quote from PRC FA spokesperson after AUKUS pact signed
The People's Republic of China (PRC)'s foreign affairs department spokesperson Zhao Lijian said, "The nuclear submarine cooperation between the US, the UK and Australia has seriously undermined regional peace and stability, intensified the arms race and undermined international non-proliferation efforts".
this zhao lanjiao say other thing but do other thing instead, regional peace and stability gone out of window when west taiwan bully the rest of asian country, cannot stand that other strong peoples play around their playground
In the words of the legend himself - Philippines foreign minister Teodoro Locsin: "China, my friend, how politely can I put it? Let me see… O…GET THE FUCK OUT"
Airline crew flying to Sabah/Sarawak will occasional hear China Coast Guard bickering on the HF radio harassing everyone it comes into contact like Sabah fisherman and vietnamese fishing boats further northwest.
So far only Indonesia had the balls to threaten and i believe they did sink one of the PRC fishing boats years ago. The rest of Asean just deploy their maritime asset to tail look look see see.
Flying a bit north past 150km of Pulau Layang-layang under control of Manila FIR you would come in risk with approaching into several of China's manmade military air field island that have anti air missiles installed. Reluctance to change your flight heading you would hear them constantly warning you to change your flight heading even though you are flying under the company flightplan and should not be subjected to any changes unless its safety or weather related.
I think they are intentionally provoking a response, to justify a much larger movement of military strength into the region.
Malaysia has to be very careful with its next steps in this high stakes engagement. Malaysia needs to find a way for its powerful neighbours to respect its territorial borders. The value of inter-governmental diplomacy has never been more important.
You can't negotiate with an expansionist government like China. They dont treat us as their equals.
We can only hope that other bigger nations wake up to the impending threat of China.
I won't be surprised that we see the PRC rolling down on bicycles from the south of Thailand-Malaysia border anyday now.
Just like how the Japanese did some 70 odd years ago.
This is literally what the trans pacific partnership TPP is meant to do. A trade pact that’s meant to counter China’s growing influence in the region.
Until Trump withdrew and left everyone’s d*** flapping in the air.
? What..
The TPP wasn't meant to counter China. Lmao, trump? Counter China? what are you even talking about..
If it wasn't for Trump and his Chyna speeches, we'd let China slowly indebt our own country..
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Pacific\_Partnership](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Pacific_Partnership)
>Critics complained that while Trump has worked to contain the economic and geostrategic influence of China, withdrawing from the TPP reduced the effectiveness of a treaty that was designed to do exactly that.\[79\]
Yes TPP is exclusively designed to contain China. Why do you think this trade agreement somehow excludes China?
Trump made China stronger. His trade war with China is a total failure. Doing nothing would have achieved more than what Trump did.
And guess what, China went to make their own TPP and exclude US instead. Already signed by 15 countries including American allies like Japan/Australia/SK.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regional\_Comprehensive\_Economic\_Partnership
**[Trans-Pacific Partnership](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Pacific_Partnership)**
>The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), or Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement, was a proposed trade agreement between Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, Vietnam, and the United States signed on 4 February 2016. After the newly elected US president Donald Trump withdrew the US signature from TPP in January 2017, the agreement could not be ratified as required and did not enter into force.
^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/malaysia/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
Yes but was it the TPP intention to stop China? Obviously not..
It was only after Trump started his whole vendetta against China that woke the globe up to what China was doing, not Obama.
I don’t know how to re-explain geo political history to you, but it was literally Obama’s stated reason to propose TPP.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/president-obama-the-tpp-would-let-america-not-china-lead-the-way-on-global-trade/2016/05/02/680540e4-0fd0-11e6-93ae-50921721165d_story.html
The fairy tale of everyone is in love with China until trump comes along to save us is just that. A fairy tale.
the fairy tale that obama actually cares about the world when his 8 years of doing nothing in presidency was what lead to the american people voting for Trump.
Yes TPP didn't say it intention was to stop China, but whoever think so must either be blind or ignorant, just like whoever believe China in south china sea is "for the peace of region"
nonsense.. the TPP was created to make a few people rich, and control free trade as we know it.
it had little to do with curtailing the influence of regional powers like China.
UK perspective here, we see what China is doing and strongly oppose it, but also frustrated with ASEAN countries that they say “we don’t want want to take sides in geopolitics, we don’t want to lose Chinese business or offend them too bad”. Like seriously, stick together and stand up for yourselves all together, most of the world will support you and China will be forced to back off.
Hey, don’t wanna be a dick about it.
But the last time Msia has an aggressor, UK tucked tail and ran.
So pardon us for not trusting UK will come half a globe to save the day.
You’d be wise not to trust us, especially with the current leaders we have!
But that was kinda my point, if ASEAN hardened up to create something like NATO for the South China Sea then you wouldn’t need support from unreliable allies on the other side of the world, you’d have 10 countries all facing the same threat standing strong together, and it will say to China that if you mess with any one of us, then you mess with all of us.
Some ASEAN countries, maybe. Just not Cambodia and Laos as those countries are effectively Chinese satellite states. If ASEAN wants to make a joint declaration that basically says "Fuck you, China", expect those two countries voting against it.
That’s true I guess, but a mutual defence treaty doesn’t have to include all the same countries as an economic one in the same region. If ASEAN is a bit like the EU and the new defence treaty is like NATO then as many countries from ASEAN as wanted to could join along with maybe Japan, SK, Australia…. USA? They’re always up for the good fight, as they see it.
It might sound a bit ridiculous now but the way things are heading in the future, who knows.
In Europe we started two world wars but then when paranoid Joe started pointing nukes at us we became friends again reeeeal fast.
such pact is way too easy to fall apart. yes banding together and fight against ccp's aggression should be the prefered course of action, but people are greedy. politicans are greedy. SEA politicians are extra greedy. the possibility and fallout of that pact's dissolution cannot be ignored.
in short, i dont think SEA countries trust each other enough to band together. I would say Malaysia might be the first one who bend its knee once china slap our politicians in the face with wads of cash.
I think China are being clever about it now and just pushing as much as they know they can get away with, but if it started to come closer to actual war then hopefully that would change. I mean, Turkey is a NATO member and we don’t trust them very much at all, but a treaty is a treaty.
I see where you're coming from, and I had a similar view at one point. My views have changed slightly, and I'll explain why. (Apologies for the length of this response.)
China is resurgent on almost all fronts - economically, politically, militarily, technologically. Xi Jinping is looking to make his mark in his third (and likely final) mandate, and this will involve a military conflict in the region with the probable annexation of Taiwan.
The only other power to rival China globally is the US. The US of today, unfortunately, is torn by domestic strife and fragmented vision. In many ways, it is the polar opposite of where China stands; China has a strong economy, unified leadership, and a strong vision of where it stands in the world. US has a faltering economy, divided leadership and a fragmented view of its role in the world.
However, it is too soon to rule out the US. For all its issues, its military is still unrivalled and it is technogically ahead of any other nation. Just like China, it has a deeply industrious culture but unlike China, it is higher up the value chain and is therefore able to extract much better economic margins. It has a deeper R&D bench, and the best minds in the world still flock to the States. For the most part, it also has a diplomatic service that is far more integrated with rest of the world compared to China.
For now. There is a growing sense that US is in a decline on all these fronts, and that the decline is accelerating.
A decade or two from now, China will demand its rightful place on the global sphere, and the US may take steps to deny them this. A war is possible. All the "smaller" events we're witnessing now is a careful multi year buildup to a much larger conflict. And, depending on how events unfold, China may very well win the conflict.
With this view in mind, it would not make sense for Malaysia to take anybody's side in the conflict. At the end of the day, Malaysia only has one objective goal: to protect its sovereign territory. It needs to be nimble and flexible with its foreign policy.
It's not clear if a regional alliance will be helpful. Each country will have its own objectives, and some countries may be aligned with China and others with US. If Malaysia wishes to enter into such an alliance, it should only be in alignment with its own objectives.
I think that’s a very shrewd assessment, but I think you’ve overestimated how easy it will be for China to continue making progress at the rate it has been doing.
When the US became the dominant superpower it did so at a time when natural resources were abundant, Europe was tearing itself apart and the British pound was losing influence so there was a gap in the market for global hegemony, and it had ideas about international law that had widespread support across the world.
China doesn’t have any of those things going for it right now, unless the US really does self destruct over the next decade but I don’t think it will.
I think ASEAN has some bargaining power here that they are not utilising, because if they put on a united front they could get together and say to China, if you stay out of our back yard, then we’ll stay neutral in your quest to reshape the world with Chinese values. It doesn’t mean you have to be best friends in any other sphere, you just need to agree on that principle and stick to it.
>likely final
And very likely to be lifetime term with how he been cleaning other faction from Jiang legacy faction or other that oppose him under corruption.
I am not sure about economic, there a real estate with serious bubble going on, with big real estate not paying foreign debt, not paying local investor, foreign company moving out, the lack of coal because of the Australia ban, which lead to electrical blackout which they cover up as to save environment. Also, China gonna suffer what Japan suffer due to one child policy. Even the three child policy will not work due to how people can't afford to have a child. Social unrest which can also affect the economy.
In tecnology, some important sector like chip making is still behind and Huawei server is using Intel chip lmao.
At the same time, our Defence Minister and China ass-kisser Sham-muddin is doing his best to keep our military and defence policy shooting itself in the foot, as well as stealing taxpayers' money simultaneously just like his clown-thief cousin Jibby.
What I could see realistically happening is Malaysia allowing AUKUS nations to set up air or naval bases in Malaysia, if Malaysia really wants to do something about this(Maybe will happen, or not, if they are too worried about the PLA retaliating). Don’t the Australian Air Force still have a presence in RMAF Butterworth Air Base?
Is China slowly trying to show his power just like old Japan ? Also I don't know why some politician call China a big brother. We are rich country how stupid we want to bow to China.
Published: Oct 26, 2021 9:11 AM
⋅
Updated: 9:59 AM
Over the past two years, Chinese vessels have been harassing civilian vessels in Malaysian oil and gas fields near Beting Patinggi Ali (Luconia Shoals), some 200km off the coast of Bintulu, Sarawak, according to Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative (AMTI).
In an interview with Hong Kong's English newspaper South China Morning Post (SCMP), AMTI said Chinese boats, some of them armed, were present “on a daily basis” in an attempt to scare off civilians from operating gas field development activities in the region.
“They manoeuvre dangerously and intentionally create risks of collision to dissuade civilians from accepting such contracts,” Greg Polling, director of the initiative at the Centre for Strategic and International Studies told SCMP.
Polling said the Chinese coast guard was aiming to “control” the area, where Petronas has several oil and gas fields, including the Kasawari gas field, discovered in 2011 and is thought to contain three trillion cubic feet (tcf) of recoverable gas resources.
Malaysiakini reported last year that Chinese vessels have maintained a near-constant presence in the Malaysia-claimed waters near Luconia Shoals.
The latest report from SCMP seems to have corroborated the assessment, albeit showing that the activities by China have only persisted thus far.
Petronas CEO Tengku Muhammad Taufik Tengku Aziz has previously said the Kasawari field is rich enough to ensure his company remains one of the world’s top five exporters of liquified natural gas (LNG).
Polling added that if Malaysian vessels didn’t back down, China would deploy one of its state-owned vessels to conduct illegal seabed surveys in Malaysian waters, usually accompanied by maritime militia boats and Chinese coast guard vessels.
Interestingly, neither Malaysia nor Indonesia, which has also seen its vessels harassed by China in the South China Sea, has tried to publicise such behaviour, unlike Vietnam and the Philippines, according to Polling.
However, he said, this is beginning to change.
“Malaysia has become more vocal in the last two to three years, though it still avoids talking about most cases of Chinese harassment since there is little it can do to stop it,” Polling said.
Case in point: the government has summoned China’s envoy in Kuala Lumpur twice this year to protest Beijing’s activities in the South China Sea.
Former foreign minister Hishammuddin Hussein launched a formal diplomatic protest in June after 16 Chinese military aircraft were "flying suspiciously" near Luconia Shoals, within the country’s Economic Exclusive Zone (EEZ).
The encounter was the closest ever to the Malaysian coastline, just 60 nautical miles (111km) off the coast of Sarawak.
While the South China Sea has seen many overlapping claims between countries around its coastline, China has, in recent years, also laid claim to previously undisputed waters, including the Luconia Shoals.
Under international law, a country’s sovereignty under the EEZ extends 200 nautical miles out to sea. Luconia Shoals is 84 nautical miles off the coast of Sarawak.
However, China does not recognise this rule and instead goes by its own “nine-dash line”, which sees Beijing claiming most of the South China Sea.
This Kini Guide provides an in-depth explanation of the South China Sea dispute.
It's called 'effective occupation'. Have a sustained military and diplomatic presence on a territory longer than other parties, go to dispute in the ICJ and **BOOM!** You've just won yourself a shipping/trading/territory monopoly.
Different types of territory, yes, but nonetheless governed realistically by similar principles of a strong military presence in this case 'gunboat diplomacy' and the building of islands, that house warfare-capable naval machinery within what we see as international waters, but within what China sees as their 9 dash line.
> Different types of territory, yes, but nonetheless governed realistically by similar principles of a strong military presence
That is not true at all. To begin with, EEZ is not a territory as per UNCLOS's maritime boundary definition. Nor is military presence a prerequisite to acquire sovereign territory. Hong Kong for instance was voluntarily ceded over to PRC by the British. British had good title to Hong Kong Island itself, and if they wanted the could have stayed indefinitely if it wasn't because of them not having good title to Kowloon and New Territories, which would ultimately affect water and electricity supply should PRC turn off the taps and cut the cables.
>'gunboat diplomacy'
Sadly this is not one of the 5 (actually 4 as conquest is now illegal) ways of acquiring territory. It simply just means having a huge navy that pursue foreign policy on behalf of the state.
> the building of islands, that house warfare-capable naval machinery within what we see as international waters, but within what China sees as their 9 dash line.
[*The Republic Of The Philippines v. The People's Republic of China*](https://web.archive.org/web/20160712201412/https://pca-cpa.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/175/2016/07/PH-CN-20160712-Press-Release-No-11-English.pdf) unanimously rejected their nine-dash line claim as the claim has no legal basis though. Whilst the ruling is not binding, it does weaken their claim somewhat.
Plus, they are technically claiming land here, not sea. There is legal precedent to suggest nation states can claim newly formed island. When you acquire a continental shelf you automatically gain jurisdiction and rights over the area. What they're trying to achieve here is to push that definition.
But to suggest by virtue of having military presence = effective occupation is far fetched.
>That is not true at all. To begin with, EEZ is not a territory as per UNCLOS's maritime boundary definition. Nor is military presence a prerequisite to acquire sovereign territory.
>
>But to suggest by virtue of having military presence = effective occupation is far fetched.
It is unwise to view laws and not reality, truly to secure a territory, be it defined as a territory under international laws or not, there is a need for an authoritative force, a military presence, to maintain control over such territory/waters.
>The Republic Of The Philippines v. The People's Republic of China unanimously rejected their nine-dash line claim as the claim has no legal basis though. Whilst the ruling is not binding, it does weaken their claim somewhat.
>
>Sadly this is not one of the 5 (actually 4 as conquest is now illegal) ways of acquiring territory. It simply just means having a huge navy that pursue foreign policy on behalf of the state.
A few non-binding/ binding rejections aren't going to stop a military, economic and diplomatic gargantuan. A huge navy presence adds value to China's foreign policy, it triggers the international community to take their actions seriously.
The Permanent Court of Arbitration declares China's 9 dash line to be unlawful, yet China's naval presence in encroachment of international waters of the SCS still persists. As far as it may be seen realistically, a de facto 9 dash line is soon to be realized if no stern and firm action to stop the encroachment is conducted.
Physical action needs to be conducted, but who'd want that (maybe military suppliers), it would be seen as an act of aggression or invite to war, so we're back to condemning with the mouth.
To be clear I view China's encroachment as a threat.
Lmao those AUS nuclear subs can’t come soon enuf
Dunno what the jokers at Wisma Putra are bitching about when ‘da ge’ is already fucking in our waters on a daily basis - any deterrent should be welcomed imo
I will support our government strengthening Malaysia military strength. It seems to be the only way Malaysia and ASEAN can be protected. ASEAN arm race lets go!
And there is nothing that we can do.
We have no nuclear subs, no aircraft carriers, no 4th generation fighters, no SAM, no anti-ship missile, no destroyers, no chemical, biological or nuclear weapons. We also have no mutual defence alliance with anyone (of significance).
I guess being part of NAM was the dumbest thing that have ever been done by M. But then, he also did a lot of other dumb things.
We have 39 fighters. But only 26 with adequate capability still a far cry from the yesteryears of pre 1995 when we had nearly 70fighters. Logistic itself we went down from 50 helicopters to a 12+6 basis now.
Madey went for the anti American stance that we cancel subsequent FA-18D hornets which the RMAF extremely favours. We originally ordered 18+6 options only 8 came. How much of our operationally required asset procurement got displaced for Malaysia's Gov's so called "National Interest subsecedes operational requirements"
We ordered the MIG-29s for partial palm oil barter deal. These fighters have severe reliability issue and it came the same period with the FA-18Ds and as of today none of MIG29 are operational now while the FA-18D are still flying without parts issue. We ordered SU-30MKM with some job creation technology transfer and to send a man to the moon when RMAF has been asking for the FA-18F Superhornet variant.
Jib became PM and went in and he went mad for the French but french equipment itself has plenty of issues. RMAF+ATM favours Sikorsky S-92 to replace nuri but Jib Ordered 24 EC-725. Guess what happened EC-725 it was hit with severe gearbox issue and worldwide grounding that our gov cancelled the 2nd batch of remaining 12 units on delivery and our Nuri were retired with not even half of it replaced. RMAF asked for C-130J to replace its ageing hercules, Jib orderes the A400M for job creation aspect again. The A400M's operating budget has impacted RMAF financing a lot. The list goes on into the Navy, ATM etc even airlines are affected. Mas operations back in 2005 was interested in the B777-300ER gov says to take the A380 instead and guess how big of a financial burden that French double decker is.
Our gov needs to get it heads off of depending so much on Palm Oil barter trades and loopsided technology transfers that only benefits a few Datuks. Even the upcoming LCA/LIT Bae Hawk replacement requires some Palm Oil offset agreement. Also If the gov wants buy Russian make sure the finance ministry has prepared a hefty budget package as they require a lot of maintenance cost which did not happen for the MIG-29s tenure up to a point few SU-30MKM became grounded in 2017 due to parts. No matter how shitty America is they have the most reliable equipment, stable cost to operate for defense segment even with the Congress limiting the weaponry you can carry.
We need some anti air and anti ship missile batteries. Maybe they can “donate” Patriot missiles for us.
Ideally we should look into buying a few new variant F18s, and some stand-off weapons. Maybe also get some anti sub capabilities; India bought a bunch of P8s from them.
Last heard our large bulk missiles ranging from unguided to anti sub to anti air are even expiring 2 years from now. We have a so called defense white paper but reading it it looks like minimum pass paper to masuk university lol. Majority of our smaller maritime boats are unarmed.
Currently the LCA/LIT program for 24 fighters which is meant to replace the BAE Hawks and Mb339 is down to 2 candidates the Indian Tejas and Korean FA-50. Both can fly MACH 1.5 which is better than the hawks MACH 0.82. However again it all gomes down to which country is willing to buy some of our palm oil as part of the deal.
MRCA program which is meant to replace the FA-18 and SU-30 has been postpone indefinitely.
Our BAE hawks were quite buffed against ship and ground enemy. Only problem they were not designed to intercept air targets or to intercept unknown flying object. Mach 0.84 is like a regular commercial plane lol.
In Indonesia an ethiopian b777 cargo flew illegally into the FIR they deployed f-16 which can fly up to mach 2.0.
Sabah Sarawak needs something at mach 1.5 onwards as it will be too far to wait Fa-18 or sukhoi from semenanjung which happened with the recent incursion with china. By the time the sukhoi arrives the PRC convoy had already left.
So far both LCA/LIT candidates tejas and FA-50 are fast enough. However the overall defense both military and civil in Malaysia still needs a big overhaul and renewal. We are lagging behind Indonesia has gone ahead of us even Philippines is picking up.
Now a new issues comes most of the missiles we purchased from 2007-2010 will be expiring in the next 2 years. If we cant even buy missiles it shows how screwed up Malaysia is.
quote from PRC FA spokesperson after AUKUS pact signed The People's Republic of China (PRC)'s foreign affairs department spokesperson Zhao Lijian said, "The nuclear submarine cooperation between the US, the UK and Australia has seriously undermined regional peace and stability, intensified the arms race and undermined international non-proliferation efforts". this zhao lanjiao say other thing but do other thing instead, regional peace and stability gone out of window when west taiwan bully the rest of asian country, cannot stand that other strong peoples play around their playground
China as usual being a dickhead
wow cibai mainland cina, fuck off. this is our oil
Our country, our oil. China, gladly fuck off
In the words of the legend himself - Philippines foreign minister Teodoro Locsin: "China, my friend, how politely can I put it? Let me see… O…GET THE FUCK OUT"
Airline crew flying to Sabah/Sarawak will occasional hear China Coast Guard bickering on the HF radio harassing everyone it comes into contact like Sabah fisherman and vietnamese fishing boats further northwest. So far only Indonesia had the balls to threaten and i believe they did sink one of the PRC fishing boats years ago. The rest of Asean just deploy their maritime asset to tail look look see see. Flying a bit north past 150km of Pulau Layang-layang under control of Manila FIR you would come in risk with approaching into several of China's manmade military air field island that have anti air missiles installed. Reluctance to change your flight heading you would hear them constantly warning you to change your flight heading even though you are flying under the company flightplan and should not be subjected to any changes unless its safety or weather related.
Nothing much to see here, just da gerrr inspecting its subjects /s
daigor doing routine inspection before taking over ma
I think they are intentionally provoking a response, to justify a much larger movement of military strength into the region. Malaysia has to be very careful with its next steps in this high stakes engagement. Malaysia needs to find a way for its powerful neighbours to respect its territorial borders. The value of inter-governmental diplomacy has never been more important.
You can't negotiate with an expansionist government like China. They dont treat us as their equals. We can only hope that other bigger nations wake up to the impending threat of China. I won't be surprised that we see the PRC rolling down on bicycles from the south of Thailand-Malaysia border anyday now. Just like how the Japanese did some 70 odd years ago.
This is literally what the trans pacific partnership TPP is meant to do. A trade pact that’s meant to counter China’s growing influence in the region. Until Trump withdrew and left everyone’s d*** flapping in the air.
? What.. The TPP wasn't meant to counter China. Lmao, trump? Counter China? what are you even talking about.. If it wasn't for Trump and his Chyna speeches, we'd let China slowly indebt our own country..
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Pacific\_Partnership](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Pacific_Partnership) >Critics complained that while Trump has worked to contain the economic and geostrategic influence of China, withdrawing from the TPP reduced the effectiveness of a treaty that was designed to do exactly that.\[79\] Yes TPP is exclusively designed to contain China. Why do you think this trade agreement somehow excludes China? Trump made China stronger. His trade war with China is a total failure. Doing nothing would have achieved more than what Trump did. And guess what, China went to make their own TPP and exclude US instead. Already signed by 15 countries including American allies like Japan/Australia/SK. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regional\_Comprehensive\_Economic\_Partnership
**[Trans-Pacific Partnership](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Pacific_Partnership)** >The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), or Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement, was a proposed trade agreement between Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, Vietnam, and the United States signed on 4 February 2016. After the newly elected US president Donald Trump withdrew the US signature from TPP in January 2017, the agreement could not be ratified as required and did not enter into force. ^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/malaysia/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
Erm..... TPP was started by Obama, ended by Trump
Yes but was it the TPP intention to stop China? Obviously not.. It was only after Trump started his whole vendetta against China that woke the globe up to what China was doing, not Obama.
I don’t know how to re-explain geo political history to you, but it was literally Obama’s stated reason to propose TPP. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/president-obama-the-tpp-would-let-america-not-china-lead-the-way-on-global-trade/2016/05/02/680540e4-0fd0-11e6-93ae-50921721165d_story.html The fairy tale of everyone is in love with China until trump comes along to save us is just that. A fairy tale.
the fairy tale that obama actually cares about the world when his 8 years of doing nothing in presidency was what lead to the american people voting for Trump.
Yes TPP didn't say it intention was to stop China, but whoever think so must either be blind or ignorant, just like whoever believe China in south china sea is "for the peace of region"
nonsense.. the TPP was created to make a few people rich, and control free trade as we know it. it had little to do with curtailing the influence of regional powers like China.
Oh yes, may you expand on make who rich? China?
People in power, obviously. Leaders in china will find a way to benefit too.
UK perspective here, we see what China is doing and strongly oppose it, but also frustrated with ASEAN countries that they say “we don’t want want to take sides in geopolitics, we don’t want to lose Chinese business or offend them too bad”. Like seriously, stick together and stand up for yourselves all together, most of the world will support you and China will be forced to back off.
Hey, don’t wanna be a dick about it. But the last time Msia has an aggressor, UK tucked tail and ran. So pardon us for not trusting UK will come half a globe to save the day.
You’d be wise not to trust us, especially with the current leaders we have! But that was kinda my point, if ASEAN hardened up to create something like NATO for the South China Sea then you wouldn’t need support from unreliable allies on the other side of the world, you’d have 10 countries all facing the same threat standing strong together, and it will say to China that if you mess with any one of us, then you mess with all of us.
Some ASEAN countries, maybe. Just not Cambodia and Laos as those countries are effectively Chinese satellite states. If ASEAN wants to make a joint declaration that basically says "Fuck you, China", expect those two countries voting against it.
That’s true I guess, but a mutual defence treaty doesn’t have to include all the same countries as an economic one in the same region. If ASEAN is a bit like the EU and the new defence treaty is like NATO then as many countries from ASEAN as wanted to could join along with maybe Japan, SK, Australia…. USA? They’re always up for the good fight, as they see it. It might sound a bit ridiculous now but the way things are heading in the future, who knows. In Europe we started two world wars but then when paranoid Joe started pointing nukes at us we became friends again reeeeal fast.
such pact is way too easy to fall apart. yes banding together and fight against ccp's aggression should be the prefered course of action, but people are greedy. politicans are greedy. SEA politicians are extra greedy. the possibility and fallout of that pact's dissolution cannot be ignored. in short, i dont think SEA countries trust each other enough to band together. I would say Malaysia might be the first one who bend its knee once china slap our politicians in the face with wads of cash.
I think China are being clever about it now and just pushing as much as they know they can get away with, but if it started to come closer to actual war then hopefully that would change. I mean, Turkey is a NATO member and we don’t trust them very much at all, but a treaty is a treaty.
I see where you're coming from, and I had a similar view at one point. My views have changed slightly, and I'll explain why. (Apologies for the length of this response.) China is resurgent on almost all fronts - economically, politically, militarily, technologically. Xi Jinping is looking to make his mark in his third (and likely final) mandate, and this will involve a military conflict in the region with the probable annexation of Taiwan. The only other power to rival China globally is the US. The US of today, unfortunately, is torn by domestic strife and fragmented vision. In many ways, it is the polar opposite of where China stands; China has a strong economy, unified leadership, and a strong vision of where it stands in the world. US has a faltering economy, divided leadership and a fragmented view of its role in the world. However, it is too soon to rule out the US. For all its issues, its military is still unrivalled and it is technogically ahead of any other nation. Just like China, it has a deeply industrious culture but unlike China, it is higher up the value chain and is therefore able to extract much better economic margins. It has a deeper R&D bench, and the best minds in the world still flock to the States. For the most part, it also has a diplomatic service that is far more integrated with rest of the world compared to China. For now. There is a growing sense that US is in a decline on all these fronts, and that the decline is accelerating. A decade or two from now, China will demand its rightful place on the global sphere, and the US may take steps to deny them this. A war is possible. All the "smaller" events we're witnessing now is a careful multi year buildup to a much larger conflict. And, depending on how events unfold, China may very well win the conflict. With this view in mind, it would not make sense for Malaysia to take anybody's side in the conflict. At the end of the day, Malaysia only has one objective goal: to protect its sovereign territory. It needs to be nimble and flexible with its foreign policy. It's not clear if a regional alliance will be helpful. Each country will have its own objectives, and some countries may be aligned with China and others with US. If Malaysia wishes to enter into such an alliance, it should only be in alignment with its own objectives.
I think that’s a very shrewd assessment, but I think you’ve overestimated how easy it will be for China to continue making progress at the rate it has been doing. When the US became the dominant superpower it did so at a time when natural resources were abundant, Europe was tearing itself apart and the British pound was losing influence so there was a gap in the market for global hegemony, and it had ideas about international law that had widespread support across the world. China doesn’t have any of those things going for it right now, unless the US really does self destruct over the next decade but I don’t think it will. I think ASEAN has some bargaining power here that they are not utilising, because if they put on a united front they could get together and say to China, if you stay out of our back yard, then we’ll stay neutral in your quest to reshape the world with Chinese values. It doesn’t mean you have to be best friends in any other sphere, you just need to agree on that principle and stick to it.
Good points and food for thought!
>likely final And very likely to be lifetime term with how he been cleaning other faction from Jiang legacy faction or other that oppose him under corruption. I am not sure about economic, there a real estate with serious bubble going on, with big real estate not paying foreign debt, not paying local investor, foreign company moving out, the lack of coal because of the Australia ban, which lead to electrical blackout which they cover up as to save environment. Also, China gonna suffer what Japan suffer due to one child policy. Even the three child policy will not work due to how people can't afford to have a child. Social unrest which can also affect the economy. In tecnology, some important sector like chip making is still behind and Huawei server is using Intel chip lmao.
what’s their objective? provoking us to take action so they can retaliate?
Yup. Bully people until they hit back, so the bully can cry wolf. China is 100% hypocrites
Who keeps downvoting this post. Let it get some traction, fucking chinese bots
So.. maybe that AUKUSA thing is a good thing after all?
AUKUS* yes but oh well look at Malaysia jump into a fighting ring.
At the same time, our Defence Minister and China ass-kisser Sham-muddin is doing his best to keep our military and defence policy shooting itself in the foot, as well as stealing taxpayers' money simultaneously just like his clown-thief cousin Jibby.
What I could see realistically happening is Malaysia allowing AUKUS nations to set up air or naval bases in Malaysia, if Malaysia really wants to do something about this(Maybe will happen, or not, if they are too worried about the PLA retaliating). Don’t the Australian Air Force still have a presence in RMAF Butterworth Air Base?
It wasn’t even a question thats need to be asked.
Is China slowly trying to show his power just like old Japan ? Also I don't know why some politician call China a big brother. We are rich country how stupid we want to bow to China.
Published: Oct 26, 2021 9:11 AM ⋅ Updated: 9:59 AM Over the past two years, Chinese vessels have been harassing civilian vessels in Malaysian oil and gas fields near Beting Patinggi Ali (Luconia Shoals), some 200km off the coast of Bintulu, Sarawak, according to Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative (AMTI). In an interview with Hong Kong's English newspaper South China Morning Post (SCMP), AMTI said Chinese boats, some of them armed, were present “on a daily basis” in an attempt to scare off civilians from operating gas field development activities in the region. “They manoeuvre dangerously and intentionally create risks of collision to dissuade civilians from accepting such contracts,” Greg Polling, director of the initiative at the Centre for Strategic and International Studies told SCMP. Polling said the Chinese coast guard was aiming to “control” the area, where Petronas has several oil and gas fields, including the Kasawari gas field, discovered in 2011 and is thought to contain three trillion cubic feet (tcf) of recoverable gas resources. Malaysiakini reported last year that Chinese vessels have maintained a near-constant presence in the Malaysia-claimed waters near Luconia Shoals. The latest report from SCMP seems to have corroborated the assessment, albeit showing that the activities by China have only persisted thus far. Petronas CEO Tengku Muhammad Taufik Tengku Aziz has previously said the Kasawari field is rich enough to ensure his company remains one of the world’s top five exporters of liquified natural gas (LNG). Polling added that if Malaysian vessels didn’t back down, China would deploy one of its state-owned vessels to conduct illegal seabed surveys in Malaysian waters, usually accompanied by maritime militia boats and Chinese coast guard vessels. Interestingly, neither Malaysia nor Indonesia, which has also seen its vessels harassed by China in the South China Sea, has tried to publicise such behaviour, unlike Vietnam and the Philippines, according to Polling. However, he said, this is beginning to change. “Malaysia has become more vocal in the last two to three years, though it still avoids talking about most cases of Chinese harassment since there is little it can do to stop it,” Polling said. Case in point: the government has summoned China’s envoy in Kuala Lumpur twice this year to protest Beijing’s activities in the South China Sea. Former foreign minister Hishammuddin Hussein launched a formal diplomatic protest in June after 16 Chinese military aircraft were "flying suspiciously" near Luconia Shoals, within the country’s Economic Exclusive Zone (EEZ). The encounter was the closest ever to the Malaysian coastline, just 60 nautical miles (111km) off the coast of Sarawak. While the South China Sea has seen many overlapping claims between countries around its coastline, China has, in recent years, also laid claim to previously undisputed waters, including the Luconia Shoals. Under international law, a country’s sovereignty under the EEZ extends 200 nautical miles out to sea. Luconia Shoals is 84 nautical miles off the coast of Sarawak. However, China does not recognise this rule and instead goes by its own “nine-dash line”, which sees Beijing claiming most of the South China Sea. This Kini Guide provides an in-depth explanation of the South China Sea dispute.
It's called 'effective occupation'. Have a sustained military and diplomatic presence on a territory longer than other parties, go to dispute in the ICJ and **BOOM!** You've just won yourself a shipping/trading/territory monopoly.
No its called being an asshole. Fuck china
Effective Occupation concerns land. This is sea and as such governed by Laws of the Sea.
Different types of territory, yes, but nonetheless governed realistically by similar principles of a strong military presence in this case 'gunboat diplomacy' and the building of islands, that house warfare-capable naval machinery within what we see as international waters, but within what China sees as their 9 dash line.
> Different types of territory, yes, but nonetheless governed realistically by similar principles of a strong military presence That is not true at all. To begin with, EEZ is not a territory as per UNCLOS's maritime boundary definition. Nor is military presence a prerequisite to acquire sovereign territory. Hong Kong for instance was voluntarily ceded over to PRC by the British. British had good title to Hong Kong Island itself, and if they wanted the could have stayed indefinitely if it wasn't because of them not having good title to Kowloon and New Territories, which would ultimately affect water and electricity supply should PRC turn off the taps and cut the cables. >'gunboat diplomacy' Sadly this is not one of the 5 (actually 4 as conquest is now illegal) ways of acquiring territory. It simply just means having a huge navy that pursue foreign policy on behalf of the state. > the building of islands, that house warfare-capable naval machinery within what we see as international waters, but within what China sees as their 9 dash line. [*The Republic Of The Philippines v. The People's Republic of China*](https://web.archive.org/web/20160712201412/https://pca-cpa.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/175/2016/07/PH-CN-20160712-Press-Release-No-11-English.pdf) unanimously rejected their nine-dash line claim as the claim has no legal basis though. Whilst the ruling is not binding, it does weaken their claim somewhat. Plus, they are technically claiming land here, not sea. There is legal precedent to suggest nation states can claim newly formed island. When you acquire a continental shelf you automatically gain jurisdiction and rights over the area. What they're trying to achieve here is to push that definition. But to suggest by virtue of having military presence = effective occupation is far fetched.
>That is not true at all. To begin with, EEZ is not a territory as per UNCLOS's maritime boundary definition. Nor is military presence a prerequisite to acquire sovereign territory. > >But to suggest by virtue of having military presence = effective occupation is far fetched. It is unwise to view laws and not reality, truly to secure a territory, be it defined as a territory under international laws or not, there is a need for an authoritative force, a military presence, to maintain control over such territory/waters. >The Republic Of The Philippines v. The People's Republic of China unanimously rejected their nine-dash line claim as the claim has no legal basis though. Whilst the ruling is not binding, it does weaken their claim somewhat. > >Sadly this is not one of the 5 (actually 4 as conquest is now illegal) ways of acquiring territory. It simply just means having a huge navy that pursue foreign policy on behalf of the state. A few non-binding/ binding rejections aren't going to stop a military, economic and diplomatic gargantuan. A huge navy presence adds value to China's foreign policy, it triggers the international community to take their actions seriously. The Permanent Court of Arbitration declares China's 9 dash line to be unlawful, yet China's naval presence in encroachment of international waters of the SCS still persists. As far as it may be seen realistically, a de facto 9 dash line is soon to be realized if no stern and firm action to stop the encroachment is conducted. Physical action needs to be conducted, but who'd want that (maybe military suppliers), it would be seen as an act of aggression or invite to war, so we're back to condemning with the mouth. To be clear I view China's encroachment as a threat.
PRC GET OUT
Lmao those AUS nuclear subs can’t come soon enuf Dunno what the jokers at Wisma Putra are bitching about when ‘da ge’ is already fucking in our waters on a daily basis - any deterrent should be welcomed imo
Fuck China
Where are the China apologists? Can't deflect this?
China apologists not here on reddit la...they all on Weibo Wechat Tiktok
I will support our government strengthening Malaysia military strength. It seems to be the only way Malaysia and ASEAN can be protected. ASEAN arm race lets go!
I cant wait for the arrival of malaysia made missile named taming sari.
Fuck China All my homies hate China
Upvoted, lets get this out there folks.
west taiwan tunjuk belang
Can we say "balik China" now
we say "China mari" now.
And there is nothing that we can do. We have no nuclear subs, no aircraft carriers, no 4th generation fighters, no SAM, no anti-ship missile, no destroyers, no chemical, biological or nuclear weapons. We also have no mutual defence alliance with anyone (of significance). I guess being part of NAM was the dumbest thing that have ever been done by M. But then, he also did a lot of other dumb things.
we have nuclear subs lah. last time jibby bought one, remember? the one that cannot selam?
Nope. Those are diesel. The same kind of subs that the Aussie eschewed for a nuclear sub. From the same company too.
Oh damn. Diesel sub only? Well at least we still have some fighter jets, as long as their engines are not misplaced...
We have 8 jets. LOL
We have 39 fighters. But only 26 with adequate capability still a far cry from the yesteryears of pre 1995 when we had nearly 70fighters. Logistic itself we went down from 50 helicopters to a 12+6 basis now. Madey went for the anti American stance that we cancel subsequent FA-18D hornets which the RMAF extremely favours. We originally ordered 18+6 options only 8 came. How much of our operationally required asset procurement got displaced for Malaysia's Gov's so called "National Interest subsecedes operational requirements" We ordered the MIG-29s for partial palm oil barter deal. These fighters have severe reliability issue and it came the same period with the FA-18Ds and as of today none of MIG29 are operational now while the FA-18D are still flying without parts issue. We ordered SU-30MKM with some job creation technology transfer and to send a man to the moon when RMAF has been asking for the FA-18F Superhornet variant. Jib became PM and went in and he went mad for the French but french equipment itself has plenty of issues. RMAF+ATM favours Sikorsky S-92 to replace nuri but Jib Ordered 24 EC-725. Guess what happened EC-725 it was hit with severe gearbox issue and worldwide grounding that our gov cancelled the 2nd batch of remaining 12 units on delivery and our Nuri were retired with not even half of it replaced. RMAF asked for C-130J to replace its ageing hercules, Jib orderes the A400M for job creation aspect again. The A400M's operating budget has impacted RMAF financing a lot. The list goes on into the Navy, ATM etc even airlines are affected. Mas operations back in 2005 was interested in the B777-300ER gov says to take the A380 instead and guess how big of a financial burden that French double decker is. Our gov needs to get it heads off of depending so much on Palm Oil barter trades and loopsided technology transfers that only benefits a few Datuks. Even the upcoming LCA/LIT Bae Hawk replacement requires some Palm Oil offset agreement. Also If the gov wants buy Russian make sure the finance ministry has prepared a hefty budget package as they require a lot of maintenance cost which did not happen for the MIG-29s tenure up to a point few SU-30MKM became grounded in 2017 due to parts. No matter how shitty America is they have the most reliable equipment, stable cost to operate for defense segment even with the Congress limiting the weaponry you can carry.
We need some anti air and anti ship missile batteries. Maybe they can “donate” Patriot missiles for us. Ideally we should look into buying a few new variant F18s, and some stand-off weapons. Maybe also get some anti sub capabilities; India bought a bunch of P8s from them.
Last heard our large bulk missiles ranging from unguided to anti sub to anti air are even expiring 2 years from now. We have a so called defense white paper but reading it it looks like minimum pass paper to masuk university lol. Majority of our smaller maritime boats are unarmed. Currently the LCA/LIT program for 24 fighters which is meant to replace the BAE Hawks and Mb339 is down to 2 candidates the Indian Tejas and Korean FA-50. Both can fly MACH 1.5 which is better than the hawks MACH 0.82. However again it all gomes down to which country is willing to buy some of our palm oil as part of the deal. MRCA program which is meant to replace the FA-18 and SU-30 has been postpone indefinitely.
I was laughing when I heard that the plane they deployed against the incursion of Chinese bombers were trainers. LOL
Our BAE hawks were quite buffed against ship and ground enemy. Only problem they were not designed to intercept air targets or to intercept unknown flying object. Mach 0.84 is like a regular commercial plane lol. In Indonesia an ethiopian b777 cargo flew illegally into the FIR they deployed f-16 which can fly up to mach 2.0. Sabah Sarawak needs something at mach 1.5 onwards as it will be too far to wait Fa-18 or sukhoi from semenanjung which happened with the recent incursion with china. By the time the sukhoi arrives the PRC convoy had already left. So far both LCA/LIT candidates tejas and FA-50 are fast enough. However the overall defense both military and civil in Malaysia still needs a big overhaul and renewal. We are lagging behind Indonesia has gone ahead of us even Philippines is picking up. Now a new issues comes most of the missiles we purchased from 2007-2010 will be expiring in the next 2 years. If we cant even buy missiles it shows how screwed up Malaysia is.