Pentagon likely to hold naval exercise in Yellow Sea with Korea

[GoFlyKiteNow]

Pentagon says likely to hold naval exercise in Yellow Sea with ROK
08:19, July 15, 2010

U.S. Defense Department on Wednesday said the United States and the Republic of Korea (ROK) are likely to hold a joint naval exercise in the Yellow Sea.

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Qin Gang said China has expressed serious concern to the relevant parties, calling on them to exercise calm and refrain from doing things that might escalate tensions in the region.

Pentagon Spokesman Geoff Morrell said the war game will be the topic of high level meetings next week in Seoul. He said Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will meet their South Korean counterparts to "discuss and likely approve a proposed series of USD/ROK combined military exercises, including new naval and air exercises in both the Sea of Japan and the Yellow Sea."

Morrell claimed the exercises are defensive, but "will send a clear message of deterrence" to the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK).

Seoul confirmed earlier it would hold a joint naval exercise with the United States in the Yellow Sea. Lee Bung-woo, the head of the press office at the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the ROK, said on Tuesday that the naval drill might be conducted after the UN Security Council takes action over the sinking of the ROK frigate Cheonan.

Seoul announced in May that the navy warship was torpedoed by a submarine of the DPRK, but Pyongyang immediately denied involvement, saying the investigation results were fabricated.

China, meanwhile, said on Thursday it firmly opposes any foreign warships or planes entering the Yellow Sea as well as adjacent waters that were engaged in activities that would impact on its security and interests.

Source:Xinhua

 

[GoFlyKiteNow]

China opposes foreign warships, planes entering Yellow Sea and adjacent waters
19:03, July 08, 2010

China on Thursday said it firmly opposed any foreign warships or planes entering the Yellow Sea as well as adjacent waters that were engaged in activities that would impact on its security and interests.

Foreign Ministry spokesman Qin Gang made the remarks in response to a question on a scheduled joint naval drill between the United States and the Republic of Korea (ROK) at a regular news conference.

China has expressed serious concern to the relevant parties, he said, calling the relevant parties to exercise calm and refrain from doing things that might escalate tensions in the region.
.

 

[sinren67]

Very soon, US Navy will hold an exercise with RSN at Orchard River

 

[longbow]

GFK - It appears that a week or so after Chinese pressure, the US has backed away from sending its carrier into the Yellow Sea !!!! As we all know, US carrier group is its way of showing who is boss. I was surprised that the US changed it position after Chinese pressure. I wonder what was the reason or which levers the Chinese pulled? Could be a few - maybe no more intelligence on Afghanistan Taliban (China shares a common border) or veto of Iranian sanctions (it as security council veto power) or stop buying US Treasuries? (there are signs that US might double dip) or maybe operating a carrier group within China military influence would allow the Chinese to fine tune its anti carrier missile. I would think that US carrier, in a military exercise would turn on all the countermeasures and vanish from radar and Chinese would be able to see if they could track and target the carrier from satellite as well as special ground radar and subs. After all if you can see and track it, chances are you can hit it.

Anyway US blinked.

http://blogs.wsj.com/chinarealtime/2010/07/17/a-sea-change-in-us-china-naval-relations/

Here is a wsj article on this backpedalling in face of Chinese pressure.

Is the U.S. about to set a precedent that could alter the way its navy operates in the far western Pacific?

That’s what some U.S. analysts fear—and many in China are hoping for—after Washington announced that it will hold a portion of planned joint naval operations with South Korea in the Sea of Japan, or East Sea, and not entirely in the Yellow Sea between Korea and China, where they were originally expected to take place.

Analysts had speculated that this meant the U.S. planned to deploy the aircraft carrier USS George Washington to the Sea of Japan to avoid upsetting China, which has vehemently objected to the idea of the aircraft carrier operating in the Yellow Sea—even though the U.S. navy has long done operations there.

And indeed, South Korean Vice Defense Minister Chang Soo-man told the Associated Press that the exercises will go ahead in the “near future,” and said a U.S. aircraft carrier would only be deployed to the Sea of Japan, east of the Korean peninsula. U.S. officials would not confirm Chang’s comments.

The concern of some analysts is that refraining from sending the George Washington to the Yellow Sea will make it harder for the navy to operate in waters near China as freely as in years past, and turn every potential deployment into a subject of bilateral debate. Ralph Cossa, president of the Pacific Forum, a Hawaii-based arm of the Washington think tank the Center for Strategic and International Studies, told The Wall Street Journal the navy needs to assert its presence in the Yellow Sea by at least making a port call at Incheon, on the west coast of South Korea.

“We are setting a bad precedent and allowing China to expand its definition of core interests, making it more difficult and controversial next time we go to [the] Yellow Sea,” he said.

The U.S.-South Korea naval drills were intended as a display of bilateral unity against a belligerent North Korea after the March Cheonan incident. The drills have been delayed since June, following repeated objections by China that military drills in the Yellow Sea would further destabilize the region.
Some in China also see a precedent in the possible decision not to deploy the George Washington in the Yellow Sea—and they are celebrating. On Friday, the Global Times, a popular state-run newspaper that often runs nationalist fare, ran an editorial arguing that this case is a turning point in how the U.S. Navy operates near China. The editorial argued that the Yellow Sea should be seen as a “boundary marker” in the Pentagon’s future decision making. “The Chinese people’s endurance is not a spring that can be pressed over and over,” it said.

The Navy’s presence in the Yellow Sea isn’t new, nor has China previously so vehemently opposed U.S. operations there, U.S. officials say. But China’s efforts to rid its coastal waters of U.S. influence are not new, having manifested themselves several times in recent years. Last year, the Pentagon complained after a group of Chinese vessels aggressively challenged an unarmed U.S. naval surveillance ship in international waters off China’s southern coast. In 2001, a Chinese fighter jet intercepted and collided with a U.S. surveillance plane. The Chinese jet crashed and the U.S. plane was forced to making an emergency landing.

Even though U.S. operations in the Yellow Sea would take place in international waters, China challenges that foreign military ships should not operate in what the U.N. has designated the country’s “exclusive economic zone.” The 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea gives countries territorial waters of 12 nautical miles and economic zones of 200 nautical miles. While foreign ships can operate in the economic zones, China has argued that doesn’t apply to foreign military ships. Few other countries share China’s view about coastal waters.

While the George Washington may be headed to the Sea of Japan, the U.S. has made clear a portion of the exercises will still take place in the Yellow Sea. Even if this case marks a turning point in how the U.S. navy operates near China, it’s unlikely the military will begin viewing the Yellow Sea as off-limits. Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell said at a briefing this week that the military’s decision to operate in international waters is not a decision to be made by other countries. “Those determinations are made by us, and us alone,” he said.

– Brian Spegele

China opposes foreign warships, planes entering Yellow Sea and adjacent waters
19:03, July 08, 2010

China on Thursday said it firmly opposed any foreign warships or planes entering the Yellow Sea as well as adjacent waters that were engaged in activities that would impact on its security and interests.

Foreign Ministry spokesman Qin Gang made the remarks in response to a question on a scheduled joint naval drill between the United States and the Republic of Korea (ROK) at a regular news conference.

China has expressed serious concern to the relevant parties, he said, calling the relevant parties to exercise calm and refrain from doing things that might escalate tensions in the region.
.

 

[longbow]

Here is recent article on Stars and Stripes on the new missile. This missile being land based could means that the Chinese could launched as many volleys of missiles against a carrier group that needs to restock fuel and weaponary. In the end the mere threat of such a system will make a carrier group keep its distance.

Curious that this article came out at time when US decided to not move its carrier into Yellow Sea.


New Chinese anti-ship missile may complicate relations with U.S.
By Erik Slavin
Stars and Stripes
Published: July 19, 2010

Sailors man the rails aboard the aircraft carrier USS George Washington as the ship pulls into port at Yokosuka, Japan, to celebrate the 4th of July.
Adam K. Thomas/Courtesy of the U.S. NavyYOKOSUKA NAVAL BASE, Japan — The official photos from a major Asian security forum in Hanoi this week will likely show Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi dutifully smiling and shaking hands. But behind the scenes of the meeting, an ominous new Chinese weapons system that the Pentagon worries could alter the balance of power in the Pacific is further complicating the tense Sino-American military dialogue.

The advanced weapon, a medium-range anti-ship ballistic missile known as the Dong Feng 21D, is “nearing operational capability,” according to a report last year by the U.S. Office of Naval Intelligence. And if its targeting system proves accurate, the Dong Feng would rank as the world’s first mobile, land-based missile capable of hitting a moving aircraft carrier from nearly 2,000 miles away, depending on its payload and other factors.

Privately, U.S. military officials concede they are alarmed. One Navy official familiar with Pacific operations, who declined to be identified because he was not authorized to speak publicly, said the Navy has only a theoretical countermeasure against the Dong Feng 21D because its trajectory and other capabilities are still largely unknown.

But even in public, senior officials have begun alluding to the problem.

“We have some concerns over the very aggressive weapons [the Chinese] are procuring,” U.S. Navy 7th Fleet commander Vice Adm. John Bird told Stars and Stripes last month.

Experts say the Dong Feng’s basic design isn’t much different from the Cold War-era Pershing II developed by the United States. But it’s the land-based platform, the payload and the capability of a ballistic missile to redirect in mid-flight that especially concerns U.S. strategists.

“[Individually], the technical abilities are not unprecedented, but it’s a revolutionary combination of capabilities,” said Paul Giarra, a former Navy commander and Defense Department senior Japan country director who now works as a strategic consultant.

The missile would be formidable during a battle, but its consequences go beyond any hypothetical, cataclysmic wars. The Chinese could use the missile as leverage to try to weaken U.S. security pledges to Taiwan and other Asian allies, establishing vast “no-go” zones in the Western Pacific, analysts say.

Relations between China and Taiwan have warmed since 2008, making confrontation between the U.S. and China over Taiwan unlikely in the short-term.

But that could change, experts predict, if China believes its softer approach isn’t making progress toward unifying with Taiwan, which it considers a wayward province.

During past security crises in the South China Sea, Beijing has launched missiles and staged amphibious assault exercises near Taiwan to try to intimidate the island nation. It did so most notably in 1996, when China tried to influence the Taiwanese presidential election when it appeared that a candidate favoring Taiwan independence would win.

In response, the United States sent two aircraft carrier groups to the Taiwan Strait, after which China ceased its military escalation. The U.S. has dispatched an aircraft carrier near the Taiwan Strait during every successive presidential election in Taiwan.

An active Dong Feng 21D missile arsenal would make that strategy more dangerous, because it would give China the option of firing warning shots if the U.S. sails too close for China’s comfort, according to Toshi Yoshihara, an associate professor of strategy and policy at the U.S. Naval War College who recently completed a report on China’s missile strategy.

“A small dose of well-placed missiles, they seem to believe, might persuade the enemy to back down or to cease and desist,” Yoshihara said.

Such an escalation, however, could quickly lead to miscalculations.

If fired upon, the U.S. might “perceive what is intended as a warning shot or demonstration of resolve as a prelude to an all-out attack,” Yoshihara said.

In a conflict, the U.S. Aegis destroyers and cruisers that accompany aircraft carriers could be used to foil anti-ship missiles with SM-3 interceptor rockets, experts say.

But Giarra noted that interceptor capacity on Aegis-equipped ships isn’t enough to reliably defend against a volley of well-placed anti-ship ballistic missiles.
The U.S. could also employ other more traditional tactics by increasing its silent-running submarine activity to evade potential attacks, Giarra said. It could also move its surface ships beyond the missile’s range.

“One approach is to withdraw, of course,” Giarra said. “But that’s the whole point the Chinese are trying to make

 

[Loofydralb]

In this instance I think both the US and China are doing the responsible thing.

US and South Korea were going to whack a couple of North Korean gunboats under the guise of military exercises where their missles went wrong; in a retaliation of North's torpedo.

North Korea are prepared to use nukes should that happen, at least this is what they managed to convince the Chinese.

Thus the current outcome.

Anyway US made a big mistake in the past for not finishing of North Korea before South Korean economy took off. Now anything they do, Seoul will take the most shit.

 

[manokie]

US and South Korea were going to whack a couple of North Korean gunboats under the guise of military exercises where their missles went wrong; in a retaliation of North's torpedo.

Are you 100% sure North fired a torpedo at SK?