The United States repeated the same thing
Reactions to Chinese military exercises are hypocritical
A spokesman for the US Seventh Fleet said that "the presence of the two carriers is not a response to any political or international events."
The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said that the seizure of the islands would be "very important in order to show power to China." Archive
picture
On July 1, the Coast Guard and the Navy of the Chinese People's Liberation Army began maneuvers in the South China Sea, including amphibious attacks. These exercises took place in an area declared to be a temporarily closed maritime zone (Metz) in southeastern Henan "and in a part" of the Parasels Islands controlled by China, but claimed by Vietnam.
The Pentagon criticized China for these maneuvers and said, "Holding such maneuvers on a disputed area of the South China Sea does not help to reduce tension and maintain stability." In the South China Sea, to avoid activities that would complicate and escalate conflicts, ”the Pentagon concluded its words by urging“ all parties to show restraint and not resort to military actions, ”and the Philippines and Vietnam objected to the maneuvers.
It was then that the United States showed how China should act by sending two of its most important symbols of power, the two aircraft carriers and their dependencies, to the South China Sea. A spokesman for the American Seventh Fleet said, "The presence of the two carriers is not a response to any political or international events," and of course, this is nonsense and hypocrisy.
It is clear that the deployment of the two carriers came in response to what the United States considered a "Chinese threat," and this is certainly not a good example of restraint. In addition, it is destabilizing and exacerbating tension with China.
The relevance of the objection
It is not clear exactly what China’s critics are against. Is it the area covered by "Metz", that is, where the Chinese maneuvers are taking place, the exercises themselves, or the two sides together. If we assume that the "Metz" area covers the same area that China declared in 2016, it extends on the outskirts and borders of the Parasels Islands. Even at the time, the case was not entirely clear.
There is a dispute over the sovereignty of the Parasles Islands by China, Taiwan and Vietnam. But China has occupied the islands since 1974, when it took them from South Vietnam. At that time, South Vietnam requested aid from the United States, but the latter refused its assistance. The US State Department refused the request, and said in a statement, “We have no relationship in this conflict. The disputants must resolve the dispute among themselves. Accordingly, the US complaint is a strange transformation of Washington’s position in the past and its previous rhetoric, as it implicitly doubts China's sovereignty over the Parasles Islands.
Vietnam has officially opposed the Chinese maneuvers because it wants to revive its old and almost faded claim to the Parasles Islands. She described the Chinese maneuvers as a "violation of sovereignty that would harm China's relationship with the ASEAN countries agreement." This issue of ASEAN is just media noise, because the conflict is related to Vietnam and China, and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations has tried to evade the whole issue.
Not new
And if the reason for the opposition is that China is using the islands as a base for part of its maneuvers, then that is not new, nor does it deserve to be news. Certainly, this is not the first time that China has declared a closed area and maneuvers in the region. In addition, Vietnam has had a military presence for a long time in the disputed areas of the Spratlys Islands, and it is assumed that it has conducted exercises there. Perhaps the anxiety stems not from principle but from the size of the disputed islands.
If Washington's objection to the Chinese maneuvers is due to the imposition of compulsory restrictions on foreigners entering the "Metz" area, which is "international waters", then this is a technical point. In fact, China's declaration of the "Metz" zone makes it mandatory to avoid the area by ships and other aircraft, while the United States claimed that it only "advises" not to approach the area. In practice, however, the United States did not allow military aircraft and boats to approach its aircraft carriers.
And if Washington and others complain that China's maneuvers used an exclusive economic zone of 200 nautical miles, extending from Hainan or the Parasels Islands (if we assume that China used such an area legally) then there is no problem with that, whether the area is in dispute or not, Assuming that the maneuvers did not violate the United Nations Charter on the Law of the Sea for peaceful purposes, approval of marine scientific research and environmental protection.
In fact, Washington is doing the same now, and in the South China Sea. And it would be the highest degree of hypocrisy if Washington asserts that China is violating an agreement that Washington had not originally signed and may be violating it repeatedly. If the maneuvers are located outside the exclusive economic zone, the freedom of navigation shall be unrestricted.
If the objection, as some believe, is caused by China conducting maneuvers in the South China Sea, then the issue of hypocrisy also exists, as Japan and other countries carried out exercises in May 2019 in the South China Sea.
The Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Joseph Danford, told the Armed Forces Committee in Congress that the seizure of the islands would be "very important in order to show power to China."
In April 2020, the US and Australian navies conducted operations in an exclusive economic zone claimed by Malaysia, apparently without its knowledge or permission. These exercises included the attack of the amphibious assault ship "America". Given what Dunford said, these maneuvers are both threatening and destabilizing.
The Philippines has criticized the Chinese maneuvers as "highly provocative," but it is not clear what worries the Philippines.
Marc Valencia is a maritime policy analyst and advisor on Asia
It is unclear exactly what China’s critics are against. Is it the area covered by "Metz", meaning where the Chinese maneuvers are taking place, the maneuvers themselves, or the two sides together.
If the United States and others complain that China's maneuvers used an exclusive economic zone of 200 nautical miles, stretching from Hainan or the Parasels Islands (if we assume that China used such an area legally) then there is no problem with that, whether the area is in dispute or not. , Assuming that the exercises did not violate the United Nations Charter on the Law of the Sea for peaceful purposes.