09 November 2018

SECDEF Mattis calls for “PRC Maritime Militia to operate in a safe and professional manner in accordance with international law…”

Important statement from Secretary Mattis at U.S.-China Diplomatic and Security Dialogue (D&SD) press conference today, Friday 9 November 2018:

We… discussed the importance of all military, law enforcement & civilian vessels & aircraft—including those in the PLA Navy, Chinese Coast Guard & PRC Maritime Militia—to operate in a safe & professional manner in accordance with international law as we seek peaceful resolution of all disputes in the South China Sea.”

Secretary Mattis made a great contribution by using his top-level authority to shine a spotlight on Chinas Maritime Militia. This PLA-controlled third Chinese sea force harasses foreign ships, including those of the U.S. government; and participates in other international sea incidents to further disputed sovereignty claims. Yet it has received far too little top-level scrutiny and official public pushback. An authoritative public statement by the Secretary of Defense—the very first by anyone in that position, to my knowledge—is extremely positive and long overdue, in my view.

Other D&SD principals were Secretary Mattis’s counterpart, State Councilor and Defense Minister General Wei Fenghe; and Secretary of State Michael Pompeo and his counterpart, Director of the Office of Foreign Affairs of the Central Commission of the Communist Party of China Yang Jiechi. The State Department, which hosted the event, lists further information here.

Click here to watch the press conference via the video the State Department posted on Facebook.

Click here for the official transcript, which includes the following full text of Secretary Mattis’s remarks:

SECRETARY MATTIS: Well, good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. And it’s been a pleasure to join Secretary Pompeo in welcoming Director Yang and Minister Wei to Washington for our U.S.-China Diplomatic & Security Dialogue. And we thank you both for making the long trip, along with your delegation, from Beijing.

Your visit reminds us that we build on a deep history between the United States and China, one that stretches back to the earliest days of our American experiment in democracy. Our meeting today is evidence of America’s efforts to work toward a brighter future for both our peoples. President Trump’s National Security Strategy makes it clear that competition does not mean hostility, nor must it lead to conflict. While our two Pacific nations may not always agree, we recognize it serves both our people’s interests to cooperate where we can.

High-level dialogues like this help diminish the space between us as we explore areas where we share common interest and common purpose. To that end, as Secretary Pompeo stated, today we discussed our shared desire to achieve the final, fully verified denuclearization of North Korea. We reaffirmed our nation’s commitments to enforcing the unanimous Security Council resolutions in pursuit of that goal for the good of all mankind.

As the Secretary of State touched on, we also discussed the importance for all military, law enforcement, and civilian vessels and aircraft, including those in the PLA Navy, the Chinese Coast Guard, and the PRC Maritime Militia, to operate in a safe and professional manner, in accordance with international law, as we seek peaceful resolution of all disputes in the South China Sea. Through candid discussions, we sought ways to lessen tension, maintain open lines of communication between our militaries, and reduce the risk of miscalculation. And we made clear that the United States will continue to fly, sail, and operate wherever international law allows.

The U.S. commitment to a free and open Indo-Pacific, one that is underpinned by the rules-based international order and regional stability, is unwavering. Director Yang, Minister Wei, within our pursuit to realize this vision for the region, I echo Secretary of State Pompeo’s words that the United States seeks a constructive, reciprocal, and results-oriented U.S.-China relationship, one that benefits the Indo-Pacific and the world.

We continue our commitment to explore new areas of cooperation on strategic issues of mutual concern like space, cyber, and nuclear capabilities, as well as reinforce the importance of military-to-military exchanges for our bilateral relationship. For we recognize our military ties can serve as a source of stability for our two nations as long as we remain transparent and communicate sincerely with one another.

Along that line, the United States is committed to finalizing a military-to-military crisis deconfliction and communication framework with China while we seek ways to implement and enhance the existing confidence-building measures, including what we call the Joint Staff Dialogue Mechanism.

Director Yang, Minister Wei, thank you again for coming to Washington today. Minister Wei, I look forward to continuing this morning’s constructive conversation at our bilateral meeting this afternoon. And I now invite you to make your remarks.

***

SECRETARY MATTIS: Sure. In regards to our exercises and operations in the South China Sea, the United States adheres strictly to international law and the international maritime rules of the road, and we continue to operate anywhere in international waters, international air space, as all nations are entitled to. So the most important thing is that we all pay equal attention to international law.

***

Secretary Mattis’s points were buttressed by content from the State Department’s release from the dialogue:

South China Sea: The two sides committed to support peace and stability in the South China Sea, the peaceful resolution of disputes, and freedom of navigation and overflight and other lawful uses of the sea in accordance with international law. Both sides committed to ensure air and maritime safety, and manage risks in a constructive manner. The United States discussed the importance of all military, law enforcement, and civilian vessels and aircraft operating in a safe and professional manner in accordance with international law. The United States called on China to withdraw its missile systems from disputed features in the Spratly Islands, and reaffirmed that all countries should avoid addressing disputes through coercion or intimidation. The United States remains committed to fly, sail, and operate wherever international law allows.

***

Additional content concerning China’s People’s Armed Forces Maritime Militia is available below.

***

INFORMATION & ANALYSIS CONCERNING CHINA’S MARITIME MILITIA:

Tracking China’s “Little Blue Men”—A Comprehensive Maritime Militia Compendium

Rarely is a topic so little recognized and so little understood, yet so important and so amenable to research using Chinese-language open sources… To increase awareness and understanding of this important subject, here is a convenient compendium of major publications and other documents available on the matter thus far. If you know of others, please bring them to my attention via <http://www.andrewerickson.com/contact/>.

***

Andrew S. Erickson, “Exposed: Pentagon Report Spotlights China’s Maritime Militia,” The National Interest, 20 August 2018.

For countering China’s shadowy Third Sea Force—the Maritime Militia—sunlight is the best disinfectant and demonstrated awareness is an important element of deterrence. This year’s Department of Defense report to Congress offers both.

Finally, some good news from Washington! Last Thursday the Pentagon released its annual report to Congress on military and security developments involving the People’s Republic of China (PRC). The single most important revelation alone justifies the 145-page report’s $108,000 cost many times over. Even more than when last year’s report mentioned it for the first time, the U.S. government has officially deployed the formidable credibility of the world’s foremost intelligence collection and analytical capabilities to shine a spotlight and expose the shadowy People’s Armed Forces Maritime Militia (PAFMM). Previously, in beltway bureaucracy, the PAFMM was mentioned by Ronald O’Rourke in his Congressional Research Service report and by the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission, which rightly recommended that the Department of Defense address this vital subject. Indeed, there is no substitute for the Pentagon’s credibility in this regard. By releasing these important facts officially and authoritatively, the 2018 report has performed a signal service.

Beijing uses the PAFMM to advance its disputed sovereignty claims across the South and East China Seas. The Maritime Militia, China’s third sea force, often operates in concert with China’s first sea force (the Navy) and second sea force (the Coast Guard). In an unprecedented accompanying Fact Sheet, the Pentagon’s 2018 report offers a recent example: “China . . . is willing to employ coercive measures to advance its interests and mitigate other countries’ opposition. . . . In August 2017, China conducted a coordinated PLA Navy (PLAN), China Coast Guard (CCG), and People’s Armed Forces Maritime Militia patrol around Thitu Island and planted a flag on Sandy Cay, a sandbar within 12 nautical miles of Subi Reef and Thitu Island, possibly in response to the Philippines’ reported plans to upgrade its runway on Thitu Island.”

Each PRC sea service is the maritime division of one of China’s three armed services, and each is the world’s largest by number of ships. “The PLAN, CCG, and People’s Armed Forces Maritime Militia (PAFMM) form the largest maritime force in the Indo-Pacific,” the report emphasizes. First, “The PLAN is the region’s largest navy, with more than 300 surface combatants, submarines, amphibious ships, patrol craft, and specialized types.” It is also the world’s largest navy numerically; as of August 17, 2018, the U.S. Navy has 282 deployable battle-force ships. Second, “Since 2010, the CCG’s fleet of large patrol ships (more than 1,000 tons) has more than doubled from approximately 60 to more than 130 ships,” the report adds, “making it by far the largest coast guard force in the world and increasing its capacity to conduct simultaneous, extended offshore operations in multiple disputed areas.” Third, Beijing has what is clearly the world’s largest and most capable maritime militia. One of the few maritime militia forces in existence today at all, it is virtually the only one charged with involvement in sovereignty disputes. Only Vietnam, one of the very last countries politically and bureaucratically similar to China, is known to have a roughly equivalent force with a roughly equivalent mission. Moreover, when it comes to forces at sea—militia or otherwise—Hanoi is simply not in the same league as Beijing and cannot compete either quantitatively or qualitatively.

Beijing’s use of the PAFMM undermines vital American and international interests in maintaining the regional status quo, including the rules and norms on which peace and prosperity depend. PAFMM forces engage in gray zone operations, at a level specifically designed to frustrate effective response by the other parties involved. One PRC source terms this PAFMM participation in “low-intensity maritime rights protection struggles”; the Pentagon’s report describes broader PAFMM and CCG “use of low-intensity coercion in maritime disputes.” “During periods of tension, official statements and state media seek to portray China as reactive,” the report explains. “China uses an opportunistically timed progression of incremental but intensifying steps to attempt to increase effective control over disputed areas and avoid escalation to military conflict.” In particular, “PAFMM units enable low-intensity coercion activities to advance territorial and maritime claims.” Because the PAFMM is virtually unique and tries to operate deceptively under the radar, it has remained publicly obscure for far too long even as it trolls with surprising success for advances in sovereignty disputes in seas along China’s contested periphery.

Fortunately, the U.S. government is well aware of the PAFMM’s predations and monitors it closely. In providing such detailed coverage of the PAFMM in its latest report, the Pentagon has strongly validated key findings from the Naval War College China Maritime Studies Institute’s (CMSI) open source research project on that subject, which is now entering its fifth year. In what follows, I share CMSI’s conclusions and the related text in the report.

A component of the People’s Armed Forces, China’s PAFMM operates under a direct military chain of command to conduct state-sponsored activities. The PAFMM is locally supported, but answers to the very top of China’s military bureaucracy: Commander-in-Chief Xi Jinping himself.

Part-time PAFMM units incorporate marine industry workers (e.g., fishermen) directly into China’s armed forces. As the Pentagon explains, “The PAFMM is a subset of China’s national militia, an armed reserve force of civilians available for mobilization. . . . Militia units organize around towns, villages, urban sub-districts, and enterprises, and vary widely in composition and mission.” While retaining day jobs, personnel (together with their ships) that meet the standards for induction into the PAFMM are organized and trained within the militia—as well as, in many cases, by China’s Navy—and activated on demand. As part of such efforts, “A large number of PAFMM vessels train with and assist the PLAN and CCG in tasks such as safeguarding maritime claims, surveillance and reconnaissance, fishery protection, logistics support, and search and rescue.” To further support and encourage PAFMM efforts, “The government subsidizes various local and provincial commercial organizations to operate militia vessels to perform ‘official’ missions on an ad hoc basis outside of their regular civilian commercial activities.”

Since 2015, starting in Sansha City in the Paracel Islands, China has been developing a new full-time PAFMM contingent: more professionalized, militarized, well-paid units including military recruits, crewing purpose-built vessels with mast-mounted water cannons for spraying and reinforced hulls for ramming. “In the past, the PAFMM rented fishing vessels from companies or individual fishermen, but China has built a state-owned fishing fleet for at least part of its maritime militia force in the South China Sea,” the Pentagon expounds. “The Hainan provincial government, adjacent to the South China Sea”—whose important role in PAFMM development my colleague Conor M. Kennedy and I explain herehere, and here—“ordered the building of 84 large militia fishing vessels with reinforced hulls and ammunition storage, which the militia received by the end of 2016, along with extensive subsidies to encourage frequent operations in the Spratly Islands.” The report elaborates: “This particular PAFMM unit is also China’s most professional, paid salaries independent of any clear commercial fishing responsibilities, and recruited from recently separated veterans.” Lacking fishing responsibilities, personnel train for peacetime and wartime contingencies, including with light arms, and deploy regularly to disputed South China Sea features even during fishing moratoriums.

China’s People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN), Coast Guard, and Government Maritime Forces 2018 Recognition and Identification Guide (Suitland, MD: Office of Naval Intelligence, July 2018).
(EXCERPT SHOWING THREE TYPES OF SANSHA CITY MARITIME MILITIA VESSELS)

In July, the U.S. Office of Naval Intelligence issued the China’s People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN), Coast Guard, and Government Maritime Forces 2018 Recognition and Identification Guide. The excerpt above shows three different types of purpose-built PAFMM vessels operated by the Sansha City Maritime Militia.

PAFMM units have participated in manifold international sea incidents. As the Pentagon attests, “The militia has played significant roles in a number of military campaigns and coercive incidents over the years, including the 2009 harassment of the USNS IMPECCABLE conducting normal operations, the 2012 Scarborough Reef standoff, the 2014 Haiyang Shiyou-981 oil-rig standoff, and a large surge of ships in waters near the Senkakus in 2016.”

The last of these is particularly significant, since it is now one of several publicly documented examples of PAFMM involvement in international incidents in the East China Sea, but had not been conclusively confirmed by previously known open sources. Other examples, as documented in CMSI research to date, include swarming into the Senkaku Islands’ territorial sea in 1978 and harassment of USNS Howard O. Lorenzen in 2014. So, while the vast majority of publicly revealed incidents involving PAFMM forces have occurred throughout the South China Sea, the PAFMM also clearly operates and has been empowered to engage in provocative activities in the East China Sea as well. Any PRC attempts to deny that the PAFMM operates in the East China Sea, including in disruptively close proximity to foreign forces, may therefore be easily disproven. The Pentagon is clear: “The PAFMM . . . is active in the South and East China Seas.”

This conclusive exposure of PAFMM activities in the East China Sea should be an important reminder to policy-makers in Tokyo and Washington alike that Beijing is certain to continue to wield its third sea force as a tool of choice to probe and apply pressure vis-à-vis the Japanese-administered Senkaku Islands. These pinnacle-shaped features are the peak Sino-Japanese geographical flashpoint. As the current and previous U.S. administrations have affirmed explicitly, the Senkakus are covered under Article 5 of the U.S.-Japan Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security, which states, in part: “Each Party recognizes that an armed attack against either Party in the territories under the administration of Japan would be dangerous to its own peace and safety and declares that it would act to meet the common danger in accordance with its constitutional provisions and processes.”

American and Japanese analysts and decision-makers should therefore redouble their efforts to share information and develop and implement potential countermeasures concerning the PAFMM. Here, as elsewhere, sunlight is the best disinfectant and demonstrated awareness is an important element of deterrence. Just as the Pentagon’s 2017 report was the first iteration to mention the PAFMM and this latest 2018 edition builds strongly on that foundation, it is to be hoped that the Japan Ministry of Defense’s Defense of Japan 2017 report—which likewise mentioned the PAFMM for the first time, albeit without explicit in-text reference to the East China Sea—will be followed with a 2018 edition offering far more robust PAFMM coverage, including detailed consideration of extant and potential future activities in the East China Sea.

As mentioned above, the Pentagon’s latest report also stresses PAFMM involvement in the layered cabbage-style envelopment of the Philippines-claimed Sandy Cay shoal near Thitu Island in the South China Sea, although it does not mention the fact—confirmed by commercially available AIS data concerning ship movements—that China has sustained a presence of at least two PAFMM vessels around Sandy Cay since August 2017. As the Pentagon emphasizes, the “PLAN, CCG, and PAFMM sometimes conduct coordinated patrols.” Inter-service cooperation applies in peace and war: “In conflict, China may also employ China Coast Guard and People’s Armed Forces Maritime Militia ships to support military operations.”

“In the South China Sea,” the report emphasizes, “the PAFMM plays a major role in coercive activities to achieve China’s political goals without fighting, part of broader PRC military doctrine stating confrontational operations short of war can be an effective means of accomplishing political objectives.” Other CMSI-documented examples of international incidents involving the PAFMM there that the report does not mention explicitly include direct participation in China’s 1974 seizure of the Western Paracel Islands from Vietnam; involvement in the occupation and development of Mischief Reef resulting in a 1995 incident with the Philippines; harassment of various Vietnamese government/survey vessels, including the Bin Minh and Viking; participation in the 2014 blockade of Second Thomas Shoal; and engagement in the 2015 maneuvers around USS Lassen.

In conclusion, the Pentagon deserves great credit for employing the full force of its tremendous analytical capabilities and official authority to shine a bright, inescapable spotlight on the PAFMM’s true nature and activities. There is no plausible deniability: the PAFMM is a state-organized, -developed, and -controlled force operating under a direct military chain of command to conduct PRC state-sponsored activities. Publicly revealing the PAFMM’s true nature and activities is an important step in deterring its future use. But far more is needed to counter the pernicious challenge of Beijing’s shadowy but fully knowable third sea force. As the Pentagon’s valuable new report emphasizes, “China continues to exercise low-intensity coercion to advance its claims in the East and South China Seas.”

Dr. Andrew S. Erickson is a professor of strategy in the U.S. Naval War College (NWC)’s China Maritime Studies Institute (CMSI) and an Associate in Research at Harvard University’s John King Fairbank Center for Chinese Studies. Since 2014, he and his colleague Conor M. Kennedy have been conducting and publishing in-depth research on the People’s Armed Forces Maritime Militia (PAFMM) and briefing key U.S. and allied decision-makers on the subject. In 2017 Erickson received NWC’s inaugural Civilian Faculty Research Excellence Award, in part for his pioneering contributions in this area.

Image: China’s People Liberation Army (Navy) sailors from the honour guard march during a welcoming ceremony for Fiji’s Prime Minister Josaia Voreqe Bainimarama outside the Great Hall of the People, in Beijing, July 16, 2015. REUTERS/Jason Lee

***

Andrew S. Erickson and Ryan D. Martinson, China’s Maritime Gray Zone Operations(Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute Press, forthcoming 2019).

Coauthor, “Introduction” and “Civil Maritime Force Structure and Trends.”

China’s maritime “gray zone” operations represent a new challenge for the U.S. Navy and the sea services of our allies, partners, and friends in maritime East Asia. There, Beijing is waging operations conducted to alter the status quo without resorting to war, an approach that some Chinese sources term “War without Gun Smoke” (一场没有硝烟的战争). Already winning in important areas, China could gain far more if left unchecked. One of China’s greatest advantages thus far has been foreign difficulty in understanding the situation, let alone determining an effective response. With contributions from some of the world’s leading subject matter experts, this volume aims to close that gap by explaining the forces and doctrines driving China’s paranaval expansion.

The book therefore covers in-depth China’s major maritime forces beyond core gray-hulled Navy units, with particular focus on China’s second and third sea forces: the “white-hulled” Coast Guard and “blue-hulled” Maritime Militia. Increasingly, these paranaval forces are on the frontlines of China’s seaward expansion, operating in the “gray zone” between war and peace: where the greatest action is. Beijing works constantly in peacetime (and possibly in crises short of major combat operations with the United States) to “win without fighting” and thereby to further its unresolved land feature and maritime claims in the Near Seas (Yellow, East, and South China Seas). There is an urgent need for greater understanding of this vital yet under-explored topic: this book points the way.

Volume 7 in Studies in Chinese Maritime Development series

March 2019 | 336 pp. | 6 x 9 | China and the Asia-Pacific

Maps | Hardcover

ASIN: 1591146933

ISBN-13: 978-1591146933

 

As Washington’s new National Security Strategy emphasizes, China is engaged in continuous competition with America–neither fully “at peace” nor “at war.” Per this national guidance the U.S. Navy must raise its competitive game to meet that challenge in part by addressing the potential risks to American interests and values posed by all three Chinese sea forces: the Navy Coast Guard and Maritime Militia. In terms of ship numbers each is the largest of its type in the world. China’s maritime “gray zone” operations represent a new challenge for the U.S. Navy and the sea services of our allies partners and friends in maritime East Asia. There Beijing is waging what some Chinese sources term a “war without gun smoke.” Already winning in important areas it could win far more if left unchecked. One of China’s greatest advantages thus far is foreign difficulty in understanding and characterizing the situation let alone responding effectively. With contributions from some of the world’s leading subject matter experts, this volume aims to close that gap by elucidating the forces and doctrines driving China’s paranaval expansion. This book covers China’s major maritime forces beyond core gray-hulled Navy units with particular focus on China’s second and third sea forces: the “white-hulled” Coast Guard and “blue-hulled” Maritime Militia. Increasingly these paranaval forces and the “gray zone” in which they typically operate are on the frontlines of China’s seaward expansion. Beijing uses these forces to further its unresolved maritime claims in the Near Seas (Yellow East and South China Seas), an approach allowing China to “win without fighting.” Beijing conducts these operations–more intensely assertive than normal interstate relations but less intense than armed conflict–to alter the status quo without resorting to war. They include actions to assert Chinese sovereignty over waters adjacent to disputed land features and jurisdiction over other parts of the ocean based on China’s willful misinterpretation of international law. Chinese behavior at sea harms U.S. interests both directly and indirectly. As a seafaring state, America demands maximal access to the world’s oceans within the constraints of international law. Actions that impede that access violate America’s maritime freedom. China harms U.S. interests indirectly when it violates the legitimate maritime freedom and maritime rights of its allies and partners. Such acts devalue Washington’s commitments to its friends and shake the foundations of our alliance system–the true source of America’s global influence. Moreover, China’s efforts to curtail and infringe upon both the maritime freedom of all nations including the United States and the maritime rights of its neighbors undermines the rules-based international order. This volume therefore concludes by examining America’s response to Beiing’s gray zone coercion and suggests what U.S. policymakers can do to counter it.

ABOUT THE EDITORS

Andrew S. Erickson is professor of strategy in the Naval War College (NWC)’s China Maritime Studies Institute (CMSI) and an associate in research at Harvard’s Fairbank Center. The recipient of NWC’s inaugural Research Excellence Award, he runs the China studies websitewww.andrewerickson.com.

Ryan D. Martinson is an assistant professor at CMSI. He holds a master’s degree from the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University and a bachelor’s of science from Union College. Martinson has also studied at Fudan University, the Beijing Language and Culture University, and the Hopkins-Nanjing Center.

ABOUT THE AUTHORS

Morgan Clemens is a Research Analyst at SOS International LLC.

Peter A. Dutton, a retired U.S. Navy Commander and judge advocate, is Professor and Director at CMSI.

Matthew Funaiole is a fellow with the China Power Project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS).

Bonnie S. Glaser is senior adviser for Asia and director of CSIS’s China Power Project.

Joshua Hickey is a senior analyst for the Department of the Navy with over fifteen years’ subject matter experience.

Henry Holst is a junior analyst for the Department of the Navy.

Conor M. Kennedy is a research associate at CMSI.

Adam P. Liff is an assistant professor at Indiana University’s School of Global and International Studies and an associate in research at Harvard’s Reischauer Institute of Japanese Studies.

Michael Mazarr is a senior political scientist and associate director of the strategy and doctrine program at the RAND Corporation’s Arroyo Center.

Barney Moreland, a retired Captain who served as the first U.S. Coast Guard Liaison Officer in Beijing, is the Senior Intelligence Analyst at U.S. Pacific Fleet Headquarters.

Lyle J. Morris is a senior policy analyst at RAND.

Cdr. Jonathan G. Odom, USN, is a judge advocate and military professor at the Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies.

Michael B. Petersen is the founding director Russia Maritime Studies Institute and an associate professor in the Center for Naval Warfare Studies at NWC.

Capt. Dale C. Rielage, USN, is Director for Intelligence and Information Operations, U.S. Pacific Fleet.

Mark A. Stokes, a retired U.S. Air Force Lieutenant Colonel, is Executive Director of the Project 2049 Institute.

Austin M. Strange is a Ph.D. candidate in Harvard University’s Government Department.

Admiral Tomohisa Takei, (Ret.) concluded his thirty-seven-year naval career as the JMSDF’s 32nd Chief of Staff, and is now a professor and distinguished international fellow at NWC.

Michael Weber a foreign affairs analyst and Presidential Management Fellow at the Congressional Research Service.

Capt. Katsuya Yamamoto, JMSDF, who served as a Defense/Naval Attaché in Beijing, is a liaison officer and international military professor at NWC.

***

If you have trouble accessing the website above, please download a cached copy here.

You can also click here to access the report via the new public CRS website.

 

KEY EXCERPTS:

USE OF CHINA COAST GUARD SHIPS, MARITIME MILITIA, AND OIL PLATFORMS ………………………………………………………………………………………. 16

p. 16

Use of Coast Guard Ships, Maritime Militia, and Oil Platforms

Coast Guard Ships

China makes regular use of China Coast Guard (CCG) ships to assert and defend its maritime territorial claims, with Chinese Navy ships sometimes available over the horizon as backup forces.48 China has, by far, the largest coast guard of any country in the region, and is currently building many new ships for its Coast Guard.49 Many CCG ships are unarmed or lightly armed, but can be effective in asserting and defending maritime territorial claims, particularly in terms of confronting or harassing foreign vessels that are similarly lightly armed or unarmed.50 In March 2018, China announced that control of the CCG would be transferred from the civilian State Oceanic Administration to the Central Military Commission.51 The transfer occurred on July 1, 2018.52 In addition to being available as backups for CCG ships, Chinese navy ships conduct exercises that in some cases appear intended, at least in part, at reinforcing China’s maritime claims.53 On May 22, 2018, it was reported that China’s navy and coast guard had conducted their first joint patrols in disputed waters off the Paracel Islands in the SCS, and had expelled at least 10 foreign fishing vessels from those waters.54

Fishing Boats/Maritime Militia and Oil Platforms

China also uses civilian fishing ships as a form of maritime militia, as well as mobile oil exploration platforms, to assert and defend its maritime claims. U.S. analysts in recent years have paid increasing attention to the role of China’s maritime militia as a key tool for implementing China’s salami-slicing strategy.55 DOD states that

47 See, for example, Natalie Thomas, Ben Blanchard, and Megha Rajagopalan, “China Apprehending Boats Weekly in Disputed South China Sea,” Reuters.com, March 6, 2014. 48 See Department of Defense, Annual Report to Congress [on] Military and Security Developments Involving the People’s Republic of China 2015, pp. 3, 7, and 44, and Department of Defense, Asia-Pacific Maritime Security Strategy, undated but released August 2015, p. 14. 49 See, for example, Office of Naval Intelligence, The PLA Navy, New Capabilities and Missions for the 21st Century, 2015, pp. 44-46. 50 See, for example, Megha Rajagopalan and Greg Torode, “China’s Civilian Fleet A Potent Force in Asia’s Disputed Waters,” Reuters.com, March 5, 2014. 51 See, for example, David Tweed, “China’s Military Handed Control of the Country’s Coast Guard,” Bloomberg, March 26, 2018. 52 See, for example, Global Times, “China’s Military to Lead Coast Guard to Better Defend Sovereignty,” People’s Daily Online, June 25, 2018. 53 See, for example, Trefor Moss and Rob Taylor, “Chinese Naval Patrol Prompts Conflicting Regional Response,” Wall Street Journal, February 20, 2014. 54 Catherine Wong, “China’s Navy and Coastguard Stage First Joint Patrols Near Disputed South China Sea Islands as ‘Warning to Vietnam,’” South China Morning Post, May 22, 2018. 55 See, for example, Jonathan Odom, “China’s maritime Militia,” Straits Times, June 16, 2018; Andrew S. Erickson, “Understanding China’s Third Sea Force: The Maritime Militia,” Fairbank Center, September 8, 2017; Andrew

[CONTINUED…]

p. 17

The CMM [China Maritime Militia] is a subset of China’s national militia, an armed reserve force of civilians available for mobilization to perform basic support duties. Militia units organize around towns, villages, urban sub-districts, and enterprises, and vary widely from one location to another. The composition and mission of each unit is based on local conditions and personnel skills. In the South China Sea, the CMM plays a major role in coercive activities to achieve China’s political goals without fighting, part of broader PRC military doctrine that states that confrontational operations short of war can be an effective means of accomplishing political objectives. A large number of CMM vessels train with and support the PLAN and CCG in tasks such as safeguarding maritime claims, protecting fisheries, logistics, search and rescue (SAR), and surveillance and reconnaissance. The government subsidizes various local and provincial commercial organizations to operate militia vessels to perform “official” missions on an ad hoc basis outside of their regular commercial roles. The CMM has played significant roles in a number of military campaigns and coercive incidents over the years, including the 2011 harassment of Vietnamese survey vessels, the 2012 Scarborough Reef standoff [with the Philippines], and the 2014 Haiyang Shiyou-981 oil rig standoff [with Vietnam]. In the past, the CMM rented fishing vessels from companies or individual fishermen, but it appears that China is building a state-owned fishing fleet for its maritime militia force in the South China Sea. Hainan Province, adjacent to the South China Sea, has ordered the building of 84 large militia fishing vessels for Sansha City.56 …

***

Erickson, “New Pentagon China Report Highlights the Rise of Beijing’s Maritime Militia,” National Interest, June 7, 2017; Ryan Pickrell, “New Pentagon Report Finally Drags China’s Secret Sea Weapon Out Of The Shadows,” Daily Caller, June 7, 2017; Conor M. Kennedy and Andrew S. Erickson, “Hainan’s Maritime Militia: All Hands on Deck for Sovereignty Pt. 3,” Center for International Maritime Security, April 26, 2017; Conor M. Kennedy and Andrew S. Erickson, “Hainan’s Maritime Militia: Development Challenges and Opportunities, Pt. 2” Center for International Maritime Security, April 10, 2017; Andrew Erickson, “Hainan’s Maritime Militia: China Builds A Standing Vanguard, Pt. 1,” Center for International Maritime Security, March 25, 2017; Conor M. Kennedy and Andrew S. Erickson, China’s Third Sea Force, The People’s Armed Forces Maritime Militia: Tethered to the PLA, China Maritime Report No. 1, China Maritime Studies Institute, U.S. Naval War College, Newport, RI, March 2017, 22 pp.; Michael peck, “‘Little Blue Sailors’: Maritime Hybrid Warfare Is Coming (In the South China Sea and Beyond),” National Interest, December 18, 2016; Peter Brookes, “Take Note of China’s Non-Navy Maritime Force,” The Hill, December 13, 2016; Christopher P. Cavas, “China’s Maritime Militia a Growing Concern,” Defense News, November 21, 2016; Christopher P. Cavas, “China’s Maritime Militia—Time to Call Them Out?” Defense News, September 18, 2016; Conor M. Kennedy and Andrew S. Erickson, “Riding A New Wave of Professionalization and Militarization: Sansha City’s Maritime Militia,” Center for International Maritime Security, September 1, 2016; John Grady, “Experts: China Continues Using Fishing Fleets for Naval Presence Operations,” USNI News, August 17, 2016; David Axe, “China Launches A Stealth Invasion in the South China Sea,” Daily Beast, August 9, 2016; Andrew S. Erickson and Conor M. Kennedy, “Countering China’s Third Sea Force: Unmask Maritime Militia Before They’re Used Again,” National Interest, July 6, 2016; Andrew S. Erickson and Conor M. Kennedy, “China’s Maritime Militia, What It Is and How to Deal With It,” Foreign Affairs, June 23, 2016. 56 Department of Defense, Annual Report to Congress [on] Military and Security Developments Involving the People’s Republic of China 2017, p. 56. See also pp. i, 12.

1972 CONVENTION ON PREVENTING COLLISIONS AT SEA (COLREGs)………………………………… 61

p. 61

1972 Convention on Preventing Collisions at Sea (COLREGs)

China and the United States, as well as more than 150 other countries (including all those bordering on the South East and South China Seas, but not Taiwan),160 are parties to an October 1972 multilateral convention on international regulations for preventing collisions at sea, commonly known as the collision regulations (COLREGs) or the “rules of the road.” 161 Although commonly referred to as a set of rules or regulations, this multilateral convention is a binding treaty. The convention applies “to all vessels upon the high seas and in all waters connected therewith navigable by seagoing vessels.”162 It thus applies to military vessels, paramilitary and law enforcement (i.e., coast guard) vessels, maritime militia vessels, and fishing boats, among other vessels. …

***

160 Source: International Maritime Organization, Status of Multilateral Conventions and Instruments in Respect of Which the International Maritime Organization or its Secretary-General Performs Depositary or Other Functions, As at 28 February 2014, pp. 86-89. The Philippines acceded to the convention on June 10, 2013.

161 28 UST 3459; TIAS 8587. The treaty was done at London October 20, 1972, and entered into force July 15, 1977. The United States is an original signatory to the convention and acceded the convention entered into force for the United States on July 15, 1977. China acceded to the treaty on January 7, 1980. A summary of the agreement is available at http://www.imo.org/About/Conventions/ListOfConventions/Pages/COLREG.aspx. The text of the convention is available at https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/UNTS/Volume%201050/volume-1050-I-15824- English.pdf.

162 Rule 1(a) of the convention.

REPORT SUMMARY

China’s actions in recent years in the South China Sea (SCS)—particularly its island-building and base-construction activities at sites that it occupies in the Spratly Islands—have heightened concerns among U.S. observers that China is rapidly gaining effective control of the SCS. U.S. Navy Admiral Philip Davidson, in responses to advance policy questions from the Senate Armed Services Committee for an April 17, 2018, hearing to consider his nomination to become Commander, U.S. Pacific Command (PACOM), stated that “China is now capable of controlling the South China Sea in all scenarios short of war with the United States.” Chinese control of the SCS—and, more generally, Chinese domination of China’s near-seas region, meaning the SCS, the East China Sea (ECS), and the Yellow Sea—could substantially affect U.S. strategic, political, and economic interests in the Indo-Pacific region and elsewhere.

China is a party to multiple territorial disputes in the SCS and ECS, including, in particular, disputes over the Paracel Islands, Spratly Islands, and Scarborough Shoal in the SCS, and the Senkaku Islands in the ECS. Up through 2014, U.S. concern over these disputes centered more on their potential for causing tension, incidents, and a risk of conflict between China and its neighbors in the region, including U.S. allies Japan and the Philippines and emerging partner states such as Vietnam. While that concern remains, particularly regarding the potential for a conflict between China and Japan, U.S. concern since 2014 (i.e., since China’s island-building activities in the Spratly Islands were first publicly reported) has shifted increasingly to how China’s strengthening position in the SCS is making the SCS an arena of direct U.S.-Chinese strategic competition in a global context of renewed great power competition.

In addition to territorial disputes in the SCS and ECS, China is involved in a dispute, particularly with the United States, over whether China has a right under international law to regulate the activities of foreign military forces operating within China’s EEZ. The dispute appears to be at the heart of multiple incidents between Chinese and U.S. ships and aircraft in international waters and airspace since 2001, and has potential implications not only for China’s EEZs, but for U.S. naval operations in EEZs globally.

A key issue for Congress is how the United States should respond to China’s actions in the SCS and ECS—particularly its island-building and base-construction activities in the Spratly Islands— and to China’s strengthening position in the SCS. A key oversight question for Congress is whether the Trump Administration has an appropriate strategy for countering China’s “salami-slicing” strategy or gray zone operations for gradually strengthening its position in the SCS, for imposing costs on China for its actions in the SCS and ECS, and for defending and promoting U.S. interests in the region.

 

CLICK BELOW FOR THE FULL TEXT OF SOME OF THE PUBLICATIONS CITED IN O’ROURKE’S CRS REPORT:

Andrew S. Erickson, “Understanding China’s Third Sea Force: The Maritime Militia,” Harvard Fairbank Center Blog Post, 8 September 2017.

Andrew S. Erickson, “New Pentagon China Report Highlights the Rise of Beijing’s Maritime Militia,” The National Interest, 7 June 2017.

Conor M. Kennedy and Andrew S. Erickson, “Hainan’s Maritime Militia: All Hands on Deck for Sovereignty, Pt. 3,” Center for International Maritime Security (CIMSEC), 26 April 2017.

Conor M. Kennedy and Andrew S. Erickson, “Hainan’s Maritime Militia: Development Challenges and Opportunities, Pt. 2,” Center for International Maritime Security (CIMSEC), 10 April 2017.

Conor M. Kennedy and Andrew S. Erickson, “Hainan’s Maritime Militia: China Builds a Standing Vanguard, Pt. 1,” Center for International Maritime Security (CIMSEC), 26 March 2017.

Conor M. Kennedy and Andrew S. Erickson, China’s Third Sea Force, The People’s Armed Forces Maritime Militia: Tethered to the PLA, China Maritime Report 1 (Newport, RI: Naval War College China Maritime Studies Institute, March 2017).

Conor M. Kennedy and Andrew S. Erickson, “Riding a New Wave of Professionalization and Militarization: Sansha City’s Maritime Militia,” Center for International Maritime Security (CIMSEC), 1 September 2016.

Andrew S. Erickson and Conor M. Kennedy, “Countering China’s Third Sea Force: Unmask Maritime Militia before They’re Used Again,” The National Interest, 6 July 2016.

Andrew S. Erickson and Conor M. Kennedy, “China’s Maritime Militia: What It Is and How to Deal With It,” Foreign Affairs, 23 June 2016.

Peter A. Dutton and Andrew S. Erickson, “When Eagle Meets Dragon: Managing Risk in Maritime East Asia,” RealClearDefense, 25 March 2015.

Andrew S. Erickson and Emily de La Bruyere, “Crashing Its Own Party: China’s Unusual Decision to Spy on Joint Naval Exercises,” China Real Time Report (中国实时报), Wall Street Journal, 19 July 2014.

Andrew S. Erickson and Emily de La Bruyere, “China’s RIMPAC Maritime-Surveillance Gambit,” The National Interest, 29 July 2014.

Andrew S. Erickson, “PRC National Defense Ministry Spokesman Sr. Col. Geng Yansheng Offers China’s Most-Detailed Position to Date on Dongdiao-class Ship’s Intelligence Collection in U.S. EEZ during RIMPAC Exercise,” China Analysis from Original Sources 以第一手资料研究中国, 1 August 2014.

Ryan D. Martinson and Andrew S. Erickson, “Re-Orienting American Sea Power For The China Challenge,” War on the Rocks, 10 May 2018.

***

Defense of Japan 2018 (Tokyo: Japan Ministry of Defense, 28 August 2018).

Full Text (Japanese) (580 pages)

Click here to download a cached copy.

Digest (English) (20 pages)

Click here to download a cached copy.

 

MARITIME MILITIA COVERAGE IN DEFENSE OF JAPAN 2018

3節中国

Section 3: China

pp. 89-123

 p. 92

一方で、国防費については、内訳の詳細を明らかにしていない8。

8 国防白書「2008年中国の国防」及び「2010年中国の国防」では、それぞれ2007年度、2009年度の国防費の支出に限り、人員生活費、訓練維持費、装備費のそれぞれについて、現役部隊、予備役部隊、民兵別の内訳が明らかにされたが、最近はそのような説明も行われていない。

 p. 93

軍事態勢

5) Military Posture

中国の軍事力は、人民解放軍、人民武装警察部隊(武警)16 と民兵17 から構成されており、中央軍事委員会の指導及び指揮を受けるものとされている。人民解放軍は、陸・海・空軍とロケット軍などからなり、中国共産党が創建、指導する人民軍隊とされている。

17 平時においては経済建設などに従事するが、有事には戦時後方支援任務を負う。国防白書「2002年中国の国防」では、「軍事機関の指揮のもとで、戦時は常備軍との合同作戦、独自作戦、常備軍の作戦に対する後方勤務保障提供及び兵員補充などの任務を担い、平時は戦備勤務、災害救助、社会秩序維持などの任務を担当する」とされる。12(平成24)年10月9日付解放軍報によれば2010年時点の基幹民兵数は600万人とされている。

p. 99

また、中国の軍隊以外の武装力である民兵の中でも、いわゆる海上民兵が中国の海洋権益擁護のための尖兵的役割を果たしているとの指摘もある41。海上民兵については、南シナ海での活動などが指摘され42、漁民や離島住民などにより組織されているとされているが、その実態の詳細は明らかにされていない。しかし、海上において中国の「軍・警・民の全体的な力を十全に発揮」43 する必要性が強調されていることも踏まえ、こうした非対称的戦力にも注目する必要がある44

41 13(平成25)年4月、習近平国家主席が海南省の海上民兵を激励した際、海上民兵に対し、遠洋の情報を集め、島嶼建設支援作業を積極的に行うよう指示し、「君たちは海洋権益を守るために先陣の役割を果たしている」と語ったと言われている。

42 例えば、09(平成21)年3月、南シナ海の公海上で中国海軍艦艇などが米海軍調査船「インペッカブル」を妨害した際、同船のソナーを取り外そうとした漁船には海上民兵が乗船していたと指摘されている。また、14(平成26)年5月から7月にかけて大水深掘削リグ「海洋石油981」が西沙諸島南方で試掘活動を行った際、同リグの護衛船団として、海上民兵が乗船する鋼鉄製漁船も進出していたとの指摘がある。

43 16(平成28)年8月、常万全国防部長(当時)が浙江省の海上民兵装備などを視察した際、「『戦い勝利できる』という要求を保証するという観点から、軍・警・民の全体的な力を十全に発揮」する必要性について訓示した。

44 中国の海上民兵については国際法上の地位が不明確であるとの指摘がある。15(平成27)年11月、スウィフト米太平洋艦隊司令官(当時)は、呉勝利中国海軍司令員(当時)との会談に際し、中国の法執行機関と海上民兵を含めた海上兵力がプロフェッショナルに、かつ国際法規に従って行動することの重要性を強調した。

 

DETAILS FROM DEFENSE OF JAPAN 2017

Japan Defense White Paper mentions China Maritime Militia (p. 95):

  • Part of China’s Armed Forces
  • Xi visited
  • SCS ops.

FN 51-54:

  • Xi visited in 2013
  • Incidents include 2009 Impeccable & 2014 HYSY-981 oil rig
  • DefMin Chang visited in 2016
  • ADM Swift stressed w/ADM Wu

***

Office of the Secretary of Defense, Military and Security Developments Involving the People’s Republic of China 2018 (Arlington, VA: Department of Defense, 16 August 2018).

Click here to read the full text of the 2018 report and accompanying Fact Sheet.

CONTENT FROM THE UNPRECEDENTED FACT SHEET ACCOMPANYING THIS YEAR’S (2018) REPORT:

China does not want to jeopardize regional stability, which remains critical to its economic development, but is willing to employ coercive measures to advance its interests and mitigate other countries’ opposition. …

In August 2017, China conducted a coordinated PLA Navy (PLAN), China Coast Guard (CCG), and People’s Armed Forces Maritime Militia patrol around Thitu Island and planted a flag on Sandy Cay, a sandbar within 12 nautical miles of Subi Reef and Thitu Island, possibly in response to the Philippines’ reported plans to upgrade its runway on Thitu Island.

CONTENT FROM THE FULL TEXT OF THIS YEAR’S (2018) REPORT:

p. 16

CHINA’S USE OF LOW-INTENSITY COERCION IN MARITIME DISPUTES

KEY TAKEAWAYS

  • The PLAN, CCG, and People’s Armed Forces Maritime Militia (PAFMM) form thelargest maritime force in the Indo-Pacific.
  • PLAN, CCG, and PAFMM sometimes conduct coordinated patrols.

China continues to exercise low-intensity coercion to advance its claims in the East and South China Seas. During periods of tension, official statements and state media seek to portray China as reactive. China uses an opportunistically timed progression of incremental but intensifying steps to attempt to increase effective control over disputed areas and avoid escalation to military conflict. China also uses economic incentives and punitive trade policies to deter opposition to China’s actions in the region. In 2017, China extended economic cooperation to the Philippines in exchange for taking steps to shelve territorial and maritime disputes. Conversely, a Chinese survey ship lingered around Benham Rise in the spring after the Philippines refused several requests from China to survey the area. Later in the spring, CCG boats reportedly fired warning shots over Philippine fishing boats near Union Bank. In August 2017, China used PLAN, CCG, and PAFMM ships to patrol around Thitu Island and planted a flag on Sandy Cay, a sandbar within 12 nm of Subi Reef and Thitu Island, possibly in response to Manila’s reported plans to upgrade its runway on Thitu Island. China probably used coercion to pressure Vietnam to suspend joint Vietnam-Spain drilling operations in a disputed oil block in the South China Sea over the summer of 2017.

p. 71

CHINA’S GROWING CIVILIAN AND PARAMILITARY MARITIME CAPABILITY

KEY TAKEAWAYS

  • The CCG is the world’s largest; the PAFMM is the only government-sanctioned maritime militia in the world.
  • The PAFMM has organizational ties to, and is sometimes directed by, China’s armed forces, and is active in the South and East China Seas.
  • PAFMM units enable low-intensity coercion activities to advance territorial and maritime claims, including a patrol with the PLAN and CCG in August 2017.

 p. 72

People’s Armed Forces Maritime Militia (PAFMM). The PAFMM is a subset of China’s national militia, an armed reserve force of civilians available for mobilization. The PAFMM is the only government-sanctioned maritime militia in the world. Militia units organize around towns, villages, urban sub-districts, and enterprises, and vary widely in composition and mission. In the South China Sea, the PAFMM plays a major role in coercive activities to achieve China’s political goals without fighting, part of broader PRC military doctrine stating confrontational operations short of war can be an effective means of accomplishing political objectives. The militia has played significant roles in a number of military campaigns and coercive incidents over the years, including the 2009 harassment of the USNS IMPECCABLE conducting normal operations, the 2012 Scarborough Reef standoff, the 2014 Haiyang Shiyou-981 oil rig standoff, and a large surge of ships in waters near the Senkakus in 2016.

A large number of PAFMM vessels train with and assist the PLAN and CCG in tasks such as safeguarding maritime claims, surveillance and reconnaissance, fishery protection, logistics support, and search and rescue. The government subsidizes various local and provincial commercial organizations to operate militia vessels to perform “official” missions on an ad hoc basis outside of their regular civilian commercial activities. In August 2017, China used PLAN, CCG, and PAFMM ships to patrol around Thitu Island and planted a flag on Sandy Cay, a sandbar within 12 nm of Subi Reef and Thitu Island, possibly in response to the Philippines’ reported plans to upgrade the runway on Thitu Island.

In the past, the PAFMM rented fishing vessels from companies or individual fishermen, but China has built a state-owned fishing fleet for at least part of its maritime militia force in the South China Sea. The Hainan provincial government, adjacent to the South China Sea, ordered  the building of 84 large militia fishing vessels with reinforced hulls and ammunition storage, which the militia received by the end of 2016, along with extensive subsidies to encourage frequent operations in the Spratly Islands. This particular PAFMM unit is also China’s most professional, paid salaries independent of any clear commercial fishing responsibilities, and recruited from recently separated veterans.

p. 124

In conflict, China may also employ China Coast Guard and People’s Armed Forces Maritime Militia ships to support military operations.

***

CONTENT FROM LAST YEAR’S (2017) CHINA MILITARY POWER REPORT:

In a long-overdue and welcome breakthrough, the Pentagon’s latest report on China’s Military and Security Developments contains substantial content on China’s Maritime Militia.

Previously, China’s Maritime Militia was mentioned by Ronald O’Rourke in his Congressional Research Service report and by the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission, which recommended that the Department of Defense address this vital subject.

But the Pentagon’s new report is the first official top-level assessment by the U.S. government to cover China’s Maritime Militia. It is extremely encouraging that the U.S. government has finally brought to bear the full force of its authority and its tremendous analytical capabilities to address this vital issue.

Office of the Secretary of Defense, Military and Security Developments Involving the People’s Republic of China 2017 (Arlington, VA: Department of Defense, 6 June 2017).

p. i

China has leveraged its growing power to assert its sovereignty claims over features in the East and South China Seas. China has used coercive tactics, such as the use of law enforcement vessels and its maritime militia, to enforce maritime claims and advance its interests in ways that are calculated to fall below the threshold of provoking conflict.

p. 12

CHINA’S USE OF LOW-INTENSITY COERCION IN MARITIME DISPUTES

China continues to exercise low-intensity coercion to advance its claims in the East and South China Seas. During periods of tension, official statements and state media seek to portray China as reactive. China uses an opportunistically timed progression of incremental but intensifying steps to attempt to increase effective control over disputed areas and avoid escalation to military conflict. China also uses economic incentives and punitive trade policies to deter opposition to China’s actions in the region. In 2016, China used CCG, maritime militia, and fishing ships to surge its maritime presence at various disputed South China Sea features following July’s arbitration ruling. At the same time, it extended economic cooperation in exchange for shelving disputes with the Philippines. Conversely, China restricted Philippine fruit imports during the height of Scarborough Reef tensions in 2012.

p. 56

China Maritime Militia (CMM). The CMM is a subset of China’s national militia, an armed reserve force of civilians available for mobilization to perform basic support duties. Militia units organize around towns, villages, urban sub-districts, and enterprises, and vary widely from one location to another. The composition and mission of each unit is based on local conditions and personnel skills. In the South China Sea, the CMM plays a major role in coercive activities to achieve China’s political goals without fighting, part of broader PRC military doctrine that states that confrontational operations short of war can be an effective means of accomplishing political objectives. A large number of CMM vessels train with and support the PLAN and CCG in tasks such as safeguarding maritime claims, protecting fisheries, logistics, search and rescue (SAR), and surveillance and reconnaissance. The government subsidizes various local and provincial commercial organizations to operate militia vessels to perform “official” missions on an ad hoc basis outside of their regular commercial roles. The CMM has played significant roles in a number of military campaigns and coercive incidents over the years, including the 2011 harassment of Vietnamese survey vessels, the 2012 Scarborough Reef standoff, and the 2014 Haiyang Shiyou-981 oil rig standoff. In the past, the CMM rented fishing vessels from companies or individual fishermen, but it appears that China is building a state-owned fishing fleet for its maritime militia force in the South China Sea. Hainan Province, adjacent to the South China Sea, has ordered the building of 84 large militia fishing vessels for Sansha City.

***

Ryan D. Martinson and Andrew S. Erickson, “Re-Orienting American Sea Power for the China Challenge,” War on the Rocks, 10 May 2018.

Summary: this article proposes a new set of tools for countering China’s maritime gray zone expansion.

As a seafaring state, America demands maximal access to the world’s oceans within the constraints of international law. Though seldom recognized, U.S. efforts to defend its interest in maritime freedom in the Western Pacific have been fairly successful. When the People’s Republic of China unlawfully draws “fences” around the sea, U.S. warships steam through the fences. Beijing recognizes the seriousness of America’s position, and thus far has generally yielded.

However, when it comes to helping its allies and partners protect themselves against Chinese encroachment, the United States has a mixed record. Since 2006, Beijing has dramatically expanded the frontiers of its control in the East and South China Seas. To pursue its irredentist agenda, Beijing has largely relied on unarmed or lightly armed paranaval forces — coast guard and militia — conducting operations in what has been described as the “gray zone” between war and peace. Despite the robust presence of American sea power in contested areas of maritime East Asia, the United States has largely failed to halt China’s bullying behavior. This failure devalues Washington’s commitments to its friends and shakes the foundations of the U.S. alliance system — the true source of American global influence.

To better aid its allies and partners, Washington should consider expanding its catalogue of peacetime maritime operations. Passive presence has proved inadequate. In some cases, American policymakers may need to place U.S. forces on the front lines, where they can play a more direct role helping other states counter China’s seaward expansion. … …

 ***

Andrew S. Erickson, “The People’s Republic at Sea: Great Power with ‘Chinese Characteristics’,” Contemporary China Initiative Lecture, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, 9 April 2018.

Click here to watch a video of the lecture.

Monday, April 9, 2018, 4:30pm to 6:00pm

Goldwin Smith Hall, G64, Kaufmann Auditorium

232 East Ave, Central Campus

The Cornell Contemporary China Initiative Lecture Series, featuring interdisciplinary talks by scholars on issues in China today, runs every Monday this semester.

Co-sponsored by the Cornell East Asia Program.

Andrew S. Erickson, Professor of Strategy in the NWC’s China Maritime Studies Institute (CMSI), U.S. Naval War College

“The People’s Republic at Sea: Great Power with “Chinese Characteristics”

Powered by the world’s second largest economy and defense budget, China has become a great sea power in its own right, and in its own way. China’s Armed Forces comprise three major organizations, each with a maritime subcomponent that is already the world’s largest such sea force by number of ships. The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) contains the PLA Navy (PLAN); the People’s Armed Police (PAP) has formally been put in charge of the consolidating China Coast Guard (CCG); and the People’s Armed Forces Militia contains a growing proportion seagoing units, the People’s Armed Forces Maritime Militia (PAFMM). Not seeking war but seeking to change the status quo in its favor, Beijing employs its enormous second and third sea forces in maritime “gray zone” operations to further its disputed East and South China Sea sovereignty claims using coercion short of warfare; typically with its first sea force providing coordination and deterrence from over the horizon. This lecture considers why and how China has gone to sea to further its security interests, as well as suggest potential implications.

***

Andrew S. Erickson, “Numbers Matter: China’s Three ‘Navies’ Each Have the World’s Most Ships,” The National Interest, 26 February 2018.

Numerical superiority allows China’s second and third sea forces to flood the maritime gray zone in ways that its neighbors, as well as the United States, may find very hard to counter.

As a friend’s five-year-old puts it, “China has three navies: the regular navy, the police navy and the sneaky navy.” Each of these three sea forces is the world’s largest of its type by number of ships—at least by some measures. China is truly a maritime power in its own right, and its sea forces’ numbers matter in important ways. In maritime “gray zone” operations, Beijing employs its enormous coast guard and maritime militia to further its disputed Yellow, East and South China Sea sovereignty claims using coercion short of warfare. This article, which is part one in a series, will focus on these quantitatively superior second and third sea forces.

More formally, China’s Armed Forces comprise three major organizations, each with a maritime subcomponent. The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) contains the PLA Navy (PLAN); the People’s Armed Police (PAP) increasingly leads China’s Maritime Law Enforcement (MLE) forces, including the China Coast Guard (CCG); and the People’s Armed Forces Maritime Militia (PAFMM) contains a growing proportion of seagoing units. The CCG and PAFMM, clearly the world’s most numerous by any logical measure, are the focus of this article.

In power and sophistication, the PAFMM is far less capable than the CCG—which, in turn, is far less capable than the PLAN. The PLAN has formidable firepower; most PLAN ships have longer-range antiship cruise missilesthan U.S. Navy ships possess. The CCG is an actual threat to both the U.S. Navy and the sea forces of all China’s maritime neighbors, and has an extremely substantial law-enforcement capability on a par with that of the U.S. and Japanese coast guards. Viewed through this unforgiving comparative lens, the PAFMM is at best a harassing force with questionable legal authority. Yet it has already killed Vietnamese citizens, helped to seize Vietnamese- and Philippine-claimed features, and harassed U.S. Navy vessels.

All three sea forces are useful tools for Beijing, when employed against different opponents and in different ways. This is no theoretical abstraction. China has already used its second and third sea forces in manifold gray-zone operations against vessels from its maritime neighbors, as well as the United States. Today, Chinese sea forces are enveloping the Philippines-claimed Sandy Cay shoal (near Thitu Island), around which China has sustained a presence of at least two PAFMM vessels since August 2017. Other publicly documented examples of PAFMM employment from research conducted by the Naval War College’s China Maritime Studies Institute (CMSI) over the past three-plus years include China’s 2015 maneuvers around USS Lassen, the 2014 repulsion of Vietnamese vessels from disputed waters surrounding China’s state-owned HYSY-981 oil rig, participation in the 2014 blockade of Second Thomas Shoal and 2012 seizure of Scarborough Shoal from the Philippines, the harassment of USNSHoward O. Lorenzen (2014) and Impeccable(2009), and the 1974 seizure of the Western Paracel Islands from Vietnam and subsequent harassment of various Vietnamese government/survey vessels.

As Adm. Harry Harris, commander of the U.S. Pacific Command, recently testified before the House Armed Services Committee, “Across the South China Sea, China’s air force, navy, coast guard, and maritime militia all maintain a robust presence. Routine patrols and exercises ensure Chinese forces are in and around all the features, not just the ones they occupy. China routinely challenges the presence of non-Chinese forces, including other claimant nations and especially the U.S., often overstating its authority and insisting foreign forces either stay away or obtain Chinese permission to operate.” … …

***

Tamara Gil, “La poco conocida Milicia Marítima de China, la unidad de Pekín que ‘actúa bajo los radares’ para controlar las aguas de Asia Pacífico” [The Little-Known Maritime Militia of China, The Beijing Unit that ‘Acts Under the Radar’ to Control the Waters of the Asia-Pacific], BBC News Mundo [BBC News World], 23 August 2018.

[Algunos miembros de la milicia son pescadores o trabajadores de astilleros.]

Juega un rol vital en la lucha de poderes que se vive en Asia Pacífico, pero poco se había hablado de ella a nivel oficial.

Hasta ahora.

Por primera vez, el Pentágono arrojó un poco de luz sobre la “Milicia Marítima” de China o, como la apoda Washington, “las Fuerzas Armadas Populares” chinas.

La única milicia marítimaen el mundo apoyada por un gobierno, según aseguró el organismo estadounidense en su “informe anual sobre desarrollo militar y de seguridad que involucra a la República Popular de China”.

Pese a que el documento, elaborado a petición del Congreso para constatar los avances chinos en ese campo durante el año anterior, se centra en el rápido desarrollo de las capacidades militares de China, “también analiza con cierta profundidad la poco conocida Milicia Marítima”, destaca Jonathan Marcus, corresponsal de la BBC especializado en Defensa.

Se trata de civiles -desde pescadores a trabajadores de astilleros- pero también exmiembros del Ejército, que son movilizados en apoyo a las Fuerzas Navales chinas y la Guardia Costera del país.

Y en el conflictivo mar de China Meridional, cuya soberanía Pekín reclama prácticamente en su totalidad en desafío a países vecinos y Estados Unidos, parecen estar muy solicitados.

Un paso crucial

Las tensiones por la soberanía del mar de China Meridional llevan años instaladas en la región y enfrentan a numerosos países de Asia y a Estados Unidos.

La disputa no solo se centra en el control de islas o zonas específicas, sino de aguas estratégicas: se cree que el mar de China Meridional contiene importantes recursos naturales y por él pasa casi un tercio del tráfico marítimo mundial.

Pekín asegura que estas aguas, que ahora son internacionales, le pertenecen casi por completo, pero su visión choca con la de sus países vecinos y Washington, que realiza patrullas en la zona en aras de defender la libre circulación de barcos en ese espacio.

En los últimos años, China ha construido islas artificiales e instalaciones en ellas que Estados Unidos y otros países consideran “militares”, mientras el régimen comunista defiende que su único fin es proteger a los barcos pesqueros.

Y se han producido diversos incidentes entre barcos chinos y de otros países y, en algunos de los sucesos más destacados, la Milicia Marítima estuvo involucrada, denuncia el Pentágono.

Entre ellos, menciona el caso de un buque estadounidense que en 2009 fue “acosado” por varios barcos chinos cuando se encontraba realizando “operaciones normales” o el conflicto de 2012 ocurrido en torno al disputado arrecife de Scarborough entre un buque filipino y navíos chinos.

La Milicia Marítima “juega un papel crucial en actividades coercitivas para lograr los objetivos políticos de China sin un enfrentamiento” en el área, especifica el informe.

“China no quiere poner en peligro la estabilidad regional, que sigue siendo crucial para su desarrollo económico, pero está dispuesta a emplear medidas coercitivas para lograr sus intereses y mitigar la oposición de otros países”, destaca el Departamento de Defensa estadounidense.

[China ha construido islas artificiales e instalaciones en ellas que Estados Unidos y otros países consideran militares.]

Esta estrategia forma parte de las llamadas “operaciones grises” del país asiático, diseñadas “para frustrar la respuesta de otros países involucrados (en el conflicto) y asegurar sus intereses” en la zona, apunta por su parte el especialista en Defensa de la BBC.

Como en años anteriores, Pekín rechazó firmemente el informe del Pentágono y presentó una protesta formal a Washington instándole a abandonar su mentalidad “de la guerra fría”.

“Una tercera fuerza marítima”

La creación de la Milicia Marítima de China se remonta a los primeros años tras la fundación de la República Popular de China, en 1949, cuando los comunistas liderados por Mao Zedong “querían defender la vulnerable costa de los ataques del Kuomintang” y al mismo tiempo controlar a la población de pescadores, explica en conversación con BBC Mundo Andrew Erickson, profesor de estrategia en el Instituto de Estudios Marítimos de China de la Escuela de Guerra Naval de EE.UU.

El profesor, uno de los más destacados investigadores en este campo junto a Conor Kennedy, aclara que la milicia actual es muy diferente a la de entonces y advierte que hoy en día forma parte de las Fuerzas Armadas de China.

Opera bajo órdenes militares directas, para llevar a cabo actividades patrocinadas por el Estado”.

[Según el profesor Erickson, miembros de la Guardia Costera china, como los que aparecen en esta foto, o de las Fuerzas Navales chinas suelen apoyar a la milicia en sus operaciones.]

Según sus investigaciones, esta “tercera fuerza marítima” del país asiático es entrenada y equipada por el Ejército Popular de Liberación chino y “está diseñada deliberadamente para pasar por debajo del radar lo más possible”.

Erickson enfatiza que esta fuerza marítima es “enorme”, con miles de barcos y de personas, cuya mayoría trabaja en operaciones rutinarias a lo largo de la costa, si bien también hay unidades que son enviadas a alta mar a defender los reclamos territoriales de la potencia asiática, como las que denuncia el Pentágono.

“China está determinada a resolver la disputa a su favor”

Andrew Erickson, profesor de la Escuela de Guerra Naval de EE.UU.

Pese a que las declaraciones oficiales sobre estos grupos han sido escasas, los medios oficiales chinos, considerados portavoces del gobierno, han mencionado el papel de esta milicia en diversas ocasiones.

“China debería mandar más misiones de la miliciaa salvaguardar la soberanía territorial y los derechos e intereses marítimos (de China) en el mar de China Meridional”, publicó el diario oficialista Global Times a principios de este año, citando a un miembro del Parlamento.

[China busca erigirse como una potencia marítima.]

La prensa oficial también informó de varias visitas del propio presidente Xi Jinping a las milicias ubicadas en la isla sureña de Hainan, adyacente al mar de China Meridional y donde, según el Pentágono, tiene base una de las unidades más profesionales de esta fuerza.

El informe de Washington especifica que para esta unidad el gobierno chino reclutó a veteranos del Ejército recientemente retirados -o puede que despedidos en la última campaña de recortes emprendida por el ejecutivo, apunta por su parte el profesor Erickson- y encargó la construcción de 84 grandes barcos de pesca con cascos reforzados y depósito para municiones.

Según explica Erickson, hay unidades “a tiempo parcial”, con personal que ostenta otros trabajos, y a “tiempo complete”, que están más militarizadas.

China ha trasladado una de estas unidades más profesionalizadas a la localidad de Sansha, en el disputado archipiélago de las Paracelso (también reclamado por Taiwán y Vietnam) y donde Pekín abrió una oficina del gobierno en 2012 para gestionar el mar de China Meridional.

El especialista advierte del riesgo de estas prácticas.

“China no desea que haya una guerra ahí. Tampoco Estados Unidos ni creo que otro país de la región (…). Pero, al mismo tiempo, está determinada a resolver la disputa a su favor”, asevera.

“Pese a que no busca una guerra, no está dispuesta a participar en medidas conciliatorias para garantizar que no se produzca una escalada de la tensión y crisis que lleve a un conflicto (…) así que sigue siendo un riesgo”.

Este no es un enfoque pacífico”.

***

Jonathan G. Odom, “China’s Maritime Militia Threat,” The Straits Times, 16 June 2018.

… China’s maritime militia raises specific concerns under the Law of the Sea, the international law governing the use of force, and international humanitarian law.

Past actions by the maritime militia have contributed to three recurring violations of China’s obligations under the Law of the Sea. First, militia vessels have interfered with the maritime freedoms of other nations, thereby breaching China’s obligation to maintain “due regard” under the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). Second, militia vessels have navigated unsafely in relation to other vessels, thereby violating the Collision Regulations Convention. Third, China has failed to police the fishing boats of its militia, breaching its UNCLOS duty as a flag state.

While these previous violations of the peacetime international law are problematic, the potential effects of China employing its maritime militia for belligerent purposes could be more troubling.

Aggressive use of the maritime militia could lead to war. Under international law, what constitutes a “use of force” is determined by the nature of actions, and not necessarily by the status of actors. Firing a missile, laying mines, enforcing a blockade, or conducting an amphibious landing of a disputed island could constitute a “use of force” — whether it was committed by the navy or a maritime militia. If China’s maritime militia engaged in any such actions, affected nations could justifiably use force in self-defence and escalation could spiral.

Consider this description in [the] PLA Daily newspaper about China’s maritime militia: “Putting on camouflage, they qualify as soldiers; taking off the camouflage, they become law- abiding fishermen.” Does this reflect a mindset to exploit international humanitarian law? The consequences of feigning civilian status would be tragic for legitimate fishermen who could inadvertently become targets if war broke out.

Third, China’s use of its maritime militia can impact the interests of many nations. They include China’s neighbours who have competing territorial and maritime claims, but they also include other Asia-Pacific nations whose navies pass through and operate in the waters of the Asia-Pacific. … …

***

Jonathan G. Odom, “Guerrillas in the Sea Mist: China’s Maritime Militia and International Law,” Asia-Pacific Journal of Ocean Law and Policy 3.1 (2018): 31-94.

This article is intended to be a comprehensive legal analysis of China’s maritime militia. It applies four major bodies of international law to the known, open-source facts about China’s maritime militia, as derived from the series of articles by Andrew Erickson and Conor Kennedy at the USNWC China Maritime Studies Institute.

Abstract

Building upon recent scholarship about the maritime militia of the People’s Republic of China, this article analyzes a number of concerns about that militia’s status and its activities under existing regimes of international law. First, it lays the foundation of general principles of state responsibility and attribution as they pertain to the maritime militia. Thereafter, it identifies and applies three specialized bodies of international law to China’s use of its maritime militia, including the law of the sea, the use of force by states, and the law of naval warfare. Ultimately, the article concludes that there are serious potential consequences and ramifications under international law arising from China’s maritime militia. Looking ahead, the article then provides a series of recommended options that other nations should consider in addressing these legal problems.

***

If you have trouble accessing the website above, please download a cached copy here.

KEY EXCERPTS:

1972 CONVENTION ON PREVENTING COLLISIONS AT SEA (COLREGs)………………………………… 13

p. 13

1972 Convention on Preventing Collisions at Sea (COLREGs)

China and the United States, as well as more than 150 other countries (including all those bordering on the South East and South China Seas other than Taiwan),35 are parties to an October 1972 multilateral convention on international regulations for preventing collisions at sea, commonly known as the collision regulations (COLREGs) or the “rules of the road.”36 Although

p. 14

commonly referred to as a set of rules or regulations, this multilateral convention is a binding treaty. The convention applies “to all vessels upon the high seas and in all waters connected therewith navigable by seagoing vessels.”37 It thus applies to military vessels, paramilitary and law enforcement (i.e., coast guard) vessels, maritime militia vessels, and fishing boats, among other vessels. …

p. 33

“Salami-Slicing” Strategy and “Cabbage” Strategy

Observers frequently characterize China’s approach for asserting and defending its territorial claims in the ECS and SCS as a “salami-slicing” strategy that employs a series of incremental actions, none of which by itself is a casus belli, to gradually change the status quo in China’s favor. At least one Chinese official has used the term “cabbage strategy” to refer to a strategy of consolidating control over disputed islands by wrapping those islands, like the leaves of a cabbage, in successive layers of occupation and protection formed by fishing boats, Chinese Coast Guard ships, and then finally Chinese naval ships.81 Other observers have referred to China’s approach as a strategy of gray zone operations (i.e., operations that reside in a gray zone between peace and war), of creeping annexation82 or creeping invasion,83 or as a “talk and take” strategy, meaning (as noted earlier) a strategy in which China engages in (or draws out) negotiations while taking actions to gain control of contested areas.84

USE OF CHINA COAST GUARD SHIPS, FISHING BOATS/MARITIME MILITIA, OIL PLATFORMS ………………………………………………………………………………………. 33

p. 33

Use of Coast Guard Ships, Fishing Boats/Maritime Militia, Oil Platforms

Coast Guard Ships

China makes regular use of China Coast Guard (CCG) ships to assert and defend its maritime territorial claims, with Chinese Navy ships sometimes available over the horizon as backup forces.85 China has, by far, the largest coast guard of any country in the region, and is currently building many new ships for its Coast Guard.86 Many CCG ships are unarmed or lightly armed, but can be effective in asserting and defending maritime territorial claims, particularly in terms of confronting or harassing foreign vessels that are similarly lightly armed or unarmed.87 In March 2018, China announced that control of the CCG would be transferred from the civilian State

p. 34

Oceanic Administration to the Central Military Commission.88 In addition to being available as backups for CCG ships, Chinese navy ships conduct exercises that in some cases appear intended, at least in part, at reinforcing China’s maritime claims.89 On May 22, 2018, it was reported that China’s navy and coast guard had conducted their first joint patrols in disputed waters off the Paracel Islands in the SCS, and had expelled at least 10 foreign fishing vessels from those waters.90

Maritime Militia

China also uses civilian fishing ships as a form of maritime militia, as well as mobile oil exploration platforms, to assert and defend its maritime claims. U.S. analysts in recent years have paid increasing attention to the role of China’s maritime militia as a key tool for implementing China’s salami-slicing strategy.91 DOD states that

The CMM [China Maritime Militia] is a subset of China’s national militia, an armed reserve force of civilians available for mobilization to perform basic support duties. Militia units organize around towns, villages, urban sub-districts, and enterprises, and vary widely from one location to another. The composition and mission of each unit is based on local conditions and personnel skills. In the South China Sea, the CMM plays a major role in coercive activities to achieve China’s political goals without fighting, part of broader PRC military doctrine that states that confrontational operations short of war can be an effective means of accomplishing political objectives.

A large number of CMM vessels train with and support the PLAN and CCG in tasks such as safeguarding maritime claims, protecting fisheries, logistics, search and rescue (SAR), and surveillance and reconnaissance. The government subsidizes various local and provincial commercial organizations to operate militia vessels to perform “official”

[CONTINUED…]

91 See, for example, Andrew S. Erickson, “Understanding China’s Third Sea Force: The Maritime Militia,” Fairbank Center, September 8, 2017; Andrew Erickson, “New Pentagon China Report Highlights the Rise of Beijing’s Maritime Militia,” National Interest, June 7, 2017; Ryan Pickrell, “New Pentagon Report Finally Drags China’s Secret Sea Weapon Out Of The Shadows,” Daily Caller, June 7, 2017; Conor M. Kennedy and Andrew S. Erickson, “Hainan’s Maritime Militia: All Hands on Deck for Sovereignty Pt. 3,” Center for International Maritime Security, April 26,2017; Conor M. Kennedy and Andrew S. Erickson, “Hainan’s Maritime Militia: Development Challenges and Opportunities, Pt. 2” Center for International Maritime Security, April 10, 2017; Andrew Erickson, “Hainan’sMaritime Militia: China Builds A Standing Vanguard, Pt. 1,” Center for International Maritime Security, March 25, 2017; Conor M. Kennedy and Andrew S. Erickson, China’s Third Sea Force, The People’s Armed Forces MaritimeMilitia: Tethered to the PLA, China Maritime Report No. 1, China Maritime Studies Institute, U.S. Naval War College,Newport, RI, March 2017, 22 pp.; Michael peck, “‘Little Blue Sailors’: Maritime Hybrid Warfare Is Coming (In the South China Sea and Beyond),” National Interest, December 18, 2016; Peter Brookes, “Take Note of China’s Non-Navy Maritime Force,” The Hill, December 13, 2016; Christopher P. Cavas, “China’s Maritime Militia a Growing Concern,” Defense News, November 21, 2016; Christopher P. Cavas, “China’s Maritime Militia—Time to Call Them Out?” Defense News, September 18, 2016; Conor M. Kennedy and Andrew S. Erickson, “Riding A New Wave of Professionalization and Militarization: Sansha City’s Maritime Militia,” Center for International Maritime Security, September 1, 2016; John Grady, “Experts: China Continues Using Fishing Fleets for Naval Presence Operations,”USNI News, August 17, 2016; David Axe, “China Launches A Stealth Invasion in the South China Sea,” Daily Beast, August 9, 2016; Andrew S. Erickson and Conor M. Kennedy, “Countering China’s Third Sea Force: Unmask Maritime Militia Before They’re Used Again,” National Interest, July 6, 2016; Andrew S. Erickson and Conor M. Kennedy,“China’s Maritime Militia, What It Is and How to Deal With It,” Foreign Affairs, June 23, 2016.

p. 34

missions on an ad hoc basis outside of their regular commercial roles. The CMM has played significant roles in a number of military campaigns and coercive incidents over the years, including the 2011 harassment of Vietnamese survey vessels, the 2012 Scarborough Reef standoff [with the Philippines], and the 2014 Haiyang Shiyou-981 oil rig standoff [with Vietnam].

In the past, the CMM rented fishing vessels from companies or individual fishermen, but it appears that China is building a state-owned fishing fleet for its maritime militia force in the South China Sea. Hainan Province, adjacent to the South China Sea, has ordered the building of 84 large militia fishing vessels for Sansha City.92

92 Department of Defense, Annual Report to Congress [on] Military and Security Developments Involving the People’s Republic of China 2017, p. 56. See also pp. i, 12.

 

REPORT SUMMARY

China’s actions for asserting and defending its maritime territorial and exclusive economic zone (EEZ) claims in the East China (ECS) and South China Sea (SCS) have heightened concerns among observers that China may be seeking to dominate or gain control of its near-seas region, meaning the ECS, the SCS, and the Yellow Sea. Chinese domination over or control of this region could substantially affect U.S. strategic, political, and economic interests in the Asia-Pacific region and elsewhere.

U.S. Navy Admiral Philip Davidson, in responses to advance policy questions from the Senate Armed Services Committee for an April 17, 2018, hearing before the committee to consider nominations, including Davidson’s nomination to become Commander, U.S. Pacific Command (PACOM), stated in part that “China is now capable of controlling the South China Sea in all scenarios short of war with the United States.”

China is a party to multiple territorial disputes in the SCS and ECS, including, in particular, disputes over the Paracel Islands, Spratly Islands, and Scarborough Shoal in the SCS, and the Senkaku Islands in the ECS. China depicts its territorial claims in the SCS using the so-called map of the nine-dash line that appears to enclose an area covering roughly 90% of the SCS. Some observers characterize China’s approach for asserting and defending its territorial claims in the ECS and SCS as a “salami-slicing” strategy that employs a series of incremental actions, none of which by itself is a casus belli, to gradually change the status quo in China’s favor.

In addition to territorial disputes in the SCS and ECS, China is involved in a dispute, particularly with the United States, over whether China has a right under international law to regulate the activities of foreign military forces operating within China’s EEZ. The dispute appears to be at the heart of incidents between Chinese and U.S. ships and aircraft in international waters and airspace in 2001, 2002, 2009, 2013, and 2014.

The U.S. position on territorial and EEZ disputes in the Western Pacific (including those involving China) includes the following elements, among others:

  • The United States supports the principle that disputes between countries should be resolved peacefully, without coercion, intimidation, threats, or the use of force, and in a manner consistent with international law.
  • The United States supports the principle of freedom of seas, meaning the rights, freedoms, and uses of the sea and airspace guaranteed to all nations in international law. The United States opposes claims that impinge on the rights, freedoms, and lawful uses of the sea that belong to all nations.
  • The United States takes no position on competing claims to sovereignty over disputed land features in the ECS and SCS.
  • Although the United States takes no position on competing claims to sovereignty over disputed land features in the ECS and SCS, the United States does have a position on how competing claims should be resolved: Territorial disputes should be resolved peacefully, without coercion, intimidation, threats, or the use of force, and in a manner consistent with international law.
  • Claims of territorial waters and EEZs should be consistent with customary international law of the sea and must therefore, among other things, derive from land features. Claims in the SCS that are not derived from land features are fundamentally flawed.
  • Parties should avoid taking provocative or unilateral actions that disrupt the status quo or jeopardize peace and security. The United States does not believe that large-scale land reclamation with the intent to militarize outposts on disputed land features is consistent with the region’s desire for peace and stability.
  • The United States, like most other countries, believes that coastal states under UNCLOS have the right to regulate economic activities in their EEZs, but do not have the right to regulate foreign military activities in their EEZs.
  • U.S. military surveillance flights in international airspace above another country’s EEZ are lawful under international law, and the United States plans to continue conducting these flights as it has in the past.
  • The Senkaku Islands are under the administration of Japan and unilateral attempts to change the status quo raise tensions and do nothing under international law to strengthen territorial claims.

China’s actions for asserting and defending its maritime territorial and EEZ claims in the ECS and SCS raise several potential policy and oversight issues for Congress, including whether the United States has an adequate strategy for countering China’s “salami-slicing” strategy, whether the United States has taken adequate actions to reduce the risk that the United States might be drawn into a crisis or conflict over a territorial dispute involving China, and whether the United States should become a party to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).

 

CLICK BELOW FOR THE FULL TEXT OF SOME OF THE PUBLICATIONS CITED IN O’ROURKE’S CRS REPORT:

Peter A. Dutton and Andrew S. Erickson, “When Eagle Meets Dragon: Managing Risk in Maritime East Asia,” RealClearDefense, 25 March 2015.

Andrew S. Erickson, “Understanding China’s Third Sea Force: The Maritime Militia,” Harvard Fairbank Center Blog Post, 8 September 2017.

Andrew S. Erickson, “New Pentagon China Report Highlights the Rise of Beijing’s Maritime Militia,” The National Interest, 7 June 2017.

Conor M. Kennedy and Andrew S. Erickson, “Hainan’s Maritime Militia: All Hands on Deck for Sovereignty, Pt. 3,” Center for International Maritime Security (CIMSEC), 26 April 2017.

Conor M. Kennedy and Andrew S. Erickson, “Hainan’s Maritime Militia: Development Challenges and Opportunities, Pt. 2,” Center for International Maritime Security (CIMSEC), 10 April 2017.

Conor M. Kennedy and Andrew S. Erickson, “Hainan’s Maritime Militia: China Builds a Standing Vanguard, Pt. 1,” Center for International Maritime Security (CIMSEC), 26 March 2017.

Conor M. Kennedy and Andrew S. Erickson, China’s Third Sea Force, The People’s Armed Forces Maritime Militia: Tethered to the PLA, China Maritime Report 1 (Newport, RI: Naval War College China Maritime Studies Institute, March 2017).

Conor M. Kennedy and Andrew S. Erickson, “Riding a New Wave of Professionalization and Militarization: Sansha City’s Maritime Militia,” Center for International Maritime Security (CIMSEC), 1 September 2016.

Andrew S. Erickson and Conor M. Kennedy, “Countering China’s Third Sea Force: Unmask Maritime Militia before They’re Used Again,” The National Interest, 6 July 2016.

Andrew S. Erickson and Conor M. Kennedy, “China’s Maritime Militia: What It Is and How to Deal With It,” Foreign Affairs, 23 June 2016.

Andrew S. Erickson and Emily de La Bruyere, “Crashing Its Own Party: China’s Unusual Decision to Spy on Joint Naval Exercises,” China Real Time Report (中国实时报), Wall Street Journal, 19 July 2014.

Andrew S. Erickson and Emily de La Bruyere, “China’s RIMPAC Maritime-Surveillance Gambit,” The National Interest, 29 July 2014.

Andrew S. Erickson, “PRC National Defense Ministry Spokesman Sr. Col. Geng Yansheng Offers China’s Most-Detailed Position to Date on Dongdiao-class Ship’s Intelligence Collection in U.S. EEZ during RIMPAC Exercise,” China Analysis from Original Sources 以第一手资料研究中国, 1 August 2014.

Ryan D. Martinson and Andrew S. Erickson, “Re-Orienting American Sea Power For The China Challenge,” War on the Rocks, 10 May 2018.

 

China Security Report 2018: The China-U.S. Relationship at a Crossroads (Tokyo: National Institute for Defense Studies, 2018).

On p. 57, the 2018 report from Japan’s National Institute for Defense Studies (NIDS), entitled “The China-US Relationship at a Crossroads,” does what the U.S. government should have done at the time, and has suffered unfortunate consequences for failing to do. In “Table 3-2: Major Actions Taken by China in the South China Sea,” under the category of “Interference in other countries’ activities,” the report correctly describes the 2009 USNS Impeccable Incident as an instance of “Harassment of the US vessel by maritime militia.”

BACKGROUND ON THE 2018 NIDS REPORT AND ITS PREDECESSORS:

The international community keeps a close watch on China’s security policy and its military trends. The Japanese public has been increasingly aware of the large impact of China’s rising military (and economic) power that may have a huge impact on Japanese security. China, now the second largest economy in the world, has become an essentially important economic partner for Japan and other East Asian countries. At the same time, its rapid economic growth allows China to multiply its military spending and move forward with the modernization of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA). Produced by Japan’s National Institute for Defense Studies, the NIDS China Security Report analyzes the strategic and military trends of China. The report is originally published in Japanese, then translated into English and Chinese.

China Security Report 2018

Statement of Admiral Harry B. Harris Jr., U.S. Navy, Commander, U.S. Pacific Command, before the House Armed Services Committee on U.S. Pacific Command Posture, Washington, DC, 14 February 2018.

“Across the South China Sea, China’s air force, navy, coast guard, and maritime militia allmaintain a robust presence. Routine patrols and exercises ensure Chinese forces are in and around all the features, not just the ones they occupy. China routinely challenges the presence of non-Chinese forces, including other claimant nations and especially the U.S., often overstating its authority and insisting foreign forces either stay away or obtain Chinese permission to operate.”

China’s Maritime Militia: A Conversation with Andrew Erickson,” podcast interview with Bonnie Glaser, ChinaPower Project, Center for Strategic and International Studies, Washington, DC, 26 October 2017.

Click here to listen to the half-hour-long podcast.

In this episode, Professor Andrew Erickson joins us to discuss the origin and role of China’s maritime militia. Our conversation traces the history of the maritime militia fleet and the training the militia receives. We talk about the various ways that the maritime militia is employed to strengthen China’s sovereignty claims in the South China. Professor Erickson provides recommendations on how the United States should respond to this unique challenge.

Andrew Erickson is a Professor of Strategy in the U.S. Naval War College’s China Maritime Studies Institute, where his research focuses on the Chinese military and maritime studies, and an Associate in Research at Harvard University’s John King Fairbank Center for Chinese Studies. He is considered a leading figure in the research of China’s maritime militia.

The views expressed here are those of Dr. Andrew Erickson alone. They in no way represent the policies or estimates of the U.S. Navy or any other organization of the U.S. government.

 

Chapter 6: Asia,” The Military Balance 118:1 (London: International Institute for Strategic Studies, 2018), 259.

p. 259

“Maritime Militia

Made up of full- and part-time personnel. Reports to PLA command and trains to assist PLAN and CCG in a variety of military roles. These include ISR, maritime law enforcement, island supply, troop transport and supporting sovereignty claims. The Maritime Militia operates a variety of civilian vessels including fishing boats and oil tankers.”

 

National Security Strategy of the United States of America 2017 (Washington, DC: The White House, December 2017).

p. 27

In addition, after being dismissed as a phenomenon of an earlier century, great power competition returned. China and Russia began to reassert their influence regionally and globally. Today, they are fielding military capabilities designed to deny America access in times of crisis and to contest our ability to operate freely in critical commercial zones during peacetime. In short, they are contesting our geopolitical advantages and trying to change the international order in their favor.

p. 28

The United States must prepare for this type of competition. China, Russia, and other state and nonstate actors recognize that the United States often views the world in binary terms, with states being either “at peace” or “at war,” when it is actually an arena of continuous competition. Our adversaries will not fight us on our terms. We will raise our competitive game to meet that challenge, to protect American interests, and to advance our values.

 

2017 Report to Congress of the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission, One Hundred Fifteenth Congress, First Session, 15 November 2017.

Click here to read the full text.

Report PDFs: 

2017 Annual Report

2017 Executive Summary and Recommendations.pdf

Comprehensive List of the Commission’s Recommendations.pdf

 

Selected content:

p. 11

“Disputes over islands and other land features in the South China Sea could easily escalate into crises, and in fact already have (notably with China’s seizure and effective blockade of Philippines-claimed Scarborough Reef in 2012 and the destructive skirmish between Chinese and Vietnamese non-naval forces over a Chinese oil rig in 2014). Should China perceive an intolerable challenge to its claimed sovereignty over one of these disputed areas, it could employ a range of options—including island landing operations, blockades, or missile strikes—to seize control of disputed features. Such operations likely would involve (perhaps even exclusively) its non-naval maritime forces, such as the China Coast Guard and maritime militia, creating operational uncertainty and “grey zone” challenges for adversaries.

 p. 153

CHAPTER 2 U.S.-CHINA SECURITY RELATIONS

SECTION 1: YEAR IN REVIEW: SECURITY AND FOREIGN AFFAIRS

Key Findings

  • China’s territorial disputes in the South China Sea and in South Asia flared in 2017. China continued to rely primarily on nonmilitary and semiofficial actors (such as the China Coast Guard and maritime militia) to advance its interests in the disputed South China Sea, straining already-unsettled relations with the Philippines and Vietnam. The 2016 ruling by the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague, which overwhelmingly sided against China’s position, has not deterred Beijing. China’s territorial assertiveness was also on display when Chinese armed forces attempted to consolidate control over territory disputed by Bhutan and India. Ultimately, India was more successful than the Philippines and Vietnam in countering Chinese coercion.”

p. 237

“Disputed Claims in the South China Sea

Protecting territory claimed by China in the South China Sea has become an increasingly important mission for the PLA.14 Chinese military scholars at China’s National Defense University and the Academy of Military Science argue that while China does not seek a conflict with the United States, “the South China Sea and the East China Sea are … issues that must be settled in the course of China’s rise.”15 Although China has used force to resolve disputes in the” …

p. 238

… “South China Sea in the past,* it has managed its South China Sea claims in recent years with a mix of naval presence, harassment, and hostilities from maritime law enforcement agencies and maritime militia,† and a massive reclamation and fortification campaign of the features it occupies within its claimed “nine-dash line.”16 Furthermore, in 2012, China Coast Guard ships wrested control of the disputed Scarborough Reef from the Philippines.17”

† China’s maritime militia, a quasi-military force of fishermen that are tasked by and report to the PLA, has a key role in China’s South China Sea strategy. They are trained to participate in a variety of missions, including search and rescue, reconnaissance, deception operations, law enforcement, and “rights protection,” which often entails activities like harassing foreign vessels in China’s claimed waters. U.S. Department of Defense, Annual Report to Congress: Military and Security Developments Involving the People’s Republic of China 2017, May 15, 2017, 56; U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission, 2016 Annual Report to Congress, November 2016, 197; Andrew Erickson and Conor M. Kennedy, “China’s Fishing Militia Is a Military Force in All but Name,” War Is Boring, July 9, 2016.

 p. 252

South China Sea Contingency Operation

China’s military, law enforcement, and maritime militia activity in the South China Sea—particularly the ongoing construction of civil-military facilities on reclaimed features in the Spratly Islands—is intended to enhance China’s control over disputed areas in the region.100 Should Beijing judge that China’s sovereignty claims over occupied features within the South China Sea are challenged by states with overlapping claims, the PLA has a range of campaigns that can be executed to maintain control of these features within the nine-dash line. These campaigns include the aforementioned joint firepower strike, joint blockade, sea force group, and coral reef offensive campaigns. China would certainly incorporate maritime law enforcement operations in conjunction with these campaigns, as well as in the run-up to one or more of these campaigns. This will have significant implications for a contingency in the South China Sea or East China Sea. As numerous analysts have noted, China’s unconventional practice of using its maritime law enforcement agencies and maritime militia to advance its territorial claims and harass neighboring countries’ vessels enables China to effectively assert military might in the “gray zone,” just below the threshold of conflict, putting the onus of escalation on the adversary.101 This approach was on display in the case of the oil rig deployed to Vietnam-claimed waters, discussed earlier in this section: Chinese maritime law enforcement forces effectively waged a small maritime” …

  1. U.S. Department of Defense, Annual Report to Congress: Military and Security Developments Involving the People’s Republic of China 2016, April 26, 2016, 7.
  2. Lyle J. Morris, “The New ‘Normal’ in the East China Sea,” Diplomat, February 24, 2017; Andrew S. Erickson and Conor M. Kennedy, “Countering China’s Third Sea Force: Unmask Maritime Militia before They’re Used Again,” National Interest, July 6, 2016; Alexander Chieh-cheng Huang, “The PLA and Near Seas Maritime Sovereignty Disputes,” in Andrew Scobell et al., eds., The People’s Liberation Army and Contingency Planning in China, National Defense University Press, 2015, 290–291.

 p. 253

… “battle against Vietnam, to the point that at least one Vietnamese vessel sank and several vessels on both sides incurred damage. But because only nonmilitary vessels were involved in the actual fighting, this conflict was characterized in international media as a “standoff,”102 rather than a kinetic conflict initiated by China. This narrative, and the general downplaying of the role maritime law enforcement forces can play in a conflict, greatly benefits China.”

p. 262

  • “After seizing control of Scarborough Reef from the Philippines in 2012, China has intermittently permitted Filipino fishermen to fish at the reef and has harassed some Filipino fishermen;186 this dispute remains a flashpoint between the two countries.187
  • In March 2017, China declared its intent to build an environmental monitoring station near Scarborough Reef.188 The Philippines government has declared that any Chinese building at Scarborough would be a “red line.”189 Should China seek to alter the reef through land reclamation or the deployment of PLA equipment such as surface search radars, this would certainly increase tension between the two countries.*
  • Second Thomas Shoal—where Filipino Marines man a makeshift outpost on the Sierra Madre, a grounded Philippine Navy amphibious ship—is another potential flashpoint.190 China has often challenged the resupply of the grounded ship and threatened to destroy the outpost.† 191
  • In April 2017, President Duterte declared the AFP would “occupy” all Philippines-claimed features in the Spratly Islands.192 Although he later walked back the statement,193 it illustrates the high level of tension that still pervades the China-Philippines relationship with regard to the South China Sea.”

*In addition to the likelihood that land reclamation activity at Scarborough Reef would in- crease tensions between China and the Philippines, Andrew S. Erickson, a professor of strategy at the U.S. Naval War College, in his testimony to the Commission stated, “It’s important to ensure that Scarborough [Reef] is not dredged and developed into a key targeting node for China in the South China Sea, where it would, in effect, be the last big piece in the coverage puzzle.” U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission, Hearing on China’s Advanced Weapons, oral testimony of Andrew S. Erickson, February 23, 2017.

p. 351

Commercial and semiofficial Chinese actors, such as fishing boats and vessels that are part of China’s maritime militia,* have accounted for the majority of China’s maritime activity near the Senkakus.219 In August 2016, China deployed roughly 230 fishing boats and 15 CCG vessels within 24 nm of the Senkakus—the largest number of vessels China has deployed to the area since tensions spiked in September 2012.220 More than 100 maritime militiamen reportedly were identified on these fishing boats, many of them apparently commanding fishing boats while dressed in Chinese military fatigues.221 With this operation, China demonstrated it can control these vessels and integrate them into operations with law enforcement. This capability has been enabled by multiple joint drills involving Chinese military, law enforcement, and civilian agencies in recent years.222 The huge number of nongovernment vessels at China’s disposal—including roughly 200,000 fishing boats—and the CCG’s growing capabilities increase the possibility that China could swarm and overwhelm the Japan Coast Guard near the Senkakus.223”

*China has the world’s largest maritime militia, a quasi-military force of fishermen that are tasked by and report to the PLA. They are trained to participate in a variety of missions, in- cluding search and rescue, reconnaissance, deception operations, law enforcement, and “rights protection,” which often entails activities like harassing foreign vessels in China’s claimed waters. Andrew Erickson and Conor M. Kennedy, “China’s Fishing Militia Is a Military Force in All but Name,” War Is Boring, July 9, 2016.

 p. 358

With Japan, China has gradually but decisively moved to consolidate its claims in the East China Sea, with its coast guard and maritime militia forces leading the chargeChina’s use of nonmilitary actors to advance its claims handicaps Japan’s ability to mount an effective countervailing force; the Japan Coast Guard is highly capable, but will meet significant difficulties engaging China’s maritime forces. China’s growing competence in conducting “gray zone” operations below the threshold of kinetic military conflict could also complicate the United States’ ability to fulfil its treaty obligation to defend Japan from an armed attack.”

p. 390

The PLA Navy has more than 300 surface combatants, submarines, and missile-armed patrol craft, in addition to China’s highly capable coast guard and maritime militia.162 Taiwan, on the other hand, has 92 naval combatants, comprising four submarines—two of which are only used for training—and 88 surface ships.† 163”

†Taiwan’s coast guard is in the midst of a ten-year shipbuilding program that will bring its forces to 173 ships. Taiwan does not have a maritime militia. Mrityunjoy Mazumdar, “Taiwanese Coast Guard Launches OPV amid Ongoing Force Development Programme,” Jane’s Defense Weekly, May 28, 2015.

p. 572 

“The PLA Navy is exploring options for unmanned surface vehicles (USVs),159 and some Chinese research institutes have made progress on these systems. However, DGI’s 2016 report assessed that Chinese military strategists appear to be minimally interested in USVs, potentially because China’s maritime militia can already be mobilized for a variety of missions to support the PLA Navy.160”

  1. Jonathan Ray et al., “China’s Industrial and Military Robotics Development,” Defense Group, Inc. Center for Intelligence Research and Analysis (prepared for the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission), October 2016, 68.

p. 579

“China has often relied on foreign technology to boost its advanced weapons programs. China may have incorporated technologies from the U.S. Pershing II MRBM into its ASBMs,233 and its HGV may be an enhanced version of a MaRV developed for an existing ballistic missile, for example.234”

  1. U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission, Hearing on China’s Advanced Weapons, written testimony of Andrew S. Erickson, February 23, 2017.

 

LINKS TO FULL TEXT OF SELECTED SOURCES CITED:

Andrew S. Erickson, ed., Chinese Naval Shipbuilding: An Ambitious and Uncertain Course (Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute Press, 2016).

Andrew S. Erickson and Adam P. Liff, “China’s Military Spending Swells Again Despite Domestic Headwinds,” China Real Time Report (中国实时报), Wall Street Journal, 5 March 2015.

Adam P. Liff and Andrew S. Erickson, “Demystifying China’s Defence Spending: Less Mysterious in the Aggregate,” The China Quarterly 216 (December 2013): 805-30.

Michael S. Chase and Andrew S. Erickson, The Conventional Missile Capabilities of China’s Second Artillery Force: Cornerstone of Deterrence and Warfighting,” Asian Security, 8.2 (Summer 2012): 115-37.

Andrew S. Erickson and Conor M. Kennedy, “China’s Fishing Militia Is a Military Force in All but Name,” War Is Boring (Blog), 9 July 2016.

Reprint of Andrew S. Erickson and Conor M. Kennedy, “Countering China’s Third Sea Force: Unmask Maritime Militia before They’re Used Again,” The National Interest, 6 July 2016.

Andrew S. Erickson, “Chinese Anti-Ship Ballistic Missile Development and Counter-intervention Efforts,” testimony at Hearing on China’s Advanced Weapons held by U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Washington, DC, 23 February 2017.

Andrew S. Erickson and Michael S. Chase, “China’s Strategic Rocket Force: Sharpening the Sword (Part 1 of 2),” Jamestown China Brief 14.13 (3 July 2014).

Andrew S. Erickson and Lyle J. Goldstein, [Xu Qi], “21世纪初海上地缘战略与中国海军的发展” [Maritime Geostrategy and the Development of the Chinese Navy in the Early 21st Century], 中国军事科学 [China Military Science] 17.4 (2004): 75-81, Naval War College Review  59.4 (Autumn 2006): 46-67.

Andrew S. Erickson and Conor M. Kennedy, “Countering China’s Third Sea Force: Unmask Maritime Militia before They’re Used Again,” The National Interest, 6 July 2016.

Andrew S. Erickson, “Showtime: China Reveals Two ‘Carrier-Killer’ Missiles,” The National Interest, 3 September 2015.

Timothy Heath and Andrew S. Erickson, “China’s Turn Toward Regional Restructuring, Counter-Intervention: A Review of Authoritative Sources,” Jamestown China Brief 15.22(16 November 2015): 3-8.

Andrew S. Erickson and Michael Monti, “Trouble Ahead? Chinese-Korean Disputes May Intensify,” The National Interest, 20 February 2015.

Andrew S. Erickson, Chinese Anti-Ship Ballistic Missile Development: Drivers, Trajectories, and Strategic Implications (Washington, DC: Jamestown Foundation, May 2013).

Andrew S. Erickson and Justin D. Mikolay, “Guam and American Security in the Pacific,” in Carnes Lord and Andrew S. Erickson, eds., Rebalancing U.S. Forces: Basing and Forward Presence in the Asia-Pacific (Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute Press, 2014), 14-35.

 

Andrew S. Erickson, “Understanding China’s Third Sea Force: The Maritime Militia,” Harvard Fairbank Center Blog Post, 8 September 2017.

Andrew S. Erickson, professor at the U.S. Naval War College’s China Maritime Studies Institute (CMSI) and Fairbank Center Associate in Research, outlines China’s evolving maritime security forces.

China’s Armed Forces are composed of three major organizations, each of which has a maritime subcomponent. The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) contains the PLA Navy (PLAN); the People’s Armed Police, which increasingly leads China’s Maritime Law Enforcement (MLE) forces, including the China Coast Guard; and the Militia, which contains a growing proportion of sea-based units, the People’s Armed Forces Maritime Militia (PAFMM). Each of China’s three sea forces is the world’s largest of its type.

First, China has the world’s largest navy. The U.S. Naval War College’s CMSI analyzed China’s fleet force development in its previous conference volume, Chinese Naval Shipbuilding. The PLAN currently has slightly over 300 vessels; by 2020, the U.S. Office of Naval Intelligence forecasts that it will have 313–342 warships. According to its official website, as of September 2017 the U.S. Navy has 277 “deployable battle force ships.” While Chinese warships lag behind their American counterparts in individual capabilities — a “mandarin oranges to apples” comparison — numbers matter significantly when it comes to maintaining presence and influence in vital seas.

Second, China has the world’s largest coast guard by a sizable margin. Today, China’s Coast Guard has 225 ships over 500 tons capable of operating offshore, and another 1,050+ confined to closer waters, for a total of over 1,275 ships: more hulls than the coast guards of all its regional neighbors combined. China has two of the world’s largest coast guard ships (10,000+ tons full load). In 2020, China’s Coast Guard is projected to have a total of 1,300+ ships: 260 large vessels capable of operating offshore, many capable of operating worldwide; and another 1,050+ smaller vessels confined to closer waters.

Third, China has the world’s largest maritime militia, and virtually the only one charged with involvement in sovereignty disputes. Only Vietnam is known to have a similar force with a similar mission. China’s PAFMM is a set of mariners and their vessels which are trained, equipped, and organized directly by the PLA’s local military commands. While at sea, these units typically answer to the PLA chain of command, and are certain to do so when activated for missions. While most militiamen have civilian jobs, new units are emerging that appear to employ elite forces full-time as militarized professionals. … …

 

China Maritime Studies Institute Faculty Brings China’s Maritime Militia Out of the Shadows,” The Beacon: U.S. Naval War College Newsletter 1.3 (August 2017): 14.

As part of an intensive multi-year project, Professor Andrew Erickson and Research Associate Conor Kennedy of the China Maritime Studies Institute (CMSI) have illuminated China’s use of a Maritime Militia to overpower its neighbors and advance Beijing’s control over the South China Sea. Since July 2015, they have authored more than twenty articles and papers and delivered numerous briefings to fleet planners, senior decision-makers, and other stakeholders. Professor Erickson has also testified on this topic before the House Armed Services Committee and briefed repeatedly at OPNAV and the National Security Council. (See Erickson and Kennedy’s China’s Third Sea Force, The People’s Armed Forces Maritime Militia: Tethered to the PLA and Professor Ryan Martinson’s The Arming of China’s Maritime Frontier.)

Using CMSI’s interdisciplinary open source methodology to evaluate hundreds of original Chinese-language sources, this project has revealed Chinese Maritime Militia involvement in international sea incidents of significant concern to the United States and its regional allies and partners.

Building on this research, Professor Erickson and Professor Ryan Martinson organized May’s CMSI conference on “China’s Maritime Gray Zone Operations.” They are editing the resulting Naval Institute Press volume, which scrutinizes China’s Maritime Militia and Coast Guard, and the central role they play in maritime operations designed to overwhelm or coerce an opponent through activities not easily countered without escalating to war.

Below: Professor Erickson gives Congressional testimony concerning China’s Maritime Militia

 

 

Andrew S. Erickson, “New Pentagon China Report Highlights the Rise of Beijing’s Maritime Militia,” The National Interest, 7 June 2017.

Pentagon experts have finally keyed in on one of the most important aspects of China’s strategy to dominate the waterways of the Asia-Pacific.

Issued yesterday, the Pentagon’s annual report to Congress on China’s military and security developments contains a typically vast array of data, some publicly specified or confirmed for the first time. Among its 106 pages—arguably the most significant development is its unprecedented coverage of China’s maritime militia—the first official U.S. government assessment to call it out in public. This is a long overdue and welcome breakthrough: the shadowy but knowable force’s vanguard units are literally on the front lines of Beijing’s efforts to overpower its neighbors and advance its control over the South China Sea.

Together with the world’s largest Coast Guard, and with China’s Navy backstopping in an “overwatch” capacity, China’s maritime militia plays a central role in maritime activities designed to overwhelm or coerce an opponent through activities cannot be easily countered without escalating to war. The report terms this approach “low-intensity coercion in maritime disputes.” Leading elements of China’s maritime militia have already played frontline roles in manifold Chinese incidents and skirmishes with foreign mariners throughout the South China Sea. Such international-sea incidents of significant concern to the United States and its regional allies and partners include multiple contributions to furthering China’s sovereignty claims in the South China Sea.

China maritime-militia forces played a central role in the 1974 battle in which China seized the western Paracel Islands from Vietnam. More recently, as the report documents, they “played significant roles in . . . the 2011 harassment of Vietnamese survey vessels.” They harassed USNS Impeccable in international waters in 2009. They helped trigger the 2012 incident in which they ultimately supported other Chinese forces in seizing Scarborough Shoal from the Philippines. They engaged in reconnaissance and sovereignty patrols during China’s February 2014 blockade of Philippine resupply of Second Thomas Shoal. They played the frontline role in the 2014 repulsion of Vietnamese vessels from disputed waters surrounding China National Offshore Oil Corporation’s HYSY-981 oil rig.

The militia is a key component of China’s armed forces and its maritime subcomponent is the Third Sea Force of China. China’s maritime militia is a set of marine industry workers (typically fishermen) and their vessels trained, equipped, organized and commanded directly by the local military commands of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA). These units typically answer to the PLA chain of command, and are certain to do so when activated for international-sea incidents pre-planned by Beijing. While most militiamen have civilian jobs, new units are emerging that appear to employ elite forces full-time as militarized professionals. Directed participation by China maritime-militia forces in international-sea incidents or provocations occurs under the PLA chain of command, and sometimes also under the temporary command of the Chinese maritime law-enforcement agencies.

Here’s why the Pentagon’s publicizing of China’s maritime-militia matters: it is strongest—and most effective—when it can lurk in the shadows. But the Naval War College China Maritime Studies Institute’s two-and-a-half-year study—and more than twenty articles, papers and briefings—reveals that there is more than enough open-source information available to expose China’s maritime militia for what it is: a state-organized, state-developed and state-controlled force operating under a direct military chain of command to conduct Chinese state-sponsored activities.

By revealing the maritime militia’s true nature and “calling it out” in public, the U.S. government can remove the force’s plausible deniability, reduce its room for maneuver, and reduce the chances that China’s leaders will employ it dangerously in future encounters with American and allied vessels at sea. The very few previous U.S. government-related statements were not top-level official assessments, and hence did not have the full force and influence of the U.S. government behind them. China’s maritime militia was mentioned by Adm. Scott Swift, commander of the U.S. Pacific Fleet; by Ronald O’Rourke in his Congressional Research Service report on Chinese maritime disputes; and by the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission, which rightly recommended that the Department of Defense address this vital subject. But the Pentagon’s new report is the first official top-level assessment by the U.S. government to cover China’s maritime militia. It is extremely encouraging that the U.S. government has finally brought to bear the full force of its authority and its tremendous analytical capabilities to address this vital issue.

Unique Insights

Beyond its maritime-militia coverage, the report offers a treasure trove of other insights. Some areas, particularly broader strategic points and basic force-structure elements, are well known to PLA analysts outside the U.S. government but are conveniently compiled in a go-to source for many in Washington not normally focused on the subject. A number of specific points, however, are difficult—if not impossible—to corroborate or even learn through open sources. The report contains too many insights to enumerate them all here, and is best read in full—or at least skimmed directly. The following surveys some of the most important and interesting highlights from both categories. … … …

 

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION & ANALYSIS:

In a long-overdue and welcome breakthrough, the Pentagon’s latest report on China’s Military and Security Developments contains substantial content on China’s Maritime Militia.

Previously, China’s Maritime Militia was mentioned by Ronald O’Rourke in his Congressional Research Service report and by the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission, which recommended that the Department of Defense address this vital subject.

But the Pentagon’s new report is the first official top-level assessment by the U.S. government to cover China’s Maritime Militia. It is extremely encouraging that the U.S. government has finally brought to bear the full force of its authority and its tremendous analytical capabilities to address this vital issue.

Office of the Secretary of Defense, Military and Security Developments Involving the People’s Republic of China 2017 (Arlington, VA: Department of Defense, 6 June 2017).

p. i

China has leveraged its growing power to assert its sovereignty claims over features in the East and South China Seas. China has used coercive tactics, such as the use of law enforcement vessels and its maritime militia, to enforce maritime claims and advance its interests in ways that are calculated to fall below the threshold of provoking conflict.

p. 12

CHINA’S USE OF LOW-INTENSITY COERCION IN MARITIME DISPUTES

China continues to exercise low-intensity coercion to advance its claims in the East and South China Seas. During periods of tension, official statements and state media seek to portray China as reactive. China uses an opportunistically timed progression of incremental but intensifying steps to attempt to increase effective control over disputed areas and avoid escalation to military conflict. China also uses economic incentives and punitive trade policies to deter opposition to China’s actions in the region. In 2016, China used CCG, maritime militia, and fishing ships to surge its maritime presence at various disputed South China Sea features following July’s arbitration ruling. At the same time, it extended economic cooperation in exchange for shelving disputes with the Philippines. Conversely, China restricted Philippine fruit imports during the height of Scarborough Reef tensions in 2012.

p. 56

China Maritime Militia (CMM). The CMM is a subset of China’s national militia, an armed reserve force of civilians available for mobilization to perform basic support duties. Militia units organize around towns, villages, urban sub-districts, and enterprises, and vary widely from one location to another. The composition and mission of each unit is based on local conditions and personnel skills. In the South China Sea, the CMM plays a major role in coercive activities to achieve China’s political goals without fighting, part of broader PRC military doctrine that states that confrontational operations short of war can be an effective means of accomplishing political objectives. A large number of CMM vessels train with and support the PLAN and CCG in tasks such as safeguarding maritime claims, protecting fisheries, logistics, search and rescue (SAR), and surveillance and reconnaissance. The government subsidizes various local and provincial commercial organizations to operate militia vessels to perform “official” missions on an ad hoc basis outside of their regular commercial roles. The CMM has played significant roles in a number of military campaigns and coercive incidents over the years, including the 2011 harassment of Vietnamese survey vessels, the 2012 Scarborough Reef standoff, and the 2014 Haiyang Shiyou-981 oil rig standoff. In the past, the CMM rented fishing vessels from companies or individual fishermen, but it appears that China is building a state-owned fishing fleet for its maritime militia force in the South China Sea. Hainan Province, adjacent to the South China Sea, has ordered the building of 84 large militia fishing vessels for Sansha City.

 

 

HERE’S A COMPREHENSIVE REPORT ON THE ORGANIZATION AND COMMAND AND CONTROL OF CHINA’S MARITIME MILITIA:

Conor M. Kennedy and Andrew S. Erickson, China’s Third Sea Force, The People’s Armed Forces Maritime Militia: Tethered to the PLA, China Maritime Report 1 (Newport, RI: Naval War College China Maritime Studies Institute, March 2017).

 

China’s Third Sea Force,

The People’s Armed Forces Maritime Militia:

Tethered to the PLA

 

Conor M. Kennedy and Andrew S. Erickson[1]

 

China Maritime Report No. 1

March 2017

China Maritime Studies Institute

U.S. Naval War College

Newport, Rhode Island

 

Summary

Amid growing awareness that China’s Maritime Militia acts as a Third Sea Force which has been involved in international sea incidents, it is necessary for decision-makers who may face such contingencies to understand the Maritime Militia’s role in China’s armed forces. Chinese-language open sources reveal a tremendous amount about Maritime Militia activities, both in coordination with and independent of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA). Using well-documented evidence from the authors’ extensive open source research, this report seeks to clarify the Maritime Militia’s exact identity, organization, and connection to the PLA as a reserve force that plays a parallel and supporting role to the PLA. Despite being a separate component of China’s People’s Armed Forces (PAF), the militia are organized and commanded directly by the PLA’s local military commands. The militia’s status as a separate non-PLA force whose units act as “helpers of the PLA” (解放军的助手)[2] is further reflected in China’s practice of carrying out “joint military, law enforcement, and civilian [Navy-Maritime Law Enforcement-Maritime Militia] defense” (军警民联防). To more accurately capture the identity of the Maritime Militia, the authors propose referring to these irregular forces as the “People’s Armed Forces Maritime Militia” (PAFMM).

Like a tetherball, the PAFMM may be sent in many different directions when contacted by different players in the Chinese security space, but is often directed by the PLA and always remains tied to the PLA.

Key points:

  • Leading elements of China’s Maritime Militia have already played frontline roles in manifold Chinese incidents and skirmishes with foreign mariners throughout the South China Sea.
  • The Militia is a key component of China’s Armed Forces and a part of what it calls the “People’s Armed Forces System” (人武系统).[3]
  • China’s People’s Armed Forces Maritime Militia (PAFMM) is therefore the most accurate name for this Third Sea Force of China.
  • Directed participation by PAFMM forces in international sea incidents or provocations occurs under the PLA chain of command, and sometimes also under the temporary command of the Chinese Maritime Law Enforcement (MLE).
  • The PAFMM is thus a state-organized, -developed, and -controlled force operating under a direct military chain of command to conduct Chinese state-sponsored activities.

 

Command and Control

China boasts the world’s largest fishing fleet. A portion of its thousands of fishing vessels, and the thousands of people who work on them and in related industries, are registered in the Maritime Militia.[4] China’s PAFMM is an armed mass organization primarily comprising mariners working in the civilian economy who are trained and can be mobilized to defend and advance China’s maritime territorial claims, protect “maritime rights and interests,” and support the PLA Navy (PLAN) in wartime.

China’s People’s Armed Forces include the PLA, People’s Armed Police (PAP), and the militia, of which the PAF Maritime Militia (PAFMM) is a subset. As militia, members of the PAFMM typically retain their regular civilian employment while fulfilling their scheduled training and providing their service on demand for multifarious state-sponsored activities. To fully understand the PAFMM, it is critical to assess the institutional relationship between the PLA and the militia broadly.

Militia building typically involves a separate system in the armed forces, termed the “militia system” (民兵制度). The most recent official public description, in China’s 2013 Defense White Paper, states that they serve “as an assistant and backup force of the PLA.” While the militia is classified as a reserve force (后备力量), it should not be confused with the actual reserves of the PLA services (预备役部队). China builds the militia and the PLA reserves simultaneously as two separate components of its reserve force system.[5] Authoritative Chinese writings typically refer to the militia as “China militia” (中国民兵), essentially a reserve force that plays a parallel and supporting role to the PLA. This confers three responsibilities: first, to support the PLA in defending China from external threats, and second, to assist China’s domestic security forces to ensure social stability and to engage in disaster relief.

The militia has a military organizational structure and, despite being a separate component of China’s armed forces, is organized and commanded directly by the PLA’s local military commands.[6] Its forces are subject to the “dual-responsibility system” (双重领导) at the core of civil-military leadership over local forces. This system is implemented through multiple institutionalized mechanisms whereby local military and civilian leaders serve in posts on each other’s Party Committees that oversee militia work. Civilian leadership involvement in local military commands’ work helps ensure ‘Party control of the gun’ and creates useful synergies by leveraging local civilian resources.[7]

Fundamentally, militia units are local forces levied by provincial governments to support national defense efforts. This is reflected in the interactions between local civilian and military leaders. National militia work policies are prescribed for the provinces by the Central Military Commission’s National Defense Mobilization Department, currently headed by PLA Generals. The PLA Provincial Military Districts (MD) send their militia force requirements to the provincial government/Party apparatuses, which then plan and fund construction of the militia in their social and economic plans.[8] The local PLA commands (MDs, Military Subdistricts, and People’s Armed Forces Departments/PAFDs) then organize, train, and command the militia units. When required, other maritime-related government departments also help local military and government authorities to construct the PAFMM. For example, local branches of MLE agencies such as the Maritime Safety Administration and the China Coast Guard (CCG) provide safety or technical training pertinent to their departmental specialties.[9] Both central and provincial governments provide funding for the militia.[10] Local governments cover lost wages or damages incurred by militia personnel in training or missions. Since they help foot the bill for militia construction, local governments may call on the units if needed. The militia thus also provide a ready source of manpower for local governments in times of emergencies, such as natural disasters, law enforcement, and search and rescue efforts. This division of responsibilities requires civilian and military leaders to cooperate in militia building.

At the bottom tiers of the PLA local commands are the PAFDs, which link the PAFMM directly to the PLA chain of command. They are divided into county-level and grassroots-level PAFDs.[11]The county-level PAFDs, through which PAFMM communications and directives—such as mobilization and mission orders—must typically pass, are manned by active duty PLA personnel. Below them, the grassroots PAFDs are manned by civilian cadres whose salaries are paid by local governments and sometimes work on a part-time basis. These grassroots PAFDs are the closest interface through which militia interact with the PLA command on a regular basis, as their direct managers for recruitment, planning, organization, training, and policy execution.

The militia’s status as a separate non-PLA armed force is further reflected in China’s practice of conducting “joint military, law enforcement, and civilian defense” (军警民联防). At sea, this takes the form of “joint PLAN, MLE, and Maritime Militia [PAFMM] defense.”[12] Managing this joint defense system is a key responsibility of PLA commands located in border and coastal regions, such as the Sansha Garrison on Woody Island in the Paracels. These efforts are meant to integrate and coordinate local forces, such as the PAFMM and the PAP, vis-à-vis the PLA services’ joint warfighting operations. These dedicated efforts to incorporate local forces into broader joint operations seek to enable the PAFMM to operate effectively in such close coordination with the PLA services. Official Chinese sources indicate that leading PAFMM units are receiving military training directly from uniformed PLAN personnel while wearing their own militia uniforms.[13] Their vessels conduct exercises with PLAN and CCG vessels. To incentivize such risky state service, localities provide PAFMM personnel with a range of periodically-adjusted compensation and remuneration, including substantial pensions, social benefits, and subsidies.

Militia units established to specifically support PLA services, called “Service Support Detachments” (军兵种民兵分队), have also received greater emphasis over the past decade.[14]“Specialized Naval Militia Detachments” (海军民兵专业分队), created jointly by Military Subdistricts and the PLAN, train to provide specified support for naval combat operations. While the types of units vary significantly, the specialized naval militia detachments appear to draw upon technical professionals and former PLAN sailors for unit personnel, and to requisition fishing vessels for missions.[15] Unlike other PAFMM units that also carry out peacetime missions in support of China’s maritime claims, this subset of PAFMM enjoys a particularly close relationship with the PLAN and likely focuses heavily on combat scenarios.

Chinese leaders clearly see value in the PAFMM’s blurred status.[16] Among the chief motivations for building the militia is that it is not technically a direct subcomponent of the PLA. This rationale was also present during the establishment of the PAP in 1982 as an internal security force to relieve the PLA of the controversial task of suppressing domestic unrest. Such ambiguity affords the PAFMM great leeway in supporting China’s national interests and maritime claims.[17] It offers freedom to act in ways that would otherwise tarnish the PLA’s professional image and heighten escalation risks.[18] For example, an article run on the PLAN’s website described the advantages civilian identities afford PAFMM forces in terms of the “Three Warfares.” According to the author, PAFMM forces can “utilize their identities as civilians to create concern for maritime rights protection, spread maritime rights protection thought, display the determination and confidence of the nation’s people in protecting maritime rights and interests, makes gains in public opinion space, and occupy our rightful moral high ground.” The author also states that PAFMM personnel enjoy civilian liberties denied to active duty troops in the expression of policy, allowing them to guide public opinion in maritime affairs.[19] Having a third sea force that can keep a low profile and engage in deception while remaining subject to PLA command and control thus appears to be an essential motivation for China’s retention of a body that might appear crude and unprofessional in some respects.

The PAFMM contributes to China’s overall national defense mobilization work and is subject to the dual-leadership of local civilian and military organs. Thus, it is a unique component of China’s armed forces that is both separate from, and bound to, the PLA.

See Figure 1 (below) for a graphic depiction of PAFMM organization.

China's People's Armed Forces Maritime Militia Organization

Notes for Figure 1 (above):

1) Command of the PAFMM depends on the conditions prompting its mobilization in the first place, both in peace and in war. Generally, the MD chain of command exercises command over the PAFMM until operational command is delegated temporarily to the PLAN or CCG.[20] The PAFMM serves the Navy in both peacetime and wartime. MLE forces can also call on PAFMM forces for their own missions, but would likely have to provide compensation for the resources, i.e., fuel and labor, expended in such operations.[21] In their non-activated regular capacity as civilians conducting economic activities such as fishing, PAFMM members also maintain subordinate relationships with administrative entities such as the CCG and the PAP Border Defense Force. In all cases, the MD military and civilian leadership would be involved, either directly or at very least in a supervisory role.

2) National Defense Mobilization Committees (国防动员委员会) are consulting and coordinating bodies that assemble each level of civilian and military leadership under a single decision-making organ. Each level of NDMC works to ensure that national resources can be swiftly incorporated into national emergency or war efforts. Following recent PLA organizational reforms, it remains unclear whether there is still a NDMC-level entity between MDs and the State/CMC level, heretofore known as the “Military Region NDMC.” Transforming the former Military Regions into Theater Commands was meant to focus theater level commands’ efforts on joint warfighting rather than on the administrative functions of preparation for mobilization. The lack of Chinese reporting makes verification of this issue particularly difficult. Not reflected in the above organization chart, but also relevant to PAFMM building, are the Border and Coastal Defense Committees (边海防委员会) established in coastal provinces. As with the NDMCs, there is a State Border and Coastal Defense Committee under the unified leadership of the CMC and State Council, as well as Border and Coastal Defense Committees established at each corresponding level of governments and military commands in the provinces. These committees are also consulting and coordinating bodies for implementing defense of China’s land borders and claimed territorial waters, coordinating military and civilian forces under a single decision-making body. It also remains unknown if there will be a Border and Coastal Defense Committee at the former Military Region level, i.e., in the new Theater Commands.

3) Following the latest reforms, former Military Regions have been relieved of their responsibility for the construction of reserve forces in the provinces. MDs are now under the management of the CMC National Defense Mobilization Department. In times of emergency or war, Theater Commands would likely assume a commanding role for militia forces operating within their areas of geographic responsibility.

4) The depiction of three PAFMM units does not represent any specific order of battle or organizational structure, but rather illustrates that multiple Maritime Militia units may exist under an individual PAFD.

Nature of PLA Control in Specific Incidents

While not all PAFMM activities at sea are directly controlled by the PLA in real time, the ones of greatest concern to the United States and its allies and security partners are PLA-affiliated. A PLA-mandated approval process for mobilizing the PAFMM is always involved in events that include its use. Due to the dual-responsibility system, local governments are often involved in providing leadership over PAFMM forces when they are mobilized. Depending on the type of missions assigned, local governments and government agencies will both assume relevant roles to facilitate the missions of the PAFMM, thereby ensuring “unified leadership” (统一领导) between the local military and government organs.

Critically, deliberate participation by PAFMM forces in international sea incidents occurs directly under the PLA chain of command, at least in a supervisory capacity. Moreover, some leading elements of the PAFMM appear to be increasingly professionalized and militarized; the most advanced among them may draw a generous salary with no fishing or other civil economic employment whatsoever.[xxii] This trend would certainly make management and training of the PAFMM easier for PLA authorities. Increasingly capable PAFMM forces may also be bolstered by the continued downsizing of the PLA Army as veterans comprise priority recruitment by MDs. Although the following examples are from the South China Sea, abundant evidence indicates that similar control structures are present in the MDs in coastal provinces bordering the East China Sea and the Yellow Sea.

Activities are also initiated by non-PLA organs, albeit with PLA approval, in a general supervisory role attentive to the condition of units and their vessels. These include basic recurrent peacetime tasks such as fishing, typhoon response and other disaster relief organized by local governments, search and rescue missions to assist the CCG, presence missions in disputed waters, and the expulsion of foreign fishermen from Chinese-claimed waters. Examples of non-recurrent assignments not known to involve PLA initiation include the following. In March 2009 Sanya’s Maritime Militia participated in the harassment of the USNS Impeccable. In March 2014, it participated in the search for missing Malaysian Airlines Flight 370, likely within the confines of the South China Sea. In April 2013 Sanya’s Maritime Militia protected China National Offshore Oil Corporation (CNOOC)’s surveying operations south of Triton Island.

The harassment of the USNS Impeccable is a fitting example. Fisheries Law Enforcement (FLE) under the direction of FLE South China Sea Bureau Director Wu Zhuang commanded the fishing vessels that impeded the U.S. survey vessel’s operations.[xxiii] Having established a PAFMM unit in 2009,[xxiv] the Sanya Fugang Fisheries Company grassroots PAFD would thus have requested mission approval from its superiors in the district or municipal PAFDs in Sanya City, notifying their PLA superiors at a minimum. The degree to which the PLA was involved in harassment of the USNS Impeccable is still unclear; at least one PLAN vessel was on the scene. However, the fact that the Sanya fishing vessels involved were in the PAFMM would necessitate PLA awareness of FLE intentions regarding the incident.

PAFMM activities documented to have been initiated and guided by PLA organs include direct participation in the following international sea incidents pre-planned by China: the 1974 seizure of the Western Paracels from Vietnam, reconnaissance and sovereignty patrols during the February 2014 blockade of Second Thomas Shoal, and the 2014 repulsion of Vietnamese vessels from disputed waters surrounding the CNOOC HYSY-981 oil rig.

The 2012 Scarborough Shoal Standoff shows how the PLA can mobilize militia forces already at sea. Available sources do not reveal a direct PLA connection to the initial PAFMM-related encounters that sparked the April 2012 Scarborough Shoal Standoff. However, reports on members of the PAFMM unit present and their actions at Scarborough Shoal suggest PLA involvement in subsequent command and control of PAFMM operations to help seize the feature from the Philippines.

When Philippine naval forces arrived at Scarborough Shoal on 10 April 2012, Chinese militiamen from the Port of Tanmen in Hainan Province provided their first reports to a Border Defense Force Control Station located in their home port, which in turn alerted a civilian law enforcement agency (China Marine Surveillance, now part of the CCG) to come to their aid. PAFMM-produced reporting on events at sea is shared among the local military commands, PLAN, and CCG; the Tanmen Maritime Militia alone is credited with providing 510 pieces of “valuable intelligence” in recent years.[xxv] Among the six Tanmen fishing vessels initially inside Scarborough Shoal’s lagoon, two were commanded by known Tanmen Maritime Militia squad leaders Chen Zebo and Xu Detan. The owner of fishing vessel Qionghai 02096 and likely a militia member, Yu Ning, transmitted several messages that alerted the PAP Border Defense Control Station of the unfolding situation and the identity of the approaching Philippine naval vessel BRP Gregorio del Pilar. The station’s attendant then rapidly issued a quick brief that was probably shared with PLAN and MLE forces.[xxvi] While the Tanmen Militia contingent was escorted away after the initial standoff by MLE vessels, their subsequent mobilization and return to the vicinity of the shoal under the company’s deputy commander, who then led the unit from outside the shoal, suggests PLA approval of such mobilization.

The PLA communicates with PAFMM vessels at sea by using a communications suite required by the MD Command to be present aboard all militia vessels. Moreover, to join the PAFMM, a Chinese fishing vessel or enterprise must meet certain capability and reliability requirements before gaining membership; many are thus ineligible. Vessels are inspected to ensure they have the onboard equipment[xxvii] to stay connected to the PAFD and can respond wherever they are located. This is central to the ISR reporting of the PAFMM, a persistent function that occurs regularly and independently outside of missions and training.[xxviii] While exact reporting protocol varies, it appears that PAFMM reporting follows the same channels that their mobilization orders originate from, the MD Command system and their PAFDs, which subsequently is shared with other agencies. During PAFMM personnel training, PAFDs provide specialized training to “information personnel” in target identification and reporting protocol. MLE forces are also involved in these information-sharing channels, but direct PAFMM to MLE vessel reporting requirements remain unclear or perhaps temporary or conditional.[xxix] Nonetheless, PAFMM forces make regular contributions to China’s maritime domain awareness, regardless of mobilization status.

Key Actors: The Leading Units

The PAFMM organizational structure resembles an enormous pyramid with a broad base. The vast majority of the thousands of Maritime Militia personnel and vessels handle relatively mundane tasks, such as supporting basic port security, in undisputed shoreline areas of no direct concern to foreign nations or navies.[xxx] An elite subset is entrusted with operating far from Mainland China’s coastline and monitoring, approaching, and engaging with other foreign sea actors as necessary, including in international sea incidents. This is evident in both articles authored by PLA leaders and actual unit construction.[xxxi]

These advanced units can be defined specifically because they are distinctive and few. They are the frontline irregular forces that the United States and its allies and partners will most likely encounter in the Near Seas (Yellow, East China, and South China Seas). With respect to the South China Sea, most known leading units are based in Hainan Province, which according to Chinese policy statements administers the vast majority of the South China Sea. Four major PAFMM units dominate Hainan’s Maritime Militia operations in the South China Sea. The Danzhou Militia, still active and developing today, is the successor to the militia company that played an important role in the 1974 Battle of the Paracel Islands wherein China wrested the Western Paracels from Vietnam. The Tanmen Militia, established in 1985, supported early first-generation-structure construction on such Chinese-occupied Spratly features as Mischief Reef in the 1990s and more recently played a key role in China’s 2012 takeover of Scarborough Shoal. President Xi Jinping visited the Tanmen Militia in April 2013. Sanya City’s Maritime Militia had a frontline role in disrupting USNS Impeccable’s operations in March 2009. Maritime Militia units from across Hainan Province, including key units from Sanya and Tanmen, participated in the two-month-long incident over an oil rig placed inside Vietnam’s claimed EEZ in 2014.[xxxii] The latest leading unit is the Sansha City Maritime Militia headquartered on the Paracels’ Woody Island, a prefectural-level city responsible for administering China’s South China Sea claims, including in the Paracels, Macclesfield Bank and Scarborough Shoal, and the Spratlys.

In Sansha, China is generating a new model for PAFMM development. The militia in the Sansha City Fisheries Development Company was established to be a professional paramilitary force first and foremost, with fishing a secondary mission at best. Sansha Maritime Militia members have been photographed loading crates labeled “light weapons” onto one of their several dozen newly delivered large vessels, all of which boast mast-mounted water cannons, collision-absorbing rails, and reinforced hulls—highly useful features for aggressive spraying and ramming. The largest Sansha Maritime Militia vessels are 59 meters long with 9 meters beam, and likely displace approximately 750 tons. Their smaller counterparts are likely closer to 600 tons.[xxxiii] All have considerable displacement and are longer than the Parola-class patrol vessels Japan is constructing for the Philippines.[xxxiv] Some of these new ships reportedly have a “weapons and equipment room” and an “ammunition store.”[xxxv]

Sansha is taking the blue hull role in China’s three-tier Navy-MLE-Maritime Militia “joint defense” to a new level of frontline capability, centered on a $6 million command center. This force also operates “informatized” outposts on at least two Paracel Islands that monitor proximal seas. PLA leaders have indicated that these initial outposts will be replicated in the Spratlys, and have begun construction on three other features in the Paracels. Already, the Sansha Garrison has established a PAFD on Fiery Cross Reef and a PAFMM element on Mischief Reef, foreshadowing a future permanent PAFMM presence in the Spratlys.

 

APPENDIX 1: PHOTOS

PAFMM_Identity, Organization & PLA Connection_PHOTO_1

Ta Kung Pao, 14 July 2016: One of Sansha City’s newly-built PAFMM fishing vessels, “Qiongsanshayu 00111” (琼三沙渔), participates in the “2016 Sansha Maritime Emergency Response Exercise” hosted by the Hainan Maritime Safety Administration. Shown in this photo conducting firefighting and rescue operations, this is one example of the new elite PAFMM forces’ vessels under construction for Sansha City.

 

PAFMM_Identity, Organization & PLA Connection_PHOTO_2

China Military Online, 24 September 2016: (Guangdong Province) Zhanjiang Maritime Militia come alongside a PLAN vessel for training. The appearance of these fishing vessels is typical of regular PRC fishing vessels.

 

PAFMM_Identity, Organization & PLA Connection_PHOTO_3

China Military Online, 24 September 2016: (Guangdong Province) Zhanjiang Maritime Militia shown conducting Petroleum, Oil, and Lubricants (POL) resupply training with the PLAN wearing clearly marked green uniforms. Collar insignia reads “GDMB” (“Guangdong Minbing”). Most militia uniforms only feature the letters “MB” on collar insignia without additional geographic designator abbreviations.

 

PAFMM_Identity, Organization & PLA Connection_PHOTO_4

Hainan Daily, 5 January 2015: (Hainan Province) Tanmen Maritime Militia are assembled wearing a different style of uniform. The Tanmen Maritime Militia have also appeared wearing the army-style green camouflage uniforms shown in the previous photo of the Zhanjiang Maritime Militia.

 

PAFMM_Identity, Organization & PLA Connection_PHOTO_5

China Military Online, 23 July 2016: A PLAN South Sea Fleet base, most likely the Yulin Navy Base given its mobilization of Sanya City’s Maritime Militia in this instance, held a joint defense exercise including PLAN ships, submarines, aircraft, shore-based guided missiles, special forces, and public security forces; as well as both land-based militia and the Maritime Militia. This photo shows a Maritime Militia unit from Sanya City’s Tianya district participating in the exercise, wearing blue uniforms clearly indicating their identity as “Tianya Militia” (天涯民兵) on the shoulder patch.

 

PAFMM_Identity, Organization & PLA Connection_PHOTO_6

The November 2016 issue of China’s Militia covering the Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region’s border and coastal defense work featured this image of non-uniformed PAFMM personnel during inspection. The article also described one of the militia’s requisite characteristics as: “putting on military uniforms [they] qualify as soldiers, taking off the uniforms they qualify as citizens” (穿上军装做合格战士, 脱下军装做合格公民).[xxxvi]

 

APPENDIX 2: BIBLIOGRAPHY OF AUTHORS’ PUBLISHED RESEARCH

Andrew S. Erickson, “Passing a Chinese Maritime ‘Trump Test’,” The National Interest, 15 December 2016, http://nationalinterest.org/feature/passing-chinese-maritime-trump-test-18754.

Andrew S. Erickson, “The South China Sea’s Third Force: Understanding and Countering China’s Maritime Militia,” Testimony before the House Armed Services Committee Seapower and Projection Forces Subcommittee, Hearing on Seapower and Projection Forces in the South China Sea, Washington, DC, 21 September 2016, http://docs.house.gov/meetings/AS/AS28/20160921/105309/HHRG-114-AS28-Wstate-EricksonPhDA-20160921.pdf.

Conor M. Kennedy and Andrew S. Erickson, “Riding a New Wave of Professionalization and Militarization: Sansha City’s Maritime Militia,” Center for International Maritime Security (CIMSEC), 1 September 2016, http://cimsec.org/riding-new-wave-professionalization-militarization-sansha-citys-maritime-militia/27689.

Andrew S. Erickson and Conor M. Kennedy, “Countering China’s Third Sea Force: Unmask Maritime Militia before They’re Used Again,” The National Interest, 6 July 2016, http://nationalinterest.org/feature/countering-chinas-third-sea-force-unmask-maritime-militia-16860.

Andrew S. Erickson and Conor M. Kennedy, “Chapter 5: China’s Maritime Militia,” in Rear Admiral Michael McDevitt, USN (ret.), ed., Becoming a Great “Maritime Power”: A Chinese Dream (Arlington, VA: CNA Corporation, June 2016), 62-83, https://www.cna.org/CNA_files/PDF/IRM-2016-U-013646.pdf.

Andrew S. Erickson and Conor M. Kennedy, “China’s Maritime Militia: What It Is and How to Deal with It,” Foreign Affairs, 23 June 2016, https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/china/2016-06-23/chinasmaritime-militia.

Conor M. Kennedy and Andrew S. Erickson, “From Frontier to Frontline: Tanmen Maritime Militia’s Leading Role—Part 2,” CIMSEC, 17 May 2016, http://cimsec.org/frontier-frontline-tanmen-maritime-militias-leading-role-pt-2/25260.

Conor M. Kennedy and Andrew S. Erickson, “Model Maritime Militia: Tanmen’s Leading Role in the 2012 Scarborough Shoal Incident,” CIMSEC, 26 April 2016, http://cimsec.org/model-maritime-militia-tanmens-leading-role-april-2012-scarborough-shoal-incident/24573.

Andrew S. Erickson and Conor M. Kennedy, “China’s Maritime Militia,” CNA Corporation, 7 March 2016, https://www.cna.org/cna_files/pdf/Chinas-Maritime-Militia.pdf.

Andrew S. Erickson and Conor M. Kennedy, “Trailblazers in Warfighting: The Maritime Militia of Danzhou,” CIMSEC, 1 February 2016, http://cimsec.org/trailblazers-warfighting-maritime-militia-danzhou/21475.

Andrew S. Erickson and Conor M. Kennedy, “China’s Daring Vanguard: Introducing Sanya City’s Maritime Militia,” CIMSEC, 5 November 2015, http://cimsec.org/chinas-daring-vanguard-introducing-sanya-citys-maritime-militia/19753.

Andrew S. Erickson and Conor M. Kennedy, “Irregular Forces at Sea: Not ‘Merely Fishermen’—Shedding Light on China’s Maritime Militia,” CIMSEC, 2 November 2015, http://cimsec.org/new-cimsec-series-on-irregular-forces-at-sea-not-merely-fishermen-shedding-light-on-chinas-maritime-militia/19624.

Andrew S. Erickson, “Making Waves in the South China Sea,” A ChinaFile Conversation, The Asia Society, 30 October 2015, http://www.chinafile.com/conversation/making-waves-south-china-sea.

Andrew S. Erickson and Conor M. Kennedy, “Directing China’s ‘Little Blue Men’: Uncovering the Maritime Militia Command Structure,” Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative, Center for Strategic and International Studies, 11 September 2015, https://amti.csis.org/directing-chinas-little-blue-men-uncovering-the-maritime-militia-command-structure/.

Andrew S. Erickson and Conor M. Kennedy, “Tanmen Militia: China’s ‘Maritime Rights Protection’ Vanguard,” The National Interest, 6 May 2015, http://nationalinterest.org/feature/tanmen-militia-china%E2%80%99s-maritime-rights-protection-vanguard-12816.

Andrew S. Erickson and Conor M. Kennedy, “China’s Island Builders: The People’s War at Sea,” Foreign Affairs, 9 April 2015, https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/east-asia/2015-04-09/china-s-island-builders.

Andrew S. Erickson and Conor M. Kennedy, “Meet the Chinese Maritime Militia Waging a ‘People’s War at Sea’,” China Real Time Report (中国实时报), Wall Street Journal, 31 March 2015, http://blogs.wsj.com/chinarealtime/2015/03/31/meet-the-chinese-maritime-militia-waging-a-peoples-war-at-sea/.

 

Notes:

[1] The views expressed here are the authors’ alone. They do not represent the estimates or policies of the U.S. Navy or any other organization of the U.S. government. A complete compilation of the authors’ analysis, together with related sources and data, is available at: http://www.andrewerickson.com/2017/03/china-open-source-example-shipyard-details-sansha-maritime-militia-vessel-with-weapons-and-equipment-room-and-ammunition-store/.

[2] “中国武装力量的多样化运用” [The Diversified Employment of China’s Armed Forces], Information Office of the State Council, People’s Republic of China, 2013, http://www.mod.gov.cn/affair/2013-04/16/content_4442839.htm.

[3] China’s “People’s Armed Forces System” is comprised of three bodies of personnel: the civilian People’s Armed Forces Cadres that man the grassroots PAFDs, the staff of grassroots PAFDs—usually veterans, and the militia.

[4] While exact numbers are difficult to calculate from open sources, a rough estimate within an order of magnitude can be established by sifting through reports on PAFMM units in the provinces. The scale and effective strength of a province’s PAFMM force are directly determined by its local conditions, such as the dynamism of its marine economy. The authors’ research on Hainan Province has identified 31 PAFMM units, all of which would be considered fendui (分队) or tactical-level-unit organizations (battalion, company, platoon, squad). While most counties establish at least one company-sized PAFMM unit, their size and capabilities vary tremendously. For example, some units can conduct missions in the Spratlys with their large-tonnage seagoing vessels while others stay in close to shore with their smaller, less capable vessels. Some specialized support units may not even possess vessels organic to their unit and must requisition them when training or conducting missions. In addition to the 31 units the authors have identified, there are also many other smaller militia elements on Hainan Island and stationed at outposts and PRC-occupied features in the South China Sea. One can notionally estimate the total number of personnel and vessels in Hainan’s PAFMM force by assuming that the 31 units are each the rough median size of a PAFMM company (approximately 120 personnel and 10 fishing vessels). This would yield a hypothetical total of 3,720 personnel and 310 vessels.

[5] “国防后备力量” [National Defense Reserve Force], Jinhu County People’s Government Double-Support Office, 20 October 2016, http://www.jinhu.gov.cn/art/2016/10/20/art_96_19469.html.

[6] Local military commands here refer to the levels of organization set up by the PLA in province-level administrative areas, forming what China terms “local military and government” (地方军地). Each military region (军区), recently reformed from 7 Military Regions into 5 Theater Commands (战区), contains several provinces and hence several Provincial Military Districts (省军区). The geographic area of responsibility by each Provincial Military District coincides with the borders of the provincial administrative area. As each province is divided into municipalities, each Provincial Military District is divided into multiple Military Subdistricts (军分区); within each Military Subdistrict are numerous county-level and grassroots People’s Armed Forces Departments. The county level PAFDs are staffed by active-duty personnel while the grassroots PAFDs are non-active duty organizations staffed by “full-time People’s Armed Forces cadres” (专职人民武装干部). The Provincial Military Districts oversee local PLA units and the reserves (both PLA reserves and PAF militia), including the militia work conducted by their subordinate Military Subdistricts and PAFDs within its area of responsibility. Each corresponding level of government in the provinces also shares responsibility for coordinating with their military counterparts, the equivalent level of local military command, to build and support the militia. This civilian-military division of responsibilities mitigates the costs and burdens of militia building on any single department.

[7] Like the PLA, militia units have Party organizations to implement the PLA’s political work. For example, militia companies have a Party branch with a political instructor. Platoons and squads also form Party Small Groups. Party members often become leading cadres in militia units. Party representation ensures Party control of the gun at the micro-levels of militia organization.

[8] Local governments can also make use of their administrative authorities to ensure smooth execution of PAFMM missions and training, as well as coordination among different bureaucracies (Maritime Safety Administration, CCG, etc.) when drafting emergency response plans that may entail mobilization of the militia. Local military commands also work with civilian governments to legislate rules and regulations for the use of PAFMM forces. This dual-responsibility system between local military and government authorities enables deeper civil-military integration and resource sharing in militia construction.

[9] 张践 [Zhang Jian], “围绕 ‘六化’ 抓建 推动海上民兵转型” [Advance the Transformation of Maritime Militia Centered on ‘Six Changes’], National Defense 10 (2015), http://kns55.en.eastview.com/kcms/detail/detail.aspx?recid=&FileName=GUOF201510009&DbName=CJFD2015&DbCode=CJFD; “钦州军分区着力提升实战能力 – 联训联演建强海上民兵” [The Qinzhou Military Subdistrict Strives to Enhance Combat Capability – Joint Exercises Strengthen the Maritime Militia], China Defense News, 15 July 2015, http://www.mod.gov.cn/power/2015-07/15/content_4601890.htm.

[10] To build the militia, the PLA receives direct allocations from central and provincial governments, and is required to submit budgets and reports for approval by government authorities. The PLA manages those funds internally through its chain of logistics departments. In addition, local governments compensate militia personnel directly for wages lost while participating in training. PAFMM costs introduce greater complexity in funding and compensation since elements of the force assist and receive support from multiple bureaucracies, such as MLE forces. Some sources suggest that whoever uses PAFMM units must provide a degree of support for those operations (谁用兵谁保障), implying that CCG may have to provide funding and material support to PAFMM units that it uses. As reflected in the dual-responsibility system of military and civilian leaders over the militia, military and civilian cooperation is required to fund the militia.

[11] Most county PAFDs are regimental grade organizations within the PLA grade structure, while PAFDs established in sub-provincial cities and their districts are deputy divisional grade organizations.

[12] “三沙市推动军警民联防机制 构建三线海上维权格局” [Sansha City Advances its Joint Military, MLE, Militia Defense System—Constructs a Three-line Maritime Rights Protection Layout], China News Online, 22 November 2014, http://www.chinanews.com/gn/2014/11-21/6803776.shtml; Interview with PLA Major General Liu Lianhua: “军队代表: 应从战略层面构建军警民海防体系” [Military Representative: [We] Should Strategically Construct a Military, Police, Militia Maritime Defense System], China News Online, 15 March 2013, http://www.chinacourt.org/article/detail/2013/03/id/922031.shtml.

[13] While a variety of militia uniforms can be observed in photos of militia training and assembly, there is no standard uniform for China’s militia forces. Militia uniforms often feature an insignia on the collar with two parallel lines interspersed with the letters “MB,” an abbreviation of the Chinese word for militia, “minbing.” Identification of PAFMM personnel is particularly difficult as they typically wear no uniforms while conducting operations at sea, thereby exploiting perceived advantages in their role as both military personnel and citizen marine workers.

[14] 刘卫华 [Liu Weihua], “军种主建, 民兵专业分队如何对接?” [Services Focus on Building, How Do Militia Specialized Detachments Correspond?], China Defense News, 27 January 2016, http://www.81.cn/mb/2016-01/27/content_7071697.htm; 吴维满 [Wu Weiman], “中国新型军兵种民兵分队上演兵场, 适应作战需要” [China’s New-type Service Militia Detachments Fielded as Soldiers, Adapting to Operational Requirements], PLA Daily, 27 December 2010, http://mil.sohu.com/20101227/n278525284.shtml.

[15] 郑一冰、钱晓虎 [Zheng Yibing and Qian Xiaohu], “后备新军: 万里海疆试锋刃- 我国海军民兵专业分队扫描” [New Reserve Forces: Testing the Vanguard of the Vast Maritime Frontier—A Review of China’s Naval Militia Specialized Detachments], China’s Militia 4 (2007), http://kns55.en.eastview.com/kcms/detail/detail.aspx?recid=&FileName=MMZG200704042&DbName=cjfd2007&DbCode=CJFD.

[16] Chinese sources express this in variations of a similar phrase, such as “putting on camouflage they qualify as soldiers, taking off camouflage they are law abiding fishermen” (穿上迷彩是合格战士, 脱下迷彩是守法渔民). “广西北海军分区加强海上民兵建设 提升装备效能” [Beihai Military Subdistrict of Guangxi Strengthens Maritime Militia Construction, Increases Equipment Performance], PLA Daily, 6 January 2014, http://www.chinanews.com/mil/2014/01-06/5700496.shtml.

[17] “科学构建海上民兵管控体系” [Scientifically Construct a Management System for the Maritime Militia], National Defense 12 (2014), http://kns55.en.eastview.com/kcms/detail/detail.aspx?recid=&FileName=GUOF201412038&DbName=CJFD2014&DbCode=CJFD.

[18] 郑陵晨 [Zheng Lingchen], “发挥好海上民兵优势 打好军民融合攻坚战” [Make Full Use of the Advantages of the Maritime Militia and Fight a Tough Battle in Civil-Military Fusion], China Navy News, 31 October 2016, http://navy.81.cn/content/2016-10/31/content_7334774.htm.

[19] The “Three Warfares” refers to the use of public opinion warfare, psychological warfare, and legal warfare to assert influence in support China’s national objectives. For more information, see Elsa Kania, “The PLA’s Latest Strategic Thinking on the Three Warfares,” Jamestown: China Brief 16.13 (22 August 2016), https://jamestown.org/program/the-plas-latest-strategic-thinking-on-the-three-warfares/; 郑凌晨 [Zheng Lingchen], “发挥好海上民兵优势 – 打好军民融合攻坚战” [Give Full Play to the Advantages of the Maritime Militia – Fighting a Civilian-Military Integrated Battle], China Navy Online, 31 October 2016, http://navy.81.cn/content/2016-10/31/content_7334774.htm.

[20] 徐海峰 [Xu Haifeng], “适应新形势 全面规范海上民兵建设 ” [Adapting to New Circumstances— Comprehensively Standardize Maritime Militia Construction], National Defense, No. 2 (2014), http://kns55.en.eastview.com/kcms/detail/detail.aspx?recid=&FileName=GUOF201402048&DbName=CJFD2014&DbCode=CJFD.

[21] Ibid.

[xxii] This report draws heavily on the authors’ research on PAFMM from Hainan Province operating in the South China Sea, which has identified and evaluated a variety of PAFMM units province-wide. They have identified an elite subset of units greater in capability and readiness than the bulk of other units; as well as recruiting preferences for more experienced mariners and PLA veterans, particularly in the Sansha City Maritime Militia.

[xxiii] Ryan D. Martinson, “From Words to Action: The Creation of the China Coast Guard,” CNA Corporation, 29 July 2015, 20, https://www.cna.org/cna_files/pdf/creation-china-coast-guard.pdf; “中国渔政 蓝色国土的守护者” [China’s Fisheries Law Enforcement—Protectors of the Nation’s Blue Territory], Lianjiang City Oceanic and Fisheries Administration Information Network, 22 February 2011, http://www.ljhyj.gov.cn/Shownews.asp?Sid=79.

[xxiv] “林同兴与林心瑞与魏立凤与三亚福港实业有限公司单位行贿罪刑事二审裁定书” [Appeal Ruling on the Lin Tongxing, Lin Xinrui, Wei Lifeng, and Sanya Fugang Fisheries Co. Ltd. Bribery Case], Hainan Province Haikou Municipal Intermediate People’s Court, 28 December 2015, http://openlaw.cn/judgement/4386f3505aaf46988c35dca2097d1b60.

[xxv] 王春棠 [Wang Chuntang], “渔民保护神: 海南潭门海上民兵连守护南海29年” [Protectors of the Fishermen: The Hainan Tanmen Maritime Militia Company Guards the South China Sea for 29 Years], Business Daily of International Tourism Island, 6 January 2014, http://sansha.hinews.cn/system/2014/01/06/016357550.shtml.

[xxvi] This dynamic was expressed in 2007 by authors from the PLAN HQ Military Affairs Department and resulted in PAFMM unit construction in Zhejiang Province. “依托海上民船民兵建立侦察信息体系” [Establish a Reconnaissance System Based on Civilian Vessels and Militia], National Defense 6, 2007, http://kns55.en.eastview.com/kcms/detail/detail.aspx?recid=&FileName=GUOF200706034&DbName=cjfd2007&DbCode=CJFD; “浙江省宁波市国动委加强海上动员力量建设记事” [Chronicle of Zhejiang Province, Ningbo City’s National Defense Mobilization Committee Strengthening Construction of Maritime Mobilization Forces], National Defense News, 25 May 2015, http://www.mod.gov.cn/mobilize/2015-05/25/content_4586486.htm; 徐海峰 [Xu Haifeng], “适应新形势 全面规范海上民兵建设” [Adapting to New Circumstances— Comprehensively Standardize Maritime Militia Construction], National Defense, No. 2 (2014), http://kns55.en.eastview.com/kcms/detail/detail.aspx?recid=&FileName=GUOF201402048&DbName=CJFD2014&DbCode=CJFD.

[xxvii] Communications equipment central to fisheries management as well as command of the PAFMM includes China’s indigenous Beidou satellite navigation system, which features transmission capability of 120 Chinese characters per message, conveying significant content thanks to Chinese characters’ unique logographic nature.

[xxviii] 廖刚斌, 王牌, 熊睿 [Liao Gangbin, Wang Pai, and Xiong Rui], “海上民兵分队建设存在的问题与对策” [Issues and Measures in Maritime Militia Unit Construction], National Defense 8 (2014), http://kns55.en.eastview.com/kcms/detail/detail.aspx?recid=&FileName=GUOF201408006&DbName=CJFD2014&DbCode=CJFD; “Scientifically Construct a Management System for the Maritime Militia], National Defense 12 (2014); 徐海峰 [Xu Haifeng], “适应新形势 全面规范海上民兵建设” [Adapting to New Circumstances— Comprehensively Standardize Maritime Militia Construction], National Defense, No. 2 (2014), http://kns55.en.eastview.com/kcms/detail/detail.aspx?recid=&FileName=GUOF201402048&DbName=CJFD2014&DbCode=CJFD.

[xxix] 徐海峰 [Xu Haifeng], “适应新形势 全面规范海上民兵建设” [Adapting to New Circumstances— Comprehensively Standardize Maritime Militia Construction], National Defense, No. 2 (2014), http://kns55.en.eastview.com/kcms/detail/detail.aspx?recid=&FileName=GUOF201402048&DbName=CJFD2014&DbCode=CJFD; “浙江省加强海上民兵建设” [Zhejiang Province Strengthens Maritime Militia Construction], Xinhua Wang, 4 December 2013, http://news.xinhuanet.com/mil/2013-12/04/c_125806747.htm; 徐海峰 [Xu Haifeng], “适应新形势 全面规范海上民兵建设” [Adapting to New Circumstances— Comprehensively Standardize Maritime Militia Construction], National Defense, No. 2 (2014), http://kns55.en.eastview.com/kcms/detail/detail.aspx?recid=&FileName=GUOF201402048&DbName=CJFD2014&DbCode=CJFD; “福安市人武部组织海上民兵信息员集训” [Fu’an City PAFD Organizes Maritime Militia Information Personnel Collective Training], Fujian National Defense Education Network, 19 September 2014, http://mil.fjsen.com/2014-09/19/content_14905500.htm.

[xxx] Among the issues beyond this report’s scope is the great diversity of unit types and functions in militia forces, even within the PAFMM alone. Due to limited capabilities and training resources, many PAFMM units are given a narrow set of mission tasks on which to focus, often in line with their civilian professional specialties, such as transport, medical rescue, supply, and reconnaissance. This division of labor and functional specialization increases the utility of individual units. As mentioned earlier, militia unit sizes are largely restricted to tactical-levels of organization usually employing army-style terms, thereby forming “squads,” “platoons,” “companies,” and “battalions.” Most PAFMM units are typically company-sized and similarly use army terms. Some reports, by contrast, refer to PAFMM units using naval-style terminology such as “squadron” (中队).

[xxxi] After becoming head of the CMC National Defense Mobilization Department’s Militia Reserves Bureau in 2016, Major General Wang Wenqing wrote in National Defense News about solutions to solving PAFMM problems, including the construction of an elite effective maritime militia forces for “year-round missions guarding the ocean frontier.” See “破解海上民兵建设难题” [Resolving Issues in Maritime Militia Construction], National Defense News, 28 July 2016, www.81.cn/gfbmap/content/2016-07/28/content_151895.htm. This is also reflected in articles written by Hainan Provincial Military District Commander Zhang Jian and Political Commissar Liu Xin: 张践 [Zhang Jian], “围绕‘六化’抓建 推动海上民兵转型” [Advance Transformation of the Maritime Militia Centered on Six Changes], National Defense 10 (2015), http://kns55.en.eastview.com/kcms/detail/detail.aspx?recid=&FileName=GUOF201510009&DbName=CJFD2015&DbCode=CJFD; 刘新[Liu Xin], “面向复杂多变海洋安全环境, 着力抓好海上民兵维权准备” [Geared Towards a Complex and Volatile Maritime Security Environment—Focus on Preparing Maritime Militia Rights Protection], National Defense 12 (2015), http://kns55.en.eastview.com/kcms/detail/detail.aspx?recid=&FileName=GUOF201512011&DbName=CJFD2015&DbCode=CJFD.

[xxxii] A knowledgeable source has described to one of the authors his experience aboard a Sanya Maritime Militia vessel. He observed substantial “T-bar” type reinforcements inside the hull. Unlike a normal fishing vessel, there was no sight or smell of anything fish-related. Personnel aboard appeared extremely professional and specialized, with a military-style bearing quite different from that of normal fishermen.

[xxxiii] Tonnage estimates were made by: (1) searching for names of known Sansha Maritime Militia at marinetraffic.com, which lists their respective displacement, length, and beam; (2) using these data and estimating draft at no more than 3 meters for vessels in this size category, and (3) employing a block coefficient to calculate displacement.

[xxxiv] Pia Lee-Brago, “Philippines to Get Nine More Patrol Vessels from Japan,” The Philippine Star, 14 October 2016, http://www.philstar.com/headlines/2016/10/14/1633448/philippines-get-9-more-patrol-vessels-japan.

[xxxv] Guangzhou Taicheng Shipbuilding Industry Co. Ltd. (广州市泰诚船舶工业有限公司) provides services for the vessels produced at Xijiang Shipyard in Liuzhou and Huangpu Wenchong Shipyard in Guangzhou, both subsidiaries of China State Shipbuilding Corporation (CSSC). These shipyards have produced a number of the new vessels built specifically for the Sansha Maritime Militia, and have subcontracted additional companies to install subsystems and finish other interior elements of the fleet’s vessels in preparation for delivery. In December 2015, among its advertised services, Taicheng Shipbuilding’s website featured one of the Sansha Maritime Militia vessels that it furnished for the vessel’s producer, Xijiang Shipyard. It is a light trapping vessel capable of employing a falling net to trap squid, a fairly-common commercial design. However, photos contained on the webpage show it to be the vessel Qiongsanshayu 000212; which other open sources reveal to be a ship in the new fleet of Sansha Maritime Militia vessels delivered to the state-run Sansha City Fisheries Development Company that operate under the guise of fishing. Among the numerous details and specifications concerning Qiongsanshayu 000212’s interior furnishing is a listing of two rooms, respectively titled “weapons and equipment room” (武备库) and “ammunition store” (弹药库). Details available in other open sources, some of which show the Sansha Maritime Militia training to load light weapons onto the deck of these new vessels, help confirm the intended roles and identities of this new militia fleet. “2015年12月西江船厂58.5米灯光罩网渔船交船” [Xijiang Shipyard’s 58.5 Meter Light Trap Falling-net Fishing Vessel Delivered in December 2015], Taicheng Shipyard, 12 December 2015. Original URL: http://www.tcship.com/news-show.php?lm=1&id=20. Complete document and accompanying photos now available at: http://www.andrewerickson.com/2017/03/china-open-source-example-shipyard-details-sansha-maritime-militia-vessel-with-weapons-and-equipment-room-and-ammunition-store/.

[xxxvi] “‘边海’二字重千钧” [“Borders and the Sea” Two Very Serious Words], China’s Militia 11 (2016), 30-32.

 

HERE’S MY RECENT CONGRESSIONAL TESTIMONY ON CHINA’S MARITIME MILITIA AND WHAT THE U.S. SHOULD DO ABOUT IT:

Andrew S. Erickson, “The South China Sea’s Third Force: Understanding and Countering China’s Maritime Militia,” Testimony before the House Armed Services Committee Seapower and Projection Forces Subcommittee, Hearing on Seapower and Projection Forces in the South China Sea, Washington, DC, 21 September 2016.

Click here to watch the hearing on YouTube

I deliver my main testimony (statement) from 1:24:07–1:32:54.

I answer questions from Congressman Randy Forbes on how to address China’s Maritime Militia from 1:40:40–1:43:02, and on why the South China Sea matters to America and Americans from 1:47:02–1:48:22.

I reminisce with Congressman Rick Larsen about our April 2011 trip with four other Members of Congress to military, defense industrial, and government-related facilities in Beijing, Qingdao, Chengdu, and Shanghai and answer a question from him about the utility of a U.S. Asia-Pacific Strategy from 2:03:42–2:07:15.

Finally, at the invitation of Chairman Forbes, I offer closing remarks from 2:24:44–2:27:28.

 

READ THE ARTICLES IN CIMSEC’S NINE-PART SERIES ON CHINA’S MARITIME MILITIA HERE:

Andrew S. Erickson and Conor M. Kennedy, “Irregular Forces at Sea: ‘Not Merely Fishermen—Shedding Light on China’s Maritime Militia’,” Center for International Maritime Security (CIMSEC), 2 November 2015.

Andrew S. Erickson and Conor M. Kennedy, “China’s Daring Vanguard: Introducing Sanya City’s Maritime Militia,” Center for International Maritime Security (CIMSEC), 5 November 2015.

Andrew S. Erickson and Conor M. Kennedy, “Trailblazers in Warfighting: The Maritime Militia of Danzhou,” Center for International Maritime Security (CIMSEC), 1 February 2016.

Conor M. Kennedy and Andrew S. Erickson, “Model Maritime Militia: Tanmen’s Leading Role in the April 2012 Scarborough Shoal Incident,” Center for International Maritime Security (CIMSEC), 21 April 2016.

Conor M. Kennedy and Andrew S. Erickson, “From Frontier to Frontline: Tanmen Maritime Militia’s Leading Role—Part 2,” Center for International Maritime Security (CIMSEC), 17 May 2016.

Conor M. Kennedy and Andrew S. Erickson, “Riding a New Wave of Professionalization and Militarization: Sansha City’s Maritime Militia,” Center for International Maritime Security (CIMSEC), 1 September 2016.

Conor M. Kennedy and Andrew S. Erickson, “Hainan’s Maritime Militia: China Builds a Standing Vanguard, Pt. 1,” Center for International Maritime Security (CIMSEC), 26 March 2017.

Conor M. Kennedy and Andrew S. Erickson, “Hainan’s Maritime Militia: Development Challenges and Opportunities, Pt. 2,” Center for International Maritime Security (CIMSEC), 10 April 2017.

Conor M. Kennedy and Andrew S. Erickson, “Hainan’s Maritime Militia: All Hands on Deck for Sovereignty, Pt. 3,” Center for International Maritime Security (CIMSEC), 26 April 2017.

 

HERE’S EXTENSIVE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON CHINA’S ***VERY-KNOWABLE*** MARITIME MILITIA:

Conor M. Kennedy and Andrew S. Erickson, “Hainan’s Maritime Militia: All Hands on Deck for Sovereignty, Pt. 3,” Center for International Maritime Security (CIMSEC), 26 April 2017.

Part I and II of this conclusion to our series on Hainan’s maritime militia discussed the Hainan Provincial Military District (MD) leadership’s approach to constructing maritime militia forces in response to national militia guidelines and how they address challenges during construction efforts. This final installment in our series offers a glimpse into what the Hainan MD’s efforts have yielded in force scale. It also examines the incentives motivating the builders of this force, such as political drivers and pressures confronting local officials. The conclusion also outlines issues meriting further observation and analysis, such as the significance of the Sansha Maritime Militia force for China’s third sea force more broadly, and the degree to which Chinese officials frame related efforts as part of a “People’s War.”

Although this series has discussed in depth four key locations for maritime militia development, they are part of a far broader effort by the entire Hainan MD. The maritime militia units of Sanya, Danzhou, Tanmen, and Sansha should not be seen in isolation, but rather as elements of the Hainan MD militia force system. Directed by national militia construction guidelines and a highly publicized visit by paramount leader Xi Jinping to the Tanmen Maritime Militia, every other county in Hainan Province has established singular or multiple maritime militia units. These include districts of the provincial capital Haikou and many other directly administered and autonomous counties. Additional noteworthy maritime militia units are located in Lingshui CountyChengmai CountyChangjiang Li Autonomous CountyWanning City, and Dongfang City. While our research to date has not revealed them to be on the same level of the four leading units in the totality of their documented capabilities or achievements, they nonetheless merit further examination. Dongfang and Wanning Cities’ maritime militia, for example, participated in defense of China’s HYSY-981 oil rig alongside the better-known Sanya and Tanmen maritime militia units.

Below is a map depicting all of the 31 maritime militia units under the Hainan MD jurisdiction identified as we conducted research for this series. …

 

Conor M. Kennedy and Andrew S. Erickson, “Hainan’s Maritime Militia: Development Challenges and Opportunities, Pt. 2,” Center for International Maritime Security (CIMSEC), 10 April 2017.

As it works to improve its maritime militia, Hainan Province is engaged in multiple lines of effort. It confronts many of the same multifarious challenges that other provinces face in constructing their own maritime militia forces. These include strengthening legal frameworks, bolstering incentive structures, constructing infrastructure, and the perennial task of organizing and improving militia training. Hainan thus offers a leading-edge microcosm of the trials and triumphs of Chinese Maritime Militia development, and a bellwether of progress in managing the sprawling effort. Part 1 of this three-part coverage of maritime militia building in Hainan Province surveyed the role of provincial officials and programs, especially at the Provincial Military District (MD) level, as well as their achievements to date; Part 2 now examines in depth the remaining hurdles and bottlenecks that they are grappling with in the process. It will explain specific measures that the Hainan MD is taking to address the abovementioned issues. These include newly promulgated regulations, specific construction projects, breakthroughs in training, increased funding, and examples of the range of direct and indirect benefits maritime militia enjoy through their service.

Challenges in Policy Execution

As explained in Part 1, the Central Military Commission National Defense Mobilization Department (CMC-NDMD) promulgates guidance for nationwide maritime militia work. Provinces, for their part, must flesh out the details in law, plans, and implementation. Numerous reports on the maritime militia by various levels of PLA commands exhort provincial governments to enact more robust laws to help govern the maritime militia. While it is difficult for outsiders to access local laws on the maritime militia, PRC news reports reveal the progress provinces are making in bolstering legal mechanisms for maritime militia mobilization. They often lament the lack of legal basis for fully implementing mobilization work, specifically the lack of legal authority in enforcing and supporting the missions of the maritime militia. One recent report from Zhejiang Province’s Wenzhou City Military Subdistrict (MSD) illuminates these efforts, representing an East China Sea-based case of this broader trend permeating China’s coastal provinces. The Wenzhou MSD struggled to levy fines on maritime militia units that refused to fulfill their duty in training exercises. The abdication of duties by some maritime militiamen triggered an effort by this MSD to evaluate the Wenzhou Court system and the Fisheries Law Enforcement Department, both of which had no legal authority to enact the punishments sought by the Wenzhou MSD.

The MSD therefore established a Maritime Mobilization Office of Legislative Affairs (海上动员法治办公室) to head efforts at drafting local rules and regulations in coordination with the city government. Ensuing maritime militia regulations drawn and passed included “Measures on Maritime Militia Intelligence and Information Incentives” (海上民兵情报信息奖励办法), “Specifications for Maritime Militia Party Organization Construction” (海上民兵党组织建设规范), “Regulations on the Education and Management of Fishing Vessels and Crews on Missions” (任务渔船船员教育管理规定), and other regulations pertaining to the mobilization of reserve forces and requisition of vessels. Troops were reportedly “stunned” when one ship repair yard that refused to cooperate in registering for national defense mobilization was fined and compelled to fulfill its duties. Whereas previous attempts by local military organs to enforce penalties against militiamen abandoning their duties were often described as “loud thunder but little rain,” Wenzhou’s courts now have the teeth to enforce national defense mobilization requisition rules. Additionally, this ordeal shows that military organs have limited legal authority over the militia; and according to Militia Work Regulations (Chapter 8), must rely on local governments or the affiliated enterprise or institution of the perpetrating militia for enforcement. Improved legal measures such as Wenzhou’s allows government and military organs to impose costs for discipline violations in the maritime militia, which directly enhances the maritime militia’s responsiveness and assures their participation in training and missions. The Hainan MD’s leadership has also expressed urgency in strengthening institutional and legal support for its maritime militia development. Specific legal measures appear to be drafted by governments below the provincial level. Like Wenzhou, Sansha City promulgated similar regulations, such as “Measures for the Regular Management of Maritime Militia” and “Rules on the Use of Militia Participating in Maritime Rights Protection and Law Enforcement Actions.”

Significant variation among the economies of each province requires their respective military and civilian authorities to calibrate the incentive structure to motivate their maritime militia units effectively. No single rubric applies, as the Wenzhou MSD discovered when it realized the national standard of fines contained in “Regulations on National Defense Mobilization of Civil Transport Resources” (民用运力国防动员条例) was insufficient to prevent abdication of mobilization duty in economically vibrant Wenzhou. The head of Wenzhou MSD’s Maritime Mobilization Office of Legislative Affairs told reporters in April that compensation for fishing vessel requisition was an example of one area that “requires a great deal of research.” The current standard stipulates that authorities should normally compensate each vessel 10,000 RMB a day, rising to 20,000 RMB a day during the busy fishing season. In Wenzhou’s thriving marine economy, this standard has proven insufficient. The same problem plagued the People’s Armed Forces Department (PAFD) of Yazhou, one of Sanya City’s districts that now host the newly constructed Yazhou Central Fishing Port known to harbor Hainan’s maritime militia forces, as described in the articles on Sanya and Sansha in this series. In addition to hosting Hainan’s maritime militia forces, the Yazhou PAFD has also established its own unit, but experienced difficulties in motivating its unit during the peak period of the fishing season. As Hainan continues to modernize its fishing fleet through vessel upgrades and the replacement of old smaller vessels with larger tonnage fishing vessels, fishing enterprises will attain greater economies of scale. Mitigating lost income due to involvement in maritime militia activities will require increasing compensation.

Parallel efforts to incentivize service help motivate militiamen with financial incentives, including compensation for lost wages, injury, and equipment damage; as well as even reduced insurance costs. A survey conducted by the director of the Sansha Garrison Political Department in 2015 found that 42 percent of Sansha’s maritime militia attached greater importance to “material benefits” than “glory” in their service.

Chinese legislation for the compensation of the military, called the Regulations on Pensions and Preferential Treatments for Servicemen, also applies to the PAP and militia. To further encourage China’s militia to execute their missions, the Ministry of Civil Affairs’ codified the treatment of militia injured, missing, or killed in action in its Measures on the Support and Preferential Treatment of Militia Reserve Personnel Carrying out Diversified Military Missions, effective on 26 September 2014. These measures categorically list the various types of missions and conditions by which the member’s regimental-grade or above PLA commanding unit (county-level PAFDs are regimental-grade units) and the county-level government would determine the status of that member. Missions include supporting the PLA in combat and “participating in maritime rights protection missions.” Militia personnel can be granted the status of “martyr” (烈士), thereby entitling their families to receive money from local governments according to the militia member’s status. For example, survivors of a martyred militia member receive what are known as “Martyr Praise Funds” (褒扬金), equivalent to “30 times the national per capita disposable income.” In addition to “Martyr Praise Funds,” survivors also receive a one-time payment for the member’s “sacrifice in public service” (因公牺牲), equal to 40 months of pay. Under certain circumstances families can also receive annual payments for the militia member’s “sacrifice in public service,” which amounts to a maximum of 21,030 RMB (approximately U.S. $3,235) per the most recent adjustments by the Ministry of Civil Affairs. The military is also allowed to offer other “special payments.”

Militia members are also taken care of and provided for if injured and disabled in the course of their duties. Depending on militia members’ status and the classification of disability they fall under, they (or their families) are granted amounts in accordance with PLA disability compensation under the “Disabled Veterans Special Care Regulations” (伤残军人优抚条例). The standards of compensation are adjusted each year as the national average income changes. According to the most recent national adjustments to the standards of compensation, disabled militia members injured in combat can receive a maximum annual payout of 66,230 RMB (approximately U.S. $10,189) — an extremely generous sum in a fishing village. Major General Wang Wenqing wrote in July 2016 that “we must provide suitable treatment and pensions according to the law for those maritime militia that are injured or sacrificed in the course of their service.” In sum, while a number of regulations already exist to assure militia members their families are taken care of no matter what might happen, authorities continue to optimize incentives for their relatively riskier missions. …

 

Conor M. Kennedy and Andrew S. Erickson, “Hainan’s Maritime Militia: China Builds a Standing Vanguard, Pt. 1,” Center for International Maritime Security (CIMSEC), 26 March 2017.

Reprinted as Hainan’s Maritime Militia: A Standing Vanguard,” with Conor M. Kennedy, The Maritime Executive, 29 March 2017.

Through the U.S. Naval War College’s China Maritime Studies Institute, the authors have just published China Maritime Report No. 1, entitled “China’s Third Sea Force, The People’s Armed Forces Maritime Militia: Tethered to the PLA.” In it, they propose a more formal term for China’s maritime militia: the People’s Armed Forces Maritime Militia (PAFMM). The present article, the first in a three-part conclusion to their nine-part series on the PAFMM of Hainan Province, will instead use the term “maritime militia” to maintain consistency with all preceding installments and to facilitate discussion of China’s broader militia construction.

Hainan Province’s unique geography makes its buildup of maritime militia units the spear tip of China’s prosecution of gray zone operations in the South China Sea: as a standing, front-line force whose leading units are lauded as models for other localities to emulate. This series has therefore examined Hainan’s leading maritime militia units, located in SanyaDanzhou, Tanmen (in parts one and two), and Sansha. To understand these grassroots units and their development, it has delved deeply into their respective local environments. Having examined these leading entities in depth, it is time to take a province-wide look at larger policy processes and trends in implementation. This installment will also examine the intentions of China’s leaders to construct new elite militia units tailored to meet heightened requirements in China’s armed forces. This new type of front-line militia will serve as a standing force for more regular employment in support of China’s objectives at sea. Part 1 of this final series will therefore explore maritime militia building in a more systemic organizational context, chiefly at the Provincial Military District level; while Part 2 will address specific challenges and how they are managed. Part 3 will conclude this series by appraising the results of Hainan’s maritime militia construction effort and discussing some additional dynamics at play in the provinces. This first part will thus start by probing how a frontier province like Hainan responds to national level militia building initiatives and the measures taken by provincial leaders to see its implementation. …

 

Andrew S. Erickson, “China Open Source Example: Shipyard Details Sansha Maritime Militia Vessel with ‘Weapons and Equipment Room’ (武备库) and ‘Ammunition Store’ (弹药库),” China Analysis from Original Sources 以第一手资料研究中国, 24 March 2017.

SUMMARY OF DOCUMENT:

“2015年12月西江船厂58.5米灯光罩网渔船交船” [Xijiang Shipyard’s 58.5 Meter Light Trap Falling-net Fishing Vessel Delivered in December 2015], Taicheng Shipyard, 12 December 2015. Original URL: http://www.tcship.com/news-show.php?lm=1&id=20.

Guangzhou Taicheng Shipbuilding Industry Co. Ltd. (广州市泰诚船舶工业有限公司) provides services for the vessels produced at Xijiang Shipyard in Liuzhou and Huangpu Wenchong Shipyard in Guangzhou, both subsidiaries of China State Shipbuilding Corporation (CSSC). These shipyards have produced a number of the new vessels built specifically for the Sansha Maritime Militia, and have subcontracted additional companies to install subsystems and finish other interior elements of the fleet’s vessels in preparation for delivery. In December 2015, among its advertised services, Taicheng Shipbuilding’s website featured one of the Sansha Maritime Militia vessels that it furnished for the vessel’s producer, Xijiang Shipyard. It is a light trapping vessel capable of employing a falling net to trap squid, a fairly-common commercial design. However, photos contained on the webpage show it to be the vessel Qiongsanshayu 000212; which other open sources reveal to be a ship in the new fleet of Sansha Maritime Militia vessels delivered to the state-run Sansha City Fisheries Development Company that operate under the guise of fishing. Among the numerous details and specifications concerning Qiongsanshayu 000212’s interior furnishing is a listing of two rooms, respectively titled “weapons and equipment room” (武备库) and “ammunition store” (弹药库). Details available in other open sources, some of which show the Sansha Maritime Militia training to load light weapons onto the deck of these new vessels, help confirm the intended roles and identities of this new militia fleet.

ORIGINAL DOCUMENT TEXT AND PHOTOS:

2015年12月 西江船厂58.5米灯罩渔船交船

2015年12月12日

2015年4月份承接中船西江造船有限公司四条58.5米灯光罩网渔船,在2015年12月陆续交船

 

西江船厂-渔船58.5米

案例简介

1 说明 1.1 灯光罩网渔船内装工程是由我司与中船西江造船有限公司双方协商后签订的。 2适用法规 2.1本船内装工程的设计、选材和施工应符合中华人民共和国农业部渔船检验局《渔业船舶法定检验规则》(2000)、中华人民共和国农业部渔船检验局《钢质海洋渔船建造规范》(1998)对船舶内装的要求。

 

详细内容

 

内装工程内容

1内装区域

内装工程区域为:

驾驶甲板区域:驾驶室,船长室,轮机长室,1号通道,1号盥洗室,报务室,备用室,二人住室。

主甲板区域:1~4号四人室,弹药库,武备库,CO2室,2号通道,储藏室,充放电室,艉镇流器室,2号盥洗室,厨房,餐厅。

主船体区域:监控室。

2我司内装工程范围为船厂提供内装设计图纸的内容,我司提供材料设备供货和安装施工,直至提交验收。

3内装工程范围

3.1内装工程范围是装修区域内除船体结构油漆、绝缘、梯子等以外的内装部分,包括:(1)舱室内装围壁板、天花板的提供与安装。(2)通道扶手、装修舱内梯口栏杆的提供与安装;(3)地板敷料的提供与敷设。(4)舱室家俱的提供与安装;(5)装修区域内的舱室门(蜂窝板门及防火门)的提供与安装。(6)浴室、卫生间的洁具、小五金的供货与安装。(7)窗套、窗帘的提供与安装。

3.2厨房的炉具及设备由船厂订货及安装;风雨密门及窗由船厂订货并安装。

3.3电气设备、空调系统以及管路、电缆、灯具、插座、开关等均由船厂供货与安装。内装区域内的壁板或天花上的设备由我司协助开孔,船厂安装。

3.4外露的电缆、管子、阀件、接头由我司进行装饰性包覆。

  4 技术要求

4.1天花板

4.1.1厨房、1号盥洗室、2号盥洗室等区域的天花板采用25mm厚A型不锈钢复合岩棉板。岩棉板的外表面为0.6mm厚304亚光不锈钢板,内表面为0.6mm厚镀锌钢板。

4.1.2驾驶室,船长室,轮机长室,1号通道,报务室,备用室,二人住室,1~4号四人室,2号通道,餐厅,监控室等区域的天花板采用25mm厚A型复合岩棉板。岩棉板的双表面为0.6mm厚镀锌钢板,可见面贴PVC膜,颜色白色。

4.1.3弹药库,武备库,CO2室,储藏室,充放电室,艉镇流器室等区域的区域不安装天花板。

4.2 壁板

4.2.1 厨房、1号盥洗室、2号盥洗室等区域的围壁采用25mm厚C型不锈钢复合岩棉板。岩棉板的外表面为0.6mm厚304亚光不锈钢板,内表面为0.6mm厚镀锌钢板。

4.2.2驾驶室,船长室,轮机长室,1号通道,报务室,备用室,二人住室,1~4号四人室,2号通道,餐厅,监控室等区域的围壁采用25mm厚C型钢复合岩棉板。岩棉板的双表面为0.6mm厚镀锌钢板,可见面贴PVC膜,颜色白色。

4.2.3 盥洗室内部的隔断板,采用30mm厚不锈钢铝蜂窝板,铝蜂窝板双面0.6mm厚304亚光面不锈钢板。

4.2.4 弹药库,武备库,CO2室,储藏室,充放电室,艉镇流器室等区域不安装围壁板。

5甲板敷料、PVC地板、地砖、防静电地板

5.1厨房、1号盥洗室、2号盥洗室等区域的地面,敷设40mm厚A-15级耐火甲板基层敷料,表面贴8mm厚防滑地砖,颜色米黄。

5.2厨房、1号盥洗室、2号盥洗室等区域的挡水围栏与围壁板间,敷设200mm厚A-15级耐火甲板基层敷料。

5.3驾驶室、轮机长室、1号通道、报务室、备用室、二人住室、1~3号四人室等区域的地面,敷设10mm厚轻质甲板敷料,2mm流平敷料,用专业地板胶粘贴2mm厚PVC地板(浅灰蓝色)。

5.4船长室、2号通道、4号四人室、餐厅等区域的地面,敷设40mm厚A-15级耐火甲板基层敷料,2mm流平敷料,用专业地板胶粘贴2mm厚PVC地板(浅灰蓝色)。

5.5弹药库、武备库等区域的地面,敷设40mm厚A-15级耐火甲板基层敷料,2mm流平敷料,用专业地板胶粘贴5mm厚条纹防滑防静电橡胶地板。

5.6 CO2室,储藏室,充放电室,艉镇流器室等区域的地面,敷设40mm厚A-15级耐火甲板基层敷料,2mm流平敷料。

5.7监控室的地面,在地铺板上用专业地板胶粘贴2mm厚PVC地板(浅灰蓝色)。

5.8 潮湿区域用地砖做地脚线。铺PVC地板的区域安装深棕色PVC地脚线。

6舱室设备

6.1内装舱室的床铺、衣柜、书桌、搁物架、海图桌、文件柜等家具用木芯板制作,木芯板内、外表面均贴木纹防火板(枫木)。

6.2餐厅的餐桌表面为304亚光面不锈钢板。

6.3驾驶室配不锈钢高脚扶手椅。

船长室、轮机长室的沙发用木芯板制作框架,座垫和背靠为黑色真皮软垫。

餐厅配带扶手的靠背椅,椅子框架为不锈钢材料,座垫和背靠为黑色超纤皮。

办公桌前的工作椅为带扶手的靠背椅,椅子框架为不锈钢材料,座垫和背靠为黑色超纤皮。

6.4所有家俱均与壁板、地板连接固定式安装。

衣柜安装平式锁,办公桌安装按拉锁,抽屉配有导轨拉手、匙锁,柜门装烟头铰或不锈钢铰等五金件。床下设有抽屉。配阻燃海棉床垫。

6.5 卫生间内的蹲便器、洗手盆用陶瓷制品,选用尺寸偏小的型号。

6.6淋浴花洒、水龙头、毛巾架、洗浴用品架、手纸盒、衣帽钩等五金件选用304不锈钢制品。

7栏杆、扶手、斜梯

7.1 内通道防浪扶手用¢38X1.5mm不锈钢制作,材料为304不锈钢。

7.2 梯道栏杆用¢32/25X1.5mm不锈钢制作,扶手用¢38X1.5mm不锈钢钢管制作,材料均为304不锈钢。

7.3 由主甲板上驾驶甲板的斜梯踏步敷设PVC地板。

8 门、窗、帘

8.1 非潮湿区域舱室的窗套采用1.0mm厚铝板制作,表面喷白色。

厨房、1号盥洗室、2号盥洗室等舱室的窗套用1.0mm厚304#不锈钢板制作窗套。

8.2非潮湿区域的窗配备窗帘轨,安装阻燃窗帘,颜色由船厂商定。(根据舱室情况现场确定安装窗帘盒)

8.3 双人住室、四人住室的每铺床配备床帘。

8.4 由船厂提供安装的门,由我司制作门套。

8.5我司根据后续页的舱室明细表,提供舱室门(防火门或空腹门)的供货与安装,门板的颜色与内装板的颜色协调。其余风雨密门、水密门为船厂提供及安装。

Andrew S. Erickson, “China Open Source Example: Proposal to Hainan Government Reveals Maritime Militia Activities,” China Analysis from Original Sources 以第一手资料研究中国, 7 February 2017.

SUMMARY OF THE PROPOSAL DOCUMENT:

“关于建设南海渔业后勤补给基地, 发展南海渔业生产的建议” [Proposal on Establishing Fisheries Logistics Supply Bases and Developing Fisheries Production in the South China Sea], submitted to the Hainan Provincial Government, 2 February 2015.

In February 2015, a proposal was submitted to the Hainan Provincial Government calling for financing the construction of fisheries logistics bases in the Spratlys (Mischief and Fiery Cross Reefs) and increasing subsidies to the fishing industry, including subsidies for activities concerning the protection of China’s claimed maritime rights and interests. According to the proposal, these bases would facilitate the management of fisheries production, streamline the processing of aquatic products and transactions, supply materials and provisions, repair fishing vessels, serve as a base for rights protection with a dedicated command center, and support disaster relief efforts.

In making this case, the proposal documents and cites the achievements of the Sanya Fugang Fisheries Maritime Militia between July 2012 and May 2014. These include rights protection presence missions in the Spratlys; and participation in the blockade of Second Thomas Shoal in February 2014, led by the Sanya City People’s Armed Forces Department (PAFD) and assisted by command-and-supply vessel F8168. This advanced People’s Armed Forces Maritime Militia (PAFMM) unit also received orders to conduct escort missions for China National Offshore Oil Corporation (CNOOC) on two occasions. The first, in April 2013, was commanded by the Hainan Province People’s Armed Police Border Defense Force. The second occurred when the Guangzhou Military Region Command mobilized Hainan Province’s forces to assist in defending the Haiyang Shiyou (HYSY)-981 Oil Rig.

This document describes in detail the performance of Sanya Fugang Fisheries Maritime Militia during the defense of the oil rig. It states that Fugang’s 29 maritime militia vessels participated in the mission for over two months. This was part of a larger effort in which China’s maritime militia drove away or rammed over 80 Vietnamese armed fishing vessels and crippled three, fighting off over 20 waves of incoming armed Vietnamese fishing vessels. The proposal also states that the general consensus regarding the best way for China to protect its sovereignty in the South China Sea is by first developing and improving its fishing industry there.

ORIGINAL TEXT OF THE PROPOSAL DOCUMENT:

关于建设南海渔业后勤补给基地,发展南海渔业生产的建议编号: 532008    时间: 2015-02-11  Source: The People’s Government of Hainan

发表人: bgtjyta

http://www.hainan.gov.cn/tiandata-rdjy–5636.html

     发展渔业已成为开发南海渔业资源和常态维护南海海洋权益的重要力量,如何提高南海捕捞作业的经济效益与保障海上维权力量的可操作性和持续性至关重要。

提高渔业产业化建设,维护固有南海主权,“渔业必须先行”,这是迄今为止社会各界达成的基本共识!南沙诸岛屿距离我省沿岸路途遥远,浩荡数百乃至上千海里,在南沙生产的渔船执行维权行动时,如果需要补给或者渔船机器发生故障时,难以在第一时间得到后勤保障,反而在渔况好时延误时机、增加海上安全风险。

目前,适宜在南沙作业的设施较先进的渔船已有数十艘,包括1艘排水量3000吨的大型南沙综合补给船,三亚已经初步建立起一支有规模的南海渔业生产船队。

2012年7月,三亚29艘渔船在1艘大型综合补给运输船的带领下,分2个编队,6个小组,一共316名渔民及4名渔政执法人员与10多名新华社等主流媒体记者,历时18日,辗转永暑礁、渚碧礁和美济礁,总航程1756海里,为海南历年首次大规模民间力量赴南沙维权的渔船船队。如果岛礁渔业基础设施建设良好,此次航程会历时更长,收获将会更大。并且在此次航程中,众渔船共同抗击了“韦森特”台风。

2013年4月中旬,中建南油井踩点护航,三亚福港水产实业有限公司配合海南省武警边防总队为我国中建南油井的勘探工作保驾护航,此次维权护航历时近30天。

2014年2月27日至3月28日,三亚福港水产实业有限公司派出琼三亚F8168综合补给船和7 艘大型捕捞渔船,配合三亚人民武装部与仁爱礁内菲律宾坐滩军舰对峙,密切监视期间,民兵与武装部官兵还进行了宣示主权仪式。

2014年5月4日,中建南油井项目安保维权行动,三亚福港公司派遣29艘民兵船队配合广州军区、海南省军分区,维护我国“981”钻井平台正常工作,共同对抗并多批次进行驱赶、撞击和阻挠越南武装渔船80余艘,我方民兵渔船撞损越南3艘渔船,并驱离越南武装渔船20余波次。此次维权行动历时两个多月。

这些壮举极大鼓舞了大量企业和渔民。因此,建设西、中、南沙渔业长效后勤补给基地是刻不容缓的,也是势在必行的!渔业生产领域流行一句话:“打政治鱼,撒主权网”。我们要让五星红旗飘扬在南沙海域,彰显我主权,以大规模的渔业生产将觊觎我南海资源的国家反蚕食出我国的海域。

为此,提出以下建议:

一、扩大南沙捕捞和养殖规模

在实施渔业产业化结构调整政策中,省政府有计划的鼓励和扶持一批渔船和渔户到南海进行捕捞和海水养殖,提高捕捞和养殖规模。南沙海域远离大陆,陆源污染极少,水质达到健康养殖标准,利用渔船捕捞的副渔获物作为饵料,可大大提升养殖产品的质量和水平,从而构建新的经济增长点。

二、建设长效后勤补给基地

目前,南海渔业的基础设施极其简陋,渔船的安全生产和渔民的生命财产得不到保障,是当前发展南海渔业的最大障碍。在美济礁、永暑礁等岛礁建设有一定规模的后勤补给基地,是发展渔业生产的重要基础,迫切需要省级财力给予解决。省政府要建设南海渔业后勤补给基地,形成长效码头、岛礁救援中心、仓储和燃料等后勤保障体系,克服后勤短板,其功能主要有:一是生产指挥功能。有利于生产调度和管理,通过北斗监控、报告、遇险报警、信息数据交换等多功能指挥,避免和减少渔业生产安全、涉外事件发生。二是简易加工与交易功能。新鲜的海产品经过海上的简易加工包装,及时入库,及时在海上岛礁进行交易,避免运输至陆地过程中产生的消耗。三是渔需品保障与后勤补给功能。提供机油、网具等生产资料,加强生活必需品的及时、有效存储与供给。四是渔船维修功能。建设配套功能的船舶维修厂。五是维权基地功能。南沙距离陆地绵延数千海里,若能建立岛礁维权指挥中心,必能克服远距离维权(山高皇帝远)这一短板。六是防灾减灾功能。提供最基本的气象、灾害预防讯息。

三、加大财政补贴

省政府对企业和渔民造大船、购买大船和改造大船要给予适当财政补贴,特别要提高柴油补贴的幅度以及在维权活动中提高补贴额度等。通过采取切实有效的财政扶持政策,鼓励企业和渔民去开发和守护本来就属于我们的南海资源。

 

Thomas J. Culora, “Maritime Hybrid Warfare Is Coming,” Comment & Discussion, U.S. Naval Institute Proceedings 143.1 (January 2017): 8, 76.

(See J. Stavridis, pp. 30–33, December 2016 Proceedings)

Thomas J. Culora, Dean, Center for Naval Warfare Studies, Naval War College—Admiral Stavridis unpacks the strategic and operational implications and identifies the challenges presented by this asymmetric form of warfare. I commend Admiral Stavridis and the Naval Institute for highlighting this important issue.

Admiral Stavridis admonishes the Naval War College to “take the lead on analyzing this phenomenon, working with the various community tactical centers.” I am pleased to report that during the past two years, the Naval War College has been engaged in a range of efforts across all military and constabulary operations, international law, freedom-of-navigation operations, cyber, and other areas attendant to many of the challenges called out in the article.

This past summer, when the Center for Naval Warfare Studies developed its research agenda for 2017 through 2018, “Gray Zone Conflict” was singled out as a priority for a comprehensive, interdisciplinary research effort in the next 18 months and beyond. This effort will build on the groundbreaking published work by our China Maritime Studies Institute (CMSI) faculty on China’s maritime militia as well as the research of many other faculty members. The leadership and the faculty understood that, while we had addressed many of the hard and soft power elements, the only way to uncover innovative methods to counter this form of hybrid warfare is through a multidisciplinary, structured approach.

Admiral Stavridis provides a consolidated accounting of the key tenets of hybrid warfare ashore that he rightly suggests provides a framework for analyzing and developing “hybrid warfare from the sea.” Any research and analysis in this area intended to build a comprehensive strategy, outline a concept of operations, and develop the tools and tactics to counter this form of warfare would do well to use these tenets as the foundation for creative thought.

Building on this foundation, it is essential to remember that the current gains garnered by both the Russians, on land in Georgia and the Ukraine, and the Chinese, in the South China Sea, were achieved through well-calculated risk that triangulated an incremental series of steps to gauge potential opponents’ tolerance and reaction. This was coupled with the use of non-traditional, hazy, hybrid forces and underpinned by classic deception and disinformation campaigns leveraged by the millennial tools of the internet, social media, and offensive cyber activities highlighted in the article. Most things worth achieving involve some level of risk; Moscow and Beijing have not shied away from taking risks and are reaping the rewards of their shrewd calculations.

Thus, approaches to counter gray zone exploits by would-be aggressors, be they nation-state or transnational actors, must address the range of risks and the attendant opportunities. To date, countering gray zone operations is seemingly intractable, as evidenced by the either anemic or non-existent responses to current and past activities. Any analysis conducted by the Naval War College, or others elsewhere, must candidly identify to U.S. military and civilian leadership the risks and rewards among a range of whole-of-government, cross-domain activities and provide a menu of options and actions. Without a full appreciation of the risks and rewards, and the grit and fortitude to take those risks, countering maritime hybrid warfare will remain intractable. As does Admiral Stavridis, we at the Center for Naval Warfare Studies take this challenge very seriously.

 

Andrew S. Erickson, “Passing a Chinese Maritime ‘Trump Test’,” The National Interest, 15 December 2016.

If the past is any guide, China may test the new administration early on. Beijing’s “maritime militia” could play an important part.

China’s Leninist leadership has rightly been termed the “high church of realpolitik.” Beijing’s leaders believe that even small changes in foreign leaders, correlation of forces, or the relative balance of power have important significance. If they appear in flux, China probes for opportunities. If meeting minimal or manageable resistance, it then pushes further to gain ground. Given the particular uncertainty concerning President-elect Donald Trump’s outlook and policies, and Beijing’s indignation at his statements already regarding both mainland China and Taiwan, he may even face probing without the typical “grace period” arguably accorded his predecessors. How Trump handles such pressure will reverberate across the Asia-Pacific and around the world.

In recent years, China has tested each new American president. The past two faced an early challenge: George W. Bush with increasingly aggressive aircraft intercepts that triggered the April 2001 EP-3 crisis, Barack Obama with the March 2009 Impeccable incident. China appears to engineer tensions or activities to assess a president’s position in an area of its interest and to attempt to alter his decision-making to Beijing’s preferences. While motivations are hard to prove, Trump and his team must certainly prepare for the possibility that at some point Beijing—having never “forgotten” whatever statements and actions may accumulate despite its objections—will push back in a manner that effectively poses a test.

If the past is any guide, Chinese leaders may test the new administration early on. While a trial could take many forms, the last two presidential tests revolved around U.S. surveillance operations in international airspace and waters, to which Beijing continually objects. Given current Sino-American friction points, one possible scenario involves the South China Sea, U.S. Navy vessels, and China’s Maritime Militia. Such a “Trump Test” could involve China’s maritime militia harassing the operations of U.S. warships or surveillance ships in hope that he could be pressured to reduce such activities, thereby accommodating Chinese sovereignty promotion efforts. It might include not only direct tests of U.S. resolve, but also that of America’s regional allies and partners and its commitment toward them; particularly given uncertainty over how the Trump Administration intends to handle longstanding alliances and partnerships. China may see this as an opportunity to weaken the alliance system, which it opposes vehemently. Here the East and South China Seas are equally likely arenas, with Japan, Vietnam, and Indonesia among the leading potential targets. Either way, the Obama Administration’s failure to publicly acknowledge the asymmetric challenge of China’s Maritime Militia on its watch contributes to a looming disconnect in which Beijing and Washington or one of its allies or partners may (eventually) be headed for a tense encounter or incident at sea, without sufficient preparations for its effective management.

Beijing’s broader South China Sea strategy includes advancing disputed claims where it can, delaying resolution of issues it cannot yet settle in its favor, and coercing potential opponents while limiting escalation. Beijing’s longstanding opposition to key principles of international air-and-sea-related law and its growing assertiveness in the South China Sea make it view ‘unapproved’ American activities there as contravening vital interests. To implement that strategy with as little American resistance as possible, and thereby further its unresolved land feature and maritime sovereignty claims without escalating to major power war, it is employing not one but three major sea forces.

China’s Maritime Militia is its Third Sea Force of “blue hulls,” after its Navy of “gray hulls” and Coast Guard of “white hulls.” Increasingly, these forces operate together, with blue hulls operating forward and white and gray hulls backstopping them. Collectively, these are “gray zone” operations: conducted to alter the status quo, and employing coercion as necessary, but without resorting to war.

China’s irregular sea force is one of the most important—yet most under-considered—factors affecting U.S. security interests in the South China Sea. These Chinese “Little Blue Men” are roughly equivalent at sea to Putin’s “Little Green Men” on land. … … …

Ryan Pickrell, “Is Trump Ready for China’s Inevitable Test of American Power?” Daily Caller, 27 November 2016.

China’s worldview prompts it to probe the strength and resolve of the dominant power, and President-elect Donald Trump will inevitably be tested.

In recent years, China has carefully tested and evaluated each new American president.

“The Leninist core of Chinese leadership thinking makes Beijing probe assiduously for international opportunities stemming from changes in counterparts’ personalities, policies, and power,” Dr. Andrew Erickson, a leading expert on China, explained to The Daily Caller News Foundation. China sees power in relative terms; one country’s loss is another’s gain. Weaknesses, even in a dominant power, are vulnerabilities that can be exploited.

For former President George W. Bush, his test was the 2001 Hainan Island Incident. …

Following the incident, China scaled back interceptions of U.S. surveillance aircraft, while the U.S. did not make any substantive concessions to the Chinese.

A few weeks after President Barack Obama took office, the Chinese tested him by harassing ocean surveillance ship USNS Impeccable. …

On March 8, 2009, five Chinese vessels — specifically a Navy intelligence ship, a government fisheries-patrol vessel, a state oceanographic patrol vessel, and two fishing trawlers — surrounded the Impeccable in international waters about 75 miles off the coast of Hainan Island.

The fishing ships came within 25 feet of the U.S. ship and even stopped in front of it, forcing the Impeccable to take emergency action to avoid a collision.

The Impeccable returned the next day accompanied by a guided-missile destroyer, a reasonable yet temporary solution overlooking a far more complicated and troublesome problem that has continuously resurfaced during Obama’s time in office.

The Chinese fishing vessels dispatched to harass the Impeccable were part of China’s Third Sea Force, its Maritime Militia. The threat has gone unacknowledged and unaddressed by the Obama administration.

As Trump prepares to take office, he can expect to be tested as well, possibly by issues left unresolved by the previous administration.

“Beijing’s longstanding opposition to key principles of international air-sea law and its growing assertiveness in the South China Sea make it view ‘unapproved’ American activities there as contravening vital interests,” Erickson told TheDCNF. “Recent evolution of bilateral frictions suggests that China might test Trump by using Maritime Militia personnel and vessels to pose some sort of ambiguity, complication, and possible harassment to a U.S. freedom-of-navigation operation.”

China uses its Third Sea Force as a paramilitary force while portraying units as noncombatants. The ambiguous appearance allows China’s Maritime Militia to engage in “gray zone aggression.”

“Make no mistake, these are state-organized, -developed, and -controlled forces operating under a direct military chain of command,” Erickson revealed at a House Committee on Armed Services hearing in September.

“Trump and his team must prepare for manifold contingencies from the start. Among them, a Maritime Militia challenge would stand out for the Obama administration’s failure to pave the way with basic public preparations,” Erickson asserted. “The Administration’s apparent dismissal thus far of repeated recommendations that it at least mention China’s Maritime Militia by name to begin raising awareness can only have emboldened Beijing.”

“This is a force that thrives within the shadows of plausible deniability,” Erickson argued in September. “China’s Maritime Militia can only be as deceptive and plausibly deniable as we allow it to be through our own silence and our own inaction.”

Throughout the Obama administration, the Third Sea Force has repeatedly made its presence known. Outside of the incident with the Impeccable, the Maritime Militia was also involved in the 2011 sabotage of two Vietnamese hydrographic vessels, 2012 seizure of Scarborough Shoal, 2014 repulsion of Vietnamese vessels near a Chinese oil rig in disputed waters, and 2015 shadowing of the USS Lassen during a freedom-of-navigation operation.

Although it has yet to do so, the Obama administration still has time to address this challenge.

“To avert a potential setback or crisis, the Obama Administration must immediately ‘call out’ China’s Maritime Militia officially in public, share information with countries at risk, and communicate clearly to Beijing that any ships ignoring repeated warnings by U.S. vessels to desist from disrupting or harassing them will be treated as military-controlled and handled accordingly,” Erickson told TheDCNF. “Regardless of what leadership and stewardship President Obama ultimately demonstrates in this regard, Trump and his team must prepare to pass their China test. The world is watching.”

While Trump promised to get tough on China on the campaign trail, there is a lot of uncertainty surrounding Trump and his policies, making him a likely target for persistent probing early on in his first term. “How he responds will reverberate across the region and around the world,” Erickson emphasized.

By firmly upholding the rules of the road, Trump has the ability to pave the way for sustainable U.S.-China cooperation within a rules-based international order. Failure to do so will result in a continuation and possibly an exacerbation of existing challenges.

 

Christopher P. Cavas, “China’s Maritime Militia a Growing Concern,” Defense News, 21 November 2016.

WASHINGTON Near the top of US Pacific Fleet commander Adm. Scott Swift’s concerns is China’s People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN), and close behind is the country’s burgeoning Coast Guard. But a third government-controlled seagoing force, the little-known and somewhat mysterious maritime militia, is drawing increased attention.

“Let’s be careful to not characterize them as, you know, a rag-tag group of fishermen. They’re well organized,” Swift told a small group of reporters in Washington Nov. 18.

The militia, Swift said, “are structured. [Chinese president] Xi Jinping has gone to visit them, recognized them publicly for their great efforts.”

The militia “are operating largely independently out there or in groups,” Swift said. And while not strictly a military force, the militia, to Swift, are not acting randomly.

“I think they have a clear command and control. It’s transparent to me,” he said.

Chinese officials routinely deny any government connection, and have described the militia as fishermen wearing camouflage uniforms for sun protection. On at least one occasion they were referred to as a film crew. Their ships have had a strong hand in numerous encounters at sea and on one occasion obstructed a US Navy surveillance ship and tried to snatch its towed listening gear.

“There needs to be precision in how we talk about the maritime militia,” Swift said. “I’ve made it clear in my conversations with my counterparts that they’re being commanded and controlled. And if they’re being command-and-controlled I have an obligation to treat them exactly like I do any other unit that’s being command-and-controlled.”

Swift noted that relationships with the Chinese Navy remain professional, and lauded the Code for Unplanned Encounters at Sea (CUES), a 2014 agreement establishing procedures and protocols to keep incidents from escalating in scale or becoming violent. At least 21 countries have signed the agreement, including China, but not every Chinese maritime agency is taking part.

“CUES has been incredibly important in reducing the uncertainty,” Swift said. “We have a mechanism now that has diminished the impact of the language barrier, we have a mechanism to communicate that transcends the differences between Chinese and English with the PLAN. That was a very positive step.”

The US has been urging the Chinese Coast Guard to join the agreement, but so far to no avail.

“We’re going to continue to push at it,” Swift said. “We’re making some progress, the conversation is deepening, but it’s been difficult to have the conversation, even to start the conversation.” …

Swift said he enjoys personal relationships with most Chinese Navy fleet commanders.

“As I talk to my counterparts in China – the South Sea Fleet commander, the East Sea Fleet commander, the North Sea Fleet commander – I know these gentlemen personally. [People’s Liberation Army Navy commander] Admiral Wu Shengli, I know him personally as well.

“The discussions we’ve had is that we have more than an obligation to ensure that a tactical event doesn’t occur that takes away maneuver space from our two presidents. We have a responsibility as maritime leaders to ensure that tactical forces don’t get so wrapped up in the rhetoric that’s occurring at the national level or the international level that they don’t think they’re defending the sovereignty of whatever their national position is.

“On the US side as well, I caution my commanders on a regular basis about their obligations and responsibilities to the ultimate authority, which is our commander in chief.

“We have complete unanimity and agreement when I talk to my Chinese counterparts,” Swift added. “That’s absolutely the case.”

But opening up communications with the maritime militia remains a vexation.

“I haven’t even pushed at the problem of bringing CUES to them because I can’t get anyone to acknowledge the veracity of who they are. I can’t get that conversation started,” Swift said.

“I don’t know how to make sure we can communicate with them other than for me to continue to say that the Pacific Fleet will continue to hold anyone responsible that is being directed to execute operations that are counter to freedom of navigation.” …

“I haven’t started the process of trying to understand the mechanisms that China has walked through to come to the conclusion that they need a Maritime Militia,” Swift admitted. “The fact is that it is there. Let’s acknowledge that it’s there. Let’s acknowledge how it’s being command-and-controlled.

“I’m concerned about it. I want dialogue, and the dialogue’s not happening,” Swift said. “I’d love to have a discussion with my Chinese counterparts – whoever’s running them. What is the intent?” …

 

2016 Report to Congress of the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission, One Hundred Fourteenth Congress, Second Session, 16 November 2016.

pp. 29-30:

THE COMMISSION’S KEY RECOMMENDATIONS

The Commission considers 10 of its 20 recommendations to Congress to be of particular significance. The complete list of recommendations appears at the Report’s conclusion on page 507.

The Commission recommends:

  • Congress direct the U.S. Government Accountability Office to prepare a report examining the extent to which large-scale outsourcing of manufacturing activities to China is leading to the hollowing out of the U.S. defense industrial base. This report should also detail the national security implications of a diminished domestic industrial base (including assessing any impact on U.S. military readiness), compromised U.S. military supply chains, and reduced capability to manufacture state-of-the-art military systems and equipment.
  • Congress amend the statute authorizing the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States to bar Chinese state-owned enterprises from acquiring or otherwise gaining effective control of U.S. companies.
  • Congress direct the U.S. Department of Defense to include a permanent section in its Annual Report on Military and Security Developments Involving the People’s Republic of China on the role and activities of China’s maritime militia and the implications for U.S. naval operations.
  • Congress enact legislation requiring its approval before China—either the country as a whole or individual sectors or entities—is granted status as a market economy by the United States.
  • Congress require that under anti-dumping and countervailing duty laws, Chinese state-owned and state-controlled enterprises are presumed to be operating on behalf of the state and, as a result, do not have standing under U.S. laws against unfair trade to block a case from proceeding.
  • Congress direct the Federal Bureau of Investigation to provide a classified report to Congress on what risks and concerns have been identified as associated with information systems acquired by the U.S. government, and how those risks are being mitigated. This report should identify information systems or components that were produced, manufactured, or assembled by Chinese-owned or -controlled entities.
  • Congressional committees of jurisdiction hold hearings to:
    • Analyze the impact of China’s state-directed plans such as “Made in China 2025” and “Internet Plus” on U.S. economic competitiveness and national security, and examine the steps Congress can take to strengthen U.S. high-tech and high-value-added industries such as artificial intelligence, autonomous vehicles and systems, and semiconductors.
    • Ensure that U.S. government agencies such as the U.S. Department of the Treasury, U.S. Department of Commerce, and the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative have sufficient personnel, funding, and Chinese-language capabilities 30 to examine China’s economic and trade policies and China’s compliance with its bilateral and multilateral commitments, including to the World Trade Organization.
    • Examine U.S. access to China’s domestic market, particularly for the service and high-tech sectors. This hearing should assess how U.S. government agencies such as the U.S. Department of Commerce and the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative are seeking to increase market access for U.S. firms and explore what additional policy options could be pursued.
  • Congress require the U.S. Department of Defense to conduct a study identifying the risks and gains associated with the United States pursuing a burden sharing strategy that utilizes emerging People’s Liberation Army expeditionary capabilities to help stabilize the Asia Pacific region during a crisis or to counter a shared threat such as the spread of terrorism in Southeast Asia.
  • Congress express support for more frequent U.S. freedom of navigation operations in the South China Sea in conjunction with U.S. allies and partners.
  • Congress direct the U.S. Department of State to develop educational materials to alert U.S. citizens living and traveling abroad about recruitment efforts by Chinese intelligence agents, and to make these materials available to U.S. universities and other institutions sending U.S. students to China. Congress should also direct the U.S. Department of Defense to develop and implement a program to prepare U.S. students studying in China through Department of Defense National Security Education Programs to recognize and protect themselves against recruitment efforts by Chinese intelligence agents.

 

James E. Fanell and Ryan D. Martinson, “Countering Chinese Expansion through Mass Enlightenment,” Center for International Maritime Security, 18 October 2016.

From Newport to New Delhi, a tremendous effort is currently underway to document and analyze China’s pursuit of maritime power. Led by experts in think tanks and academia, this enterprise has produced a rich body of scholarship in a very short period of time. However, even at its very best, this research is incomplete—for it rests on a gross ignorance of Chinese activities at sea.  

This ignorance cannot be faulted. The movements of Chinese naval, coast guard, and militia forces are generally kept secret, and the vast emptiness of the ocean means that much of what takes place there goes unseen. Observers can only be expected to seek answers from the data that is available.

The U.S. Navy exists to know the answers to these secrets, to track human behavior on, above, and below the sea. While military and civilian leaders will always remain its first patron, there is much that USN intelligence can and should do to provide the raw materials needed for open source researchers to more fully grasp the nature of China’s nautical ambitions. Doing so would not only improve the quality of scholarship and elevate the public debate, it would also go a long way to help frustrate China’s current—and, to date, unanswered—strategy of quiet expansion. Most importantly, sharing information about the movements and activities of Chinese forces could be done without compromising the secrecy of the sources and methods used to collect it. …

The available information provides important clues about the nature and extent of Chinese activities at sea. This is true for all three of the sea services: the coast guard, the maritime militia, and the PLA Navy. …

Chinese sources also provide raw materials for understanding the activities of the second major instrument of Chinese sea power—the maritime militia. This force is comprised of civilians trained to serve military and other state functions. In peacetime, a segment of the militia, mostly fishermen, constitutes an important tool in Chinese maritime strategy. It sails to disputed waters to demonstrate Chinese sovereignty and justify the presence of the Chinese coast guard and navy. The militia also harasses foreign vessels, and helps protect China’s own.

China’s maritime militia is particularly active in the South China Sea. The Chinese press eagerly covers their activities in disputed waters, often revealing ship pennant numbers and the names of key militiamen. Websites owned by provincial, municipal, and county governments also highlight their local contributions to the “people’s war” at sea. Using such sources, Conor Kennedy and Andrew Erickson have tracked the militia’s activities at places such as Mischief Reef and Scarborough Shoal, and deciphered its role in pivotal events such as the 2009 assault on the USNS Impeccable. … 

 

Daniel L. Kuester, “Naval War College Professors Testify on State of South China Sea,” Navy News Service, Navy.mil, 30 September 2016.

WASHINGTON (NNS) — The House Armed Services Committee (HASC) invited two U.S. Naval War College (NWC) faculty members to testify in Washington, D.C. on understanding and countering China’s growing maritime concerns.

Andrew Erickson, professor of strategy in the China Maritime Studies Institute (CMSI), and James Kraska, professor in the Stockton Center for the Study of International Law, explained to the subcommittee the current situational framework and offered courses of action at the committee’s hearing titled “Seapower and Projection Forces in the South China Sea.”

Erickson’s testimony centered on China’s growing involvement of their Maritime Militia, which he describes as the third maritime force in addition to the nation’s navy and coast guard.

The Maritime Militia is a civilian force posing as fishing boats and other noncombatants but is clearly under the operational control of the government, according to Erickson.

“China’s irregular sea force is one of the most important-yet most under-considered-factors affecting U.S. security interests in the South China Sea,” said Erickson in his testimony. “Many in Washington understand that China has the world’s second-largest blue water navy, some that China has the world’s largest blue water Coast Guard. But almost no one knows that China-drawing on the world’s largest fishing fleet-has deployed the world’s largest Maritime Militia; and virtually the only one charged with advancing disputed maritime claims.”

Kraska’s testimony focused on the legal issues of the region and enforcement of the rule of law in the oceans. The events unfolding in the area have regional and global consequences, he said.

“The South China Sea is the maritime fulcrum in East Asia, where the United States has treaty commitments to Japan, Korea, Thailand, Australia, and the Philippines, and legislative obligations to Taiwan,” testified Kraska. “The rule of law in the oceans provides an important force multiplier for U.S. military operations and diplomacy. Consequently, the navigation and overflight rules accepted in the region have great strategic consequence.”

Kraska also gave the committee direction on how the United States’ responses to China’s actions in the region could improve the situation in the long term.

“The right to transit through some Asian littoral areas is being effectively abandoned out of concern that China will react and create an incident,” he said. “But forgoing the right to be present in these areas makes it more likely that it will be impossible to reenter them later. Indeed, the cost of doing so now is higher than it would have been had the United States continuously exercised its rights; the cost tomorrow will be even greater unless action is taken now. China’s expectation and sense of entitlement to ‘own’ parts of the global commons increases each year they remain unchallenged.”

Erickson also gave advice on how to effectively respond to China.

First, Erickson asked for the U.S. to call out China’s Maritime Militia officially in public.

Second, Erickson proposed having the U.S. share information with countries at risk, and provide strategic reassurance to them.

Last, he called for the U.S. to communicate clearly with Chinese interlocutors and make it plain that any elements that ignore repeated warnings by U.S. vessels to desist from disruptive activities will be treated as military-controlled and dealt with accordingly, to ensure self-defense and unobstructed mission accomplishment.

To view the complete hearing, visit https://armedservices.house.gov/legislation/hearings/seapower-and-projection-forces-south-china-sea.

For more information, visit www.navy.milwww.facebook.com/usnavy, orwww.twitter.com/usnavy.

For more news from Naval War College, visit www.navy.mil/local/nwc/.

 

Ronald O’Rourke, Maritime Territorial and Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) Disputes Involving China: Issues for Congress (Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service, 8 June 2016), R42784.

USE OF CHINA COAST GUARD SHIPS, FISHING BOATS/MARITIME MILITIA, AND OIL EXPLORATION PLATFORMS ………………………………………………………………………………………. 25

p. 25

Use of China Coast Guard Ships, Fishing Boats/Maritime Militia, and Oil Exploration Platforms

China makes regular use of China Coast Guard (CCG) ships to assert and defend its maritime territorial claims, with Chinese Navy ships sometimes available over the horizon as backup forces.74 China has, by far, the largest coast guard of any country in the region, and is currently building many new ships for its Coast Guard.75 CCG ships are generally unarmed or lightly armed, but can be effective in asserting and defending maritime territorial claims, particularly in terms of confronting or harassing foreign vessels that are similarly lightly armed or unarmed.76 In addition to being available as backups for CCG ships, Chinese navy ships conduct exercises that in some cases appear intended, at least in part, at reinforcing China’s maritime claims.77China also uses civilian fishing ships as a form of maritime militia, as well as mobile oil exploration platforms, to assert and defend its maritime claims.78

78 See Department of Defense, Annual Report to Congress [on] Military and Security Developments Involving the People’s Republic of China 2015, pp. 3, 7; Ryan D. Martinson, “Shephards of the South Seas,” Survival, June-July 2016: 187-212; Conor M. Kennedy and Andrew S. Erickson, “From Frontier to Frontline: Tanmen Maritime Militia’s Leading Role Pt. 2,”Center for International Maritime Security (CIMSEC), May 17, 2016; Matthew Carney, “China’s Secret Maritime Militia: Fishermen the Forward guard in South China Sea Dispute,”ABC News (Australia), May 8, 2016; Reuters, “Beijing Training ‘Fishing Militia’ for South China Sea,” Straits Times, May 2, 2016; Megha Rajagopalan, “China Trains ‘Fishing Militia’ to Sail into Disputed Waters,” Reuters, April 30, 2016; Conor M. Kennedy and Andrew S. Erickson, “Model Maritime Militia: Tanmen’s Leading Role in the April 2012 Scarborough (continued…)

p. 26

(…continued) Shoal Incident,” Center for International Maritime Security (CIMSEC), April 21, 2016; Simon Denyer, “How China’s Fishermen Are Fighting A Covert War in the South China Sea,” Washington Post, April 12, 2016; Tom Hanson, “China’s Super Strategy to Dominate South China Sea: Little Green Fisherman,” National Interest, April 7, 2016; Teo Cheng Wee, “China’s Front-Line Fisherman,” Straits Times, April 5, 2016; Brendan Nicholson, “China’s Huge Fleet ‘Is Fishing for Information for Its Navy,’” The Australian, March 15, 2016; Minnie Chan and Liu Zhen, “Beijing Enlists Trawlers to Help Protect Maritime Rights in Disputed Waters,” South China Sea Morning Post, March 7, 2016; Yao Jianing, “Maritime Militia Increases Drills, Expands in Scope,”China Daily, February 2, 2016; Andrew S. Erickson and Conor M. Kennedy, “Trailblazers in Warfighting: The Maritime Militia of Danzhou,” Center for International Maritime Security (CIMSEC), February 1, 2016; Andrew S. Erickson and Conor M. Kennedy, “China’s Daring Vanguard: Introducing Sanya City’s Maritime Militia,” Center for International Maritime Security (CIMSEC), November 5, 2015; Andrew S. Erickson and Conor M. Kennedy, “Irregular Forces at Sea: ‘Not Merely Fisherman— Shedding Light on China’s Maritime Militia,” Center for International Maritime Security (CIMSEC), November 2, 2015; Christopher P. Cavas, “China’s ‘Little Blue Men’ Take Navy’s Place in Disputes,” Defense News, November 2, 2015; Justin Chock, “China’s Non-Military Maritime Assets as a Force Multiplier for Security,” Asia Pacific Bulletin, September 22, 2015; Andrew S. Erickson and Conor Kennedy, “Directing China’s ‘Little Blue Men’: Uncovering the Maritime Militia Command Structure,” Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative (Center for Strategic & International Studies), September 11, 2015; “Beijing Expands Its Maritime Militia in South China Sea,” Want China Times, August 3, 2015; Andrew S. Erickson and Conor M. Kennedy, “Tanmen Militia: China’s ‘Maritime Rights Protection’ Vanguard,” The National Interest, May 6, 2015; Andrew S. Erickson and Conor M. Kennedy, “Meet the Chinese Maritime Militia Waging a ‘People’s War at Sea,” Wall Street Journal (China Real Time), March 31, 2015; James R. Holmes. A Competitive Turn: How Increased Chinese Maritime Actions Complicate U.S. Partnerships, Washington, Center for a New American Security, December 2012, East and South China Sea Bulletin 7, p. 1, accessed March 25, 2012, at http://www.cnas.org/files/documents/flashpoints/CNAS_bulletin_Holmes_ACompetitiveTurn.pdf; James R. Holmes, “China’s Small Stick Diplomacy,” The Diplomat, May 21, 2012, accessed October 3, 2012, at http://thediplomat.com/2012/05/21/chinas-small-stick-diplomacy/; Jens Kastner, “China’s Fishermen Charge Enemy Lines,” Asia Times Online, May 16, 2012; Carlyle A. Thayer, “Paracel Island: Chinese Boats Attack Vietnamese Fishing Craft,” Thayer Consultancy Background Brief, May 28, 2013, p. 1; Kurt Campbell, “Trouble at Sea Reveals The New Shape of China’s Foreign Policy,” Financial Times, July 22, 2014; John Ruwitch, “Satellites and Seafood: China Keeps Fishing Fleet Connected in Disputed Waters,” Reuters, July 27, 2014; Wendell Minnick, “Fishing Vessels in China Serve as Proxy Enforcers,” Defense News, August 17, 2014.

 

Report Summary

China’s actions for asserting and defending its maritime territorial and exclusive economic zone (EEZ) claims in the East China (ECS) and South China Sea (SCS), particularly since late 2013, have heightened concerns among observers that China may be seeking to dominate or gain control of its near-seas region, meaning the ECS, the SCS, and the Yellow Sea. Chinese domination over or control of this region could substantially affect U.S. strategic, political, and economic interests in the Asia-Pacific region and elsewhere.

China is a party to multiple territorial disputes in the SCS and ECS, including, in particular, disputes over the Paracel Islands, Spratly Islands, and Scarborough Shoal in the SCS, and the Senkaku Islands in the ECS. China depicts its territorial claims in the SCS using the so-called map of the nine-dash line that appears to enclose an area covering roughly 90% of the SCS. Some observers characterize China’s approach for asserting and defending its territorial claims in the ECS and SCS as a “salami-slicing” strategy that employs a series of incremental actions, none of which by itself is a casus belli, to gradually change the status quo in China’s favor.

In addition to territorial disputes in the SCS and ECS, China is involved in a dispute, particularly with the United States, over whether China has a right under international law to regulate the activities of foreign military forces operating within China’s EEZ. The dispute appears to be at the heart of incidents between Chinese and U.S. ships and aircraft in international waters and airspace in 2001, 2002, 2009, 2013, and 2014.

The U.S. position on territorial and EEZ disputes in the Western Pacific (including those involving China) includes the following elements, among others:

  • The United States supports the principle that disputes between countries should be resolved peacefully, without coercion, intimidation, threats, or the use of force, and in a manner consistent with international law.
  • The United States supports the principle of freedom of seas, meaning the rights, freedoms, and uses of the sea and airspace guaranteed to all nations in international law. The United States opposes claims that impinge on the rights, freedoms, and lawful uses of the sea that belong to all nations.
  • The United States takes no position on competing claims to sovereignty over disputed land features in the ECS and SCS.
  • Although the United States takes no position on competing claims to sovereignty over disputed land features in the ECS and SCS, the United States does have a position on how competing claims should be resolved: Territorial disputes should be resolved peacefully, without coercion, intimidation, threats, or the use of force, and in a manner consistent with international law.
  • Claims of territorial waters and EEZs should be consistent with customary international law of the sea and must therefore, among other things, derive from land features. Claims in the SCS that are not derived from land features are fundamentally flawed.
  • Parties should avoid taking provocative or unilateral actions that disrupt the status quo or jeopardize peace and security. The United States does not believe that large-scale land reclamation with the intent to militarize outposts on disputed land features is consistent with the region’s desire for peace and stability.
  • The United States, like most other countries, believes that coastal states under UNCLOS have the right to regulate economic activities in their EEZs, but do not have the right to regulate foreign military activities in their EEZs.
  • U.S. military surveillance flights in international airspace above another country’s EEZ are lawful under international law, and the United States plans to continue conducting these flights as it has in the past.
  • The Senkaku Islands are under the administration of Japan and unilateral attempts to change the status quo raise tensions and do nothing under international law to strengthen territorial claims.

China’s actions for asserting and defending its maritime territorial and EEZ claims in the ECS and SCS raise several potential policy and oversight issues for Congress, including whether the United States has an adequate strategy for countering China’s “salami-slicing” strategy, whether the United States has taken adequate actions to reduce the risk that the United States might be drawn into a crisis or conflict over a territorial dispute involving China, and whether the United States should become a party to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). …

 

Ryan Pickrell, “How the US Should Respond to China’s ‘Secret’ Weapon,” The Daily Caller, 24 September 2016.

China’s naval and coast guard ships in the South China Sea tend to draw the most attention, but a more troublesome force has been hiding in plain sight for years.

China deploys three types of ships to enact its will in the South China Sea. These include navy “grey hulls,” coast guard “white hulls,” and maritime militia “blue hulls,” Naval War College Professor Dr. Andrew Erickson explained during a [House] Armed Services Committee hearing Thursday. 

Naval vessels — labeled People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) ships — are noticeably threatening and escalatory, so China often limits their deployment.

Coast guard and maritime law enforcement ships are seen as China’s go-to units in the South China Sea. Between 2010 and 2016, Chinese coast guard units were involved in 71 percent of the 45 [reported] incidents. China’s coast guard vessels are growing in size and are, in some cases, navy “grey hulls” which have been painted white, according to Center for Strategic and International Studies scholar Bonnie Glaser, who also spoke at the hearing.

The third sea force, China’s maritime militia, is a paramilitary force that operates on the front lines but hides behind the façade of civilian operations. They are often presented as fishing trawlers, but they rarely behave as such. These maritime militia “blue hulls” are waging a campaign of “grey zone aggression.”

“Make no mistake, these are state-organized, developed, and controlled forces operating under a direct military chain of command,” Erickson stated emphatically during the recent hearing.

China’s maritime militia has been involved in numerous incidents. Maritime militia units made appearances during the 2009 harassment of a U.S. surveillance ship, 2011 sabotage of two Vietnamese hydrographic vessels, 2012 seizure of Scarborough Shoal, 2014 repulsion of Vietnamese vessels near a Chinese oil rig in disputed waters, and 2015 harassment of the U.S.S. Lassen during a Freedom of Navigation Operation (FONOP).

“China is generating a worrying new wave … in leading maritime militia development,” Erickson mentioned. “The Sansha maritime militia was established to be a professional paramilitary force first and foremost, with fishing a secondary mission at best,” he added.

Several new, large maritime militia vessels with reinforced hulls, external rails for the mitigation of collision damage, and water cannons have been deployed in the South China Sea. Such features are not necessary for standard fishing trawlers, but they work well for ramming other vessels and spraying other ships with water to force them out of certain areas.

A 1978 report estimated that China’s maritime militia consisted of 750,000 personnel and 140,000 vessels, but the current size of this force is unknown. A 2010 defense white paper reported that China had 8 million militia units; the maritime militia would be a smaller subset of that group.

China’s maritime militia is typically positioned on the front line, with naval and coast guard vessels stationed nearby for protection. China uses these vessels to skirt claims that it is militarizing the South China Sea. “This is a force that thrives within the shadows of plausible deniability,” argued Erickson.

Despite the present administration’s emphasis on pivoting to Asia and deterring Chinese aggression in the South China Sea, the U.S. government has not addressed this lethal third sea force. Erickson explained, “American officials must reveal the third sea force’s true nature and deeds. China’s maritime militia can only be as deceptive and plausibly deniable as we allow it to be through our own silence and our own inaction.”

China’s maritime militia is not really a “secret” weapon. It is a force that has been operating in the open for quite some time.

An English-language China Daily article openly referred to the “less noticed force, China’s maritime militia” earlier this year. An image in the article showed men in military drab training with firearms equipped with bayonets, but the article claimed that “most of the maritime militia is made up of local fishermen.”

Maritime militia units have taken part in many air and naval exercises since 2014, according to Senior Colonel Xu Qingduan.

“The maritime militia is … a component of China’s ocean defense armed forces [that enjoys] low sensitivity and great leeway in maritime rights protection actions,” explained Zhoushan Garrison Commander Zeng Pengxiang.

Erickson asserts that the U.S. should acknowledge China’s maritime militia as a paramilitary force, revoking civilian protections for these vessels in the event of a conflict.

The U.S. should also call out China’s maritime militia publicly and share information with countries affected by the third sea force, Erickson said in his testimony. Furthermore, the U.S. should make it clear that units which ignore repeated warnings from U.S. vessels will be treated as military units and dealt with accordingly.

Plausible deniability is a strength, yet unmasking it will expose the maritime militia force to vulnerabilities. “We have to make it clear that we are wise to Beijing’s game,” said Erickson.

The South China Sea is a national interest for the U.S., as well as American allies and partners. “The issue is really about having a rules-based order, that if there are no international rules everybody agrees to and abides by, then you have chaos and anarchy in a region where we have enormous interests,” Glaser explained. China appears to be undermining that order to create its own regional norms.

 

Megan Eckstein, “Experts Advocate Harder Stance Against Illegal Claims in South China Sea,” U.S. Naval Institute News, 22 September 2016.

… The experts from the U.S. Naval War College and the Center for Strategic and International Studies agreed at a House Armed Services seapower and projection forces subcommittee hearing yesterday that adherence to maritime law in the South China Sea is important not only for regional security but also for maintaining law of the sea elsewhere on the globe.

In addition to unanimously supporting the U.S. ratifying the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, the experts testified that U.S. Navy freedom of navigation operations (FONOPS) needed to be bolstered. …

Beyond agreeing that the U.S. needs to be more direct in countering illegal Chinese territorial claims, the panelists also discussed how China was attempting to enforce those claims – not primarily through the People’s Liberation Army Navy’s fleet of gray-hull navy warships, but through the white-hull coast guard ships and the rarely discussed blue-hull maritime militia ships.

“Make no mistake, these are state-organized, -developed and -controlled forces operating under a direct military chain of command,” Andrew Erickson, a professor of strategy at the U.S. Naval War College’s China Maritime Studies Institute, said of the maritime militia ships, which are essentially fishing trawlers outfitted with strengthened hulls, guardrails to protect the hulls when ramming other ships, and water cannons to harass nearby vessels.

“This is a force that thrives in the shadows of plausible deniability, and I tried to make the case today that it is well within our power to shine enough light to dispel a lot of those shadows,” he said at the hearing. During last year’s Lassen FONOPS patrol, “small commercial craft with the hallmarks of maritime militia vessels approached [Lassen] provocatively, having apparently anticipated its presence. Who knows what contingencies they might have been practicing for or what footage they might have been capturing for later misuse. So before China is able to put the United States or one of our regional allies or partners in a misleading but precarious position of appearing to confront ‘innocent civilian fisherman,’ American officials must finally publicly reveal the third sea force’s true nature and deeds.”

Erickson said he worried that the maritime militia may turn on a U.S. warship, leading to a Gulliver’s Travels-type scenario with …Gulliver taken captive by the tiny Lilliputians. To avoid being stymied by this fleet – which he called little blue men, much like Russia’s ambiguous little green men – Erickson said the next administration needs to publish a comprehensive policy statement on freedom of navigation and consider how China employs all its assets to block that freedom at sea.

“We cannot tolerate a situation in which their navy bear hugs our Navy in search of best practices and diplomatic cameo (opportunities) as a kind of a good cop, while their other two sea forces, the coast guard and the maritime militia, play the role of bad cops doing the dirty work in the South China Sea,” Erickson said.

“So I think by looking at this issue comprehensively, by raising attention to it in Congress and asking the administration to do the same, by communicating all of this with resolve to our Chinese interlocutors, I think we can create a much better baseline and understanding in the South China Sea. It won’t solve all the problems, but it will reduce risk.” …

 

HEARING: 

SEAPOWER AND PROJECTION FORCES IN THE SOUTH CHINA SEA

Date: 

Wednesday, September 21, 2016 – 2:00pm

Location: 

2212 Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC 20515

House Armed Services Committee

Subcommittees: 

 

WITNESSES

Dr. Andrew S. Erickson, Ph.D. 

Professor of Strategy, China Maritime Studies Institute, U.S. Naval War College

Andrew S. Erickson, “The South China Sea’s Third Force: Understanding and Countering China’s Maritime Militia,” Testimony before the House Armed Services Committee Seapower and Projection Forces Subcommittee, Hearing on Seapower and Projection Forces in the South China Sea, Washington, DC, 21 September 2016.

Click here to watch on YouTube.

I deliver my main testimony (statement) from 1:24:07–1:32:54.

I answer questions from Congressman Randy Forbes on how to address China’s Maritime Militia from 1:40:40–1:43:02, and on why the South China Sea matters to America and Americans from 1:47:02–1:48:22.

I reminisce with Congressman Rick Larsen about our April 2011 trip with four other Members of Congress to military, defense industrial, and government-related facilities in Beijing, Qingdao, Chengdu, and Shanghai and answer a question from him about the utility of a U.S. Asia-Pacific Strategy from 2:03:42–2:07:15.

Finally, at the invitation of Chairman Forbes, I offer closing remarks from 2:24:44–2:27:28.

 

Ms. Bonnie S. Glaser 

Senior Adviser for Asia and Director, China Power Project, Center for Strategic and International Studies

Dr. James Kraska, S.J.D. 

Professor of International Law, Oceans Law and Policy, Stockton Center for the Study of International Law, U.S. Naval War College

 

Christopher P. Cavas, “China’s Maritime Militia—Time to Call them Out?” Defense News, 18 September 2016.

… “China’s maritime militia is only as deniable for China as we allow it to be, and we don’t have to allow it to be deniable,” said Andrew Erickson, a professor of strategy at the US Naval War College, where he is a founding member of the China Maritime Studies Institute.

The militia, Erickson said, are controlled directly by the Chinese military, adding another degree of complexity to at-sea confrontations below that of the navy and coast guard. The craft, he said, are “working in close coordination with the other two more powerful sea forces or at least with their backing and coordination added as necessary.”

Erickson often refers to the militia as “little blue men” – a play on references to little green men” employed by Russia in Crimea and the Ukraine to insinuate military forces into a region without clear identification.

“There is plenty of evidence of the front-line elite Chinese maritime militia units answering specifically to a People’s Liberation Army (PLA) chain of command, being entrusted with the fulfilling of specific state-sponsored missions with respect to participation in international sea encounters and incidents,” Erickson declared.

While the Chinese don’t widely advertise the militia in English-language publications or web sites, the Chinese Internet is rife with information confirming that craft involved in confrontations are militia-controlled, Erickson said. The evidence in some cases goes back years – he cited the example of a March 2009 confrontation in the northern South China Sea where several trawlers harassed the US intelligence ship Impeccable. One of those vessels, Erickson pointed out, bore a clear fishing registration number.

“You can run that number through the Chinese Internet and you’ve got clear documentation of its registration in a maritime militia organization,” Erickson said. “You can see very clearly that it was owned by someone named Lin Wei and reportedly piloted by him during the incident. Lin Wei is a cadre in the maritime militia of Sanya City, Hainan, from where the boats were dispatched.

“We have lots of nitty-gritty,” Erickson said, “specifying and backing this up with the authoritative Chinese sources, including Chinese provincial government sources, that you can piece together to document all of this — how the vessels are registered, who owns them, the status of that person as a member of the maritime militia, having a specific role in the maritime militia.”

While the total number of militia is not clear, the potential is large.

“China has the world’s largest fishing fleet, has thousands of fishing boats and a portion of these fishing vessels and a portion of the people who work on those fishing vessels and in related industries are specifically registered in the maritime militia,” Erickson said. “They receive some form of training and compensation, and in return, they have some sort of responsibility to be available to be called up for various types of state-sponsored activities.”

Erickson has frequently written about the Tanmen Militia, another organization also based on Hainan Island that has even been cited by Chinese President Xi Jinping as a model for maritime militia building.

“The current deputy commander of the Tanmen Militia is Wang Shumao,” Erickson said. “He is the operational commander when the militia goes out to participate as a fleet in international sea incidents. The two big international incidents we know it’s participated in are the 2012 Scarborough Shoal incident, and a 2014 oil-rig incident. Wang was in charge of that. He’s been in the Tanmen Militia since the late 1990s and his risen up through the ranks.

“This is not a faceless organization. We can document it, provide many details on who’s leading it, what the organizational structure is, how they report, how it all works,” Erickson added. “I believe we already have enough data to make very conclusive durable connections using sources that, within China’s own system, are authoritative and legitimate. The only thing missing is for some US government official and report to state this officially.”

Erickson noted that except for one public reference he’s found uttered by the US Pacific Fleet commander, there seem to be no authoritative US government statements directly referring to the maritime militia. In the constant tit-for-tat arena of public relations and diplomatic maneuvering, the issue could become important.

“We could have a very difficult situation with China sending out a media information or disinformation campaign and the public at home and in the region buying China’s version of events or getting confused,” he said, adding that “this could also all come to a head in a particularly worrisome way at the start of the next presidential administration.”

The outgoing Obama administration, Erickson noted, has not taken the opportunity to call out the maritime militia.

“China may already lay the groundwork to create a distorting ‘CNN effect’ or ‘CCTV effect’ that lays a difficult trap for us,” Erickson said. “For all we know China is selectively collecting video and photographic images to be used as part of an information-operations campaign, so that at some future point they’ll be ready to selectively portray or mis-portray what they’re doing and what we’re doing. I see this potentially coming to a head in some sort of Chinese effort to make a freedom-of-navigation type of operation more difficult for us.”

The administration, Erickson said, should “go on the record and document publicly the reality, the nature and the approach of China’s maritime militia.” Such an effort could “create a measure of deterrence, showing the US is wise to China’s game.

“If we do our homework and act well in advance,” he added, “we can portray the facts accurately and thereby have a powerful narrative in our favor and deter Chinese adventurism and the causing of problems for us.”

 

Conor M. Kennedy and Andrew S. Erickson, “Riding a New Wave of Professionalization and Militarization: Sansha City’s Maritime Militia,” Center for International Maritime Security (CIMSEC), 1 September 2016.

On 21 July 2013, several dozen Sansha City “residents” stood before the city government building and swore oaths during an inspection by Mayor Xiao Jie (肖杰) and his military counterpart Garrison Commander Cai Xihong (蔡喜宏). Clad in militia uniforms and toting Type-56 assault rifles, the Sansha Maritime Militia was officially established to uphold Chinese interests throughout the Paracels and beyond. According to the Garrison Commander, Sansha City’s Maritime Militia are given five major missions in China’s struggle for maritime rights protection: regular declarations of sovereignty, conducting reconnaissance and patrols, cooperating with maritime law enforcement, participating in marine rescue, and supporting combat operations. They also repel foreign fishing vessels, safeguard islands and reefs, and provide disaster relief for civilians living there. Such missions represent important, evolving roles for the militia as China seeks to reinforce its claims to the South China Sea. Sansha’s Maritime Militia is on the frontlines of this effort given the municipality’s responsibility for administering all Chinese-claimed features in the South China Sea.

We previously examined in depth the maritime militia forces of SanyaDanzhou, and Tanmen (Parts One and Two). No examination of the maritime militia of Hainan Province would be complete, however, without scrutinizing the Sansha Maritime Militia. As China’s newest, southernmost municipality, Sansha City is a critical node in China’s South China Sea strategy. Given its responsibility to administer all of China’s claimed features within the nine-dashed line by Beijing, Sansha lies at the apex of Chinese civilian presence in the South China Sea and efforts to exercise administrative control over China’s claimed waters. To better grasp the range of tools China uses to achieve such control, deeper understanding of Sansha’s Maritime Militia is necessary.

Most importantly, recent organizational developments concerning the Sansha Maritime Militia demonstrate a new professionalization and militarization of China’s elite maritime militia forces. Indicators of increased professionalization include hiring recently separated veterans, standardization and enhancement of training, and in some cases lack of clear fishing responsibilities in return for payment of salaries. Key indicators of increased militarization include preparations to make small arms rapidly available to deploying units according to mission requirements, construction of new bases, deployment for noncommercial purposes, and introduction of new classes of vessels with dedicated weapons and ammunition storage rooms, reinforced hulls, and water cannons.

Significantly, the Sansha Maritime Militia is being created from scratch using personnel that receive extremely generous guaranteed salaries—seemingly independent of any fishing or marine industrial activity on their part, a dedicated arrangement that we have not seen elsewhere. This represents a significant departure from what we have described previously regarding the maritime militias at Sanya, Danzhou, and Tanmen. These militias were formed and evolved over years if not decades, drawing upon the community’s resident skills and resources. The majority of such militia members engaged in fundamentally civilian economic activities with occasional additional purposes assigned through a People’s Liberation Army (PLA) chain of command, including military law enforcement-style activities. While these three elite militias remain important to Chinese “rights protection” activities, Sansha City’s new, purpose-built militia may in the future be even more so. …

 

Andrew S. Erickson, “China Open Source Example: Big Plans for Maritime Militia Base Buildup, as Seen from a Government Proposal Document,” China Analysis from Original Sources 以第一手资料研究中国, 30 August 2016.

“关于在文昌木兰头规划建设三沙战略腹地和民兵渔船停泊港的建议” [Proposal for the Planning and Construction of Wenchang Mulantou Rear Area for Sansha and Harbor for MooringMaritime Militia Fishing Vessels], submitted to the Hainan Provincial Government, 12 February 2015.

This proposal, as a result of a special assessment made by the Development Research Center of the State Council and submitted to the Hainan Provincial Government in early 2015, details plans to bolster what is apparently emerging as its leading state-owned militia fishing fleet: the Sansha City Fisheries Development Company. The proposal involves development of a new port to act as a “strategic rear area” for Sansha City, providing a logistics base for the 84 large steel-hulled militia fishing vessels allocated to Sansha City by Hainan provincial authorities. According to the proposal, ten of these vessels were delivered in 2015, with 70 more scheduled for delivery in 2016. Citing concerns regarding Woody Island’s fragile environment and the inability of Hainan’s other fishing ports to support this large militia fleet, the proposal argues for the appropriation of 20 square kilometers of coastal land in Wenchang City’s Puqian Township. Located on Hainan Island’s northern coast, this land is envisioned to be designated as a strategic rear area for Sansha City.

(Since this proposal’s promulgation, there have been multiple official indications that it has been formally approved; and that this project is therefore proceeding, with planning already well underway.)

ORIGINAL TEXT OF THE PROPOSAL DOCUMENT:

关于在文昌木兰头规划建设三沙战略腹地和民兵渔船停泊港的建议编号: 532238    时间: 2015-02-12    发表人: bgtjyta

    省政府2013年政府工作报告明确提出研究建设三沙市战略腹地,为开发建设提供依托。为此,三沙市积极委托国务院发展研究中心进行专题比选研究。

一、建设三沙战略腹地和民兵渔船停泊港的必要性

(一)三沙战略腹地和民兵渔船停泊港建设是中央经略南海战略的重要举措。为推进三沙“维权、维稳、保护、开发”工作,省委省政府深入贯彻落实中央领导关于海南海上民兵钢质渔船建造的一系列指示精神,将84艘民兵钢质渔船交给三沙市运营管理,但由于三沙远离海南本岛、台风多,生态环境脆弱,岛礁人口承载力有限,无法在本市范围内建立渔船的停靠泊地。目前,三沙在文昌清澜港有1个专用码头(仅能停靠“琼沙3号”和“三沙1号”),今年即将投入使用的10艘渔船以及明年陆续投入使用的70多艘渔船面临的停靠及综合保障问题急需解决。为解决民兵渔船的停靠、维修、保养、海上训练、船员后勤保障等事宜,急需建设海南本岛停靠泊地及综合保障基地,才能更好地在维护国家主权和海洋权益中发挥重要作用,实现国防战略安全和区域经济发展的双赢目标。

(二)三沙战略腹地和民兵渔船停泊港建设是加快三沙建设发展的必然要求。加强三沙建设发展是党和国家提出的明确要求,是实现我国南海战略目标的必要前提和保障。2013年4月,习总书记在海南考察时强调“加快三沙建设,是海南省委、省政府的重要职责,是必须承担好的重大担当”。三沙设市以来,在省委省政府的领导和支持下,在政权建设、基础设施建设、民生工作、环境保护、军民融合等方面取得了显著成效,但目前存在的问题也比较突出。三沙市陆地面积狭小,陆地面积仅13平方公里,土地资源稀缺,建设用地紧张,难以承载大规模、高强度的开发利用,不能满足三沙市日益发展的新常态。在海南本岛建设三沙战略腹地和民兵渔船停泊港,作为三沙市后方生活保障基地和产业基地,承接三沙市政权和经济社会建设在海南本岛的落地,有利于保护三沙生态环境,有利于通过促进三沙产业建设带动海南经济发展。

二、建设三沙战略腹地和民兵渔船停泊港的可行性

(一)机遇百年不遇。三沙面临着巨大的发展机遇。从国家总体战略布局看,三沙设市,是中央经略南海的重大战略部署。随着海洋强国发展战略和21世纪“海上丝绸之路”的推进,党中央、国务院高度重视三沙的发展,三沙在国家总体发展布局中的战略支点地位日益突显。从三沙发展总体规划看,由国家发改委牵头编制的《三沙市总体发展规划》颁布在即,明确了三沙重点项目支持政策。与此同时,随着南海维权力度不断加强,以及海南国际旅游岛建设成效初显等一系列发展环境的改善,南海海上形势总体稳定,三沙发展在向常态化转变,为在海南本岛规划建设三沙战略腹地和民兵渔船停泊港奠定了良好的基础。

(二)木兰头条件成熟。经过对海南本岛规划体系中42个三级以上渔港进行比选,条件比较成熟,能够批量停靠民兵渔船的渔港仅有3个,分别是文昌市清澜渔港、三亚市崖州渔港、儋州市白马井渔港。清澜渔港承载力有限,清澜港航道泥沙沉积量大,需每年疏浚,且不能停泊5000吨以上大型补给船,对民兵渔船的补给和停泊都有很大的限制;三亚市崖州渔港2014年底实现功能性开港,儋州白马井渔港综合补给能力还未形成。为保障民兵渔船正常管理运营及今后长远发展的需要,有必要在海南本岛建设停靠泊地,为民兵渔船提供有力的综合保障服务。

木兰头位于文昌市铺前镇境内,木兰湾是海南三大最具有开发价值的深水良港,海岸线长25公里。铺前湾大桥建成后距离海口仅40公里,未来交通便利;港址位置水深条件良好,开挖量少,建设方波提后便可满足民兵渔船使用要求。因此,在文昌市铺前镇木兰头划出适当区域,规划建设三沙后方战略腹地和民兵渔船停泊港,具有天时地利的良好条件。

三、建设三沙战略腹地和民兵渔船停泊港的建议

建议省政府在文昌市铺前镇木兰头划出20平方公里土地及沿岸海域给三沙市,用于建设三沙后方战略腹地和民兵渔船停泊港,统一规划建设,形成以海洋产业园区、生活保障、渔船维修保养、物资补给等为主的综合性保障基地。将此项目建设经费列入国家、海南省十三五规划,列入国家发改委的三沙建设专项。并给予特殊的金融、税收、海关优惠政策,支持三沙发展海洋特色产业,为海南建设海洋强省发挥重要作用。

Original source URL: http://www.hainan.gov.cn/tianprint-rdjy–5740.html

 

David Axe, “Little Blue Men: China Launches a Stealth Invasion in the South China Sea,”The Daily Beast, 9 August 2016.

Beijing isn’t fighting for control of disputed waters with missiles and drones—it’s using Chinese coast guard and fisherman instead.

On Aug. 6, the Chinese government sent a stealth invasion force sailing into the disputed waters surrounding traditionally Japanese-occupied islands in the East China Sea.

But there wasn’t a single Chinese naval warship among the nearly 250 vessels that swarmed the Senkaku Islands, around 250 miles southwest of Japan. Instead, Beijing deployed 13 coast guard ships, some of them armed, along with an estimated 230 fishing vessels operated by government-sponsored maritime militiamen. …

Beijing’s heavy reliance on [the maritime] militia is equally noteworthy—and, for China’s rivals, potentially very worrying. These “little blue men,” as U.S. Naval War College professor Andrew Erickson has dubbed them, have become the main combatants in China’s undeclared—and so far mostly bloodless—pseudomilitary campaign of expansion into the East and South China Seas.

Erickson’s nickname for China’s maritime militia references the so-called “little green men,” or incognito soldiers, that Moscow sent into Ukraine to back pro-Russian separatists.

There are clear advantages to mobilizing… [militias and] paramilitaries for what amounts to a military mission, Erickson said. In deploying government-controlled fishermen, Beijing gets “the bonus without the onus” as it tries to forcefully cement its claim to huge, fish- and mineral-rich swathes of the western Pacific. …

… in sending fishermen, China both maintains credible deniability regarding its true intentions and has the opportunity to portray the other side as overly forceful—or indeed to turn the tables, and cast the defender as the attacker.

The little blue men have popped up across the China Seas…. “Anyone seeing a pattern here?” Erickson quipped on Twitter. …

In a foreboding message to the Chinese people in the aftermath of the tribunal’s ruling on China’s South China Seas claims, Chinese defense minister Chang Wanquan called for a “people’s war at sea” in order to preserve Chinese sovereignty. …

…when Beijing wants to take over an island without starting a war, it doesn’t need a fleet of warships. The little blue men can do the job.

 

下平 拓哉 [Capt. Takuya Shimodaira, JMSDF], “中国第3の海上兵力: 海上民兵” [China’s Third Sea Force: The Maritime Militia], 海上自衛隊幹部学校 [Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force Maritime Staff College], 8 August 2016.

これからの中国の海洋におけるパワーを判断するためには、中国海軍、第2の海軍と言われる中国海警局(China Coast Guard)、そして海上民兵(Maritime Militia)の3つの研究が欠かせません。  米海大中国海事研究所(CMSI)における海上民兵研究のスペシャリストは、アンドリュー・エリクソン(Andrew S. Erickson)教授とコナー・ケネディ(Conor M. Kennedy)研究助手でしょう。特にケネディ氏は、この新しい研究分野におけるパイオニア的存在であり、CMSIでは親しみを込めて「ミスター海上民兵」と呼ばれているほど、緻密な分析研究を続けています。

中国の海上民兵は、近年急速に活動を活発化しています。特に、東シナ海や南シナ海において中国の権利を主張するための情報収集や建築資材の運搬等、幅広い任務を果たすようになってきています。また、中国海軍艦艇への燃料や弾薬等の補給や、機雷や対空ミサイルを使ったゲリラ戦の訓練も実施されています。

エリクソン教授によれば、海上民兵に係る最近の特徴は、次のとおりです。  第1に、中国の主張を強硬に推し進めるために、単一ではなく、中国海軍、中国海警局、海上民兵の3つが協同する。

第2に、中国は、世界第2の中国海軍、世界第1の中国海警局、そして世界第1の海上民兵を有しており、海上民兵は非正規戦の最前線に立つ。

第3に、海上民兵は、平時に相手に圧力をかける上で非常に有効である。

今後、中国の海上民兵は、米国等による「航行の自由作戦」に挑戦するために、より高圧的な行動に出ることが予想され、また米国や同盟国の交戦規定(ROE)の隙をつく活動を活発化する等、ますます厄介なアクターとなってくるでしょう。多数の船団からなる海上民兵の船舶は、中国の衛星測位システム北斗で位置情報を入手していると言われていますが、部隊としての通信ネットワークについてはまだまだ問題があるようです。

(2016年7月23日記)

【エリクソン教授推薦の海上民兵に関する論文】

1) Andrew S. Erickson and Conor M. Kennedy, “China’s Maritime Militia: What It Is and How to Deal With It,” Foreign Affairs, June 23, 2016.

http://nationalinterest.org/feature/countering-chinas-third-sea-force-unmask-maritime-militia-16860

2)                    , “Countering China’s Third Sea Force: Unmask Maritime Militia before They’re Used Again,” The National Interest, July 6, 2016.

http://nationalinterest.org/feature/countering-chinas-third-sea-force-unmask-maritime-militia-16860

3)                    , “China’s Maritime Militia,” CNA, June 2016.

https://www.cna.org/CNA_files/PDF/IRM-2016-U-013646.pdf

海上民兵の歴史、任務、指揮統制、情報化、組織、訓練、最近の活動等について詳細に分析されています。

【エリクソン教授のHP】

http://www.andrewerickson.com/

最新の中国研究に欠かせない必読論文がぎっしり詰まっています。

 

J. Michael Cole, “China Opens Large Fishing Port to ‘Safeguard’ South China Sea Claims,” The News Lens International, 2 August 2016.

A new port facility in Hainan could serve as a base for China’s ‘maritime militias’ in the disputed South China Sea.

China on Monday officially opened a new fishing port at Yazhou, Hainan Province, to host fishing vessels operating in the disputed South China Sea.

Located approximately 50 km West of Sanya, the Yazhou Bay Central Fishing Port — the largest in Hainan and the closest to the Nansha Islands (Spratlys) — commenced limited operations in April 2015. The port spans a length of 1,063 meters and counts 11 functional berths that can currently accommodate a fleet of 800 fishing boats. Local officials say they hope to expand capacity to as many as 2,000. Construction was completed in June this year.

Starting on May 15, fishing boats stationed at Sanya Port were ordered to relocate to Yazhou. As per official plans, 468 Sanya-registered fishing boats and approximately 1,000 non-Sanya-registered fishing boats and 66 ice-making workshops and traders are to be transferred to Yazhou.

Yazhou Port is located about 260 km from the Xisha Islands (Paracels)… which “administers” an area of about 2 million square kilometers in the South China Sea. …

According to U.S.-based defense expert Andrew S. Erickson, the world has not paid enough attention to what he calls China’s “maritime militia,” or “irregular forces [that] have been an important element of Chinese maritime force structure and operations.”

An expanding maritime militia, Erickson says, is one of the many instruments at China’s disposal to defend its territorial claims in the South China Sea, allowing it to “vigorously pursue objectives without risking military conflict or creating an image of gunboat diplomacy.”

Erickson adds that Hainan’s maritime militia — and there is absolutely no doubt that Yazhou will serve as a base for those — is “poised to become even more significant,” adding that “they remain widely under-appreciated and misunderstood by foreign observers.” Particularly worrying, he observes, is the high possibility that such maritime militias could be used to undermine and harass freedom of navigation operations (FONOPS) by the U.S. Navy operating in the South China Sea.

 

International Tribunal to Rule on South China Sea Case,” interviewed by Anthony Kuhn, Morning Edition, National Public Radio, 11 July 2016.

Click here to listen to the program.

A decision in the case is expected on Tuesday. The Philippines challenged China’s claims to most of the South China Sea, through which about a 5th of the world’s commerce passes through.

Anthony Kuhn, “In a Chinese Port Town, South China Sea Dispute Is Personal,” Parallels, National Public Radio, 11 July 2016.

… At this time of year in Tanmen, many fishing boats are in the docks for repairs. A fishing ban from May to August gives the fish populations some time to recover.

Only a few decades ago, the town’s docks were mostly lined with wooden sailboats. Now many of them are 100-ton steel trawlers with electronic navigation systems. The government subsidizes the building of these boats. It has also recruited many of the fishermen into maritime militia units.

Near the docks, a billboard shows a picture of President Xi Jinping talking to local fishermen and praising their vanguard role in protecting China’s maritime rights and interests in the South China Sea.

Critics charge that China has used these militia forces to build up artificial islands and reefs, to harass the ships of its Southeast Asian neighbors and the U.S.

Chinese fishing trawlers — possibly belonging to militia units — reportedly crossed the bow of a U.S. destroyer, the USS Lassen, as it conducted freedom of navigation operations in the South China Sea last October.

Chinese militia boats also rammed and destroyed Vietnamese trawlers in a fight over a Chinese oil rig operating in waters claimed by both China and Vietnam near the Paracels in 2014.

China and Vietnam both have maritime militias, notes Andrew Erickson, a professor of strategy and expert on China’s navy at the U.S. Naval War College. He accuses China of trying to create confusion about whether the militia forces are military or civilian.

“By obfuscating and having these forces lurk in the shadows,” he argues, “China’s trying to have it both ways in a way that doesn’t accord with international law.”

Erickson says there should be no confusion: The militia takes orders from China’s military.

“It’s high time that the U.S. made statements in advance so that it’s clear to everybody that the U.S. is wise to China’s game,” he says, and that American naval vessels will not be deterred by the militia as they carry out their operations in the South China Sea.

When asked to clarify the status of the maritime militias, Chinese Ministry of Defense spokesman Yang Yujun did not respond directly, saying only that the militia forces engage in fishing and “maritime rights protection” activities in accordance with Chinese law. …

 

Episode 340: China’s Maritime Militia with Andrew Erickson,” Live Interview on Midrats Radio Program, Blog Talk Radio, 10 July 2016.

Click here to listen to the complete podcast.

 

Navy Milbloggers Sal from “CDR Salamander” and EagleOne from “EagleSpeak” discuss leading issues and developments for the Navy, Marine Corps, Coast Guard and related national security issues.

As China continues to slowly use a variety of tools to claim portions of her maritime near-abroad in the South China Sea and elsewhere, part of their effort includes what can almost be considered naval irregular forces – a Maritime Militia.

What is China doing with these assets, why are they being used, and what could we expect going forward as she taps in to a variety of assets to attempt to establish her authority?

Our guest for the full hour to discuss this and more will be Dr. Andrew S. Erickson.

Dr. Erickson is Professor of Strategy at the U.S. Naval War College (NWC)’s China Maritime Studies Institute (CMSI). Since 2008 he has been an Associate in Research at Harvard University’s John King Fairbank Center for Chinese Studies, and is an expert contributor to theWall Street Journal’s China Real Time Report, for which he has authored or coauthored thirty-seven articles.

He received his Ph.D. and M.A. in international relations and comparative politics from Princeton University and graduated magna cum laude from Amherst College with a B.A. in history and political science. He has studied Mandarin in the Princeton in Beijing program at Beijing Normal University’s College of Chinese Language and Culture; and Japanese language, politics, and economics in the year-long Associated Kyoto Program at Doshisha University. Erickson previously worked for Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) as a Chinese translator and technical analyst. He gained early experience working briefly at the U.S. Embassy in Beijing, the U.S. Consulate in Hong Kong, the U.S. Senate, and the White House. Proficient in Mandarin Chinese and conversant in Japanese, he has traveled extensively in Asia and has lived in China, Japan, and Korea.

***Please note: unless otherwise specified, the views posted, reposted, or otherwise expressed on Dr. Andrew S. Erickson’s research websites, social media accounts, and other electronic and print sources are his alone and should not be construed to represent the official policies or estimates of the U.S. Navy or any other organization of the U.S. government. Additionally, retweets via Twitter do not imply endorsement in any way. Neither tweets nor retweets should be construed as political statements.***

 

China’s Third Sea Force—the Maritime Militia,” interviewed on “‘Farce’ Says China, in the South China Sea” program, The John Batchelor Show, 77 WABC Radio New York, 7:30 p.m. EST, 6 July 2016.

Click here for webcast, and listen to minutes 30:40-39:33.

 

Andrew S. Erickson and Conor M. Kennedy, “Countering China’s Third Sea Force: Unmask Maritime Militia before They’re Used Again,” The National Interest, 6 July 2016.

As the South China Sea heats up, one of Beijing’s most important tools—its Maritime Militia or “Little Blue Men,” roughly equivalent at sea to Putin’s “Little Green Men” on land—offers it major rewards while threatening the U.S. and other potential opponents with major risks. When the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) in the Hague announces its rulings on the Philippines-initiated maritime legal case with China on July 12—likely rejecting some key bases for excessive Chinese claims in the South China Sea—the Maritime Militia will offer a tempting tool for Beijing to try to teach Manila (and other neighbors) a lesson while frustrating American ability to calm troubled waters. This major problem with significant strategic implications is crying out for greater attention, and effective response. Accordingly, this article puts China’s Maritime Militia under the spotlight to explain what it is, why it matters and what to do about it.

To promote its disputed claims to features and maritime zones with increasing assertiveness, China is employing not one but three major sea forces—a potent three-pronged trident. In addition to what will soon be the world’s second-largest blue-water navy, and what is already the world’s largest blue-water coast guard, Beijing wields the world’s largest maritime militia, whose leading units are military-controlled forces trolling for territory. Most usefully in the peacetime coercion Beijing hopes to exclusively employ to advance its claims, China’s Maritime Militia remains the least recognized and understood of its sea forces. That needs to change—immediately.

Last October, when destroyer USS Lassen passed near Subi Reef, built up by Beijing in the Spratlys, merchant ships including fishing vessels maneuvered around it, having apparently anticipated its approach. China opposes such freedom of navigation operations categorically. In the future, to turn up the heat, while attempting to preserve plausible deniability and exploit perceived limitations in U.S. rules of engagement, China may employ Maritime Militia vessels more assertively to harass—and even attempt to thwart—such operations. Chinese propagandists might preemptively flood the airwaves with a misleading narrative of selectively edited footage of “civilian fishermen” being “unjustly attacked.” Leading People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) scholar and former deputy naval attaché to the United States Sr. Capt. Zhang Junshe seemed to be laying possible groundwork for just such a (mis)portrayal when he told Global Times that:

“waters adjacent to the Spratly Archipelago are the traditional fishing grounds of Chinese fishermen. For an American warship to barge into the adjacent waters constituted a threat to the normal operations of Chinese fishermen. The displacement of Chinese fishing vessels is small, and they have a shallow draft. They cannot withstand a collision. Americans show no remorse for their own actions or talk about the threat that a 10,000-ton warship represents for Chinese fishermen. Instead they hype up the ‘harassment’ of Chinese Maritime Militia. They are totally off base. There is absolutely no connection to the Maritime Militia.”

Yet, as of today, the U.S. government has demonstrated neither public awareness of the problem nor offered authoritative information to dispel such propaganda. Absent further preparations, this inaction could leave U.S. decisionmakers in a difficult position indeed. …

 

Andrew S. Erickson, Interviewed by Eleanor Hall, “Tensions between China and U.S. Intensify over South China Sea,” The World Today Program, Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC), 29 June 2016.

Click here to listen to both key interview highlights (MP3 Download) and the full-length interview (Extra Audio).

The World Today is Australia’s leading midday current affairs radio program, broadcast across the country and throughout the region by the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC). An hour of current affairs background and debate from Australia and the world every Monday to Friday, 12:05 pm, ABC Local Radio and Radio National, The World Today is a comprehensive current affairs program which backgrounds, analyses, interprets and encourages debate on events and issues of interest and importance to all Australians.

Transcript of key interview highlights:

“Tensions between China and U.S. Intensify over South China Sea”

ELEANOR HALL: Well let’s go now to one of the world’s most critical and contested trade routes, the South China Sea.

The standoff there between China, its neighbours and the US has been intensifying in recent months, with the Chinese taking an increasingly acquisitive stance in the area.

And a specialist on China’s strategy is adamant that one of the keys to China’s success is a secretive militia based on China’s fishing fleet.

Dr Andrew Erickson is a professor of strategy and a founding member of the China Maritime Studies Institute at the US Naval War College.

He joined me earlier from Rhode Island to discuss his latest research.

ANDREW ERICKSON: The maritime militia appears to be an important part of China’s maritime security approach, nothing less than a third sea force for China.

China’s maritime militia is mostly effective for China and most corrosive to regional security and international norms when it’s able to lurk in the shadows below the level of awareness for the vast majority of outside observers and policy makers.

ELEANOR HALL: And how effective are these apparent fishermen against the huge United States naval vessels that are conducting their freedom of navigation trips through this area.

ANDREW ERICKSON: The capabilities of China’s maritime militia are not just theoretical. This is a force that has played a significant role in a variety of Chinese international sea battles, skirmishes, and incidents. … most importantly in recent years the 2012 direct participation of maritime militia forces in China’s seizure of Scarborough Shoal from the Philippines, and finally in 2014, maritime militia participation in repelling Vietnamese forces that were trying to challenge the stationing of the Chinese HYSY-981 oil rig in waters disputed with Vietnam.

And according to an article in Defence News, late last October when the USS Lassen was involved in a freedom of navigation operation in the South China Sea, it’s reported that a number of civilian-like vessels anticipated its transit and approached it and that has all the hallmarks of maritime militia activity that in the future I worry could be dialled up.

ELEANOR HALL: And is there a particular power in this militia because it is not wearing a naval uniform?

ANDREW ERICKSON: At this point China’s trying to have it both ways. The maritime militia are in fact organised forces subordinate to a PLA, People’s Liberation Army, Chinese military, chain of command.

It appears Chinese officials are going to deny some of these things in a very implausible way. We are getting some very implausible stories here and I think it’s really high time that we got to the bottom of this and got down to the facts, so that’s what we’re trying to do now with our research.

ELEANOR HALL: You’ve been urging the US government to at least acknowledge the existence of this militia, why is the US reluctant to do this?

ANDREW ERICKSON: I don’t know why it hasn’t come up in a significant number of US official public statements. I’m optimistic that that will change in the near future. I think the fact that some of these Chinese official denials are as implausible as they are is testimony to the cost of the US not making a more conclusive official statement.

ELEANOR HALL: What do you think would happen were the US government to acknowledge the existence of this fishing militia? Do you think it would make it harder for the Chinese to then use them to build the islands and block the US vessels?

ANDREW ERICKSON: The more that this irregular force is called out and documented for what it is, I think the more power and the more effectiveness it will lose. It will lose plausible deniability, it will lose an element of surprise, and… Chinese officials may be extremely reluctant acknowledge or admit how it’s been developed in some ways.

I think… that as other countries take it seriously and their officials make statements about it, those very facts will make Chinese officials much more careful about how they think about developing and employing this third sea force of theirs.

ELEANOR HALL: Do you think that the US Navy should change its rules of engagement so that it can take action against what appear to be civilian vessels?

ANDREW ERICKSON: I am not a lawyer so I am not qualified to comment on the specific details of rules of engagement. My personal strong recommendation, and I think this should be communicated to China, is that any Chinese maritime militia-type elements that ignore repeated warnings by US Navy or other US government vessels to desist from disruptive activities, should be treated as militarily controlled and should be dealt with accordingly to ensure self defence and unobstructed mission accomplishment.

It seems clear to me that there should be ways to make it clear that US government vessels will act in a positive way and they’re not looking for some sort of unsafe encounter, but nor will they allow themselves to be stymied or thwarted or diverted by any kind of Chinese military-sponsored harassment even if it comes from ostensibly humble appearing maritime militia forces.

ELEANOR HALL: Could doing what you suggest, though, actually spark a military conflict in the area?

ANDREW ERICKSON: I think that both the US and China have very strong incentives and strong shared interests to not let tensions get out of hand. I think we’re in a period right now, at least in some security aspects, that I term ‘competitive coexistence’.

So, on the one hand our two countries have deep, shared economic interests, we have strong interests in counter-terrorism. These are strong bulwarks that I think can keep things from spinning out of control. The fact is China has equally strong interests not to allow any sort of unexpected encounter or incident to escalate out of control.

ELEANOR HALL: That’s Dr Andrew Erickson, a professor of strategy and a founding member of the US Naval War College’s China Maritime Studies Institute.

 

Andrew S. Erickson and Conor M. Kennedy, “Chapter 5: China’s Maritime Militia,” in Rear Admiral Michael McDevitt, USN (ret.), ed., Becoming a Great “Maritime Power”: A Chinese Dream (Arlington, VA: CNA Corporation, June 2016), 62-83.

Introduction

An important component of China’s local armed forces is the militia. It supports China’s armed forces in a variety of functions, and is seeing expanded mission roles as the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) continues to modernize. While the maritime militia is not a new addition to China’s militia system, it is receiving greater emphasis since China now aspires to become a great maritime power and because maritime disputes in China’s near seas are a growing concern.

No official definition of the maritime militia exists in the many sources the authors examined. However, in late 2012 the Zhoushan garrison commander, Zeng Pengxiang, and the garrison’s Mobilization Office described it concisely: “The Maritime Militia is an irreplaceable mass armed organization not released from production and a component of China’s ocean defense armed forces [that enjoys] low sensitivity and great leeway in maritime rights protection actions.”

The only estimate of the size of the maritime militia obtained during the course of this research was from a source published in 1978, which put the number of personnel at 750,000 on approximately 140,000 craft. In its 2010 defense white paper, China stated that it had 8 million primary militia members nationwide. The maritime militia is a smaller unique subset since it performs many of its missions at sea. However, an accurate number is not available. It is important to note that the maritime militia is distinct from both China’s coastal militia (shore based) and its naval reserve, although some coastal militia units have been transformed into maritime militia units.

History of China’s maritime militia

China’s militia system originated before the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) came to power, but the system of making numerous state-supported maritime militias out of the coastal populations was not fully implemented until the Communists began to exercise greater control of the coastline in the 1950s. This segment of China’s population had been relatively isolated from events on land and was subject to Japanese and Nationalist control in the decades before CCP rule was established. The CCP targeted the fishing communities, creating fishing collectives and work units, enacting strict organizational control, and conducting political education.146 Factors motivating and shaping this transformation included:

  • The PLA’s early use of civilian vessels
  • The need to prevent Nationalist Chinese (ROC) incursions along the coast
  • The need to man the maritime militia with fishermen, as there were too few other experienced mariners
  • Confrontations with other states’ fishing and naval vessels, due to the depletion of fishery resources.
  • The need to fish farther from shore, in contested waters.
  • The transformation from coastal defense militias to the at-sea maritime militia
  • Overall trends in militia development, including specialization, emergency response, technological units, and increased orientation towards supporting each of the PLA branches.

The maritime militia has played significant roles in a number of military campaigns and coercive incidents over the years, including:

  • The 1950s support of the PLA’s island seizure campaigns
  • The 1974 seizure of the western portion of the Paracels
  • The 2009 Impeccable incident
  • The 2011 harassment of Vietnam’s survey vessels (Viking II and Binh Minh)
  • The 2012 Scarborough Shoal standoff (Tanmen Militia present)
  • The 2014 Haiyang Shiyou-981 oil rig standoff. …

 

Andrew S. Erickson and Conor M. Kennedy, “China’s Maritime Militia: What It Is and How to Deal With It,” Foreign Affairs, 23 June 2016.

Last October, when the American destroyer USS Lassen sailed by Subi Reef, an artificial island built by China in the South China Sea, a number of Chinese merchant ships and fishing boats maneuvered around it, apparently having anticipated its approach. The Lassen was on a freedom of navigation operation, meant to demonstrate the United States’ commitment to maintaining open access to the area, much of which China claims as its own. China was using an unusual resource to broadcast its opposition to the trip: ships that appeared to be crewed by civilians, but in all likelihood were actually controlled by state-sponsored forces taking orders from China’s military.

To promote its disputed claims in the South China Sea, China is increasingly relying on irregular forces such as these, which together form what China calls its maritime militia. In recent years, maritime militia units have played important roles in a number of encounters and skirmishes in international waters: in 2012, for example, they participated in China’s seizure of the Scarborough Shoal from the Philippines, and in 2014, they helped China repel Vietnamese ships from an oil rig that China had stationed near the contested Paracel Islands.

The militia represents a useful tool in China’s plan to bloodlessly press its maritime claims, since its frequently civilian appearance allows Beijing to deny its involvement in encounters such as last October’s and exploit the U.S. Navy’s rules of engagement…. …

 

萧雨 [Xiao Yu], “南海仲裁在即 潭门渔民集体封口” [South China Sea Arbitration Imminent—Tanmen Fishermen Collective Seals Mouth],  美国之音 [Voice of America], 23 June 2016.

 

John Sudworth, “South China Sea: The Mystery of Missing Books and Maritime Claims,”BBC News, 19 June 2016.

If you want to understand the way China really feels about its controversial claim to huge swathes of the sea off its southern shore, then the island of Hainan is a good place to start.

This is a place where everything is bent towards justifying and upholding that assertion of sovereignty, from government and military policy, to fishing and tourism, and even history itself.

We came to the fishing port of Tanmen, on Hainan’s east coast, because of recent state media reports about the existence of an extraordinary document – a 600-year-old book containing evidence of vital, national importance. …

China’s insistence that these features are Chinese territory rests largely on a “we were there first” argument. So 81-year-old Mr Su’s book, “cherished” and “wrapped in layers of paper” is apparently a kind of maritime Holy Grail. …

… when I ask to see the document – the existence of which was, just a few weeks ago, being so widely reported in China and beyond – there’s a surprising development.

Mr Su tells me it doesn’t exist.

“Although the book was important, I threw it away because it was broken,” he says. …

Whatever it was, Mr Su’s book is not, it seems, any longer ironclad proof of anything. Except perhaps China’s Communist Party-controlled media’s willingness not to let a few facts get in the way of the official narrative. …

Everywhere we go, we’re followed by a number of blacked-out government cars; from the port where we try to interview fishermen, to the fish market where we speak to traders, and all the way back to our hotel. …

All of this comes, of course, amid the much-anticipated international court ruling on the South China Sea, expected some time in the next few weeks. …

This may help to explain why a foreign journalist’s presence in Hainan at this particular moment in time is likely to attract such close attention from the authorities.

Although in our case there may have been another reason: we were, perhaps, asking too many questions about Hainan’s notorious “maritime militia”.

China has been known to be giving its fishermen military training for decades.

But in recent years, the number of militiamen on fishing boats is reported to be increasing and their actions appear to be becoming more assertive in helping to underwrite and enforce China’s sovereignty claims.

Their strategic advantage is that they can be, and often are, used for irregular military engagements – occupying territory at sea, carrying out surveillance or harassing other vessels – while operating under the guise of civilian fishing boats.

The activities of the militia units in the port of Tanmen have been well documented.

They even have their own headquarters inside the town’s government compound, honoured with a visit in 2013 by the Chinese President Xi Jinping. 

Despite our efforts though no-one would talk about the role this shadowy force plays within China’s fishing fleet, and the more we ask, the more intense the tailing and government surveillance seems to become.

Prof Andrew S Erickson from the Chinese Maritime Studies Institute at the US Naval War College believes the presence of the militia in already troubled waters raises risks.

“I see a tremendous risk of miscalculation and escalation,” he told me.

“The current approach that China is taking to the use of its maritime militia not only puts them in danger, [it] puts any other individuals and vessels around them in danger and it indeed imposes a risk of force being used against them by the US and other forces in legitimate self defence or to ensure the legitimate passage of vessels.”

And that risk may rise even further, he suggests, after the Permanent Court of Arbitration Ruling.

“When the arbitral tribunal finally hands down some sort of a ruling I think China is going to try to find a way to concretely register its opposition, its resolve and its displeasure.

“And I think using maritime militia forces to further approach in close proximity and potentially harass US, Philippine and other vessels is something that policy makers from those countries must be prepared for.” …

 

Andrew S. Erickson, “Reported Chinese Efforts to Conceal Maritime Militia Reach Intelligence-Insulting Level,” China Analysis from Original Sources 以第一手资料研究中国, 16 June 2016.

Chinese officials are insulting foreign intelligence, likely in all senses of the word.

Xi Jinping’s visit in 2013 to Tanmen Township, and the designation of its Maritime Militia as a national model, has made this the leading unit for other seaports to emulate. Yet earlier this month, as the Al Jazeera article below documents, a local propaganda official told foreign reporters that a contingent of 40-50 fatigue-clad militiamen drilling was “part of a film crew.” Moreover, Wang Shumao, the Tanmen Militia’s deputy commander and a veteran of its involvement in the Scarborough Shoal Standoff with the Philippines in 2012, “denied knowing anything about the militia.” Amazingly, Wang further claimed that his deeply-tanned comrades were simply fishermen who “chose to wear camouflage to protect themselves from the sun”!

Unfortunately, we’ve seen this movie before—one of confirmed Maritime Militia involvement in a series of international maritime incidents and skirmishes, including the 1974 Battle of the Paracel Islands, the 2011 sabotage of Binh Minh 02 and harassment ofViking II, the 2012 Scarborough Shoal Standoff, and the 2014 HYSY-981 Oil Rig Standoff.

Whatever its future plans for its irregular sea forces, China clearly has something to hide. Fortunately for open source analysts, China can be surprisingly transparent—at least in Chinese. In the tradition of supporting free scholarly inquiry and discussion, as pioneered and practiced by the China Maritime Studies Institute, China Analysis from Original Sources now offers an updated China Maritime Militia Compendium:

 

Florence Looi, “Looking for China’s Maritime Militia,” Al Jazeera, 4 June 2016.

Reporting on groups involved in confrontations with foreign patrol vessels in the South China Sea is proving difficult.

Tanmen, China – We had come to this fishing village on Hainan Island, China’s southern-most province, because it’s home to one of the country’s best-known maritime militias – the Tanmen Maritime Militia Company.

Its recruits are mostly men from the fishing community. They are given basic military training, and their activities, according to the Hainan Daily, include “collecting maritime information … and contributing to sovereignty defence in the South China Sea.”

Chinese President Xi Jinping cited the Tanmen Maritime Militia as the model for maritime militia building, and honoured them with a visit in 2013.

But while they may be celebrated in local media, we soon found out filming the Tanmen Maritime Militia was not so straightforward.

It was by chance that we spotted them one sunny morning, as we drove past Tanmen Port – around 40 or 50 men, dressed in military fatigues, going through a drill.

What was to prove even more difficult though was getting people to talk about the group.

We asked a local official from the propaganda office whether the men we saw were members of the Tanmen Militia. He told us they were part of a film crew. That would have been a bit more believable, had we not driven past the film crew just minutes earlier.

A fisherman we interviewed, Wang Shumao, denied knowing anything about the militia. He said the men we saw were just fishermen who “… chose to wear camouflage to protect themselves from the sun.”

But it turned out Wang was not telling the truth about how much he knew about the group.

We found out later that he was not just an ordinary fisherman. He is a deputy commander of the Tanmen Maritime Militia.

He was also on one of the 12 Chinese vessels involved in a standoff with the Philippine Navy at Scarborough Shoal in 2012. He had led an unsuccessful attempt to block Philippine vessels from approaching the shoal.

The Qionghai City Government website published a profile of Wang last year.

Wang did not reveal any of that when we spoke to him, and denied knowing anything about the group.

But why were the Chinese so reluctant to talk to foreign media about the Tanmen Maritime Militia?

Perhaps because of the unflattering reports about China’s maritime militias. These groups have been involved in confrontations with foreign patrol vessels in the South China Sea.

In 2014, boats belonging to maritime militias, together with Chinese coastguard and naval ships helped form a cordon around an oil rig, that the Chinese had installed in disputed waters, to prevent Vietnamese maritime authorities from approaching.

A year later, fishing vessels, believed to be part of several Chinese maritime militias, were reportedly involved in harassing a US navy ship when it sailed near the Spratly Islands in October 2015.

Experts say the use of quasi-civilian forces is a tactic to avoid direct military confrontations, and allows the Chinese government some degree of deniability.

Andrew Erickson, professor at the US Naval War College, told Defense News: “China is trying to use these government-controlled fisherman below the radar to get the bonus without the onus to support its South China Sea claims.”

China however denied this. Its foreign ministry spokesman Lu Kang said: “This kind of situation does not exist.” …

 

Conor M. Kennedy and Andrew S. Erickson, “From Frontier to Frontline: Tanmen Maritime Militia’s Leading Role—Part 2,” Center for International Maritime Security (CIMSEC), 17 May 2016.

Tanmen Militia’s Leading Role in the 2014 Haiyang Shiyou (HYSY)-981 Oil Rig Standoff, Spratly Features Construction, and Beyond

Our series on the leading maritime militias of Hainan Province continues with this second installment in a two-part in-depth examination of the maritime militia of Tanmen Township. Since its founding in 1985, this force has transformed from an entrepreneurial fishing collective on China’s marine frontier to a reliable frontline unit in increasingly vigorous sovereignty promotion. In part one we discussed the role Tanmen’s maritime militia played in the 2012 Scarborough Shoal Incident that resulted in a Chinese takeover of the feature from the Philippines. After the Communist Party of China (CPC) officially declared the new national goal of becoming a maritime power at the 18thNational Congress, newly appointed Chinese President Xi Jinping marked the Tanmen Militia unit as the model for emulation in maritime militia building. A subsequent deluge of delegation visits further reinforced the significance of this unit. Part two will focus on other major events involving the Tanmen Maritime Militia, particularly its participation in the 1995 Mischief Reef Incident and China’s sea-based defense of the HYSY-981 oil rig off the southern Paracel islands in 2014 (which also involved the Sanya militia, as the first article in this series discussed) and China’s multi-decade augmentation of its Spratlys outposts. This article will also probe the Tanmen militia’s organization and leadership, the challenges and opportunities associated with its management and motivation, and will raise the possibility that the Tanmen militiamen’s mission at Scarborough Shoal may not yet be finished.

After Xi Jinping’s visit in 2013, Tanmen Township quickly became ground zero in China’s discussion about the future direction of militia work. The township was host to the 2014 National Border and Coastal Defense Work Conference. Additionally, Tanmen People’s Armed Forces Department (PAFD) Head and Maritime Militia Company Commander Zhang Jiantang attended the Fifth National Conference on Border and Coastal Defense Construction Work in Beijing in June 2014. There he received awards on behalf of his company for its bravery in defending China’s maritime sovereignty. One month prior, he and his men were involved in one of the most volatile showdowns between Vietnam and China since their border war in 1979, the Haiyang Shiyou (HYSY)-981 Oil Rig Standoff of 2 May-15 July 2014.

On 6 June 2014, Vietnamese Ministry of National Defense newspaper The People’s Army stated that China was maintaining between 110 and 115 vessels around China National Offshore Oil Corporation’s (CNOOC) HYSY-981 oil rig. This included 35-40 coast guard vessels, 30 transport ships and tugboats, 35-40 “fishing vessels,” and four naval ships. These forces assembled to form what the PRC Ministry of Foreign Affairs referred to in English as a “cordon” around the oil rig, effectively preventing Vietnamese vessels from approaching the platform. For China’s maritime forces it was an escort mission to protect HYSY-981 during its operations. In early May, the Chinese government issued Maritime Notice 14034 warning foreign vessels not to enter within three nautical miles of the location of the rig at these coordinates (15°29’58.0”N 111°12’06.0”E). However, Vietnamese reports state China expanded its cordon radius and would confront approaching vessels 9.5-10 nautical miles out from the rig. It appears that Vietnam’s fishing vessels could not fish near the platform because of heavy Chinese interference, so they opted to fish outside of the Chinese cordoned area to display presence in their “traditional fishing grounds.” They were not safe, however, as vessels from China’s maritime militia sallied forth to repel the Vietnamese vessels, using non-military forces against non-military forces as a deliberate means of preventing escalation. One report describes Chinese fishing vesselQiongdongfang 11209 (琼东方11209) ramming and sinking Vietnamese fishing vessel No. 90152 during an encounter 17 nautical miles from the rig, where Vietnamese fishing vessels were surrounded by 40 Chinese fishing vessels. Video footage of Qiongdongfang 11209 running down the smaller Vietnamese vessel can be seen below. Moreover, Vietnam’s smaller wooden-hulled fishing vessels were outclassed by China’s larger tonnage steel-hulled fishing vessels. …

 PART ONE OF THE TWO-PART ARTICLE:

Conor M. Kennedy and Andrew S. Erickson, “Model Maritime Militia: Tanmen’s Leading Role in the April 2012 Scarborough Shoal Incident,” Center for International Maritime Security (CIMSEC), 21 April 2016.

This series on the leading maritime militias of Hainan Province began by examining the “rights protection” efforts of Sanya City’s maritime militia, whose exploits have given them a prominent position among the province’s irregular sea forces. Discussionsabout the Sanya City maritime militia are still ongoing as we watch their development. Next came our evaluation of the historical legacy of Danzhou’s maritime militia, which directly demonstrated the value of irregular forces in naval warfare during the 1974 Paracels Sea Battle. This third installment in the series is part one of a two-part in-depth look at the maritime militia of Tanmen.

Tanmen Fishing Harbor is a small fishing port on the eastern shore of Hainan Island. It is home to one of China’s best-known maritime militia units, the Tanmen Maritime Militia Company (潭门海上民兵连). This irregular force receives disproportionate media coverage stemming largely from its involvement in numerous incidents with foreign actors at sea, most notably the April 2012 Scarborough Shoal Incident between the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and the Philippines. Since its founding in 1985, Tanmen has received numerous accolades as an “advanced militia unit” from the government and military on all levels. Tanmen’s fame spread further after Chinese President Xi Jinping’s high-profile visit on the first anniversary of the incident. Xi encouraged Tanmen’s maritime militia to build larger vessels, collect information in distant waters, master modern equipment, and support “island and reef” development. The extent of Chinese attention to this fishing village merits a deep-dive analysis to determine what is happening on the ground there, and what kind of maritime militia capabilities are resulting.

Some of Tanmen’s importance to the PRC stems from the wealth of historical artifacts and other evidence China possesses that allegedly support claims that Tanmen fishermen were the earliest community to discover and sustain continuous exploitation of the Paracel and Spratly Islands. Numerous reports of Tanmen fishermen having been detained or attacked by foreign states also support a growing Chinese narrative of the victimization of Chinese fishermen in the South China Sea. This narrative justifies enhanced ‘defensive’ activities by Chinese maritime forces operating there. Contributions from fishing communities such as Tanmen’s to China’s overall posture in the South China Sea bolsters domestic Chinese rationale for regaining lost “blue territory” (蓝色国土) and “maritime rights and interests” (海洋权益). Tanmen Village is likewise the future site of China’s South China Sea Museum and the South China Sea Base for the State Administration of Cultural Heritage’s Undersea Cultural Heritage Protection Center. Both institutions will likely be dedicated to bolstering China’s historical evidence to support its claims of sovereignty over the islands of the South China Sea and resource rights in those waters. The latter also has a stated purpose of “promoting maritime industries, shoreline protection and development, utilization and conservation of marine resources, marine service systems, and the implementation of the overall national marine economic development strategy.”

Central to furthering these interests are irregular units including the Tanmen Maritime Militia Company. Its history exhibit, located in its headquarters, houses artifacts documenting historical presence in the South China Sea by the forefathers of present-day militia members. These include navigation logs, compasses, and diving gear. Tanmen’s maritime militia activities began well before the present company’s official establishment in 1985. Previously a more loosely-organized fishermen militia, it became an official militia company when the PRC promulgated new guidelines for developing fisheries in distant waters and opened up the oceanic fishing industry to privatization. A contingent from this new organization was led initially by its first commander, Huang Xunmian, to the Spratlys, thereby becoming the first organized Tanmen fleet for Spratly development. Huang became a major part of the militia movement to mobilize Tanmen fishermen to build bigger vessels and venture to the Spratlys. By the early 1990s, the company included 150 militiamen and 21 vessels. Today it continues to expand under the current political agenda of transforming China into a “maritime power.”

Chinese media coverage of Tanmen fishermen often states that a large portion of incidents in the South China Sea between Chinese fishermen and foreign states is attributable to the Tanmen fishermen and maritime militia, whose members resolutely oppose “foreign encroachment.” The deputy station chief of the Qionghai City Fisheries Management Station told reporters in 2012 that 90% of the Chinese fishing vessels visiting the Paracels and Spratlys are from Tanmen Harbor, the remainder from Sanya City (also in Hainan Province) or Guangdong Province. While that particular claim is difficult to verify, the number of tense encounters between Tanmen fishermen and militia and the maritime forces of other South China Sea states—particularly the Philippines—certainly helps illustrate the point. Below is a brief, non-exhaustive list of events within the past three decades involving Tanmen fishing vessels, documenting their constant presence and activities in disputed waters and the resulting encounters, and periodic altercations, with other claimant states’ maritime forces. Of note, the incidents listed are as reported in the Chinese press.  Instances of provocations by Tanmen fishermen or Chinese law enforcement vessels are therefore not included. …

 

PRESENTATION BASED ON AN EARLIER ARTICLE IN THE SERIES:

Andrew S. Erickson and Conor M. Kennedy, “China’s Maritime Militia: An Update,” one of five presentations of 2015-16 top-vote-receiving Center for International Maritime Security (CIMSEC) articles from set selected by the think tank’s leadership at “CIMSEC Forum for Authors and Readers (CFAR) 2016 Forum: Maritime Security, Technology, and Foreign Policy,” CIMSEC, hosted at CNA Corporation, Arlington, VA, 24 March 2016.

Presentation based on award-winning article: Andrew S. Erickson and Conor M. Kennedy, “China’s Daring Vanguard: Introducing Sanya City’s Maritime Militia,” Center for International Maritime Security (CIMSEC), 5 November 2015.

Click here to watch the presentation:

RELATED CHINESE SOURCES:

FMPRC Spokesperson Lu Kang Apparently Denies Maritime Militia’s Role in “Rights Protection”—But China Daily Has Already Confirmed It, and China Military Online Republished Confirmation

This is an instance in which the saying “You can’t un-ring the bell” would appear to apply…

During Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Lu Kang’s Regular Press Conference on 7 April 2016, the following exchange occurred (key quotations underlined):

Q: Over the past few years, there have been frequent confrontations between fishing boats from China, the Philippines, Malaysia, Vietnam and the Taiwan region. Some of them have involved China’s coast guard authorities and even the military. Chinese fishermen have found themselves in danger when fishing in disputed waters. What is the Chinese government planning to do to avoid tensions in the future, in particular in the fishing industry? Is China using the country’s fishing fleet to assert its claim over relevant disputed waters?

A: I will take your second question first. There is no such thing as what you said.

On your first question, fishery disputes are not exclusive to this area. The Chinese government attaches great importance to fishery management and directs Chinese fishermen to conduct fishing operations in accordance with laws and regulations. Fishery cooperation is an important part of mutually beneficial cooperation between China and neighboring countries including coastal countries in the South China Sea. A very good approach of resolving disputes through friendly consultation has been developed over time. As for the disputes you mentioned, China and relevant countries are trying to solve them through friendly consultation.

Regardless of why Lu responded as he did, on 2 February 2016 China Daily published (and China Military Online reposted) a fascinating article that clearly acknowledged precisely such a role for China’s maritime militia. Given its extensive substance, it is reproduced here in full:

Maritime Militia Increases Drills, Expands in Scope

Source: China Daily Editor: Yao Jianing

2016-02-02 17:160

Maritime militia in Sansha, Hainan province, demonstrate their training in July. [Guo Cheng / Xinhua]

As the People’s Liberation Army upgrades its navy, commissioning dozens of new ships under a watchful global eye, a less noticed force, China’s maritime militia, is also improving its operational capability.

Despite a history that can be traced back to as early as the 1970s, China’s maritime militia remains weaker compared with the land militia due to a lack of government funding and volunteers.

However, the situation has changed as a result of the country’s efforts to strengthen its maritime capabilities and safeguard its interests at sea.

According to the PLA Beihai City Military Command in the Guangxi Zhuang autonomous region, the proportion of maritime militia in the city increased tenfold over the past two years, from less than 2 percent at the end of 2013 to more than 20 percent last year.

That enabled the city’s maritime militia to play a bigger role in drills organized by the PLA Navy – in 2013 it participated in only one such exercise, while it took part in four naval drills in 2014 and seven drills last year.

Most of the maritime militia is made up of local fishermen.

Senior Colonel Xu Qingduan, commander of the PLA Beihai City Military Command, said the city’s maritime militia has been required to take part in more air and naval exercises since 2014 while the land militia’s role has shrunk.

This fact pushed the command to negotiate with city government departments on the expansion of maritime militia, he said, adding that the government and the military decided to give more favorable policies and financial support to the civilian sea force.

A number of Navy veterans and experienced sailors have been recruited in Beihai’s maritime militia and 10 specialized teams have been established for transport, reconnaissance, obstacle clearance, medical service and equipment repair.

The maritime militia recently worked with Navy warships in a joint operation drill and successfully fulfilled their designated tasks, according to Xu’s command.

Beihai is not alone in improving its irregular maritime force.

Hainan’s Sansha, China’s youngest city that administers vast island groups and their surrounding waters in the South China Sea, is enhancing its maritime militia’s training and giving more duties to the force.

Local fishermen have assisted more than 250 law enforcement operations at sea over the past three years.

Jiangmen in Guangdong province is also organizing realistic sea operation exercises for local militiamen to strengthen their combat capability.

Statistics released by China’s fishery authorities showed the nation had nearly 21 million fishermen in 2013, the most in the world.

According to the latest information published by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations in 2012, China had nearly 439,000 motorized fishing vessels that could operate at sea.

 

This was followed by an unofficial article on 7 March 2016 in the South China Morning Post that nevertheless quoted an important Chinese official and a well-published Chinese expert concerning the use of “fishing vessels” to uphold Beijing’s ‘maritime rights and interests’:

China Enlists Fishermen’s Help to Protect Maritime Rights in Disputed South China Sea

Beijing is using trawlers to safeguard its claims in the region – but it is not the first country to recognise the influence fishermen can have

PUBLISHED : Monday, 07 March, 2016, 10:58pm

UPDATED : Tuesday, 08 March, 2016, 11:11am

By Liu Zhen and Minnie Chan

China is encouraging its fishermen to venture into the South China Sea by offering subsidies and security training, a government official said ­on Monday.

Luo Baoming, the Communist Party chief of southern province Hainan, said China’s rights in the hotly contested body of water were underscored by the traditional activities of Chinese fishermen there.

“Given the current situation in the South China Sea, fishermen have to protect their normal fishing operations in the region, because it is our ancestors’ fishing place,” Luo said at the annual parliamentary session in Beijing.

There were more than 100,000 fishermen in Hainan, which administers China’s vast claims in the sea, Luo said.

The Hainan government had provided resources such as shipbuilding and fuel subsidies to those involved in pelagic fishing, Luo said. It had also provided training in self-defence.

He said some Chinese fishing boats operated in high seas and displaced up to 400-tonnes of water – meaning they were bigger than some naval warships from Southeast Asian countries.

Hainan’s fishermen have documented proof of their navigation routes in the South China Sea dating back 600 years.

China has been known to use civilian ships as government proxies, often to harass foreign vessels, especially US naval ships, in the South China Sea.

Last October, when the US destroyer Lassen passed near the newly built artificial island on Subi Reef in the South China Sea, it was escorted by several Chinese naval warships and smaller vessels including merchant ships and fishing vessels. The fishing boats were “provocative”, crossing and sailing close to the Lassen’s bow, the US military website DefenceNews reported.

Encouraging fishing vessels to take part in protecting maritime rights is very common among other Southeast Asian countries like Vietnam and the Philippines, because it’s not banned by international law and the law of sea,” said Professor Wang Hanling, of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences.

He said Chinese authorities had discovered some Vietnamese soldiers had posed as fishermen to collect intelligence near some Chinese controlled islets in the South China Sea.

Beijing-based naval expert Li Jie said that fisherman could play the most influential role in protecting a country’s maritime interests because they were the people most knowledgeable about the areas under dispute.

“In peacetime, fisherman can provide first-hand and the most up-to-date intelligence to the navy, while in wartime, they are the best at logistical tasks such as supplying food and water.”

 

Simon Denyer, “How China’s Fishermen Are Fighting a Covert War in the South China Sea,” Washington Post, 12 April 2016.

TANMEN, China — In the disputed waters of the South China Sea, fishermen are the wild card.

China is using its vast fishing fleet as the advance guard to press its expansive territorial claims in the South China Sea, experts say. That is not only putting Beijing on a collision course with its Asian neighbors, but also introducing a degree of unpredictability that raises the risks of periodic crises.

In the past few weeks, tensions have flared with Indonesia, Malaysia and Vietnam as Chinese fishermen, often backed up by coast guard vessels, have ventured far from their homeland and close to other nations’ coasts. They are just the latest conflicts in China’s long-running battle to expand its fishing grounds and simultaneously exert its maritime dominance. …

At the end of March, Malaysia’s maritime authorities spotted about 100 Chinese fishing boats, accompanied by a Chinese coast guard vessel, in its waters. They were close to Luconia Shoals, less than 100 nautical miles from Malaysian Borneo but 800 nautical miles from China’s southern island of Hainan.

Early this month, Vietnam seized a Chinese ship that it said was supplying fuel to Chinese fishing boats in its waters.

The biggest flare-up came on March 20, when Indonesian officials boarded a Chinese fishing vessel close to Indonesia’s Natuna Islands. As an Indonesian vessel began towing the boat to shore, a Chinese coast guard ship intervened to ram the fishing boat, pushing it back into the South China Sea — until the Indonesians released the tow line. …

The fishing vessel, Beijing’s Foreign Ministry said, was operating in China’s “traditional fishing grounds,” though the incident occurred just a few nautical miles from the Natunas and around 900 nautical miles from Hainan. …

Economics is a major driving force for the expansion…to satisfy China’s ever-growing appetite for fish and its profitable and rapidly expanding fish export industry, already the world’s largest.

China’s per capita fish consumption was estimated by the Food and Agriculture Organization at nearly 80 pounds in 2010, nearly double the global average, and is growing by roughly 8 percent a year. The fish industry employs nearly 15 million people. …

The government is also pushing the fishermen further from shore. It provides fuel subsidies, with higher rates for bigger boats and journeys to the Spratlys. The Hainan government heavily subsidizes the construction of larger, steel-hulled trawlers, and an expensive satellite system was provided virtually free of charge to about 50,000 vessels.

With it, Chinese fishing crews can send emergency signals to coast guard ships with their exact location if they run into trouble.

Fishermen said the government often organizes trips to the Spratlys, with coast guard vessels in attendance, especially when tensions are high.

“When our country needs us, we will go without a second thought to defend our rights,” [captain] Chen [Yuguo, a fifty-year-old Tanmen fisherman] said.

Embedded within the fishing communities and often organizing these trips are what China calls its “maritime militia” — civilians trained in small-arms use whose job it is to help defend the country’s maritime claims.

The Tanmen Maritime Militia is the most celebrated of the groups. It was honored with a visit from Chinese President Xi Jinping in April 2013, just after he took office.

Its members played a leading role in encouraging fishermen to travel to the Spratlys as far back as 1985. Their repeated trips to Scarborough Shoal culminated in a standoff with the Philippines in 2012 that ultimately saw China seize control of the submerged coral feature, and they sparred with their Vietnamese counterparts in 2014 when China towed an oil rig into disputed waters.

Their fishing boats also helped deliver construction materials for China’s land reclamation and construction program in the Spratlys. Last October, when the USS Lassen conducted a freedom-of-navigation operation near Subi Reef, the Chinese navy kept a respectful distance, but smaller merchant or fishing vessels came much closer and even crossed the destroyer’s bow, Defense News reported. Experts say those boats were probably manned by militia members.

Andrew S. Erickson, at the U.S. Navy War College’s China Maritime Studies Institute, calls them China’s “little blue men,” comparing them to Russia’s “little green men,” the armed men in unmarked uniforms who played a leading role in the takeover of Crimea from Ukraine.

As well as giving Beijing a degree of deniability, their quasi-civilian status also complicates the rules of engagement for U.S. naval vessels. …

 

Andrew S. Erickson and Conor M. Kennedy, “China’s Maritime Militia,” CNA Corporation, 7 March 2016.

An important component of China’s local armed forces is the militia—an armed mass organization of mobilizable personnel who retain their normal economic responsibilities in daily civilian life. A reserve force of immense scale, the militia is organized at the grassroots level of society: its units are formed by towns, villages, urban sub-districts, and enterprises. It supports China’s armed forces in a variety of functions, and is seeing expanded mission roles as the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) continues to modernize. Militia units may vary widely from one location to another, as the composition of each one is based on local conditions (yindi zhiyi). A good example is the establishment of emergency repair units in areas with a strong shipbuilding industry. While the Maritime Militia is not a new addition to China’s militia system, it is receiving greater emphasis since China now aspires to become a great maritime power and because maritime disputes in China’s near seas are a growing concern.

No official definition of the Maritime Militia exists in the many sources the authors examined. However, in late 2012 the Zhoushan garrison commander, Zeng Pengxiang, and the garrison’s Mobilization Office described it concisely: “The Maritime Militia is an irreplaceable mass armed organization not released from production and a component of China’s sea defense armed forces [that enjoys] low sensitivity and great leeway in maritime rights protection actions.” Of course, this description does not cover all aspects of the Maritime Militia. Members of the Maritime Militia are all primary militia (jigan minbing), as opposed to those in the less active ordinary militia (putong minbing). The former receive more frequent training, and they have more advanced skills for carrying out missions at sea.

Logically, the Maritime Militia is found in port areas with large fishing, shipbuilding, or shipping industries where experienced mariners or craftsmen provide a ready pool of recruits. Citizens can join land-based primary militia organizations when they are between the ages of 18 and 35 (or 45 for those who have special skills). The Maritime Militia also has relaxed policies for age requirements, with even more emphasis on their specialized skills in some localities (e.g., Yancheng City of Jiangsu Province extended the maximum age for its maritime militiamen to 55).

The only estimate of the size of the Maritime Militia obtained during the course of this research was from a source published in 1978, which put the number of personnel at 750,000 on approximately 140,000 craft. In its 2010 Defense White Paper, China stated that it had 8 million primary militia members nationwide. The Maritime Militia is a smaller unique subset since it performs many of its missions at sea. Since an accurate number is not available this chapter takes more of a grassroots approach and attempts to determine the average size of a unit at the local level. It is important to note that the Maritime Militia is distinct from both China’s coastal militia (shore based) and its naval reserve, although some coastal militia units have been transformed into Maritime Militia units.

Although this paper focuses on the current organization and employment of Chinese Maritime Militia organizations, it first puts this force into context by presenting a brief history of the Maritime Militia and a discussion of the changing role of militia in the Chinese armed forces as the PLA continues its transformation into a force that will win high-tech local wars under informatized conditions. Next, it examines the current role of the Maritime Militia in China’s goal of becoming a great maritime power, which will include both old and new mission areas. Because of the Maritime Militia’s localized roots, a section of this paper is devoted to surveying Maritime Militia activities in various provinces along China’s coast. This will give the reader a sense of this force’s scale and diversity. The remaining sections will address specific Maritime Militia modes of training, organization, and command and control, and will offer possible scenarios and implications. …

 

Toshi Yoshihara, “The 1974 Paracels Sea Battle: A Campaign Appraisal,” Naval War College Review 69.2 (Spring 2016): 41-65.

On 19 January 1974, the Chinese and South Vietnamese navies clashed near the disputed Paracel Islands. The short but intense battle left China in control of seemingly unremarkable spits of land and surrounding waters in the South China Sea. The skirmish involved small, secondhand combatants armed with outdated weaponry. The fighting lasted for several hours, producing modest casualties in ships and men. The incident merited little public attention, especially when compared with past titanic struggles at sea, such as those of the two world wars. Unsurprisingly, the battle remains an understudied, if not forgotten, episode in naval history.

But its obscurity is undeserved. Newly available Chinese-language sources reveal a far more complex naval operation than is commonly depicted in Western scholarship. Hitherto-unknown details of the battle illustrate how Chinese strategists tailored their tactics so as to coerce, deter, and defeat a rival claimant in the South China Sea. Notably, China employed a mix of conventional and irregular forces to meet its operational objectives. Such hybrid methods not only were common in Chinese naval history, but also foreshadowed the kinds of combined maritime warfare China has employed recently against its neighbors in maritime Asia, including Japan, Vietnam, and the Philippines. Indeed, Chinese operations in the Paracels represent an archetype that could be employed again in the future. It thus behooves policymakers to pay attention to China’s naval past. …

 

Andrew S. Erickson and Conor M. Kennedy, “Trailblazers in Warfighting: The Maritime Militia of Danzhou,” Center for International Maritime Security (CIMSEC), 1 February 2016.

This is the second article in a five-part series exploring Hainan Province’s maritime militia, an important but little-understood player in the South China Sea and participant in its ongoing disputes. Our first article covered the maritime militia of Sanya City on Hainan Island’s southern coast, China’s closest naval and geo-cultural analogue to Honolulu. Now we direct our focus to Hainan’s northwestern shore, home to Baimajing (白马井, lit. “White Horse Well”) Fishing Port in Danzhou Bay. If Sanya and its Fugang Fisheries Co., Ltd. can be considered a wellspring of recent frontline activities by irregular Chinese forces in the South China Sea, Danzhou and its succession of fisheries companies—the current incarnation being Hainan Provincial Marine Fishing Industry Group (海南省海洋渔业集团)—may be regarded as some of the pioneers of military applications for Chinese maritime militia use in recent decades. Examining Danzhou’s forces in detail thus offers a comprehensive window into the origins, contributions, and ongoing development of China’s maritime militia to help elucidate these irregular actors.

China’s maritime militia forces are responsible for both peacetime and wartime roles. Most recently, their peacetime mission has focused on the protection of China’s maritime rights and interests. Maritime militia charged with the peacetime mission of “rights protection” (维权) could engage in the simple flooding of disputed waters with Chinese vessels, resisting foreign vessels’ attempts to drive them away. During wartime, maritime militia detachments might provide logistic support to active duty forces, or even lay sea mines themselves.

In the decades following the founding of the People’s Republic of China (PRC), the maritime militia served important coastal patrol functions, providing regular sea monitoring during their normal operations, and preventing Nationalist agents from infiltrating the mainland. While recent examples of irregular forces such as the Sanya maritime militia performing rights protection actions are available for observers to study, the fortunate absence of any recent maritime conflict leaves their potential use during any actual future combat less clear. Open sources can nevertheless help elucidate this important yet understudied issue. The maritime militia’s current training program for wartime missions is well-documented. Further insights may be gleaned by studying its actions during a previous conflict and in particular during a naval battle, which should serve as useful sources of insight into how the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Navy (PLAN) may undertake any future potential coordination with the maritime militia. This conflict is the PLA Navy’s employment of the South China Sea Fisheries Company’s maritime militia during the 1974 contest between China and South Vietnam (hereafter, “Vietnam”) over the Paracels.

Although the mission roles of the maritime militia have evolved since 1974, they still retain many wartime functions deemed important by Chinese leaders. Considering that both the Paracel and Spratly archipelagoes are widely dispersed; and that some features are occupied by China’s weaker neighbors, with at least one maintaining a military alliance with Washington; any employment of the maritime militia in a limited Spratly conflagration could potentially resemble the 1974 conflict in important respects. Maritime militia activities could conceivably form a tripwire for confrontation that Chinese leaders might believe could confound American intervention, especially if the costs of intervening promised to damage U.S.-China relations significantly.

Danzhou Bay’s Baimajing Fishing Port holds a unique place in China’s recent history as the PLA’s first landing site during the Hainan Island Campaign (海南岛战役) in 1950. There, on 5 March, the PLA made the first of a series of landings that collectively allowed it to link up with the local guerilla resistance to achieve an overwhelming victory over Nationalist forces by 1 May and to expel surviving enemy soldiers completely from the island. Subsequently, Baimajing became home to the South China Sea Fisheries Company (南海水产公司). Established in Guangzhou, in neighboring Guangdong Province, it became one of the metropolis’s largest fishing companies before moving to Baimajing in 1958. In a sign of the interconnected nature of such enterprises, the South China Sea Fisheries Company still maintained operations in Guangzhou.

Two trawlers employed by the South China Sea Fisheries Company served in a variety of supporting roles for the PLA Navy during the January 1974 Battle of the Paracel Islands (西沙海战). From the outset, the militia’s presence agitated the Vietnamese naval forces, and served to steal the initiative from them. Vietnamese destroyer commanders were preoccupied with determining how to deal with these trawlers without resorting to armed force, affording the PLA Navy time to coordinate its own forces. The militia was tasked with monitoring the Vietnamese flotilla, and rescue and repair of a badly damaged PLA Navy mine sweeper. After the PLA Navy repelled the Vietnamese flotilla, the two trawlers provided transportation for 500 troops—two companies and an amphibious reconnaissance team from the Hainan military district—onto the remaining Vietnamese-occupied features. The Vietnamese hold-outs on the islands were quickly overwhelmed and surrendered. While small in scale, the important supporting role these irregular forces played during a period of PLA Navy weakness helped China secure ground crucial to supporting its current maritime strategy in the South China Sea.

 

Andrew S. Erickson and Conor M. Kennedy, “China’s Daring Vanguard: Introducing Sanya City’s Maritime Militia,” Center for International Maritime Security (CIMSEC), 5 November 2015.

The following is the first in a five-part series meant to shed light on Hainan Province’s maritime militia. For decades, these irregular forces have been an important element of Chinese maritime force structure and operations. Now, with Beijing increasing its capabilities, presence, and pushback against other nations’ activities, in the South China Sea (SCS), Hainan’s leading maritime militia elements are poised to become even more significant. Yet they remain widely under-appreciated and misunderstood by foreign observers. Read the introduction to the article series here, which offers a general background on China’s maritime militia and explains its growing importance.

Such lack of understanding is increasingly risky for U.S. policy-makers, planners, and military operators. This is particularly the case given recent, long-overdue American expression of determination to continue Freedom of Navigation Operations (FONOPS) in accordance with international law near Chinese-occupied and -augmented features in the Spratlys. As demonstrated by apparent maritime militia operations in proximity to USS Lassen when it sailed near Subi Reef on 27 October 2015, Beijing may well see maritime militia as a tool with which to make FONOPS increasingly uncomfortable for U.S. forces while carefully calibrating its signaling and avoiding undue escalation.

To help rectify this knowledge gap, we begin by introducing and analyzing maritime militia based in strategically-situated Sanya City, one of Hainan’s greatest naval, fishing, and maritime economic hubs. Prominent among Sanya-based maritime militia is the Sanya Fugang Fisheries Co., Ltd. (三亚福港渔业水产实业有限公司), founded in 2001. One of Sanya City’s major marine fisheries companies, Fugang Fisheries is composed primarily of Fujianese fishermen. A leading participant in both fishing expeditions to the Spratlys and harassment of foreign vessels there and elsewhere in the SCS, it has been celebrated for its bravery.

Indeed, among even the vanguard militia units profiled in this series, Fugang Fisheries is itself at the vanguard. That helps to explain why it has been entrusted with supporting so many Chinese operations, and involved in so many related international incidents, in the SCS. Fugang has dispatched its vessels and crews as maritime militia in service of China’s maritime security efforts in the SCS, primarily for “rights protection” (维权), efforts to advance and defend China’s island and maritime claims that are increasingly in tension with Beijing’s parallel objective of “maintaining stable relations” (维稳) with its immediate neighbors and the United States. Focusing on Sanya’s maritime militia, Fugang Fisheries first among them, thus offers disproportionate insights into an important element of Chinese maritime policy and activity with direct implications for U.S. interests, presence, and influence in the SCS. …

 

Christopher P. Cavas, “China’s ‘Little Blue Men’ Take Navy’s Place in Disputes,” Defense News, 2 November 2015.

China using maritime militia to carry out its dirty work in seagoing confrontations

WASHINGTON — When the US destroyer Lassen passed near a newly-built artificial island on Subi Reef in the South China Sea’s Spratly Islands Oct. 27, it was already being escorted by several Chinese Navy warships. …

But several smaller vessels, described by the source as merchant ships or fishing vessels, were more provocative, crossing the Lassen’s bow and maneuvering around the destroyer even as they kept their distance.

“There were Chinese merchant vessels present that were not as demure as the Chinese Navy,” the US Navy source said Oct. 30. “One came out of its anchorage in the island and crossed the destroyer’s bow but at a safe distance, and the Lassen did not alter course as the merchant ship circled around.”

Fishing vessels in the area added to shipping traffic in the immediate area, the source said. But the extra craft seem to have been present, the source noted, “because they anticipated the Lassen’s transit.”

China has been known to use civilian ships as government proxies, often to harass foreign vessels, and several analysts have been scrutinizing current and recent incidents to determine who’s on board those mysterious vessels.

Andrew Erickson, an associate professor at the US Naval War College and well-known authority on Chinese naval and maritime affairs, is pretty sure he knows. He suspects the Chinese naval militia, forces he’s dubbed “little blue men” — a reference to the “little green men” employed by Russia in Crimea and the Ukraine to insinuate military forces into a region without clear identification.

One clue, Erickson noted, is that there usually aren’t that many fishing vessels around Subi Reef.

“Actual numbers of fishing vessels regularly present in the Spratlys appear relatively low,” he observed Nov. 2. “If you look at it rationally, it’s pretty clear the operators of those fishing boats were maritime militia, especially to have done that maneuver” around the destroyer’s bow.

“China is trying to use these government-controlled fisherman below the radar to get the bonus without the onus to support its South China Sea claims,” Erickson said. “It’s a phenomenon little-known or understood in the US.”

“While Russia’s little green men in Crimea are widely known, insufficient attention has been paid to China’s little blue men in the South China Sea,” he said. “It’s so different from what the US does. People aren’t familiar with it, it’s hard to wrap their heads around it.” …

“As China is trying to show opposition to these freedom of navigation operations in the South China Sea,” Erickson said, “we need to be more attuned to the types of vessels and types of personnel they may send there to create a more complex picture and even to push back.”

Erickson and his associates have discovered that militia have been involved in numerous incidents, including confrontations in March 2009 when several Chinese fishing vessels harassed the US intelligence ship Impeccable in the South China Sea.

“We have traced Chinese maritime militia to direct involvement in the Impeccable incident,” Erickson said, “and in the HYSY 981 oil rig incident with Vietnam [when numerous Vietnamese ships were rammed by the Chinese, with at least one sinking, in a three-and-a-half-month standoff in 2014], and potentially with Chinese pressure on the Philippine resupply effort of Second Thomas Shoal” in March 2014, where the Philippines have stationed a grounded naval ship on a disputed shoal.

Erickson noted that at the time of the Impeccable incident militia involvement was not widely discussed, but it has now been confirmed by images and written evidence. Now, “we’re trying to get ahead of the curve so that we can actually figure out who these trawlers belong to that were spotted near USS Lassen. I think it’s highly unlikely that it was a coincidence. If you read Chinese maritime doctrine … this is right out of the playbook of typical techniques that they use and are designed for.”

Reports of the Lassen incident, Erickson observed, are “empirical evidence matching up very closely to what Chinese writings on the maritime militia say its designed to be able to do, including obstruction activities.”

The militia on board the ships are often clearly identifiable.

“They have uniforms — many if not all of them have uniforms. We have many photographs of them with their uniforms,” he said. The PLA Daily, a People’s Liberation Army publication, even speaks to this.

“‘Putting on camouflage [uniforms], they qualify as soldiers,’” Erickson quoted. “‘Taking off the camouflage, they become law-abiding fishermen’”

“So China’s trying to have it two ways here,” he noted. “Besides deception and confusion, US and allied rules of engagement might be very restrictive against fishermen.”

“China is trying to use these maritime militia forces to put it in a position that frustrates us in our ability to respond.”

Erickson and his associates have tried to determine who is controlling the militia.

“The militia, often drawn from local workers or demobilized troops, are organized in a somewhat complex manner, reporting initially to local People’s Armed Forces Departments (PAFD). When activated, though, they could report directly to naval authorities,” Erickson said.

“In peacetime their responsibilities include supporting China’s Navy and Coast Guard. They always answer to the People’s Liberation Army through the PAFD. But they also report to whatever agency they’re supporting at the time.”

While there are dozens of militia, several units stand out as frontline elements, Erickson noted.

“The majority of maritime militia are less elite, do more mundane transport, crewing, repair, coastal patrolling, and emergency response. But there is a small elite that is better manned, trained and equipped. They are developed to support those more advanced types of missions. Which include, theoretically, some wartime capabilities.”

That the militia are an entity unto themselves, in addition to the Navy and Coast Guard, is only recently becoming apparent.

“This is not a type of force we understand well enough,” Erickson said. “They could conceivably achieve some advantages through elements of surprise and confusion. Then even if we know who they are and what they’re doing we might have great difficulty dealing with them because of our rules of engagement. China could go out of its way to mis-portray some of these personnel as random patriotic fishermen, as vocal ‘residents’ of these ‘islands’ in the Spratlys. They’re very good at that kind of propaganda warfare.”

A greater awareness of the militia and their techniques, Erickson said, could weaken their effectiveness.

“These forces have their greatest power when they’re least known, least anticipated. The more we can call them out to foresee their presence and actions in advance, the more power we can take away from them. These are forces with rather limited capabilities overall. And if they’re exposed as militia that answer to the PLA chain of command it can be seen in a different light.”

Erickson is trying to get the word out about the militia, and published an Internet piece on Monday tying those forces to the Lassen’s transit.

The US and China, in an effort to reduce the possibility of violence, agreed earlier this year to an agreement, the Code for Unplanned Encounters at Sea (CUES). But the agreement only covers the Chinese Navy, not its other maritime services.

Erickson noted that while relations between the US and Chinese navies might be cordial and professional, the Coast Guard and militia are not bound by the same constraints.

“There’s a potential problem whereby China’s Navy is bear-hugging the US Navy to learn more about our best practices, talking the talk of a good cop, while the bad cops — the Coast Guard and maritime militia — are doing the dirty work in the East China Sea and the South China Sea.”

“Our approach to China’s maritime forces and our interaction with them is incomplete,” Erickson said, “so long as two of the three sea forces are running around doing stuff that we consider very negative.”

 

Andrew S. Erickson and Conor M. Kennedy, “Irregular Forces at Sea: ‘Not Merely Fishermen—Shedding Light on China’s Maritime Militia’,” Center for International Maritime Security (CIMSEC), 2 November 2015.

Maritime militia, dead ahead! In a just-published Defense News article, Chris Cavas has made an important contribution to our understanding of the operations and applications of China’s irregular maritime forces. The forces he describes are almost certainly neither ordinary merchant ship operators nor random fishermen, but rather militiamen operating in pre-planned roles in conjunction with USS Lassen’s Freedom of Navigation Operation (FONOP) in the South China Sea (SCS) on 27 October 2015.

Cavas cites a U.S. Navy source: “‘There were Chinese merchant vessels present that were not as demure as the Chinese Navy. One came out of its anchorage in the island and crossed the destroyer’s bow but at a safe distance, and the Lassen did not alter course as the merchant ship circled around.’ Fishing vessels in the area added to shipping traffic in the immediate area, the source said, but the ship did not have to maneuver around them. But the extra craft seem to have been present, the source noted, ‘because they anticipated the Lassen’s transit.’”

In what follows, the authors trace maritime militia involvement—in close coordination with other Chinese maritime forces—to a variety of important incidents at sea. It is thus not surprising to see these forces active near such China-occupied Spratly features as Subi Reef. But greater awareness is needed to address this vital but too-long-understudied issue. To that end, we offer the following major points:

  • China’s maritime militia is understudied, but it is important for understanding Beijing’s maritime strategy, especially in the SCS.
  • The militia work with other instruments of Chinese sea power—the military and the coast guard—to defend and advance China’s position in its disputes. They may also support military operations in wartime.
  • They allow China to vigorously pursue objectives without risking military conflict or creating an image of gunboat diplomacy.
  • This article series will profile four of the most important militia units operating in the SCS. …

 

Andrew S. Erickson, “Making Waves in the South China Sea,” A ChinaFile Conversation, The Asia Society, 30 October 2015.

… In air and sea, China will likely attempt to make future FONOPS increasingly uncomfortable for foreign vessels and aircraft. This would be an over-reaction that fails to acknowledge vital international interests in this region. As part of such efforts, China may harass FONOPS vessels with maritime militia while misleadingly portraying them as ordinary civilian fishermen. Such theatrics would prove ineffective, since state control of these irregular forces is clearly documented and the U.S. government can publicize ample evidence in this regard. …

 

Andrew S. Erickson and Conor M. Kennedy, “Directing China’s ‘Little Blue Men’: Uncovering the Maritime Militia Command Structure,” Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative, Center for Strategic and International Studies, 9 September 2015.

While Russia has employed “Little Green Men” surreptitiously in Crimea, China uses its own “Little Blue Men” to support Near Seas claims. As the U.S. military operates near Beijing’s artificially-built South China Sea (SCS) features and seeks to prevent Beijing from ejecting foreign claimants from places like Second Thomas Shoal, it may well face surveillance and harassment from China’s maritime militia. Washington and its allies and partners must therefore understand how these irregular forces are commanded and controlled, before they are surprised and stymied by them.

China has long organized its civilian mariners into maritime militia, largely out of necessity. Recent years have seen a surge of emphasis on maritime militia building and increasing this unique force’s capabilities; however, it is difficult to ascertain who or what entity within China’s government has ordered such emphasis. One can point to Xi Jinping’s visit to the Tanmen Maritime Militia in 2013, after which maritime militia building oriented toward the SCS has seen growth in places like Hainan, Guangdong, and Guangxi. Yet local militia training and organization plans prior to this date had already emphasized the training of maritime militia units.

Unit Composition and Organization

China’s militia has two major subcomponents: an “ordinary” reserve of registered male citizens akin to the U.S. Selective Service pool, and a “primary” force more readily mobilized to respond to various contingencies. The primary force receives dedicated resources, troops demobilized from active duty, and training. Within the primary force, maritime militia units—formed solely at the tactical level of organization—are smaller and more specialized on average than their land-based counterparts. Within the maritime militia, a small but growing elite set of units are the ones most likely to be deployed on more sophisticated operations that involve monitoring, displaying presence in front of, or opposing foreign actors. They do so in part by supporting China’s navy and coast guard in such efforts. Some cities with large mobilization potential—i.e., a large maritime industry or fishing community—will form battalion-sized units. Most localities create company-sized units, however. These companies are divided into platoons and squads, with the smallest grouping based on each individual vessel. …

 

Andrew S. Erickson, “New U.S. Security Strategy Doesn’t Go Far Enough on South China Sea,” China Real Time Report (中国实时报), Wall Street Journal, 24 August 2015.

The Pentagon just released an “Asia-Pacific Maritime Security Strategy.” … … …

In sum, the report represents progress, but much work remains. Here’s what the Obama administration still needs to do to defend U.S. interests and the global system, and thereby shore up its Asia-Pacific legacy: …

2. Call out China’s “Little Blue Men.” Just as Russian President Vladimir Putin used so-called “Little Green Men” in the 2014 Crimean Crisis, Chinese President Xi Jinping is now accelerating the development of maritime militia elements in part to advance China’s position in claims disputes, particularly in the South China Sea. Before these irregular forces interpose themselves at Second Thomas Shoal or some other contested location, the U.S. government must publicize the details of their existence and clarify that their use to resolve disputes or impair foreign vessels operating legally in international waters will not be tolerated. …

 

Andrew S. Erickson and Conor M. Kennedy, “Tanmen Militia: China’s ‘Maritime Rights Protection’ Vanguard,” The National Interest, 6 May 2015.

The maritime militias built out of the fishing industry are becoming a major foreign policy tool for the consolidation of China’s claims.

Hainan Province is using the fishing industry as a launching pad for the nation’s consolidation of the South China Sea (SCS). It is one of many measures—such as strengthening maritime law enforcement forces, enhancing administrative measures, augmenting infrastructure through island building, and delivery of 3G cellular coverage—but one with particular potential. China’s fishing industry and the world’s largest fleet that it wields has been an important foreign policy tool in Beijing’s repertoire since much of China’s historic claim on the SCS and current presence therein hinges on fishing activities. The fishing fleet’s political and strategic role has been given special significance and potential by China’s widespread employment of a relatively unknown paramilitary organization: the maritime militia.

Maritime militia building dates to the founding of the People’s Republic, when the People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) had only the most basic naval capabilities. KMT blockading of mainland ports and depredations against merchant vessels along the coast forced the PRC to arm and prepare its fishermen militias, not only to protect themselves but to also aid early PLA ground and naval operations. During the tumultuous periods of the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution, the fishing fleet saw ever more importance as high-end naval capabilities were targeted as tools of “the imperialists.” Desperately needed as providers of food during the long periods of famine, China’s fishing fleets were relatively insulated from political attacks. They saw employment in early PLAN coastal operations to recapture KMT occupied islands, surprise attacks against KMT naval ships, and later in the 1974 Battle of the Paracels.

Despite the leaps and bounds achieved by China’s Navy and Coast Guard forces in recent years, maritime militias still form “an irreplaceable force” within China’s maritime armed forces. There are increasing efforts to organize, standardize and normalize their utilization in support of broader foreign policy goals, inserting additional options into Chinese military and government leaders’ playbooks. They also have a particular set of advantages that allows their employment when professional, more visible maritime forces would create political costs that could trigger anti-China coalition building in neighboring countries.

Heading up the charge to build Hainan’s Maritime Militias is Luo Baoming, the provincial party chief; followed by a number of officials, most notably former Director of the State Oceanic Administration Liu Cigui. At the center of this effort are the newly founded Sansha prefecture-level city, its mayor Xiao Jie, and Maritime Militia Company, established in July 2013. This all comes on the heels of General Secretary Xi Jinping’s historic visit to the small fishing village of Tanmen in Qionghai County during his tour of Hainan Province in April 2013. There he listened to the fishermen’s stories and visited the local Maritime Militia Company’s museum exhibit. Xi’s commendations and instructions to this famous company have sparked a fury of Militia growth in Hainan Province. Subsequently Hainan’s government, party and military jointly promulgated “Opinions on Strengthening Maritime Militia Construction” in 2014 to legislate the guiding spirit Xi articulated on his visit. Such legislation serves to fund and promote local counties to organize and recruit maritime militias, largely for the express purpose of protecting China’s sovereignty and maritime interests in the SCS.

Seen as brave patriotic mariners opposing incursions by foreign navy and coast guard vessels, and aided by the political steamroller that is executing China’s long-term strategy of becoming a great maritime power, these grassroots actors joining paramilitary organizations are creating a grey area difficult for other navies, or even coast guards, to deal with. They constitute a portion of a multipronged effort directed at the SCS, which includes the Paracel Islands, the Zhongsha Islands, and the Spratly Islands, and could be described as forming a united front outwards from China’s “Southern Gate” designed to solidify China’s position in the SCS.

The humble Tanmen Maritime Militia may seem like a small organ in the vast body that constitutes China’s maritime forces, but its ability to pioneer techniques and serve as a model for the thousands of other maritime militias along China’s coast—in coordination with China’s more professional forces—should not be overlooked. China’s government and military leaders, Xi foremost among them, emphasize its value. …

 

Andrew S. Erickson and Conor M. Kennedy, “China’s Island Builders: The People’s War at Sea,” Foreign Affairs, 9 April 2015.

Recent satellite images show that the Spratly islands, a series of features in the South China Sea, are growing at a staggering pace. Tons of sand, rocks, coral cuttings, and concrete are transforming miniscule Chinese-occupied outcroppings into sizeable islands with harbors, large multi-story buildings, airstrips, and other government facilities. The parties behind the construction and defense of these islands remain a thinly veiled secret. As China builds up its presence in the South China Sea, it is also greatly increasing its ability to monitor, bully, and even project force against its neighbors. In Machiavelli’s words, Beijing has decided that it is more important to be feared than loved—and that making progress before a new U.S. president pushes back is crucial to its regional aspirations.

FOLLOW THE TRAIL

Chinese strategy in the South China Sea may have many components, but it rests on the shoulders of one man: President Xi Jinping. Since assuming office in 2012, Xi has directed the nation’s transformation into a “Great Maritime Power” capable of securing its offshore rights and interests, including its unresolved maritime claims in the Yellow, East China, and South China Seas. …

 

Andrew S. Erickson and Conor M. Kennedy, “Meet the Chinese Maritime Militia Waging a ‘People’s War at Sea’,” China Real Time Report (中国实时报), Wall Street Journal, 31 March 2015.

… China’s territorial ambitions in the East and South China seas are by now well-documented. Much less understood is one of the key factors in the country’s ability to realize those ambitions: an increasingly well-funded and capable maritime militia.

Along with Vietnam, China is one of very few countries to have a maritime militia. Such forces are typically comprised of civilian fishing vessels and fill a variety of roles, from using emergency response units to rescue stranded vessels to more assertive operations including conducting island landings to declare sovereignty. Mariners retaining civilian jobs in large companies or fishing collectives are recruited into military organizations and undergo military training, political education, and mobilization in defense of China’s maritime interests.

China’s force, which was formed in the early years of the People’s Republic, is drawn from the world’s largest fishing fleet. In recent years, it has grown in sophistication and importance, performing a range of tasks from supplying building materials to collecting intelligence. The most advanced units are even training to confront foreign ships, if necessary, in a guerrilla-style “People’s War at Sea” with sea mines and anti-air missiles. It now essentially functions as Beijing’s first line of surveillance, support and pressure in promoting the country’s claims and interests in East and South China seas. …

 

FOR IMPORTANT LEGAL INSIGHTS, SEE:

James Kraska and Michael Monti, “The Law of Naval Warfare and China’s Maritime Militia,” International Law Studies 91.450 (2015): 450-67.

CONTENTS

I. Introduction ……………………………………………………………………………………450

II. China’s Maritime Militia ………………………………………………………………….451

A. Organization, Equipment and Training………………………………………452

B. Use of the Militia for Peacetime Power Projection……………………..454

C. Use of the Militia in Naval Warfare…………………………………………….455

III. Use of Fishing Vessels For Intelligence Collection………………………….456

IV. The Legal Status of Fishing Vessels in the Law of Naval Warfare…..458

A. The Principle of Distinction……………………………………………………….458

B. Contours of Customary Law………………………………………………………459

V. Problems Raised by China’s Maritime Militia ………………………………….465