
While Chinese athletes try to gobble up Olympic gold in London, half a world away Chinese strategists are trying to gobble up vast tracts of contested territory in the South China Sea.
Without strong push back, Beijing may be able to do just that.
You see, Beijing believes many of these South China Sea islands (and their adjacent waters) are "indisputable" Chinese territory, despite their often great distances from China itself and proximity to other nations.
The problem is countries such as Vietnam, the Philippines, Brunei, Malaysia and Taiwan also claim territory in places with names like the Spratly and Paracel Islands.
Not surprisingly, these areas may have lots of natural resources; some estimate the seabed could hold more than 200 billion barrels of oil and nearly 900 trillion cubic feet of natural gas.
That's huge.
Adding to China's questionable historical and legal claims to these areas is a recent Beijing announcement that China is establishing a military garrison in the Paracels, which would look after Beijing's "claims" in the South China Sea.
While previously the Chinese coast guards' duty, it now appears Beijing will militarize the disputes within its so-called "nine-dash line" that outlines its claim to roughly 80 percent of the nearly 1.5-million square mile South China Sea.
What's also interesting about this is that China increasingly has the naval forces to throw its weight around in East Asia after years of being anything but a maritime power.
For instance, it's developing an aircraft carrier and an air wing to operate off it. It has new attack submarines and blue-water destroyers, plus a unique land-based ballistic missile that can take out carriers.
OK, but why should we care?
First the United States is a Pacific nation. Nearly half our global trade is with East Asia; additional trade passes through the region to places like South Asia and the Middle East.
With trillions of dollars in ship-borne trade sailing the South China Sea annually, freedom of the seas through this "global common" is important to U.S. interests.
We've also got lots of allies and old - and new - friends in the region that are unnerved by Chinese boldness and brutish behavior such as (defense treaty ally) Philippines and Vietnam.
Plus if Beijing's assertiveness is ignored, or acquiesced to, who knows what might come next?
China already feels encouraged - and driven - by lust for natural resources and perceptions of regional players' weaknesses.
Unfortunately, while the Pentagon claims its Asia strategic "pivot" will shift half the Navy's ships to the Pacific, it might be tough to do, considering Middle East commitments and ship numbers falling below requirements by nearly 30 in the coming years.
The geopolitical storm clouds forming over the South China Sea provide only the latest in a series of reasons for ensuring we have a strong national defense, especially our Navy, to look after our national interests - even in tough economic times.

Peter Brookes is a Senior Fellow for National Security Affairs at the Heritage Foundation and is a member of the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission. He writes a weekly column for the New York Post and frequently appears on FOX, CNN, MSNBC, CNBC, NPR and BBC. He is the author of: "A Devil’s Triangle: Terrorism, Weapons of Mass Destruction and Rogue States." Mr. Brookes served in the U.S. Navy and is now a Commander in the naval reserves. He has over 1300 flight hours aboard Navy EP-3 aircraft. He is a graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy; the Defense Language Institute; the Naval War College; the Johns Hopkins University; and is pursuing a Doctorate at Georgetown University.
Peter Brookes is a Heritage Foundation senior fellow and a former deputy assistant secretary of defense.
peterbrookes@heritage.org
Twitter: @Brookes_Peter

Join FSM and stay informed. Get your daily Security Update delivered each day to your e-mail.

Sen. Tom Coburn reportedly will seek spending offsets for Oklahoma relief money
May 20, 2013 09:47 PM
.@meredithshiner Really, Meredith? That's real classy.— Jason B. Whitman (@JasonBWhitman) May 21, 2013 @JasonBWhitman @meredithshiner Not to mention petty, no, moronic.— Scott Jones (@NScottJtx) May 21, 2013 Don’t forget Vanity Fair contributor Kurt Eichenwald. He’s worried about the answer too. And again, I ask the question: Will tea partiers call for offsets to pay for […]![]()
Karma, again: Liberals already tying Oklahoma relief efforts to Superstorm Sandy aid vote
May 20, 2013 07:34 PM
Residents of Oklahoma are all too familiar with tornado season, but there’s a new cycle that’s popped up in association with natural disasters; every major storm in a conservative area is now followed by claims of “karma”-driven payback linked to the House’s Sandy relief aid vote soon after the new year. It happened after tornadoes hit Georgia […]![]()
Scandals, schmandals: @WhiteHouse claims Obama is ‘all smiles'
May 20, 2013 06:22 PM
Or ever. When Jay Carney said this afternoon that senior White House staffers kept bad news from the president, maybe he was telling the truth! We kid, of course, but that would certainly explain this offering from the White House Twitter account, sent out during Carney’s disastrous press briefing: All smiles in the Oval Office. […]![]()
Frightening: Content from DOJ's warrant application to spy on James Rosen [pics]
May 20, 2013 05:22 PM
The news that Fox News reporter James Rosen was the victim of a Justice Department spying campaign is disturbing enough. But take a look at the DOJ’s search warrant application, in which it laid out its case for tracking Rosen’s movements and sifting through his personal emails, and the story takes an even more sinister turn. […]![]()
Another shoe to drop? Drudge editor suggests WH is sitting on another scandal
May 20, 2013 04:29 PM
Is it time to toss another shoe onto the White House scandal pile? Fresh on the heels of the explosive revelations about reporter James Rosen and other Fox News staffers being targets of a DOJ spying campaign, Drudge editor and Washington Times columnist Joseph Curl is tweeting about yet another possible White House scandal. CIA […]![]()

FSM Archives
blog comments powered by Disqus