Border face-off: China and India each deploy 3,000 troops

[Double Edge]

Been a while since i read anything from Dan Markey of CFR on the subject. He's mostly on the right path

Preparing for Heightened Tensions Between China and India | CFR | Apr 19 2021

Washington’s eagerness to cultivate deeper strategic ties with New Delhi needs to be tempered by an appreciation of the risks and how its own actions have the potential to affect Indian and Chinese behavior for better or worse. U.S. strategic commitments and support to India should be carefully calibrated in a way that satisfies two imperatives:

• On the one hand, Washington’s assurances and material assistance to New Delhi should aim to reduce India’s vulnerability to Chinese coercion and aggression, thereby lessening the likelihood that the United States would be placed in the uncomfortable position of either living up to its commitments and being drawn into a direct confrontation with China or backing off those commitments and dealing a blow to U.S.-India relations.

• On the other hand, however, U.S. support should avoid emboldening India to extend its strategic aims and act during any future crisis in ways that threaten U.S. interests. This concern is not hypothetical; under Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s leadership, Indian policies in Kashmir and military escalations with China and Pakistan have already demonstrated an atypical streak of nationalistic ambition and risk-acceptance. Feeding aggressive Indian tendencies would also increase the likelihood that China would respond by accelerating its deployment of new or redirected forces along the land border. Together, those behaviors would raise the risks and stakes of China-India land border conflict. It would also suck New Delhi into a costly trap of focusing ever greater attention and resources on land border defenses rather than on its navy, even though India’s geography offers it unique strategic advantages in the Indian Ocean.

I'm surprised he thinks the US could be drawn into a direct confrontation with China because of India.

This atypical streak of nationalistic ambition and risk acceptance is what had reduced the Paks to insignificance and kept China at bay. We're not looking for a fight but are acting to deter it.

India too can force China into a costly trap of land border defenses which means less for their navy. That will in turn benefit others in the region.

The United States should thus aim to enhance India’s independent capacity to defend against Chinese aggression, taking care to prioritize assistance that helps India deter future Chinese aggression mainly by denying Beijing easy or low-cost opportunities to extend military control over territories along their contested land border and by improving India’s resilience against Chinese cyberattacks and economic coercion.

Agreed

A U.S. strategy aimed at achieving the right combination of U.S. priorities—not only improving the U.S.-India partnership but also preventing or mitigating the escalation of crises between China and India—should have five components.

1) The United States should prioritize assistance that improves India’s ability to anticipate and parry Chinese military moves, without encouraging major new Indian investments in offensive capabilities.

2) In meetings of the U.S.-India Cyber Dialogue or a new working-level mechanism, the United States should identify opportunities to help India improve its resilience to Chinese cyberattacks.

3) To enhance India’s ability to deter and withstand possible Chinese economic coercion, the United States should work with India and other like-minded states, especially Quad partners Australia and Japan, to identify and develop a coordinated multiparty response strategy.

4) The United States should seek diplomatic opportunities to promote restraint and remove obstacles to the peaceful resolution of disputes between China, India, and Pakistan.

5) The United States should prepare its own policymakers for the possibility of a new China-India crisis as early as this spring or summer.

He agrees that the Bombay power grid failure was a result of Chinese hacking. No doubt we need to work more on cyber. Whenever GOI makes up its mind

He points to the article 370 decision likely contributed to regional tensions will hold no water in Delhi. Had posted a good rebuttal by Sushant Sareen to this point but am unable to locate that post

China has not mentioned what its reasons were for the latest standoff. What did come across to me was Pakistan's diminishing nuisance value which meant China had to take matters into their own hands.

I have no idea where his point 5 is coming from. Spring is over. Why will China want to start something again this year given how last year went.

Better to wait a bit, and then try again. We will be ready

In addition to their outreach to Indian counterparts, Biden administration officials should consult closely with Donald Trump–era officials to learn from their experience during the 2020 China-India and 2019 India-Pakistan crises. Those consultations and exercises should help inform a playbook for future China-India crises that would include military and intelligence moves as well as U.S. options for coordinating diplomatic messaging with India in ways that bolster its ability to withstand Chinese pressure, encourage restraint, and open the door to a face-saving de-escalation.

Good idea. Thanks to Trump we were successfully able to deal with a staggered two front challenge and come out on top.

Took deft footwork by Pompeo to handle. Also Alice Wells deserves a mention here. Her performance at the senate hearing on 370 was exemplary. Doubt any GOI official could have put across our case better than she did.

[Double Edge]

You make it sound like we didn't have bastards for allies before. Stalin, Mao, Deng, Samosa, Chiang, Tito, the Shaw of Iran. Yes, Pakistan is a bastard but she's our bastard.

None of them compromised your end goals the way the Paks did in Afghanistan.

Thanks to the Paks you are now working out NATO's terms of surrender with the Taliban. Who needs enemies with partners like that.

The only reason this happened and went on as long is funding was available for GWOT.

Where was the pressure to deliver on Afghanistan ? The generals were in charge, they got their budget until the civvies decided it was time to pull the plug.

I strongly suggest you look at Cold War China and today's India and to see what your future with us will be like, look at modern day China. There are fundamentals that we will not abandon and that smacks in direct odds with Indian strategic needs. For one, we will not abandon Pakistan. She is a check on future Indian expansion.

By preventing us from finishing off the Paks you allowed 9/11 to occur. By propping up China you created the present mess.

What Indian expansion are you referring to ? Instead of these two had India been the preferred partner like is increasingly becoming the case today the world would be a different place.

Pakistan was never set up to check India. It was set up as a military outpost to check against the Soviets and prevent a link up between India and the Soviets. Which happened any way. The Paks traded off their position to try their games with us. China uses them as a check on India but refuses to come to their help when we threaten them.

The present setup is optimal, Keep them in the grey list and should they misbehave then put them in the black list. But its only temporary. By which time India grows larger and they become insignificant. I think they are already that right now.

The Great Game.

As for Afghanistan, we learning the same lesson the Soviets did. We can't win but we can keep them killing each other. The same lesson the British learned a over a century ago.

The only place there will be an issue is with Russia and we'll cross that bridge when we come to it.

Soviets had you guys to contend with in Afghanistan. They did not interfere in Afghanistan when you were there.

The problem was Iran. Could not use them. Otherwise the Paks would have been irrelevant and you would been successful.

[Officer of Engineers]

None of them compromised your end goals the way the Paks did in Afghanistan.

Are you freaking joking me? Stalin did far worst to us than the Paks could ever do. Chiang lost us China. The Shaw lost us Iran. Mao exported a Personality Cult.

Thanks to the Paks you are now working out NATO's terms of surrender with the Taliban. Who needs enemies with partners like that.

I have news for you. The Taliban never left. The Afgahnis switched sides like I switch socks. There were and are former Taliban working alongside Kabul. I have zero doubts they would become the Mickey Mouse Club if Disney was in charge of Kabul.

By preventing us from finishing off the Paks you allowed 9/11 to occur. By propping up China you created the present mess.

As opposed to allowing Soviet domination of the Indian Ocean? 9/11 was far cheaper in comparsion. No matter what you're proposing, Pakistan has done far, far, far more for us as an ally than what you're proposing even in your wildest dreams and we still treated her like shit. I am at a loss why you think India would get any better for far lessor terms except maybe more love letters

What Indian expansion are you referring to ? Instead of these two had India been the preferred partner like is increasingly becoming the case today the world would be a different place.

Exactly this. That you know better than us. That you tell us what to do. Now imagine our reaction when you are able and willing to impose your polciies on others just like China is doing today. Thing is this is inevitable. India, one day, will impose policies that oppose our wishes. This is just a rise of power and the need to be respected as a power. This also means that we must hedge against your future rise. Note, even during the best times with China, we NEVER gave up on our check against her: Taiwan. We even sold Taiwan F-16s when China couldn't even get the MiG-21 right. So, why you think we would abandon Pakistan is beyond me.

The Great Game.

BTW, this is peanuts. I will gladly take today over what I've faced during the Cold War. The PRC is not the USSR and Thank God for that, China and Pakistan combined ain't anywhere as close as being as mean and as dangerous as the USSR. No, I would NOT trade India for Pakistan and China. That would have meant the USSR becoming stronger and a lot meaner, more than likely winning Afghanistan.

Pakistan was never set up to check India. It was set up as a military outpost to check against the Soviets and prevent a link up between India and the Soviets. Which happened any way. The Paks traded off their position to try their games with us. China uses them as a check on India but refuses to come to their help when we threaten them.

Who cares? They're checking India now and the thing is, they want to check India.

Soviets had you guys to contend with in Afghanistan. They did not interfere in Afghanistan when you were there.

The problem was Iran. Could not use them. Otherwise the Paks would have been irrelevant and you would been successful.

Afghanistan is near impossible to control precisely because there is nothing to control. Natural resources are scarce, making it damned expensive to occupy. No ROI. Historically, any occupying army left after they take a few goats and make the locals starve a few years so that they too busy finding food to eat instead of raiding their neighbours, ie punitiive expeditions. We are falling into that category now, using drones to hunt groups who are not part of the Treaty.

I gave you all the historic references and the current examples all point to a repeat of that history. Perhaps, you read up on those histories and see the parallels.

[Double Edge]

Are you freaking joking me? Stalin did far worst to us than the Paks could ever do. Chiang lost us China. The Shaw lost us Iran. Mao exported a Personality Cult.

They did not collude with the enemy is what i mean.

Russia absorbed huge losses in WW2. Arguably weakened the nazis to the point of defeat.
Chiang was against the communists. His own losses is what gave Mao the win.
Mao put his country and people in between you and the Soviets.
Shah went on his own mad streak. Never worked with your enemies.

4/4 these allies worked for you not against.

What came after is different but when it mattered they delivered.

I have news for you. The Taliban never left. The Afgahnis switched sides like I switch socks. There were and are former Taliban working alongside Kabul. I have zero doubts they would become the Mickey Mouse Club if Disney was in charge of Kabul.

I don't dispute this. But you had on them on the run and out. They managed to regroup and for that they needed a safe harbour. They got that in Pakistan. This has happened enough times in the NE to count. So the insurgency never goes away.

As opposed to allowing Soviet domination of the Indian Ocean? 9/11 was far cheaper in comparsion. No matter what you're proposing,

ok, i can see where you're going with this but hear me out.

The idea of being non-aligned is we did not want any super powers in the Indian Ocean. We intended it to be an ocean of peace.

This is a question of perception for you. Will you believe that. Will you trust it at the time. History bears it out.

There were never any Soviet bases in India. You'd think after 1971 we'd give them some. Never happened.

So the Soviets would have to get past us to have a base there let alone dominate it. We were quite adamant on this point going to the point of threatening Sri Lanka not to allow the Americans a base there.

Pakistan has done far, far, far more for us as an ally than what you're proposing even in your wildest dreams and we still treated her like shit. I am at a loss why you think India would get any better for far lessor terms except maybe more love letters

Because you're making a false equivalence between the two countries. India is going to be #3 in terms of economy. That tells you what we can get and do in relation to the Paks

Raja was pointing out that critics of NATO engagement on the Indian side act like India is like some small child that NATO will kidnap and exploit

Exactly this. That you know better than us. That you tell us what to do. Now imagine our reaction when you are able and willing to impose your polciies on others just like China is doing today. Thing is this is inevitable. India, one day, will impose policies that oppose our wishes. This is just a rise of power and the need to be respected as a power. This also means that we must hedge against your future rise. Note, even during the best times with China, we NEVER gave up on our check against her: Taiwan. We even sold Taiwan F-16s when China couldn't even get the MiG-21 right.

Another false equivalence. Where have we done that. Only an authoritarian regime can get away with that kind of policy.

So, why you think we would abandon Pakistan is beyond me.

After the Afghan experience what good are they ?

After discovering OBL, the main perp in this affair is hiding out near army colleges. Didn't hand him over, they hid him. How does that serve your interest.

What more proof do you need.

The Great Game.

BTW, this is peanuts. I will gladly take today over what I've faced during the Cold War. The PRC is not the USSR and Thank God for that, China and Pakistan combined ain't anywhere as close as being as mean and as capable as the USSR. No, I would NOT trade India for Pakistan and China. That would have meant the USSR becoming stronger and a lot meaner, more than likely winning Afghanistan.

We never get to find out with China because they were never tested. Other than border skirmishes they managed to avoid any Soviet action. They came under the US umbrella.

Who cares? They're checking India now and the thing is, they want to check India.

That is to China's benefit not the west. Of diminishing value going forward.

Afghanistan is near impossible to control precisely because there is nothing to control. Natural resources are scarce, making it damned expensive to occupy. No ROI. Historically, any occupying army left after they take a few goats and make the locals starve a few years so that they too busy finding food to eat instead of raiding their neighbours, ie punitiive expeditions. We are falling into that category now, using drones to hunt groups who are not part of the Treaty.

I gave you all the historic references and the current examples all point to a repeat of that history. Perhaps, you read up on those histories and see the parallels.

Thanks

The only objective now is to prevent it reverting to a safe harbour for terror.

[Officer of Engineers]

They did not collude with the enemy is what i mean.

You must be seriously dense. Stalin signed a non-Agression Pact with Tojo and interned all allied planes, ships, and crews that landed in Siberia, including LL shipments that were meant for the Soviets. He also left all captured Japanese weaponry to Mao after Op AUGUST STORM. Chiang ceased all offenses against the Japanese after Pearl Harbour. Mao was actively supporting Hanoi even when Nixon was paying him a visit. Your lack of knowledge is severly hampering your conclusions.

I don't dispute this. But you had on them on the run and out. They managed to regroup and for that they needed a safe harbour. They got that in Pakistan. This has happened enough times in the NE to count. So the insurgency never goes away.

That's not why they won. They won because they outbled us. There's one and only one way to stop an Afghan insurgency, genocide, and we do not have the stomache for that.

ok, i can see where you're going with this but hear me out.

The idea of being non-aligned is we did not want any super powers in the Indian Ocean. We intended it to be an ocean of peace.

This is a question of perception for you. Will you believe that. Will you trust it at the time. History bears it out.

There were never any Soviet bases in India. You'd think after 1971 we'd give them some. Never happened.

So the Soviets would have to get past us to have a base there let alone dominate it. We were quite adamant on this point going to the point of threatening Sri Lanka not to allow the Americans a base there.

Oh give me a break. You couldn't stop the USS ENTERPRISE from going into the Bay of Bengal. What makes you think you could stop the Soviet Navy from sailing into the Indian Ocean especially when you don't have the numbers to keep escourting them. It is a pipe dream that you could keep either superpower out.

Because you're making a false equivalence between the two countries. India is going to be #3 in terms of economy.

China is currently #2 and she was going to march over 300,000 men north and sacrafice 40 cities for us. What are you offering?

That tells you what we can get and do in relation to the Paks

Raja was pointing out that critics of NATO engagement on the Indian side act like India is like some small child that NATO will kidnap and exploit

Also tells you that we're going to keep Pakistan as a check.

Another false equivalence. Where have we done that. Only an authoritarian regime can get away with that kind of policy.

4 Wars with Paklistan.

After the Afghan experience what good are they ?

After discovering OBL, the main perp in this affair is hiding out near army colleges. What more proof do you need.

They're bastards but they're our bastards.

We never get to find out with China because they were never tested. Other than border skirmishes they managed to avoid any Soviet action. They came under the US umbrella.

Of course they were tested. They DARED to attack a key Soviet ally. TWICE! Two wars with Vietnam and checked Soviet domination of SE Asia. Also, China was not cowed. That there was zero doubt that China will fight is what kept 45 Divisions and 1000 nukes on China's borders. Say what you want about what and what did not happen but we're talking about Deng Xia Peng here. No one questioned that he had the balls to march North if the Soviets marched West.

That is to China's benefit not the west.

The only objective now is to prevent it reverting to a safe harbour for terror.

No, the only objective is to keep the trade lanes under Western Control. We cannot and will not rely on the Indian Navy to kill the Iranian Navy. That's because India can always say no. We cannot tolerate that kind of stategic ambuiguity. Pakistan, however, is not in the same boat. And if that means using the Pakistani Navy, that means using the Pakistani Navy. And we have the option NOT to allow Pakistan to say no.

[Double Edge]

Another exercise. This one is a "passage" one. Exercise with the 7th fleet as they pass through the region

Eye on China, India begins drill with US | Tribune | Jun 23 2021

The Indian Navy and the Indian Air Force are separately participating in joint exercises with the sword arm of the US Seventh Fleet in the Indian Ocean, south of Thiruvananthapuram.

Besides sending out strategic signals about the joint intent to defend maritime interests in the Indo-Asia-Pacific region, the two-day mega exercise is another step in the growing operational cooperation between the two militaries. It involves a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, destroyers, frigates, maritime surveillance aircraft and several types of fighter jets. The aircraft carrier Ronald Reagan, flagship of the US Carrier Strike Group (CSG) 5, which in turn is with the Seventh Fleet, is currently passing through the Indian Ocean.

The IAF’s assets drawn from four operational commands will jointly simulate attack scenarios such as targeting warships with jets drawn from USS Ronald Reagan. The Navy’s destroyer and frigate will join hands with American warships to hone air-defence skills and anti-submarine warfare.

A joint fly-past during the exercise will also be executed by IAF, Indian Navy and US Navy aircraft.

Interestingly, the Indo-US military exercise comes a month after China and Pakistan conducted an air force-level joint military exercise in Tibet to target warships, launch land attacks from sea and sharpen air-defence skills.

The Indian Navy said the joint exercise will strengthen bilateral relationship and cooperation “by demonstrating the ability to integrate and coordinate comprehensively in maritime operations”.

India’s maritime strategy is in high gear and New Delhi is working in the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue with Japan, Australia and the United States in the Indo-Pacific.

Integrate and coordinate

[Officer of Engineers]

Two Days? With a joint Fly By? That's a dog and pony show. Any ex with an aircraft carrier should last at least a week to be of any value; taking turns to be the hunted and the hunter. A sub should have multiple passes at the aircraft carrier and the screen should have multiple passes against the sub. Same for air sorties and AD screens.

[Officer of Engineers]

If you want to pick out true Indo-American exercise, it's Ex RED FLAG. Two weeks of ACM training from planning, execution, to recovery. Puts everything to the test, including your ground crews. India participated in 2008 and 2016 and gained extremely valuable experience, especially with the ground crews (how everyone ignores them). Turn around times (getting the planes ready after a sortie) drop 30%+ between 2008 and 2016.

That is the benchmark to measure things. The non-sexy things. Actually planning out the ACM flight before the planes take to the air.

[Double Edge]

Some notes on the China Pak exercise that was held recently. We're preparing for any misadventures.

LAC: China’s air defence at play, joint drill with Pak | Tribune | Jun 02 2021

In a new development along the Line of Actual Control (LAC), China and Pakistan are conducting a joint military exercise in Tibet. It has two-pronged goals — targeting warships, besides launching land attack from sea; and honing air-defence skills to target enemy aircraft, missiles or UAVs.

The exercise comes in the backdrop of a recent move of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), which has, for the first time, integrated its units with air-defence assets with PLA-Air Force (PLAAF) along the LAC.

The exercise, which reportedly started on May 22, is scheduled to end in the middle of this week.

China and Pakistan often exercise together. This year, the drill comes in the backdrop of around 1-year military standoff between India and China in eastern Ladakh. The number of Pakistan troops taking part in the exercise is not known. From the Chinese side, troops of the 3 Air Defence Division are participating in it.

In the run-up to the exercise, the PLA conducted a pre-exercise training for the Pakistan army at Sargodha, Punjab, Pakistan.

Pakistan already uses some of the missiles being used in this exercise. For India, this means that similar arsenal could be on board PLA navy and Pakistan navy warships. Moreover, Indian pilots, drones and missiles could face similar threats and counters on both borders.

Indian security establishment is aware that the Chinese low-to-medium altitude air-defence system, also known as LY-80, is being used. This is a medium-range surface-to-air defence missile system with around 150-km range. It can intercept and destroy aerial targets flying at low and medium altitude. The second set of missiles being used in the exercise are SM-6, Eagle anti-ship cruise missiles (better known in military circles by their numbers — YJ-81, YJ-82 & C-802). C-802 is the export version of YJ-802 land attack and anti-ship cruise missile with a range of 120-150 km. The C-802 anti-ship missile can also be launched from a fighter jet. Tibet has several lakes and water bodies where dummy ships are placed for target practice.

Meanwhile, the PLA has changed its defence tactics along the Line of Actual Control. The PLA air-defence units in its western theatre (Tibet & Xinjiang) form a combined air-defence control system. At least 10 PLA units in the western theatre have been integrated for sharing inputs on early warning and combat readiness.

---

Exercise under way in Tibet since May 22

• China-Pak joint military drill in Tibet near LAC to end this week
• Exercise includes targeting warships, planes, missiles, UAVs

Chinese Air-defence system deployed

• Chinese low-to-medium altitude system (LY-80) deployed, has a range of about 150 km
• Anti-ship cruise missiles (YJ-81, YJ-82 & C-802) also being used at the drill

Integrating army, air force elements

• PLA air defence units in its Western Theatre (Tibet & Xinjiang) have formed a combined Air Defence Control System jointly with the PLA-Air Force (PLAAF)
• The PLAAF could be possibly controlling all air defence network assets along the LAC

The only odd thing in that article is they're exercising in Tibet to hit warships and practicing land attacks from sea (!) Why do this in Tibet ? shouldn't they be doing this off the Pak coast ?


China-Pak exercise | Tribune | Jun 03 2021

It’s no coincidence that the China-Pakistan military exercise in Tibet comes amid celebrations marking 70 years of the establishment of diplomatic relations between the two countries which share their borders with India. The drill has taken place near the Line of Actual Control (LAC) — the scene of a prolonged standoff between Indian and Chinese troops — weeks ahead of the first anniversary of the bloody clash in Ladakh’s Galwan valley. Both the venue and the timing of the exercise have struck a discordant note for India, bringing under scrutiny the intentions of the two allies. The bilateral show of strength reeks of aggressive posturing apparently aimed at unnerving India. The development is also a grim reminder that the disengagement process in eastern Ladakh has only flattered to deceive, even as Pakistan’s overtures to bring peace along the LoC can’t be taken at face value.

The writing is on the wall: military and economic ties between China and Pakistan are getting stronger by the day and India needs to remain wary of both its neighbours, which have a long history of duplicity. The leaders of the two nations congratulated each other recently on the progress of the $60-billion China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), a major infrastructure project that connects Xinjiang province with Gwadar port in Balochistan. Though New Delhi has lodged a protest with Beijing over the CPEC, which passes through Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK), China has asserted that it is an economic initiative that won’t affect its ‘principled stand’ on the Kashmir issue. The argument has failed to convince India of China’s credibility.

The Chinese consolidation of air defence assets along the LAC makes it obvious that peace and tranquillity in the area will continue to be elusive as the neighbour is in no mood for de-escalation. With the Chinese Communist Party gearing up for its centenary celebrations next month, several grand displays of military might are to be expected. That’s reason enough for Indian troops to be well prepared for any mischief or misadventure from across the border or on the high seas.

ok, let's see what they have in store for us

I don't think anything will happen this summer and this is just posturing.

[Double Edge]

Two Days? With a joint Fly By? That's a dog and pony show. Any ex with an aircraft carrier should last at least a week to be of any value; taking turns to be the hunted and the hunter. A sub should have multiple passes at the aircraft carrier and the screen should have multiple passes against the sub. Same for air sorties and AD screens.

Passage so that's how long the 7th fleet will be in the area.

Makes you wonder why they do them in the first place.

They want to show how quickly they can come together and be dangerous ? this "integrate and coordinate" business

What if next time the Indians tagged along to unknown destinations further on

[Double Edge]

Sounds like free training for the future Tibetan resistance

In 2010 there were 4,000 Tibetans in an army of 2 million Han.

They're looking to hire more and deploy them around Sikkim & Arunachal.

They've inducted a couple of hundred recently. They are of mixed parentage.

[Double Edge]

The defense minister is in Ladakh on a 3 day visit.

Rajnath Singh to visit Ladakh for 3 days, review India’s operational readiness | PTI | Jun 26 2021

Wonder why GOI believes something is afoot.

His visit comes two days after a fresh round of diplomatic talks.

[Officer of Engineers]

Passage so that's how long the 7th fleet will be in the area.

Makes you wonder why they do them in the first place.

They want to show how quickly they can come together and be dangerous ? this "integrate and coordinate" business

What if next time the Indians tagged along to unknown destinations further on

Then, it's a political statement, not a military one.

[kato]

I've often wondered why NATO does not join US in FONOPS. They do transits of the SCS but NATO will not pass through territorial waters of the disputed islands like the US. No article i've seen about transits by UK, France, Canada or Australia has the words territorial waters or 12 nautical miles. Am article i read of a planed German transit explicitly said it would not pass within territorial waters or the 12 nautical mile limit of disputed islands

You will find an explicit statement on this from the French side here.

“France does not conduct ‘FONOPS’ and do not intend to take part in territorial disputes, but aims to preserve the right given to any nation to sail, patrol and operate without constraints in the international air-sea commons,” [Rear Adm. Jean-Mathieu Rey, COMALPACI] said.

While French policy on the matter is a bit more reserved the German Indopacific Policy released last year spells out a developing dualism between the USA and China in which Europe needs to tread careful not to be pulled to either side and needs to carve out its own separate path and position.

I think i should also note that NATO Europe does not consider the Pacific as relevant to NATO. The sole obligation EU nations have is to defend the two Outermost Regions of the Union in the Indian Ocean, Mayotte and La Reunion. The various overseas countries and territories allied to the Union otherwise are solely France's concern.

[Double Edge]

“France does not conduct ‘FONOPS’ and do not intend to take part in territorial disputes, but aims to preserve the right given to any nation to sail, patrol and operate without constraints in the international air-sea commons,” [Rear Adm. Jean-Mathieu Rey, COMALPACI] said.

This was the American position until China took over Scarborough shoal in 2012. Chinese were surprised at the lack of a reaction and concluded they could speed up their island building. Build enough and the overlapping EEZ's will push any FONOPS out of the SCS, yes ?

We get to 2015 and McCain made some comments at a senate hearing. Read McCain's arguments here.

The problem is China grabs territory here and there when the world turns a blind eye to it. Been doing it for long. Southern Mongolia, East Turkestan, Tibet. The world said nothing. When they get away with that much they do not see a problem with acquiring more.

So the American do FONOPS close to their reclaimed islands to demonstrate they do not accept their claims.

What is so unique about this position that it only applies to USN.

Something a passage through the EEZ fails to do.

If France does not do FONOPS then what are they doing in the SCS.

What is NATO doing in the SCS ? What is NATO trying to signal here then ?

While French policy on the matter is a bit more reserved the German Indopacific Policy released last year spells out a developing dualism between the USA and China in which Europe needs to tread careful not to be pulled to either side and needs to carve out its own separate path and position.

I still hear the same arguments from local commentators as well. For so long India has been doing just that.

We've learnt taking the CCP's concerns into account does not really get us anything. The CCP will still do whatever they want and not reciprocate vis a vis our concerns.

More countries are also reaching the same conclusion.

My position is clear, we belong to the free world and should stick together.

I think i should also note that NATO Europe does not consider the Pacific as relevant to NATO. The sole obligation EU nations have is to defend the two Outermost Regions of the Union in the Indian Ocean, Mayotte and La Reunion. The various overseas countries and territories allied to the Union otherwise are solely France's concern.

This was my understanding too but Stoltenberg has more ideas which you can listen to here