Combating ability in South China Sea, China VS US

China's DF-21C missiles


Recently, the tense in the South China Sea has drawn the world's attention.


At a regional meeting in Hanoi in late July, Hillary Clinton unveiled an initiative the effect of which is an attempt to forge a defensive alliance along the maritime perimeter, with nations such as Vietnam and the Philippines. Meanwhile, China made strong response to Hillary's statement of internationalizing and multinationalizing the issue of the South China Sea.


On Tuesday, Vietnam and the United States held their first ever defense talks. Last week, an American warship, the USS John S. McCain, docked in Vietnam and the two navies conducted training exercises — a sign of growing military ties.


As tension is increasing, people shift their focus on China and US, and make analysis of their combating ability in the South China Sea.


China:


1. In the South China Sea, China has military advantages in its land-based air arms and naval troops. And airports and ports along the coast could multiply its combating capability.


China's J-10 fighter


A warship in China's millitary drill in the South China Sea



New type of war ships from the South China Sea Fleet


2. The number of land-based aircraft are five times as that of US aircraft which could be deployed in the South China Sea. China owns the fifth generation fighter, of which performance is similar to US F-22. Besides, China owns anti-ballistic missiles.


3. China has advantages in supplying capability in the South China Sea. The Xisha islands are only 200 miles away from the South China Sea fleet. Besides, the South China Sea fleet and Guangzhou Military Command also have a number of bases scattered in this region.


4. PLA Navy and Air force develop very fast. Besides, China's missile forces' nuclear strike capability also improves very fast.



US:


USS George Washington aircraft carrier fleet


1. US doesn't have sufficient frontline force in the South China Sea.


2. US allies in the South China Sea have limited military forces and unlikely stand on US side. In this case, US cannot gain support from these allies. Even though US dispatches an aircraft carrier, at most 350 fighters could be deployed in the South China Sea.


3. US nuclear-powered submarines could destroy China's submarines, which target US aircraft carrier. However, US carrier also faces threats from China's ballistic missiles.


4. US cannot launch a comprehensive attack in the South China Sea. The Xisha islands are 14,000 miles away from US Norfolk naval base, 8,000 miles away from San Diego naval base, 6,000 miles away from the Pearl Harbour and 2,300 miles from Guam.


Which state is more capable of combating in the South China Sea?

Poll Options ( single choice ) Number of participants 118  

  1. China  

80 (67.80%)

2. US  

26 (22.03%)

3. Hard to Say  

9 (7.63%)

4. Unclear  

3 (2.54%)

  Submit

SOUTH CHINA SEA - A TRIAL OF STRENGTH

AUM.
I was indeed delighted to read the concerned article giving out comparative military might of the PLA and the US Forces in the Pacific Ocean. As far as a trial of strength between the two countries is concerned, the time is not yet ripe.
USA has been cosying up with Vietnam lately and also garnishing support of the Phillipines but all three put together will not have sufficient Naval strengthto match that of the People's Republic of China.
Logistics will play a major role in the outcome of a naval war in the South China Sea, As the name suggests, China is almost there and can sustain a sea battle for a long time. On the other hand, the lifeline of US forces from Guam or the Continental United States would be too long. For Americans the Logistics will be a nightmare.
In my opinion there is no possibility of a Naval shooting war in the South China Sea between the Americans and the Chinese in the near future.
Therefore, taking up the naval strategy and dissecting it at this stage may be an exercise in futility.
For a chat, you are welcome to write to me, Thanks.
From : Chitranjan Sawant, INDIA. At the moment the US has military bases around the world, forming a military empire that it uses to get what it wants.

China probably has stronger control in the South China Sea, but for other places in the world the story is very different.

Take Central and South America, for example, the US is military master of these places, and uses its strength to force the countries of those places to adopt governments that give the US all their resources at low prices, and attack their own people when they disagree with them.

Another example of the US military network at work is the Middle East, where the US's diplomatic position is weaker, but its military is still strong. The people of Iraq have suffered greatly at the hands of the US. The people of Palestine are suffering at the hands of the US's strong allies in Israel.

This military network has caused so much pain around the world. It needs to be dismantled, and countries around the world need to be given the power to defend themselves, without ruling each other.

China has a right to defend itself, but China's policy about the South China Sea looks like a policy of claiming it as China's personal property, ignoring the other countries surrounding it. Claiming it personally is displaying the same arrogant attitude that created the US's military network.

Just imagine you are a South East Asian country, such as Vietnam, Malaysia or the Philippines. If the big country to the north of you had military control of the sea that forms your border, how safe would you feel?

Control of the South China Sea should be shared among South East Asian countries, according to a mutual-defence agreement. China should get a share of that, but not the majority of control.

Vietnam is trying to play balance-of-power on China and the US, so that neither of them controls its waters. I respect Vietnam for that, but in the end, the US's worldwide military network should be dismantled, and China should not replace it.

In the short term, if China works out an agreement that guarantees the safety of its South East Asian neighbours, it might be able to push the US out of the Sea diplomatically, thus cutting of one of the arms of the US giant.

From Chutro, Australia.

Who cares?

China will die without export and foreign experts.

The people of Iraq have suffered since the Meads crossed the Tigris....

...At the hands of the US, at the hands of the current and previous Iraqi government, at the hands of Iran, Great Britain, the Ottoman Empire, the Persians, the Mongols, the Romans, and the Greeks as well as the Babylonians.

Not sure what your point is.

But the United States lacks both the capability and the intent to conquer China. The strategic goal has clearly always been fostering governments that will permit it to conduct business in a stable predictable way. This policy includes China. The US certainly isn't in the business of exporting democracy. Any democracies that have resulted such as Japan and Germany were purely from lack of experience with any other system and fear of Russian influence if more progressive options were taken.

This is just fear-mongering on the part of some in China who would love to participate in the graft associated with a US-style military industrial complex. China should resist such nonsense and focus on sound fiscal policy and building internal markets for its goods.

Wishful Writer

This article is too much hype and wild exagerrations.  Wishful thinking, more than anything else.China and the US would not come to blows as the SCS will most likely come to an agreement.