China deploys misssiles on Woody Island in South China Sea

10 Conflicts to Watch in 2016

From Syria to the South China Sea, the conflicts and crises the world will face in the coming year.

Pulling together a list of the wars most in need of international attention and support in 2016 is challenging for all the wrong reasons. For 20 years after the end of the Cold War, deadly conflict was in decline. Fewer wars were killing fewer people the world over. Five years ago, however, that positive trend went into reverse, and each year since has seen more conflict, more victims, and more people displaced. 2016 is unlikely to bring an improvement from the woes of 2015: It is war — not peace — that has momentum.

That said, there are conflicts whose urgency and importance rise above. This year’s list of 10 is weighted toward wars with the worst humanitarian consequences: Syria and Iraq, South Sudan, Afghanistan, Yemen, and the Lake Chad basin. It includes those in influential and functioning states, like Turkey, as well as those that have collapsed, like Libya. It features conflicts that are already bad but are poised to get much worse without intelligent intervention, such as Burundi, as well as tensions, such as those in the South China Sea, that are simmering but have yet to boil over. The list also considers the hopeful example presented by Colombia, where considerable progress is being made toward ending a 51-year insurgency.

Half of the conflicts on this year’s list involve extremist groups whose goals and ideologies are difficult to accommodate through negotiated settlement, complicating efforts to plot a path to peace. Looking ahead to 2016, it’s time to dispense with the notion that fighting against violent extremism suffices as a plan for world order — or even the basis of a solution for a single country like Syria. To be sure, stopping the abominations of the Islamic State and other jihadis is vital, but it also exposes policy dilemmas: The fear of what follows the demise of authoritarians (Iraq and Libya being prime exhibits) creates a strong incentive to back repressive regimes, but order based solely on state coercion is not sustainable. The dramatic increase in the reach and influence of jihadis over the past few years is a symptom of deeper trends in the Middle East: mounting sectarianism, a crisis of legitimacy of existing states, and escalating geopolitical competition, particularly between Saudi Arabia and Iran. When the enemy comes from within a given region, military action directed from abroad is more likely to aggravate than assuage.

There is an alternative to this approach: States could work pragmatically at managing differences rather than overcoming them while leaving political space open for local actors to speak up. This will require courage, patience, and creative diplomacy, but the two most important diplomatic successes of 2015 — the Iran nuclear deal and the agreement on climate change — give reason to believe an international approach based on finding common interests could work. There are other glimmers of hope, too: major strides forward in Colombia’s peace talks, a cease-fire in Ukraine bolstered by the Minsk process, progress in Myanmar’s democratic transition, and a welcome, if long overdue, resolution from the U.N. Security Council on Syria.

Most of the conflicts listed here require action at several levels — between major powers, regionally and locally — and none are amenable to a quick fix. Given the challenges of ending conflicts amid the upheaval of a revolutionary era, it is all the more urgent to provide humanitarian aid and to mitigate the human toll of violence — evidenced starkly in the hundreds of thousands of refugees who have fled toward Europe in the past year. States must also redouble efforts to forge political agreements, taking advantage of even the narrowest openings to find opportunities for compromise. The fluidity of the present moment can and must be used to shape a new, better-balanced order.

Syria and Iraq

At the close of the year, the war in Syria is the world’s gravest, with its effects stretching across the region and sucking in major powers. More than a quarter of a million Syrians have been killed and almost 11 million — about half the country’s population — displaced in or outside the country. The rise of the Islamic State, which now controls a large swath of eastern Syria and northwest Iraq, has drawn in firepower from countries including the United States, France, the United Kingdom, and Russia. As yet, however, none of these countries has articulated a coherent strategy to defeat the Islamic State.

Worse still, Moscow and Western powers have been working at cross-purposes, with Russian jets bombing anti-Islamic State rebels that Washington considers partners against the jihadi group. Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s regime continues to use indiscriminate aerial bombardment and other methods of collective punishment, inflicting civilian casualties in Sunni-majority areas that dwarf the numbers of victims claimed by the Islamic State’s violence. Assad’s tactics fuel continued cycles of radicalization, in Syria in particular, but also across the region, by fanning sectarian flames and feeding the sense of Sunni victimization from which the Islamic State profits.

The pace of diplomatic action has quickened, spurred in part by Russia’s military intervention in Syria in September and the Islamic State-sponsored terrorist attacks in Paris in November. While the growing internationalization of the conflict presents many dangers, it may also open possibilities for diplomacy. In December, the U.N. Security Council unanimously adopted a resolution calling for a cease-fire and political solution in Syria. The resolution sets forth an ambitious timetable, with talks between the government and the opposition to start in January; a Syrian-led political process to establish “credible, inclusive and non-sectarian governance” within six months; and elections within a year-and-a-half. Questions about Assad’s future — which provoke the most vehement disagreement between major powers on the Security Council, rival regional powers, and Syrian factions — remain unaddressed.

Despite many reasons to be skeptical, it is worth hoping that this latest initiative marks the beginning of a meaningful effort to resolve the conflict. A conference in Riyadh in December exceeded expectations by bringing together an unprecedented range of the opposition’s armed and political factions to agree on a negotiating team. Participants pledged their commitment to a pluralistic Syrian future and conditional willingness to engage in the peace process. For a national cease-fire to work, however, there must be a strategy for dealing with spoilers — especially al Qaeda affiliate al-Nusra Front, which is geographically, and often operationally, integrated into the non-jihadi opposition in much of western Syria.

In Iraq, meanwhile, the Western strategy to defeat the Islamic State relies largely on military offensives by Iraqi Kurds, a mostly Shiite Iraqi army, and Iran-backed Shiite militias. This risks feeding the resentment of Sunni Arabs in areas currently under Islamic State control. Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi’s government is under pressure from rival Shiite factions for a host of reasons — including anger over corruption, the state’s failure to provide basic services and security, resistance to his reform agenda, and intramural jockeying for power. Shiite militias are not only fighting the Islamic State, but have organized to fill the security vacuum and defend Baghdad and Shiite holy sites. The militias’ partial success resonates with many unemployed youth, who have been at the forefront of street protests. The Islamic State rules partly through brutal coercion but also by exploiting fear of the Shiite-dominated government and by empowering formerly marginalized segments within the Sunni community. Iraqi forces have spent months trying to retake Ramadi, the capital of Anbar province, after a humiliating withdrawal last May, and in the last week of the year managed to finally gain control of the city. The next priority will be to oust the Islamic State from Mosul, the northern city where it is perhaps best entrenched.

Turkey

Recent photographs from the southeastern city of Diyarbakir show young militants with assault rifles manning sandbagged roadblocks and engaging in bloody urban battles. Such images capture a dangerous escalation in Turkey’s long conflict with the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), a confrontation that has killed more than 30,000 people since 1984. Many factors have fueled the sharp upsurge in violence following the end of peace talks last spring and the collapse of the cease-fire in July. Turkey’s Kurdish movement backs the PKK’s Syrian affiliate, the PYD, which has made gains in fighting against the Islamic State. Ankara worries that cross-border Kurdish solidarity will further strengthen demands for a separate state. This perceived threat has weakened Turkey’s focus on the fight against the Islamic State, leading many Turkish Kurds to conclude that Ankara supports the terrorist group that is ostensibly their common enemy.

Over the past six months, the conflict has escalated to its most violent point in two decades. Both sides know that there is no military solution; however, each wants to weaken the other as much as possible while waiting for the Syria quagmire to settle. To prevent the Middle East’s ethno-sectarian violence from spilling further into Turkey, both sides should urgently end violence, agree on cease-fire conditions, and restart peace talks. Free from electoral pressures for four years, the new Justice and Development Party (AKP) government should formulate a concrete reform agenda to address demands for Kurdish rights — including decentralization and mother-tongue education — that can be advanced within a democratic framework.

Yemen

The Saudi-led war in Yemen — backed by the United States, Britain, and allies in the Gulf — has been grinding on since March 2015, with no end in sight. U.N.-sponsored peace talks in Switzerland in mid-December yielded only an agreement to resume negotiations on Jan. 14. Nearly 6,000 people have reportedly been killed, almost half of them civilians. More than 2 million people have been uprooted from their homes; an additional 120,000 have fled the country. The war has destroyed the country’s already weak infrastructure, deepened political divides, and introduced a narrative of sectarianism where previously there had been little or none. The conflict threatens the security of the Arabian Peninsula, particularly Saudi Arabia itself, by feeding the growth of terrorist networks like al Qaeda and the Islamic State.

The violence has its roots in a botched political transition following the departure of longtime President Ali Abdullah Saleh, who was forced out amid protests in 2011. After years of indecision about the country’s political future, Houthi militias took matters into their own hands and captured the capital, Sanaa, in September 2014. The Houthis — a predominantly Zaydi Shiite movement rooted in the north — began moving south in alliance with forces loyal to Saleh. On March 25, 2015, they seized a strategic military base near Aden and held the defense minister hostage. The next day, Saudi Arabia launched a major military campaign — Operation Decisive Storm — to roll back the Houthi advance and restore the government of President Abed Rabbo Mansour Hadi. The Houthis bear much of the responsibility for triggering the war, but the Saudi-led campaign has only escalated the violence and thus far proved largely counterproductive.

Saudi Arabia sees the Houthis as proxies for Iran. While Iran’s role has been minimal, Tehran has not hesitated to make political hay of Houthi successes, thereby further raising the stakes in a volatile region. The perception that it is meddling has alarmed Saudi Arabia, which sees Iran as ascendant and having hegemonic ambitions. A peaceful solution to the Yemen war may well require a prior accommodation between these two regional superpowers, currently a remote possibility.

Libya

The Islamic State’s apparent consolidation of its base around Sirte, on Libya’s Mediterranean coast, has brought fresh urgency to international efforts to end a political crisis that has left the country in a shambles.

Following NATO’s military intervention and the ouster of longtime dictator Muammar al-Qaddafi in 2011, assorted political parties, tribes, and militias have been fighting for power and control over the nation’s vast oil and gas riches. Since mid-2014, the country has been governed by two rival factions — another way of saying that no one is really in charge. A U.N.-brokered deal to form a national unity government emerged in December, thanks to heavy lifting from the United States and Italy.

Members of both factions signed up, but many powerful constituents still oppose the deal. The unity government may not be able to govern much, especially if opponents prevent it from taking a seat in Tripoli.

Meanwhile, lawlessness continues to take a heavy toll. Thousands of detainees languish in prisons without proper judicial review while kidnappings and targeted killings are rampant. Libya is also a major transit hub for refugees and migrants trying to reach Europe from other parts of the Middle East and Africa. The unchecked flow of arms and fighters through Libya has fueled conflicts across the Sahel, including in Mali and the Lake Chad basin (see below). Western intelligence officials say that the impoverished Fezzan region in the south is swiftly becoming a haven for criminal networks and radical groups. On top of all this, economic collapse looms on the horizon unless oil production increases and officials act to maintain the integrity of Libya’s core financial institutions, which the two rival administrations have been squabbling over.

The first task for the new Libyan government, and its international partners, must be to bring aboard those Libyans who currently oppose it. At best, the recently signed agreement should be seen as a beginning, not an end, to the peace process.

Lake Chad basin

Nigeria, Niger, Chad, and Cameroon face an evolving threat from the jihadi militant group Boko Haram. Over the past six years, the group has transformed itself from a small protest movement in northern Nigeria to a powerful force capable of mounting devastating attacks across the Lake Chad basin. Last March, it pledged allegiance to the Islamic State — an affiliation that appears to have had little impact beyond improving Boko Haram’s online presence.

This past summer, Cameroon experienced the greatest increase in attacks by Boko Haram, followed closely by Niger and Chad. Nigeria, however, remains the epicenter of the conflict. Nigerian President Muhammadu Buhari, who took office in May, ambitiously pledged to end the insurgency by December. While this remains a distant goal, Buhari — a former army major general — has shaken up his country’s security establishment and joined with regional forces to drive Boko Haram from the areas in northeastern Nigeria it had seized earlier in 2015.

Boko Haram is, however, resilient, adaptable, and mobile. Military efforts, to date, have had limited success in countering its use of suicide bombers, who are often young women and girls. Its terrorist attacks on remote and unprotected villages — and even on regional capitals, like N’Djamena — continue. Indiscriminate responses by state security forces and insufficient efforts to win over the affected communities only pour fuel on the fire. Regional governments are still failing to address the factors behind radicalization. Decades of political corruption, festering grievances, and poor access to basic social services have bred deep anger and alienation. These issues are compounded by rapid population growth and environmental degradation, which drive social tension and migration.

South Sudan

Yet again, the world’s newest country is at risk of descending into full-blown civil war. The peace agreement reached between the government and the largest armed opposition group in August after intensive African-led mediation is on the brink of collapse. Meanwhile, independent armed groups outside the deal are proliferating.

The roots of the conflict date back to internecine competition among various factions during South Sudan’s decades-long independence struggle. South Sudan won independence from Sudan, only to explode into civil war on Dec. 15, 2013, as divisions within the ruling Sudan People’s Liberation Movement led to fighting and targeted ethnic killings in the capital of Juba. Only hours after the conflict erupted, tens of thousands of people sought refuge at U.N. bases to escape ethnic massacres and sexual violence. Today, nearly 200,000 people live under the direct protection of U.N. peacekeepers.

Over the past two years, more than 2.4 million people have been displaced, and tens of thousands have been killed. A report released by the African Union in October detailed atrocities by both sides, including mass killings and rapes. Now, with an increasing number of the country’s more than 24 armed groups aligned with neither the government nor the main opposition forces, the prospect of a multipolar war is real. Regional actors, especially members of the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD), which mediated the peace agreement, and international powers, including IGAD partners China, Norway, the United States, and the United Kingdom, must take urgent, united action to push South Sudan’s leaders to respect their commitments to the peace deal and avert a catastrophic return to war.

Burundi

Almost daily, dead bodies appear on the streets of Bujumbura, with the circumstances surrounding their deaths often unknown. More than 300 people have been killed since last April, when President Pierre Nkurunziza announced plans to seek a third term in office despite widespread opposition. Nkurunziza’s re-election in July, following a failed coup attempt, sparked a season of confrontation between government forces and armed opposition fighters. Escalating violence raises fears of a return to conflict after a decade of relative peace. At least 300,000 people died during Burundi’s 12-year civil war, which ended in 2005 after dogged peace-building efforts led by former Presidents Julius Nyerere of Tanzania and Nelson Mandela of South Africa.

In December, the African Union Peace and Security Council took the bold step of authorizing an African Prevention and Protection Mission in Burundi to halt the slide toward civil war and mass atrocities. Nkurunziza reacted angrily and said Burundians would “stand up and fight” against foreign troops. The African Union has reached out to the government and is calling on both sides to cooperate with peace talks, with the next round scheduled for Jan. 6. It is not clear if the African Union has sufficient member support to impose a mission against the will of the Burundian government.

The humanitarian situation is dire. More than 200,000 people have fled the country, and U.N. officials have warned that without immediate action there is a risk of “catastrophic violence.” So far, the crisis is more political than ethnic. However, some leaders appear to be exploiting ethnic divisions, and there is a risk of mass atrocities if violence continues unchecked. It also threatens to further destabilize the fragile Great Lakes region, with increasing numbers of refugees fleeing to Rwanda, Tanzania, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

Afghanistan

U.S. President Barack Obama’s endgame in Afghanistan seems ever more remote, as the country remains mired in conflict more than 14 years after the United States intervened to oust the Taliban and destroy al Qaeda. Today, the Taliban, despite internal splits, are still a formidable force; al Qaeda maintains a presence, and the Islamic State has established a foothold. A short-lived breakthrough in Pakistan-brokered peace talks last July was scuttled after opponents of the talks disclosed that the Taliban’s reclusive leader, Mullah Mohammed Omar, had died in 2013. The Taliban eventually confirmed these reports and announced that longtime deputy Mullah Akhtar Mohammad Mansour had taken over. Mullah Mansour, who reportedly has close ties to Pakistan’s intelligence services, consolidated his leadership position with a string of military victories, including the temporary capture of Kunduz in late September. Yet factionalism continues to bedevil the Taliban movement. Unconfirmed reports surfaced in early December indicating that Mullah Mansour may have been injured or killed in a firefight with rivals in Pakistan. A handful of field commanders throughout the year declared allegiance to the Islamic State.

Fighting across multiple provinces continues to inflict heavy civilian casualties — one reason that Afghanistan is second only to Syria as a leading source of refugees. Rampant corruption and abuse of power by local authorities continue to be the chief drivers of support for the insurgency. The United States now says that it will maintain troop levels at 9,800 for most of 2016, and NATO’s Resolute Support Mission is committed to providing financial support for Afghan security forces until 2020. But given the potency of the insurgency, there is clearly no military solution to the conflict. And the splintering and proliferation of militant groups threaten future efforts to broker peace. President Ashraf Ghani’s attempts to resume negotiations with the Taliban are controversial and strain the cohesion of his national unity government. For talks to succeed, they must be broadly Afghan-led and owned, and driven more by the interests of the Afghan people than by those of powerful external players like Pakistan and the United States.

South China Sea

The South China Sea risks becoming a theater of big-power competition, as the United States challenges China’s large-scale land reclamation and construction on several disputed reefs. China’s aggressive assertion of its territorial claims sets it on a collision course with several Southeast Asian nations with competing sovereignty claims in one of the world’s busiest waterways, an area rich with fisheries and possible oil and gas reserves. Tensions flared in May, when a U.S. spy plane flew near Fiery Cross Reef in the Spratly archipelago, where China is building an airfield. U.S. Defense Secretary Ash Carter called for an immediate and lasting halt to land reclamation in the disputed area and announced that the United States “will fly, sail, and operate wherever international law allows.” In October, a U.S. Navy warship approached another disputed reef in the Spratlys, prompting a sharp rebuke from Beijing that the action was illegal and posed a threat to its national security. In November, Obama announced an aid package worth $259 million over two years to boost the maritime security of Vietnam, Indonesia, the Philippines, and Malaysia, all rival claimants to China.

In what could prove a landmark case, a tribunal in The Hague is considering an arbitration request filed by the Philippines accusing China of violating international law in the South China Sea. Beijing refuses to participate or accept the court’s jurisdiction, but the case could still help unite international opinion and nudge China toward greater cooperation. A decision is expected in 2016.

Beijing should realize that its use of sharp elbows diminishes confidence in regional self-governance and encourages its neighbors to turn to the United States for protection. In turn, Washington must use its words and actions to defend the global commons and support multilateral diplomacy, rather than merely asserting its military supremacy. The Association of Southeast Asian Nations should drive negotiations with China to commit all parties to a code of conduct to manage maritime disputes before small ripples grow into big waves.

Colombia

Peace talks in Havana between the Colombian government and the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) achieved a series of breakthroughs in recent months, raising hopes that the country may finally see an end to its 51-year-old armed conflict in 2016. The conflict has claimed the lives of an estimated 220,000 people; 50,000 have been “disappeared,” and a staggering 7.6 million people have registered as victims of the conflict.

In December, the two sides announced a milestone agreement on transitional justice, one of the toughest issues on the agenda. They had previously reached agreements — with some matters left open for discussion — on rural development, political participation, and drug policy.

President Juan Manuel Santos has declared an ambitious March 23 deadline for reaching a final agreement, but he has pushed back the date for a bilateral cease-fire. Sensitive questions continue to dog the disarmament and reintegration of rebel forces, as well as monitoring mechanisms to ensure implementation. Other complex issues include how to confirm the peace agreement: The government has committed to a popular vote, while the FARC has long called for a constituent assembly. A smaller rebel group, the National Liberation Army (ELN), must also join the peace process. And the huge challenge of healing the scars left by decades of war in a country still plagued by illegal armed groups remains. All that said, there are positive signs that the continent’s longest-running, and last-remaining, armed conflict will soon come to a conclusion.

China Declares Australia a Military Threat Over U.S. Pact

China’s state-run media have declared Australia a threat to its national security, after Australia finalized a 25-year military pact with the United States.

 

The United States currently has 1,200 troops from the Marine Corps and Air Force training with Australian troops for humanitarian and disaster relief. The defense agreement will increase the number of U.S. troops at Darwin in northern Australia to 2,500.

 

The Chinese regime is none too pleased about the agreement, however.

 

Li Jie, rear admiral of China’s People’s Liberation Army Navy, told Want China Times that Australia could pressure China’s supply lines in the Strait of Malacca in a conflict over the South China Sea.

“Australia is therefore likely to become a threat to China’s national security,” it states.

Global Times reported that if a war broke out between China and Vietnam or the Philippines, the United States could deploy submarines and aircraft from Australia.

 

Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel announced the U.S.-Australia Force Posture Agreement on Tuesday alongside Australian minister of defense David Johnston and minister of foreign affairs Julie Bishop.

 

Hagel said during a press conference, “This is a part of the world that represents five of America’s seven treaty obligation countries that we are committed to, which we’ve made very clear we’re committed to.”

 

Johnston said the U.S. troops are helping train the Australian military. “The Marines, of course, are the world’s experts in amphibious combat and amphibious operations,” he said during the press conference. “And so, we’re watching as to how those operations are carried out.”

 

The recent troop increase is part of a 2011 agreement between the United States and Australia. It was in turn part of the Asia Pivot, which has focused the U.S. military on the Asia Pacific region.

 

The number of U.S. troops in Australia is comparatively small. Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel said during an Aug. 12 troop event in San Diego that the United States has 360,000 men and women currently deployed in the Asia Pacific.

 

China has previously threatened Australia for aligning with the United States.

 

A source who formerly worked in U.S. intelligence told Epoch Times that, around 2010 and early 2011, China was trying to strong-arm Australia with indirect threats.

 

The threat went along the lines of “If Australia was attacked, the United States wouldn’t get here in time to save you. You should align with China instead.”

 

Not long after, however, the United States signed the agreement with Australia and began stationing U.S. marines and airmen in the country.

 

In response, China’s Global Times published an article in November 2011 that brought its threats to the surface. “The U.S. military presence in Australia will not change matters in the short-term,” it stated. “It remains to be seen how Australia will behave in the future and how China is going to respond.”

 

“But one thing is certain,” it added,” if Australia uses its military bases to help the U.S. harm Chinese interests, then Australia itself will be caught in the crossfire.”

China continues building ‘fixed aircraft carrier’ inside PH territory

Amid Philippine government’s call for construction freeze within the disputed territories in South China Sea including West Philippine Sea, China openly rejected the proposal.

 

“China opposed it immediately. They should study it before they reject it. If they reject it without studying it, then it looks like China does not recognize that the developments in the South China Sea are creating problems for everyone,” Foreign Affairs Secretary Albert del Rosario said after attending the regional Ministers’ Meeting over the weekend.

 

According to del Rosario, China is like saying “What tensions? What problem? There is no problem.” The Philippine top diplomat said problems can’t be solved if it is not recognized.

 

Instead of listening to international community’s call to freeze construction, China is busy building its ‘fixed aircraft carrier’ inside Philippine exclusive economic zone in the West Philippine Sea.

According to Filipino fishermen operating in West Philippine Sea, China is creating concrete sea barriers in Mabini reef. They also attested that there is an increased Chinese coast guard presence in the territory.

 

“The artificial island at Fiery Cross Reef will be an unreplaceable military base with great strategic significance due to its location and size. Such a base will realize the value of the South China Sea for China and ensure China’s status in South East Asia,” a Chinese news provider said.

 

“It can threaten all our vital economic installations and this is the most awesome, our vital military installations including what would be the installations we can make available at the EDCA (Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement),” Former National Security Adviser Roilo Golez told Submariners World.

Chinese patrols in Asian seas 'legitimate': General

Chinese warships will continue to patrol waters where Beijing has territorial claims, a top general said Sunday, amid simmering rows with neighbouring countries over the South China Sea and islands controlled by Japan.

Lieutenant General Qi Jianguo, deputy chief of the general staff of the People's Liberation Army, defended the patrols as legitimate and said his country's sovereignty over the areas could not be disputed.

"Why are Chinese warships patrolling in East China Sea and South China Sea? I think we are all clear about this," Qi told the annual Shangri-La Dialogue security conference in Singapore.

"Our attitude on East China Sea and South China Sea is that they are in our Chinese sovereignty. We are very clear about that," he said through an interpreter.

"So the Chinese warships and the patrolling activities are totally legitimate and uncontroversial."

Qi was responding to a question from a delegate after giving a speech in which he sought to assure neighbouring countries that China has no hegemonic ambitions.

"China has never taken foreign expansion and military conquering as a state policy," he said.

One delegate however said there appeared to be growing regional scepticism over China's peaceful intentions because it was inconsistent with moves to send naval patrols to waters where other countries also have claims.

China is locked in a territorial dispute with Brunei, Malaysia, the Philippines and Vietnam in the South China Sea.

The four states have partial claims to islands but China says it has sovereign rights to nearly all of the sea, including areas much closer to other countries and thousands of kilometres from the Chinese coast.

China also has a dispute with Japan over the Senkaku islands, which Beijing calls the Diaoyus, in the East China Sea.

"I do hope the statements of the good general today will be translated into action," Philippine Defense Secretary Voltaire Gazmin told reporters.

He said Qi's remarks about China having no hegemonic ambitions were "far from what is happening" in the sea.

Manila last month protested at what it called the "provocative and illegal presence" of a Chinese warship near Second Thomas Shoal, which is occupied by Philippine troops.

Among the other moves that have caused alarm were China's occupation of a shoal near the Philippines' main island last year, and the deployment in March of Chinese naval ships to within 80 kilometres (50 miles) of Malaysia's coast.

Competing claims have for decades made the area -- home to rich fishing grounds and vital global shipping lanes and believed to sit atop vast natural gas deposits -- one of Asia's potential military flashpoints.

China and Vietnam fought in 1974 and 1988 for control of islands in battles that left dozens of soldiers dead.

The US-China strategic rivalry also loomed large during the conference, with US Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel on Saturday accusing Beijing of waging cyber espionage against the United States.

But General Qi on Sunday allayed concerns that China had dropped a pledge not to be the first to use nuclear weapons in a conflict.

Omission of the "no-first-use" pledge in a recent defence white paper had created ripples in military circles and sparked speculation that China may have abandoned the policy.

Qi also distanced his government from claims by some Chinese scholars that the Ryukyu Islands, which include Okinawa, do not belong to Japan.

"This is only an article of particular scholars and their views on these issues... it does not represent the views of the Chinese government," he said.

Maritime disputes and the risks of conflicts that could hurt Asia's economic growth were a running theme during the three-day conference that ended Sunday.

"Asia holds great promise for ourselves and the world but continued peace and prosperity in this region are neither fait accompli nor automatic," Singapore Defence Minister Ng Eng Hen told the conference.

"Instead, if we are to continue to enjoy stability and progress, we must work effectively in unison to strengthen areas of common interests."

The Philippines' Gazmin defended Manila's move unilaterally to bring its territorial dispute with China before a UN tribunal after China refused to take part.

"We hope that the arbitration tribunal will issue a clarification in accordance with international law that will direct China to respect our sovereign rights," Gazmin told the forum.

Philippine President Vows To Rebuild Air Force by 2016

Philippine President Benigno Aquino vowed Monday to acquire fighter jets, air defense radar and other equipment within three years to bolster the country’s weak air force, amid a territorial dispute with China.

“I assure you that before I step down from office, our skies will be guarded by modern air assets,” he said in a speech during a visit at an air base in Clark, north of Manila. The speech was broadcast live on radio and television.

Among these are “lead-in fighters, long-range patrol aircraft, close-air-support aircraft,” as well as transport planes, attack- and multi-use helicopters, air defense radar and flight simulators.

He gave no details of the aircraft and equipment, nor the terms for their acquisition.

In January, an Aquino spokesman announced the government would buy 12 South Korean FA-50 fighter jets to be used for “training, interdiction and disaster response.”

The Philippines, a former US colony, retired the last of its US-designed F-5 fighters in 2005 and lacks air defense.

Aquino, whose six-year term ends in mid-2016, has set about modernizing the military in his first three years in office as tensions rise with China over overlapping territorial claims to islands and waters in the South China Sea.

The main focus was initially the navy with the acquisition of two Hamilton-class cutters decommissioned by the US Coast Guard.

The first of the two refurbished vessels became the Philippine Navy’s flagship in 2011, replacing a warship initially built for the US Navy in World War II.

The second cutter is set to arrive in the Philippines later this year.

Aquino said Monday he was committed to reversing the under-spending on military capability that he said had characterized the Philippines since the early 1990s.

“Over the past decades the air force had its wings broken and we relied on old and rickety planes and equipment,” he said.

Parliament has since authorized the defense department to spend 75 billion pesos (US $1.7 billion) on modernizing the military over the next five years, Aquino added.

This is on top the more than 19 billion pesos that it had spent over the past three years for this purpose.

Between 1992 and 2010, the Philippines spent just 33 billion pesos for military modernization, Aquino said.

US Trains Philippines On Drones Amid China Fears

US troops trained their Philippine counterparts how to use surveillance drones Friday, as Manila seeks to boost military ties with Washington and counter what it perceives as a rising security threat from China.

The naval exercises are part of annual training operations between the two defense partners, but they have come under closer scrutiny this year due to simmering tensions between Manila and Beijing over rival claims to the South China Sea.

At a naval base around 13 kilometers (eight miles) southwest of the capital Manila, US Navy SEALs taught Filipino soldiers how to use small unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), or drones, launching one from a boat at sea. It circled the base and landed in the water.

US maritime civil affairs officer Jeremy Eden said these were the smaller “Puma” drones used only for surveillance and not the more lethal, armed versions employed in Afghanistan.

“They (the Filipinos) are very interested and highly motivated to learn and if they acquire the systems, they will use them effectively,” Eden said.

The drones would be useful for the poorlyequipped Philippine military, which faces both internal insurgencies and potential external threats, said Lt. Jojit Fiscar, a senior coordinator of the naval exercises.

“This would be a very good instrument to use. This unmanned aerial vehicle can monitor the actual movement of the targets,” he said.

US and Philippine troops also practiced marksmanship and piloting small rubber boats that are frequently used by naval commandos.

Military officials from both sides stressed that the exercises had nothing to do with China’s claim to the South China Sea.

But Philippine Defense Secretary Voltaire Gazmin reiterated Friday that the Philippines was looking to give the United States greater access to its military bases, saying this was needed to respond to China’s threats.

“At this point in time, we cannot stand alone. We need allies. If we don’t do this, we will be bullied by bigger powers, and that is what is happening now: There is China, sitting on our territory,” Gazmin said.

“What are we going to do? Wait till they get into our garage?”

On Thursday, he said the Philippines wanted to give the United States and also Japan greater access to its military bases.

President Benigno Aquino’s spokeswoman, Abigail Valte, said separately that any increased US presence would comply with the Philippine constitution.

She also said China should not object. “Whatever we do within our territory... is perfectly within our rights.”

China claims nearly all of the strategically vital South China Sea, even waters close to the shores of its smaller neighbors.

Tensions between Beijing and other claimants to the sea, particularly the Philippines and Vietnam, have escalated in recent years amid a series of Chinese political and military actions to assert its claims to the waters.

Philippines: Chinese Military In South China Sea Threatens Peace

The Philippines said Sunday that an increasing Chinese military and paramilitary presence in the disputed South China Sea was a threat to regional peace.

Philippine Foreign Affairs Secretary Albert Del Rosario made the statement in a press release issued at a regional security forum attended by his counterparts from the 10-member Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and China.

“Del Rosario today expressed serious concern over the increasing militarisation of the South China Sea,” the statement said.

He said there was a “massive presence of Chinese military and paramilitary ships” at two groups of islets within the Philippines’ exclusive economic zone called Scarborough Shoal and Second Thomas Shoal.

Del Rosario described the Chinese military presence at these islets as “threats to efforts to maintain maritime peace and stability in the region”.

Del Rosario said the Chinese actions violated a pact made in 2002 in which rival claimants to the sea pledged not to take any actions that may increase tensions.

The declaration on conduct signed by ASEAN nations and China also committed rival claimants to resolve their disputes “without resorting to the threat or use of force.”

“We reiterate our continued advocacy for a peaceful and rules-based settlement of disputes in accordance with universally recognised principles of international law,” Del Rosario said.

China claims nearly all of the strategically vital and potentially resource-rich South China Sea, even waters approaching the coasts of neighbouring countries.

ASEAN members the Philippines, Vietnam, Brunei and Malaysia, as well as Taiwan, also have competing claims to parts of the sea.

The rivalries have for decades been a source of regional tension, with China and Vietnam fighting deadly battles for control of some islands in the sea.

Tensions have built in recent years with the Philippines, Vietnam and some other countries expressing concern at increasingly assertive Chinese military and diplomatic tactics to assert control of the sea.

Manila says China has effectively occupied Scarborough Shoal, a rich fishing ground far closer to Philippine land than Chinese, for more than a year.

The Philippines says China has recently also deployed vessels to intimidate a tiny Philippine garrison on Second Thomas Shoal that has been stationed there since the mid 1990s.

Australia to deploy warship to join U.S. fleet in Japan

Australia will deploy a guided- missile frigate, HMAS Sydney, to join the U.S. 7th Fleet in Japan at a time of heightened tensions on the Korean peninsula and in the South China Sea, according to The Australian on Friday.

The Australian said the warship will be "embedded" with a U.S. aircraft carrier strike group operating out of Yokosuka, but the Department of Defense didn't confirm the news so far.

HMAS Sydney is an Adelaide-class guided-missile frigate launched in 1980. It was sent to the Persian Gulf five times in support of U.S. operations during the Gulf War, in Afghanistan and Iraq.

According to the report, this mission has been long-planned to increase Australian Navy's experience at providing air defense for a fleet, in preparation for the arrival of the Navy's two massive landing ships and three air warfare destroyers.

"Australia has made it clear we stand shoulder to shoulder with the Republic of Korea, also with Japan," the report quoted Defense Minister Stephen Smith as saying.

And Peter Jennings, a former senior Defense official who now heads the Australian Strategic Policy Institute think tank, said the deployment was significant. "It does reflect a return to the type of co-operation that used to happen in the 1980s and 90s when we exercised more frequently with the Americans."

Philippines - China Has An Invasion Plan That Is Working

More and more Filipino fishermen are complaining to the government that they are being chased away from their traditional fishing areas off the Filipino coast by Chinese coast guard ships. This is particularly bad at Scarborough Shoal. This is in violation of a deal made last June with the Chinese. Not only did Chinese patrol boats soon return to Scarborough Shoal but Chinese fishing boats are again operating there and even erected a flimsy barrier (with rowboats, rope and fishing nets) across the entrance to the lagoon and forcibly preventing Filipino fishing boats from entering. Scarborough Shoal is in waters the Philippines claims (according to international law). The shoal is only 250 kilometers from the Philippines, and 1,200 kilometers from China. Despite this China claims ownership of Scarborough Shoal, but has not yet used deadly force to assert that claim. What China is apparently doing is sending patrol boats from their fishery protection service to “protect their fishermen”. According to China, they are in compliance with the June deal, as they never agreed that Chinese fishing boats could not operate around Scarborough Shoal. The Philippines does not agree but has refrained from sending warships to the shoal and chasing the Chinese fishing boats away. To Filipinos this is another example of China saying one thing and doing another.

 

MILF and government negotiators continue working out the details of a peace deal over Moslem autonomy in the south. MILF is impatient but the government points out that the deal has to be acceptable to most of the Filipinos MILF does not represent. Moslems are only eight percent of all Filipinos, and an even smaller proportion of the economic activity. MILF wants control of more of the economy, which meant control of "ancestral Moslem areas" in the south that are now populated by Christians. The Christian majority refuses to allow domination by Moslems in a more autonomous Moslem south. This issue has not been completely resolved. This deal does not please some radical groups, who may try to block implementation.

 

The Filipino Moslems claiming nearby Sabah say they have sent another thousand armed men to Sabah but have ordered them to remain quiet until after the May 5^th elections in Malaysia. Filipino clan leader Raja Kiram openly invaded the Malaysian province of Sabah in February and sought to take control of the area because of an old claim his family had on the area. The invasion force was destroyed in March. The fighting resulted in over 80 dead (nearly all of them Filipinos). Malaysia believes there are still at least a hundred of the armed Kiram followers in the area and military forces continue to search for these invaders. Most of those already captured are being charged with murder and terrorism. Meanwhile over 5,000 Filipino civilians (most of them apparently working in Sabah illegally) have fled Sabah, many of them returning to the Philippines. Malaysia does not believe there are another thousand armed Kiram followers who have recently arrived. It is known that hundreds of Filipinos continue to flee Sabah each week as the Malaysian government is no longer tolerating Filipinos living illegally in Sabah. 

 

April 19, 2013: In the south (the Sulu Sea) a Chinese fishing boat was removed from Tubbataha  Reef where it had run aground April 8th. The Chinese boat was in a nature preserve closed to commercial shipping. Moreover the Chinese boat had 2,000 pangolins on board, an endangered species that is a valuable delicacy in China but illegal to fish in Filipino waters. The twelve man crew of the Chinese ship was arrested, even though they tried to bribe the nature park rangers who found them. At first the Chinese ship was thought to be a spy ship as the crew was dressed in military style camouflage uniforms. 

 

April 18, 2013: In the south (Surigao del Sur province) two policemen held captive by the NPA escaped. Elsewhere in the south (Zamboanga Sibugay province) police clashed with 30 NPA men and forced the rebels to retreat. Apparently several of the communist rebels were wounded. 

 

April 15, 2013: In the south (Basilan) soldiers attacked an Abu Sayyaf camp, killing eight terrorists. Three soldiers were wounded. MILF complained that their men were also attacked, but that was because a MILF camp was only 300 meters from the Abu Sayyaf camp and some gunfire came their way during the fighting. The government accuses MILF of tolerating the presence of Abu Sayyaf, which MILF denies. 

 

April 14, 2013: In the south (Surigao del Sur province) two policemen were captured by NPA rebels. 

 

April 12, 2013: The government noted that, if there were another war in Korea, the mutual defense treaty with the U.S. would allow America to use some Filipino bases to support American forces in Korea or headed there. The Philippines is hoping to get more commitment from the U.S. for support against growing Chinese aggression. The Chinese know that as long as they do not commit an obvious act of war they can push the Filipinos around without the risk of American military intervention.

China has launched the first ship in a new class of stealth missile frigates, state media reported Tuesday, amid ongoing tensions with neighboring countries over Beijing's maritime claims.

The People's Liberation Army Navy is building a total of 20 Type 056 Jiangdao class frigates to replace older models and bolster its ability to conduct patrols and escort ships and submarines in waters it claims in the South China and East China seas.

The first in the class, No. 582, was formally delivered to the navy on Monday in Shanghai, which is home to one of the country's largest complexes of naval shipyards, according to the official Xinhua News Agency and the navy's official website.

Newly promoted navy commander Wu Shengli attended the delivery ceremony, the reports said, an indication of the importance with which the service regards the new ships' mission.

The helicopter-equipped ships feature a sleek design to reduce clutter and make them harder to spot by radar and are armed with anti-ship and anti-aircraft missiles. They also need a crew of just 60, two-thirds fewer than older vessels, a major advantage that should boost efficiency and relieve burdens in training and recruitment. At 1,440 tons fully loaded, is considerably smaller than U.S. Navy frigates, and is categorized by some observers as a member of the smaller class of ship known as corvettes.

China's navy has so far stayed aloof from the island disputes in order to avoid further escalating tensions, with patrol ships from the Ministry of Transportation and other government agencies dispatched instead to assert China's territorial claims.

However, China has made no secret of its desire to extend its navy's global reach, and the service has received considerable attention in China's military modernization. China's first aircraft carrier, the overhauled Soviet-era Liaoning, entered service last year, while a growing array of nuclear submarines and ultra-modern surface ships are also joining the fleet.

China Paints Itself Into A Very Dangerous Corner

The government is negotiating with the United States regarding the extent of increased American military presence in the Philippines and surrounding waters. China has reacted by proclaiming that its armed forces would be adequate to confront any foreign efforts to contest Chinese claims to most of the South China Sea (including areas off the coast of the Philippines where oil and natural gas have been found). The U.S. does not want to get into a war with China over its outrageous claims to the South China Sea, but there is the problem of allowing a nation to just grab islands that have long been recognized as belonging to a neighbor. The Chinese claims include revising international law (the 1994 Law of the Sea treaty) that finally (it was thought) settled who was entitled to what and where. This treaty left many disputed islands whose ownership still had to be settled by negotiation. But China is blowing right past the 1994 treaty (which China signed) and saying, in effect, “what’s mine is mine and what’s yours is mine too.” Chinese leaders have made these claims a matter of national pride, painting themselves into a very dangerous corner. The Philippines, and all the other nations that are locked in this territorial dispute are forming an alliance, which contains the United States. America is willing to train more frequently with Filipino forces and spend more time in the Philippines, but the U.S. does not want to get involved with confrontations with Chinese forces unless forced to. What kind of force that might be has been left vague.

MILF and the government are stalled in negotiating the details of their peace deal. Neither side believes that these disagreements will derail the peace deal.

December 21, 2012: The NPA declared a 26 day nationwide truce, to last from December 20 to January 15. This is the longest truce the NPA has ever declared. Due to the decentralized nature of the NPA, some of its 4,000 fighters (organized into over a hundred separate groups) will not obey the truce. Since the late 1960s the leftist NPA has caused over 40,000 deaths. The NPA wants to establish a communist dictatorship in the Philippines but been in decline since the collapse of European communism in the late 1980s.  

December 20, 2012: In the north (Quezon) NPA rebels kidnapped a former NPA rebel and two village guards and killed them. The leftist rebels consider those who leave the NPA to be deserters and try to kill them whenever possible.

December 17, 2012: In the south (Iloilo province) troops doing disaster relief work were attacked by NPA rebels. One soldier was killed and the attackers were repulsed with casualties (blood trails were found). Soldiers in the area were ordered to be more alert because the local NPA appears to be ignoring the 18 day disaster relief truce. 

December 15, 2012:  The government declared an 18 day unilateral truce with the NPA, in part because troops and police are needed to help victims of a recent massive typhoon (Pacific hurricane) on the 4^th that left over a thousand dead and many more injured or homeless. Soldiers and NPA units began observing informal truces five days ago, in areas hardest hit by the typhoon (which damaged or destroyed NPA bases as well).

December 14, 2012: MILF has ordered members of its combat units to not appear in public carrying weapons or wearing their uniforms. That can be done on MILF bases, but in areas where they might encounter soldiers or police. This new policy is meant to prevent gun battles between armed MILF members and government security forces. 

Police In the south (Davao City) shot dead an Islamic terrorist (Mohd Noor Fikrie Abd Kahar) who had threatened to detonate a bomb in a backpack. Kahar was a Malaysian son of a police sergeant who was recruited into Indonesian Islamic terror group Jemaah Islamiyah (JI) via Facebook. Like many JI members he fled to the Philippines and found sanctuary with local Islamic terror group Abu Sayyaf. Filipino police have been searching for Kahar since early February when Kahar was almost captured during a raid on an Islamic terrorist camp. Kahar, in his haste to flee, left some personal items behind, including his Malaysian government ID card. Police soon found that Kahar was a wannabe terrorist who was still out there seeking an opportunity to kill for the cause. Police are unsure where Kahar planned to place the bomb. Kahar had been keeping in touch with other JI members via the Internet. He and his Filipina wife were located via a tip.

December 12, 2012:  In the central Philippines (Palawan) NPA rebels attacked a police station, killing one policeman and wounding another. The police chief was supposed to be there but was absent and is being investigated for that. The police chief is also in trouble over allegations that the NPA attack was in retaliation for police extorting protection money from miners, which is a criminal activity the NPA considers theirs alone.

December 11, 2012: The government extended its modernization plan for the army another 15 years. The previous plan had not worked out so well and the Philippines Army is still one of the most poorly equipped in the region. This is largely because the Philippines has not got a lot of money for the military and most of what is available goes to pay for operations against Islamic and leftist rebels. Then there is corruption, with is frequently found in procurement programs. This means that the new equipment funds are often plundered by corrupt officers and little or nothing actually gets to the troops.

December 6, 2012: In the north (Leyte) ten NPA rebels attacked an army detachment doing development work in a rural village and killed two soldiers. Elsewhere in Leyte NPA men attacked a village and wounded a civilian. In both attacks the leftist rebels were driven off by troops.

December 5, 2012:  The NPA said they would observe a 29 day unilateral truce with the government, in part because troops and police are needed to help victims of a recent massive typhoon. The truce will apparently only apply in the provinces hardest hit by the Typhoon.

Japan flexes its maritime muscle at Beijing

Japan's navy marked its 60th anniversary with a major exercise Sunday, Oct. 14, intended to show off its maritime strength. The display comes amid a tense territorial dispute with China.

About 40 ships -- including state-of-the-art destroyers, hovercraft able to launch assaults on rough coastlines and new conventionally powered submarines -- took part in Fleet Review 2012, the maritime equivalent of a military parade. About 30 naval aircraft, mostly helicopters, also participated.

Japan's navy was joined by warships from the United States, Singapore and Australia. Representatives from more than 20 countries, including China, also attended the event staged in waters south of Tokyo.

Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda, who watched aboard the destroyer JS Kurama, said Japan faces "severe" challenges to its security, though he did not specifically mention the dispute with Beijing over islands in the East China Sea.

Japan's navy -- formally called the Maritime Self-Defense Force -- is among the best-equipped and best-trained in the world. As part of a post-World War II mutual defense pact, Japan also hosts the U.S. 7th Fleet, which includes the USS George Washington aircraft carrier battle group.

South Korea: Asia’s Other Rising Naval Power

With the world’s attention focused on a potential confrontation between China and Japan in the East China Sea, a third player has built what may be the most powerful ship-for-ship fleet in Northeast Asia.  Over the past fifteen years, the Republic of Korea Navy (ROKN) has expanded dramatically, acquiring a substantial fleet of modern, powerful warships. While the ROKN continues to prepare for the contingency of conflict with North Korea, it has become a force capable of significant foreign deployment.  If Seoul maintains its commitment to the Navy, the ROKN could become one of the world’s premier middle power navies.

Since 1953, North Korea has posed the central strategic problem for the ROKN.  The sinking of the Cheonan and the DPRK’s bombardment of offshore islands in 2010 served as harsh reminders of the maritime aspects of the North Korea dilemma.  New designs (especially frigates) suggest a renewed emphasis on anti-submarine warfare. However, many of the capabilities of South Korea’s new warships seem geared towards global contingencies, rather than being designed to meet specific North Korean threats.

The Aegis equipped Sejong the Great (KD-III) class destroyers, for example, compare favorably with American, Japanese, and Chinese designs, carrying more missiles in VLS cells than their foreign counterparts.  Although quite capable of engaging North Korea in a strike, air defense, or missile defense capacity, the three ships of the class represent a much more substantial commitment to surface warfare than the threat of the DPRK demands.

Similary, the Dokdo class amphibious warships suggest a maritime focus extending well beyond the Korean Peninsula.  Like many amphibious warships, the 18,000 ton Dokdo strongly resembles a small aircraft carrier. As British and French operations in Libya last year demonstrated, amphibious warships can become strike vessels through the addition of attack helicopters.  Although South Korea does not currently participate in the F-35B project, the prospect of flying the STOVL fifth generation fighter from Dokdo (or potentially from Dokdo’s successors) undoubtedly appeals to some South Korean defense planners.  However, even if the tremendous expense of acquiring and operating such fighters proves daunting, the light carriers could someday employ Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) optimized for strike and reconnaissance roles.  In any case, the Dokdos give South Korea a plausible expeditionary capability.

South Korea’s robust shipbuilding industry (the world’s largest) helps support and underwrite the ROKN’s expansion and modernization. Four Dokdos and six KD-IIIs are planned, although actual construction may not match these numbers.  If it does, however, this would represent one of the most potent naval warfare squadrons in the world, potentially capable of conducting many different missions in the region.  The KD-IIIs and Dokdos are supported by a force of nine modern large frigates (designated destroyers), all displacing from 3500-6000 tons and specialized for surface and sub-surface warfare.  Another fifteen 3000 ton frigates are in the ROKN’s plans.

Much like the PLAN, the ROKN has taken advantage of every opportunity to develop experience with distant, long-term deployments.  South Korea is a regular participant at RIMPAC, as well as other significant multilateral exercises.  Also like the PLAN and the Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force (JMSDF), the ROKN has maintained a continuous presence in support of CTF 151’s anti-piracy operations off the coast of Somalia.

All of this suggests that the ROKN is built for exigencies well beyond war on the Peninsula.  Naval vessels of the sort operated by South Korea (small carriers and the modern-day equivalent of battleships) carry a high prestige value.  This signals to both domestic and international audiences that Seoul is to be taken seriously on the international stage.  However, the fleet also represents a hedge against the possibility that South Korean relations with its larger neighbors may deteriorate.  The capabilities the ROKN is currently pursuing could operate abroad in expeditionary and humanitarian relief operations, or could help protect South Korea’s maritime lifelines.  In any case, the tendency to focus exclusively on the navies of China and Japan misses out on one of the most important new players in the Northeast Asian maritime scene.