Opinion: China’s ‘monster’ ship is a sign of a much bigger problem
(CNN) — Protect. Defend. Save. Three words that define the US Coast Guard’s missions and are central to its ethos statement. For the antithesis of this ethos, look directly at the China Coast Guard.
For nearly 234 years, the US Coast Guard has been true to that ethos in carrying out its many missions around the country and the globe. Around the world, many countries with a coast guard use a facsimile of the distinguishing US Coast Guard ‘racing stripe’ and white paint scheme, which differentiates these vessels from the Navy, to mark their ships or cutters. It’s an homage, intended or not, to the nobility of purpose embodied in our coast guard.
That is why I find the conduct of the China Coast Guard so jarring and disconcerting — such as attacking and destroying a Philippine resupply mission. It is completely at odds with the ethos of coast guards not just here, but everywhere small naval forces seek to bring governance and stability to the waters for which they are responsible.
China recently continued this aggressive conduct by anchoring one of its behemoth 541-foot coast guard vessels, dubbed by some observers “The Monster,” within the Philippines’ exclusive economic zone (EEZ) maritime territory. I’m struck by how closely the ship resembles the 378-foot cutter Mellon that I served aboard as an ensign more than 30 years ago, but the incongruity of the actions of this vessel with my experience is striking.
“Monster” and coast guard don’t belong in the same sentence. However, by the actions of this ship violating the Philippines’ EEZ in an act of intimidation, and the overall conduct of China in the South China Sea and the territorial seas of its many neighbors, it is clear this ship has earned the moniker. And we need to be prepared for additional aggressive actions from China.
“Gray zone” warfare is a term that refers to unfriendly actions that fall short of outright armed conflict between nations. It’s somewhat ambiguous and may not be immediately clear to observers what might be involved in the “zone.” US Indo-Pacific Commander Adm. Samuel Paparo has aptly described these activities as “illegal, coercive, aggressive and deceptive” — a simple, straightforward characterization of China’s maritime activity in the region.
Instead of guarding, protecting, defending and saving, as a coast guard should do, the China Coast Guard is attacking, intimidating, violating and threatening its neighbors in the region.
China continues to violate international norms, customs of the sea and national boundaries in a vast operating area across the South China Sea. It persists not because no one cares, or due to a lack of protest, but because it is in fact a vast operating area and China brings the most capacity to the region.
According to the Center for Strategic and International Studies, China now boasts the world’s largest maritime fighting force, with 234 warships in operation. It has 142 coast guard ships complemented by a maritime militia consisting of uniformed crews operating vessels that support China’s efforts to intimidate and harass its neighbors. Additionally, CSIS found in 2021 that some 300 Chinese maritime militia vessels had been operating in disputed South China Sea regions at any given time since 2018.
China has laid claim to contested islands and built artificial ones in disputed waters, while installing military and civilian outposts. It has used these outposts to project persistent presence in disputed areas of the South China Sea. It has attempted to establish sovereignty via its simple presence, seemingly using “possession is nine-tenths of the law” as their guiding principle, and has ignored a 2016 ruling from an international tribunal made under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. Despite that ruling, China claims it has “indisputable sovereignty” over almost all of the South China Sea, and has rejected that its vessels, like its coast guard’s “monster,” are operating in the Philippines’ EEZ.
My hat is off to the Philippines and the other nations who have held fast and continue to stand up to these illegal, coercive, aggressive and deceptive activities. The US Navy, US Coast Guard and our partners across the US Indo-Pacific Command area of operations will continue to counter these activities and support our allies. We know China is playing the long game with its policies, with a planning horizon extending to 2049, which is the 100-year anniversary of the People’s Republic, and beyond.
As a matter of policy, and as long as they are successful, China will continue to attempt to exert sovereign control over areas, disputed or not, that serve its interests.
Look next to the Arctic. Despite having no land mass in the Arctic, China first styled itself as a “near-Arctic state,” a term that underscores its dominance goals yet has no legal meaning. It continued to press this claim, eventually being granted “permanent observer” status at the Arctic Council. “Observe” is too passive to describe what China is doing there: Through its status, it seeks to influence outcomes in its interest.
On July 5, China commissioned its fourth icebreaker vessel, the Jidi, building on its lead over the United States. In the harsh Arctic and Antarctic operating areas, icebreakers are often the only surface vessels that can safely operate. In addition, they are needed to accompany commercial vessels transiting an ice-affected area and government vessels seeking to carry out military and law enforcement missions by breaking channels through the ice to allow passage.
The US Coast Guard has been pursuing new icebreakers for more than a decade and has begun construction of its long-overdue new Polar Security Cutter. This is the first heavy icebreaker built in the US since 1977, when the US Coast Guard Cutter Polar Sea was commissioned. That vessel is now a spare-parts donor to the only active US heavy icebreaker, the aging Polar Star, which along with the medium icebreaker US Coast Guard Cutter Healy represents the total ability of the United States to bring surface ships to the polar regions — fewer than China’s four icebreakers, and significantly fewer than Russia’s available fleet of 46.
China, like other nations, understands that natural resources above the Arctic Circle are becoming more accessible as the region warms, and that there are increased opportunities for shipping to use new routes as Arctic ice continues to recede. Given that China now puts to sea more commercial ship tonnage than any other nation, it likely sees much to gain.
The United States and other Arctic nations with recognized waters in the Arctic understand that defending sovereign claims to fish stocks, minerals and other resources will require more than lines drawn on a navigation chart. As China has repeatedly shown with its neighbors, ignoring those lines and taking possession of what it wants has led to outcomes in its interest. This tactic has allowed China to build on disputed island chains, fish in others’ EEZs and head off development of oil fields by its neighbors.
I once heard the argument in a budget discussion for new funding that “you can’t just leave a Post-it note on the North Pole.” The point is that with an adversary who’s willing to take possession first — and ask permission never — we must be present to enforce possession of what is legally ours. Without the nine new icebreakers the US Coast Guard is advocating for, though, that is the position the United States will find itself in.
As we invest in icebreakers in the Arctic, we must continue to invest in capacity and capability in the Indo-Pacific — for our Navy, our Coast Guard and our partners such as Japan and the Philippines. Each has a complementary role in providing a counter to the growing Chinese presence across the region.
Our partners must see that we are committed to the rule of law and to them. US presence emboldens our allies as they confront aggression in their waters. Sovereign claims require sovereign presence. Both in the South China Sea and the Arctic.
The-CNN-Wire
™ & © 2024 Cable News Network, Inc., a Warner Bros. Discovery Company. All rights reserved.
