China Stealing Land, Exploiting it

In part, JapanTimes: It’s the first time the leaders of Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, Brunei, Vietnam, Laos, Myanmar and Cambodia have held a stand-alone meeting in the U.S. China is not an ASEAN member, but its territorial claims over disputed waters have raised international concerns and heightened tensions with some member countries.

Obama said trade between the U.S. and ASEAN had increased 55 percent since he took office. The region is now the U.S.’s fourth-largest goods trade partner. U.S. companies are also the largest source of foreign investment in its member nations, he said.

Obama said he wants to build on that progress “so that growth and development is sustainable and inclusive and benefits all people.” More here.

China Reclaimed Land for South China Sea Anti-Submarine Helicopter Base Near Vietnam

PLAN Chinese Z-18F Anti-Submarine Helicopter

PLAN Chinese Z-18F Anti-Submarine Helicopter

The People’s Liberation Army is building a South China Sea helicopter base that could be a key node in a Chinese anti-submarine warfare (ASW) network across the region, according to new satellite images and analysis shared with USNI News on Friday.

The imagery — first published on news site The Diplomat — show what appears to be extensive reclamation work to build could easily be an ASW helicopter base on Duncan Island, about 200 miles from the coast of Vietnam in the disputed Paracel Islands.

The base “could signal a step-up in China’s ASW capabilities across the South China Sea. A network of helicopter bases and refueling stops scattered across the South China Sea, using no more than the bases China is already known to be building, would make almost any coordinate in the sea reachable,” read the analysis by Victor Robert Lee.
“By hopscotching between bases, the [ASW] helicopter fleet would be unconstrained by fuel range or limited numbers of ship-borne landing berths, creating a continuous and contiguous web of surveillance and response capability.”

thediplomat_2016-02-12_15-55-05The analysis went on to say “such a web would have utility beyond anti-submarine warfare, and would probably reshape surface ship and aerial combat strategies in the region,” Lee wrote.

In reaction to the revelation, Pentagon officials reiterated their call for all South China Sea nations to island reclamation work, in a Sunday statement to USNI News

“The United Sates continues to call on all claimants to halt land reclamation, construction and militarization of features in the South China Sea,” spokesman Cmdr. Bill Urban told USNI News. “While the United States does not take a position on sovereignty claims to land features, we have growing concerns about China’s pattern of assertive behavior, which creates uncertainties about China’s strategic intentions.”

Naval analyst Eric Wertheim told USNI News last week, if the analysis holds up, it would give the Chinese more military options regionally.

“If it turns out to be true. It’s another example of China excreting its effort to control the South China Sea,” the author of the U.S. Naval Institute’s Combat Fleets of the World said.
“From a military perspective it certainly has an impact as these bases can serve as unsinkable aircraft carriers.”

According to Wertheim, the bases could sustain and act as lily pads for the PLAN’s new Changhe Z-18F ASW variant – based on the French SA 321 Super Frelon heavy lift helicopter – which have a range of 450 nautical miles. The Duncan Island installation would put the helicopters easily in range of Vietnam’s maritime territory.

thediplomat_2016-02-12_15-55-13In September, Pacific Command commander Adm. Harry Harris told the Senate how he viewed the expanded installations across the entire region.

“If you look at all of these facilities — and you could imagine a network of missiles sites, runways for their fifth generation fighters and surveillance sites and all that — it creates a mechanism in which China would have de facto control over the South China Sea in any scenario short of war,” Harris said.
“These are obviously easy targets in war, it’s what we call in the military, “grapes” if you will, but short of that, the militarization of these features pose a threat against all other countries in the region.”

News of the base comes as Vietnam is in the midst of modernizing its submarine force to include six Russian-built improved Kilo-class diesel electric attack submarines. The submarines, acquired for the maritime defense of Vietnam’s substantial coastline, are part of a Hanoi naval expansion that would assert Vietnam claims in the region.

The disparity between the Vietnamese Navy and the PLAN and China’s heavily armed coast guard ships, was highlighted in 2014. That May, China sent a $1 billion offshore oil platform inside Vietnam’s disputed economic exclusion zone (EEZ) and had ringed it with ships to prevent challenges. If China, for example, made a similar attempt in the future, it could make it riskier for Vietnams reconstituted submarine force to intercede with closer ASW helicopters.

While the reclamation work in the Paracels – where last month the U.S. sent the guided missile destroyer USS Curtis Wilbur (DDG-54) on a freedom of navigation operation – is not as controversial as the ongoing work the Chinese have done to build artificial islands in the Spratly Islands near the Philippines.

In the last two years China has turned low tide elevations into military-style installations – though China insists they aren’t for military use.

Victor Robert Lee image.The Chinese controlled territories in the Paracels – on the other hand – are recognized land features that China has controlled since the mid-1970s while Vietnam and Taiwan also have claims.

In addition expanding the territory on Duncan Island by more than 50 percent in the last year, China has also expanded its Paracel holdings at its airbase at Woody Island, North Island and Tree Island.

“The recent developments at Tree, North, and Duncan islands indicate that Beijing is augmenting its position in the Paracels, which have been overshadowed of late by China’s epic construction projects in the Spratlys,” Lee wrote.
The changes in progress will in the Paracels “probably reshape surface ship and aerial combat strategies in the region.”

Strategic Implications of the Transpacific Partnership

Document: Report to Congress on Strategic Implications of the Trans-Pacific Partnership

Screen Shot 2016-02-16 at 7.15.29 AM

 

R44361

Summary

 
On October 5, 2015, Ministers of the 12 Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) countries announced conclusion of their free trade agreement (FTA) negotiations. The agreement is one of the Obama Administration’s signature trade policy initiatives, an effort to reduce and eliminate trade and investment barriers and establish new rules and disciplines to govern trade and investment among the 12 countries. TPP proponents, including Administration officials, argue that the proposed TPP would have substantial strategic benefits for the United States in addition to its direct economic impact. They argue that the agreement would enhance overall U.S. influence in the economically dynamic Asia
Pacific region and advance U.S. leadership in setting and modernizing the rules of commerce in the region and potentially in the multilateral trading system under the World Trade Organization (WTO).
 
Congress plays a key role in the TPP. Through U.S. trade negotiating objectives established in Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) legislation and informal consultations and oversight, Congress has guided the Administration’s negotiations. Ultimately, Congress would need to pass implementing legislation if the concluded agreement is to take effect in the United States. The geo- political arguments surrounding TPP are widely debated, as are the arguments about its  potential economic impact. To some, the TPP is an important litmus test of U.S. credibility in the Asia-Pacific region. As the leading economic component of the Administration’s “strategic rebalancing” to the region, the TPP, proponents argue, would allow the United States to reaffirm existing alliances, expand U.S. soft power, spur countries to adopt a more U.S. friendly foreign  policy outlook, and enhance broader diplomatic and security relations. Many Asian policymakers  – correctly or not – could interpret a failure of TPP in the United States as a symbol of the United States’ declining interest in the region and inability to assert leadership. Some critics argue that TPP backers often do not identify specific, concrete ways that a successful deal would invigorate U.S. security partnerships in the region, and that an agreement should be considered solely for its economic impact. They maintain that past trade pacts have had a limited impact on broad foreign policy dynamics and that U.S. bilateral relations are based on each country’s broader national interests.
 
The Administration is also pursuing strategic economic goals in the TPP. Through the agreement,  proponents argue, the United States can play a leading role in “writing the rules” for commerce with key trading partners, addressing gaps in current multilateral trade rules, and setting a  precedent for future regional and bilateral FTA negotiations or multilateral trade talks at the World Trade Organization (WTO). The core of this argument is the assertion that the TPP’s  potential components – including tariff and non tariff liberalization, strong intellectual property rights and investment protections, and labor and environmental provisions – would build upon the U.S. led economic system that has expanded world trade and investment enormously since the end of World War II.
 
Although most U.S. observers agree it is in the U.S. interest to lead in establishing global and regional trade rules, less consensus exists on what those rules should be, yielding some criticism on the strength and breadth of various TPP provisions. In addition, some argue that crafting new rules through “mega regional” agreements rather than the WTO could undermine the multilateral trading system, create competing trading blocs, lead to trade diversion, and marginalize the countries not participating in regional initiatives.

WTH is Wrong with the Law and Police in Britain?

Free speech in Britain is over with and coupled with phone call harassment is a double whamy. We have all the exact symptoms of this in America as well. What say you?

 

VIDEO: Watch Paul Golding and Jayda Fransen be arrested by Luton Police!

Due in part to the death of Supreme Court Justice Antoine Scalia, I am reminded of the Magna Carta. However, there is a document, the English Bill of Rights.

English Bill of Rights 1689

An Act Declaring the Rights and Liberties of the Subject and Settling the Succession of the Crown

Whereas the Lords Spiritual and Temporal and Commons assembled at Westminster, lawfully, fully and freely representing all the estates of the people of this realm, did upon the thirteenth day of February in the year of our Lord one thousand six hundred eighty-eight [old style date] present unto their Majesties, then called and known by the names and style of William and Mary, prince and princess of Orange, being present in their proper persons, a certain declaration in writing made by the said Lords and Commons in the words following, viz.:

Whereas the late King James the Second, by the assistance of divers evil counsellors, judges and ministers employed by him, did endeavour to subvert and extirpate the Protestant religion and the laws and liberties of this kingdom;

By assuming and exercising a power of dispensing with and suspending of laws and the execution of laws without consent of Parliament;

By committing and prosecuting divers worthy prelates for humbly petitioning to be excused from concurring to the said assumed power;

By issuing and causing to be executed a commission under the great seal for erecting a court called the Court of Commissioners for Ecclesiastical Causes;

By levying money for and to the use of the Crown by pretence of prerogative for other time and in other manner than the same was granted by Parliament;

By raising and keeping a standing army within this kingdom in time of peace without consent of Parliament, and quartering soldiers contrary to law;

By causing several good subjects being Protestants to be disarmed at the same time when papists were both armed and employed contrary to law;

By violating the freedom of election of members to serve in Parliament;

By prosecutions in the Court of King’s Bench for matters and causes cognizable only in Parliament, and by divers other arbitrary and illegal courses;

And whereas of late years partial corrupt and unqualified persons have been returned and served on juries in trials, and particularly divers jurors in trials for high treason which were not freeholders;

And excessive bail hath been required of persons committed in criminal cases to elude the benefit of the laws made for the liberty of the subjects;

And excessive fines have been imposed;

And illegal and cruel punishments inflicted;

And several grants and promises made of fines and forfeitures before any conviction or judgment against the persons upon whom the same were to be levied;

All which are utterly and directly contrary to the known laws and statutes and freedom of this realm;

And whereas the said late King James the Second having abdicated the government and the throne being thereby vacant, his Highness the prince of Orange (whom it hath pleased Almighty God to make the glorious instrument of delivering this kingdom from popery and arbitrary power) did (by the advice of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal and divers principal persons of the Commons) cause letters to be written to the Lords Spiritual and Temporal being Protestants, and other letters to the several counties, cities, universities, boroughs and cinque ports, for the choosing of such persons to represent them as were of right to be sent to Parliament, to meet and sit at Westminster upon the two and twentieth day of January in this year one thousand six hundred eighty and eight [old style date], in order to such an establishment as that their religion, laws and liberties might not again be in danger of being subverted, upon which letters elections having been accordingly made;

And thereupon the said Lords Spiritual and Temporal and Commons, pursuant to their respective letters and elections, being now assembled in a full and free representative of this nation, taking into their most serious consideration the best means for attaining the ends aforesaid, do in the first place (as their ancestors in like case have usually done) for the vindicating and asserting their ancient rights and liberties declare

That the pretended power of suspending the laws or the execution of laws by regal authority without consent of Parliament is illegal;

That the pretended power of dispensing with laws or the execution of laws by regal authority, as it hath been assumed and exercised of late, is illegal;

That the commission for erecting the late Court of Commissioners for Ecclesiastical Causes, and all other commissions and courts of like nature, are illegal and pernicious;

That levying money for or to the use of the Crown by pretence of prerogative, without grant of Parliament, for longer time, or in other manner than the same is or shall be granted, is illegal;

That it is the right of the subjects to petition the king, and all commitments and prosecutions for such petitioning are illegal;

That the raising or keeping a standing army within the kingdom in time of peace, unless it be with consent of Parliament, is against law;

That the subjects which are Protestants may have arms for their defence suitable to their conditions and as allowed by law;

That election of members of Parliament ought to be free;

That the freedom of speech and debates or proceedings in Parliament ought not to be impeached or questioned in any court or place out of Parliament;

That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted;

That jurors ought to be duly impanelled and returned, and jurors which pass upon men in trials for high treason ought to be freeholders;

That all grants and promises of fines and forfeitures of particular persons before conviction are illegal and void;

And that for redress of all grievances, and for the amending, strengthening and preserving of the laws, Parliaments ought to be held frequently.

And they do claim, demand and insist upon all and singular the premises as their undoubted rights and liberties, and that no declarations, judgments, doings or proceedings to the prejudice of the people in any of the said premises ought in any wise to be drawn hereafter into consequence or example; to which demand of their rights they are particularly encouraged by the declaration of his Highness the prince of Orange as being the only means for obtaining a full redress and remedy therein. Having therefore an entire confidence that his said Highness the prince of Orange will perfect the deliverance so far advanced by him, and will still preserve them from the violation of their rights which they have here asserted, and from all other attempts upon their religion, rights and liberties, the said Lords Spiritual and Temporal and Commons assembled at Westminster do resolve that William and Mary, prince and princess of Orange, be and be declared king and queen of England, France and Ireland and the dominions thereunto belonging, to hold the crown and royal dignity of the said kingdoms and dominions to them, the said prince and princess, during their lives and the life of the survivor to them, and that the sole and full exercise of the regal power be only in and executed by the said prince of Orange in the names of the said prince and princess during their joint lives, and after their deceases the said crown and royal dignity of the same kingdoms and dominions to be to the heirs of the body of the said princess, and for default of such issue to the Princess Anne of Denmark and the heirs of her body, and for default of such issue to the heirs of the body of the said prince of Orange. And the Lords Spiritual and Temporal and Commons do pray the said prince and princess to accept the same accordingly.

And that the oaths hereafter mentioned be taken by all persons of whom the oaths have allegiance and supremacy might be required by law, instead of them; and that the said oaths of allegiance and supremacy be abrogated.

I, A.B., do sincerely promise and swear that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to their Majesties King William and Queen Mary. So help me God.

I, A.B., do swear that I do from my heart abhor, detest and abjure as impious and heretical this damnable doctrine and position, that princes excommunicated or deprived by the Pope or any authority of the see of Rome may be deposed or murdered by their subjects or any other whatsoever. And I do declare that no foreign prince, person, prelate, state or potentate hath or ought to have any jurisdiction, power, superiority, pre-eminence or authority, ecclesiastical or spiritual, within this realm. So help me God. Much more detail here.

 

Syria: 11.5% have been either killed or injured

11.5 percent of the population have been either killed or injured, 45 percent of the population is displaced and no end in sight.

Syria death toll almost twice as high as previously thought: Report

Over 470,000 Syrians are alleged to have died as a result of the war and collapse of infrastructure

A new report suggests that the death toll in Syria’s long-running civil war may be much higher than previous estimates.

The Syrian Centre for Policy Research (SCPR) reports that around 470,000 people have been killed in the conflict as opposed to the figure of 250,000 cited by the UN. Around 11.5 percent of the population have been either killed or injured, according to the report.

Many of the deaths, previously unreported, are caused by the collapse of infrastructure caused by the devastating conflict.

“We use very rigorous research methods and we are sure of this figure. Indirect deaths will be greater in the future, though most NGOs and the UN ignore them,” the report’s author, Rabie Nasser, told the Guardian.

Forty-five percent of the population is displaced and life expectancy in the country had dropped from 70 in 2010 to 55.4 in 2015, the report said. Nearly 14 million Syrians have lost their source of livelihood.

The report also warned that different armed players in the Syrian war had begun carving the country to suit their proxies.

“During 2015, the Syrian economy became more shattered and fragmented, mainly dominated by the fighting subjugating powers,” the report said.

“Each of these powers is rebuilding its own independent economic entities and foundations in which resources are being reallocated to serving its objectives and creating incentives and drawing loyalty among their narrow group of followers against people’s needs and aspirations.

“The absence of a framework for national dialogue which brings together the Syrian parties, which can represent and unify Syrians to create an inclusive process to overcome the conflict, has aggravated the state of socioeconomic fragmentation and enhanced the conflict economy.”

SCPR’s research was carried out from inside Syria, until recently based in Damascus.

Based on SCPR’s estimates, Syria’s death toll now exceeds the mortality for the US-led war in Iraq, which according to a 2013 study totaled 461,000.

Russian bombers and Iranian troops have helped the forces of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad besiege the key city Aleppo, partially held by rebel forces since 2012, over the past fortnight, derailing peace talks in Geneva and threatening Europe with another huge influx of refugees.

Tens of thousands of Syrians are stranded on the Turkish border north of Aleppo, where observers say 500 fighters and civilians have been killed since the bombing started on 1 February.

In Munich on Thursday, US Secretary of State John Kerry and his Russian counterpart Sergei Lavrov will host foreign ministers from the 17-nation Syria contact group, in a meeting billed by Kerry as a moment of truth for the floundering peace process.

Washington wants a ceasefire and humanitarian access to besieged rebel cities but has threatened an unspecified “Plan B” if talks fail, as tension mounts with Moscow over its air campaign.

“There is no question… that Russia’s activities in Aleppo and in the region right now are making it much more difficult to be able to come to the table and to be able to have a serious conversation,” Kerry said this week.

America’s special envoy for the fight against the Islamic State group (IS), Brett McGurk, said Russia’s bombing campaign was “directly enabling” the jihadists.

While Moscow has promised to bring “new ideas” for kick-starting the peace process to Munich, Russia and Iran are adamant the rebels in Aleppo are just as much “terrorists” as IS and there can be no settlement until they have been militarily defeated.

The rebels say they will not return to talks in Geneva, pencilled in for 25 February, unless government sieges and air strikes end.

Read more:

Leaders agree to ‘full cessation of hostilities’ in Syria within 1 week: Kerry #SyriaWar

Clapper’s Briefing on Chemical Weapons, History

Mustard gas ‘used in Iraq’ in August

The Hague (AFP) – Mustard gas was used in two attacks in Iraq near the Kurdish capital of Arbil in August last year, sources close to the world’s chemical watchdog said on Monday.

 

“The results of some sampling have confirmed the use of mustard gas,” one source said, asking to remain anonymous.

The news comes amid an investigation by the Iraqi government into the 2015 attacks aided by the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW), based in The Hague.

It is also only days after US officials said IS jihadist fighters had the capability to make small quantities of chlorine and mustard gas and had used it in war-torn Syria and Iraq.

Iraqi Kurd authorities last year said two attacks were carried out by Islamic State group fighters on August 11 on the frontline towns of Gweyr and Makhmur southwest of Arbil, during which around 50 mortar rounds were launched.

The peshmerga ministry said “37 of the rounds released a white dust and black liquid when they exploded. Thirty-five peshmerga fighters were exposed and some were taken for treatment”.

“The results of the tests on blood samples… reveal traces of mustard gas,” the ministry said at the time, but the origin of the suspected gas was unclear.

OPCW spokesman Malik Ellahi confirmed the watchdog had sent a team of experts to help Iraq in its investigation into possible chemical weapons.

“The team completed its mission and the OPCW has shared the results of its technical work with the government of Iraq,” Ellahi said in a statement.

“The complete findings and conclusions can be expected to be issued by the government of Iraq together with the OPCW inputs,” he said, declining to give further details.

Diplomatic sources told AFP the report was a survey conducted by Baghdad with the OPCW’s help.

“The report is still a work in progress,” the source told AFP, stressing it would be “logical” for the OPCW to publish it — but it may well also be released by Baghdad.

“It is not the OPCW’s role” to point fingers as to which side used the weapon, the source stressed.

US national intelligence director James Clapper last week told a congressional committee that the IS group have used toxic chemicals in Iraq and Syria, including sulphur mustard.

Clapper said it was the first time an extremist group had produced and used a chemical warfare agent in an attack since Japan’s Aum Supreme Truth cult carried out a deadly sarin attack during rush hour in the Tokyo subway in 1995.

– Deadly chemical weapon –

In January the OPCW announced the complete destruction of neighbouring Syria’s declared chemical weapons arsenal.

But the use of chemical weapons in the deadly nearly five-year conflict continues.

In November the OPCW confirmed with “utmost confidence” that mustard gas was used in Syria in August during fighting between rebels and jihadists and “likely” killed a child.

Mustard gas has been dubbed Yperite because it was first used near the Belgian city of Ypres in July 1917 by the German army.

An oily yellow almost liquid-like substance that smells like garlic or mustard, the gas causes the skin to break out in painful blisters, irritates eyes and causes eyelids to swell up, temporarily blinding its victims.

Classified as a Category 1 substance, which means it is seldom used outside of chemical warfare, mustard gas was banned by the UN in 1993.
 Translation in the text below the video.

It is believed however that the regime of former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein unleashed mustard gas against the Iraqi Kurds in Halabja attack in 1988.

IS fighters launched a lightning offensive in Iraq in 2014, allowing it to take control of swathes of territory north of Baghdad and in the Kurdistan region.