….” [22] It is against that backdrop, in the context of
Washington putting the finishing touches to the
consolidation of an Asian analogue of the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization, that China is being
challenged in the Yellow Sea. The last-cited source detailed the Pentagon’s
encroachment near China’s borders: “The radius of the US military operation has
expanded to more than 1,000 kilometers, which means a
US military mission in the waters off the ROK [South
Korea] can still constitute a huge deterrence to China
and other countries along the nearby coastline and
strike at strategic targets deep inside their
territories. “With unchallenged armed forces, the US has never
relented in its efforts towards long-planned strategic
adjustment in the Asia-Pacific region. Under this
strategy, the US has gradually increased the presence
and activity of its warships and airplanes in China’s
surrounding maritime area.” [23] Regarding the naval exercise with the U.S., South
Korean Foreign Ministry spokesman Won Tae-jae recently
affirmed that “We can say that it will take place
sometime this month. This month, there are a variety
of schedules concerning bilateral security and
diplomatic issues, and the decision on the exercise
will be made in consideration of those schedules.”
[24] China, which conducted a live-fire naval exercise
in the East China Sea from June 30-July 5 “in an
apparent show of…force ahead of the [U.S.-South
Korean] exercise…appears unnerved as the 97,000-ton
[USS George Washington] carrier has an operational
range of some 1,000 kilometers and can glean
intelligence on military facilities and installments
along China’s eastern coastal regions once it is
deployed in the West [Yellow] Sea.” [25] The U.S. armed forces newspaper Stars and Stripes
disclosed on July 14 that “In what the Pentagon says
is a direct response to North Korea’s sinking of the
South Korean naval vessel Cheonan, the U.S. and South
Korea likely will agree to a series of new naval and
air exercises next week, when Defense Secretary Robert
Gates and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton make a
joint visit to Seoul.” [26] Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell was cited
asserting that “The announcement is the result of
direct instruction from President Barack Obama to find
new ways to collaborate with…Korean counterparts
following the attack….He would not offer specifics
other than they would occur in the Sea of Japan and
the Yellow Sea.” In his own words, Morrell said “We are not yet
ready to announce the precise details of those
exercises but they will involve a wide range of assets
and are expected to be initiated in the near future.”
[27] Gates and Clinton are to meet for the first
bilateral talks with their South Korean counterparts
Minister of National Defense Kim Tae-young and Foreign
Minister Yu Myung-hwan on July 21 and, according to
the Pentagon spokesman, will “discuss and likely
approve a proposed series of US/ROK combined military
exercises.” [28] Regarding concerns voiced by China about the U.S.
advancing its military so near its coast, Morrell said
that “Those determinations are made by us, and us
alone….Where we exercise, when we exercise, with whom
and how, using what assets and so forth, are
determinations that are made by the United States
Navy, by the Department of Defense, by the United
States government.” [29] There is no way that such confrontational, arrogant
and vulgar language was not understood at its proper
value in Beijing. Nor is the prospect, as noted by Lee
Su-seok, analyst at South Korea’s Institute for
National Security Strategy, of “the involvement of a
U.S. aircraft carrier in the Yellow Sea as having a
possible link to plans by the U.S. to defend Taiwan”
[30] likely to go unnoticed. What the response to the U.S.’s increasingly more
brash and adventurist policy might be was indicated in
a recent Chinese editorial, which stated in part: “In their recent responses, several high-ranking
Chinese navy officials have made it plain that China
will not stay in ‘hands-off’ mode as the drill gets
underway. For that will make the US believe that
China’s defense circle on the sea is small, and,
therefore, US fleets will be able to freely cruise
over the Yellow Sea, East China Sea and South China
Sea in the future. “Military experts have warned that if the joint
drill really takes place off the western coast of
South Korea, Chinese airplanes and warships will very
likely go all the way out to closely watch the war
game maneuvers. Within such proximity on
not-so-clearly-marked international waters, any move
that is considered hostile to the other side can
willy-nilly trigger a rash reaction, which might
escalate into the unexpected or the unforeseen. “One false move, one wrong interpretation, is all
it would take for the best-planned exercises to go
awry….The impact of a crisis on that scale would be
tremendous, making any dispute over trade or the
yuan’s value between the two in recent years pale in
comparison….Tension is mounting over the US-South
Korean joint exercise. Beijing and Washington still
have time, and leeway, to desist from moving toward a
possible conflict on the Yellow Sea.” [31] A similar warning was sounded in another major
Chinese daily: “If the US and ROK continue to act willfully by
holding the controversial military drill, it would
pose a challenge to China’s safety and would
inevitably provoke a huge backlash from Chinese
citizens. “Today’s China is no longer the China of a century
ago that had no choice but to bend to imperialist
aggression. After decades of development, especially
since the adoption of the reform and opening-up
policies, China has become the world’s third largest
economy and possesses a modern military capable of any
self-defense missions.” [32] When Robert Gates and Hillary Clinton arrive in
Seoul on July 21 it will formally be to mark the 60th
anniversary of the beginning of the Korean War, which
within three months drew China into the fighting. When the two American secretaries meet with South
Korea’s defense and foreign ministers and, as State
Department spokesman Philip Crowley recently claimed,
“likely approve a proposed series of U.S. and Korea
combined military exercises, including new naval and
air exercises in both the Sea of Japan and the Yellow
Sea” [33], the world should prepare for the threat of
a second Korean war, a second U.S.-China armed
conflict. 1) Global Times, July 12, 2010
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-president-obama-g-20-press-conference-toronto-canada 7) Global Times, July 14, 2010 http://rickrozoff.wordpress.com/2010/../2061 10) Mongolia: Pentagon Trojan Horse Wedged
Between China And Russia
http://rickrozoff.wordpress.com/2010/../mongolia-pentagon-trojan-horse-wedged-between-china-and-russia 11) Xinhua News Agency, July 12, 2010
http://rickrozoff.wordpress.com/2010/../afghan-war-petraeus-expands-u-s-military-presence-throughout-eurasia 15) Radio Netherlands, July 15, 2010 |
Add Comments