The Japanese Maritime Self-Defense Force commander, Hiromi Hamano, told reporters that Wednesday’s joint training exercise—which he termed a humanitarian and disaster response drill—was a success, shortly after the Orion landed at a Philippine air base in Palawan.

“I think it is important to continue HADR (humanitarian and disaster response), SAR (search and rescue) training with the Philippine Navy,” Hamano told reporters.

The Philippine Navy said the drill was a search-and-rescue exercise.

“It should not be taken as an affront to any other and is an expression of cooperation and learning from all those involved,” said Cmdr. Lued Lincuna, a spokesperson for the Philippine Navy.

And a spokesperson for President Aquino said this week’s activities “should not be taken as an affront” to any other nation.

No spying

“The Philippines has had these exercises before with our strategic partners,” deputy presidential spokesperson Abigail Valte said in a statement.

A spokesperson for the Japanese defense department said the Orion was not used to spy over the South China Sea.

“The purpose of this exercise is to enhance the Japanese Maritime Self-Defense Force’s capabilities in humanitarian support and disaster relief, not to conduct surveillance activities,” she said.

The surveillance plane crew did not observe anything unusual in the waters, Hamano said.

Recto Bank lies about 153 km west of Palawan, within the Philippines’ 370-km exclusive economic zone.

An encounter near Recto Bank between a Chinese vessel and a survey ship contracted by Philippine firm Philex Petroleum in 2012 has stalled exploration in the area.

The 36-billion-baht budget covers two submarines, as well as maintenance and training of the navy's personnel. Some reports say China has offered special, undisclosed packages to win the deal.

Sources in the navy said there are two short-listed countries. China is the No.1 option, followed by South Korea.

Adm Narongpol, who spoke in his capacity as head of the navy committee, said the purchase would be good for the national economy.

Another source in the navy dismissed concerns that Chinese-made submarines may not be reliable.

"We choose the best for the country. The submarines we buy must be suitable. We are concerned about the safety of our men. The committee's reputation will suffer if it makes the wrong choice," said a panel source.

A committee member who declined to be named said the Chinese-made subs are the cheapest and good quality.

He insisted the committee looked at the whole package in making its decision as China also offered military technology transfer and training. Other countries would charge more for a similar package.

"We should not look down on Chinese submarines," a committee member said, adding China has made progress in arms research and development.

He likened the submarine deal to car buying. "If we are able to buy a Mercedes but have no money left for petrol, we should look at a top model Toyota instead, which would still leave some money for petrol."

The poll found strong support for the U.S. decision to place a greater military priority on the Pacific, where many countries feel they are being challenged by China's growing economic might, military power and assertiveness.

“By and large, people tended to say that this was a good thing, that they see a U.S. military presence in the region as being something that encourages stability," Wike said.

Overall, a global median of 51 percent support increased U.S. military resources in Asia, compared to 34 percent who said they are opposed. Support for the pivot was particularly high in the Philippines, Vietnam and Japan, all of which have territorial disputes with China.

One exception was Malaysia, "where 54 percent believe [the U.S. defense pivot] is a bad thing because it could lead to conflict with China," according to Pew.

The Para heroes of Palman Mapu

Troops from the Parachute Regiment, outnumbered by more than 10 to one, withstand a ferocious enemy attack lasting more than two hours.

A firefight which should have ended in bloody defeat instead becomes an astonishing victory against the odds.

The feat has been likened by one senior officer to the Battle of Rorke’s Drift during the 19th century in Africa when a garrison of 150 British troops fought off up to 4,000 Zulu warriors.

But you will struggle to find much in the history books about the battle for Plaman Mapu, which happened 50 years ago on the border of Malaysia and Indonesia.

That is about to change with the imminent screening of a new documentary about this largely forgotten incident.

The latest in the We Were There series on Forces TV reveals the story of the brave 36 soldiers and shows three surviving veterans revisiting the scene of their triumph five decades later.

It is a bittersweet experience as the men are feted by locals and pay tribute to fallen comrades.

Back in 1965 Les Simcock, then 18, was on leave and in a cinema with a girl when his name flashed up on the screen.

The message was to alert him that he had received a telegram ordering him to report back for duty.

I’d thought we were just there for a bit of guard duty and never imagined we’d actually have to fight

Private Les Simcock

Les and his colleagues in 2 Para were bound for Malaysia, a fledgling state that was being supported by Britain.

Over the next six weeks they received intense jungle training before being deployed to the island of Borneo where they were posted to a base on the 1,000-mile border with communist leaning Indonesia.

The remaining 36 men including Private Les Simcock were dug in but the attack starting at 5am came as a surprise. Most of the Paras were sleeping and a downpour helped camouflage the sound of the advancing Indonesians.

The attack was intended by Indonesia to impress Russia and China, while also destabilising Malaysia with its Western allies.

“I’d thought we were just there for a bit of guard duty and never imagined we’d actually have to fight,” recalls Les, 68, from Portsoy, Aberdeenshire, who was the youngest soldier on the base.

He said: “The first thing I heard was machine-gun fire then blasts and bangs. The whole place seemed to explode. In the darkness I didn’t know if it was 10 people attacking us or 1,000. A rocket -propelled grenade landed about three feet away from me but fortunately it didn’t go off, otherwise that would have been me finished.”

One British soldier was killed in the initial bombardment and another was fatally wounded.

Within moments the first wave of Indonesian special forces was through the perimeter barbed wire and inside the compound. It seemed certain that the base would be overrun before the British troops could gather their wits.

It is thought that the attack was deliberately launched when the garrison strength was weak.

Yet this proved to be a mistake because the British troops were spread out thinly and casualties were light.

Slowly the fightback began, led by Sergeant Major John Williams. He grabbed a sub-machine gun and sprinted towards the onrushing Indonesians, firing aggressively from the hip.

His men were inspired by his actions and Private George Averre, from Sunderland, seized the only remaining undamaged mortar.

However he faced a problem because the fighting was now at close quarters and the weapon was designed to fi re over much longer distances.

Thinking on his feet the 22-yearold pulled the mortar off its tripod to change the angle and allow the shells to hit the advancing enemy just 25 yards away.

It is thought that about 60 Indonesians were killed. The base is now overgrown but traces of the battle remain, including scores of cartridge cases, mortar fuses and the scars of the trenches.

Field Marshall Lord Carver said immediately after the battle: “The battle of Plaman Mapu and the brave efforts of the 2 Para soldiers there on the day can be likened to the defence of Rorke’s Drift.”

GILL BOYD, a former Para and regimental historian who has spent years researching the battle, adds: “The bravery of the young men who held that position that night was totally synonymous with the ethos of the Parachute Regiment soldier: surrounded, outnumbered and outgunned but never a thought of surrender.”

Yet the tally of military awards is low given the heroic defence of the garrison against an estimated 400 elite enemy soldiers.

Sergeant Major Williams, who lost an eye in the battle and was thereafter known as “Patch”, received the Distinguished Conduct Medal.

One further medal was handed out and Mick Murtagh was mentioned in dispatches.

It is claimed that the authorities did not want to draw attention to this largely secret war being waged in South-east Asia.

It was feared that the conflict could escalate into “Britain’s Vietnam” and was politically sensitive.

But after the failure of the attack on the garrison at Plaman Mapu the Indonesians never again dared to threaten a British border post in Malaysia.

However, Western analysts have begun to caution that Russian official announcement by the tank designers and military officials should be taken with a grain of salt. As Henry Boyd of the Institute for Strategic Studies told Voice of America:

Where this puts it in comparison with contemporary Western tank design is something I think we’ll have to wait some time to get a better sense of. It’s inevitably not going to end up with everything that is currently being advertised as possible to put on this platform, the ambition is just going to be too great. Cost will come in at some point.

I have written about the T-14 and the cost factor (see: “Is the World’s Deadliest Tank Bankrupting Russia?”), recounting a joke that made the rounds during the rehearsals of the May 9 Victory parade regarding a T-14 Armata which broke down while crossing Red Square:  “The Armata truly has unprecedented destructive power; a battalion can destroy the entire Russian budget!”

Additionally, if the recently published analysis of the U.S. cybersecurity firm Taia Global is correct, a crucial piece of the tank’s equipment – the night vision cameras – might not even be Russian-made (see: “Is Russia’s Deadliest Tank Using Western Technology?”).

Like Boyd, I also repeatedly underlined that there is very little we genuinely know about this new piece of Russian military hardware and that it is impossible for now to truly assess the tanks capabilities. It is mostly an informed guessing game.

Following maneuvers by Malaysian war boats and planes in Ambalat waters, Defense Minister Ryamizard Ryacudu said he is ready with the Operasi Perisai Sakti (Operation Invincible Shield).

He said that Malaysian forces were frequently illegally entering Indonesian territorial waters located at the eastern coast of Kalimantan when the country was off guard. “Now we have jet fighters ready in Makassar [South Sulawesi],” he told reporters on Thursday as quoted by tribunnews.com.

Ryamizard said that the Indonesian Military (TNI) is currently running the operation, which involves five jet fighters and three war ships, to attack the Malaysian craft.

Admiral Kawano’s disclosure comes as Japanese troops this week are conducting their second-ever joint exercises with the Philippine navy. To practice search-and-rescue missions around the Spratlys, Japanese P-3 patrol planes with Japanese and Philippine troops aboard have flown from Palawan Island, the Philippine province that lies within 100 miles of the disputed waters.

In separate drills nearby, other Philippine troops this week are training with Americans, who for the first time included a littoral combat ship, the USS Forth Worth, newly based in Singapore as part of Washington’s Asian “rebalance.” The U.S. and the Philippines last year signed a new defense agreement that could see U.S. Marines rotate through Palawan bases.

Malaysia this month said it would formally protest Chinese incursions into its 200-mile exclusive economic zone, including the anchoring of a Chinese Coast Guard vessel by Malaysia’s Luconia Shoals, near gas wells operated by state-owned Petronas. This represents a change, as Kuala Lumpur previously kept quiet about Chinese patrols near James Shoal, also within its exclusive economic zone. Last month Malaysia’s defense chief warned that South China Sea tensions could “escalate into one of the deadliest conflicts of our time.”

Indonesia is beginning to raise its voice about Chinese incursions around its Natuna Islands. Vietnam, which saw China plant an oil rig in its waters last year, is on an arms-buying spree while expanding cooperation with the U.S., Japan, India and others. All of these countries could benefit from a new U.S. fund of $425 million to support Southeast Asian military modernization over the next five years. Japan is also boosting regional arms sales.

Last week, a report emerged that seemed to point to growing friction between Russia and China in Central Asia. According to WantChinaTimes, Russia’s recent deployment of drone technology in Central Asia was not due to Islamist threats in northern Afghanistan. Rather, according to the paper, Moscow opted to test its drones “to confront Chinese influence in the region.” As WantChinaTimes continued, “Since Russia itself relies heavily on economic exchanges with China, military deterrence is now the only way Putin can confront Chinese influence in the region.”

On its face, the report jibes with recent trends and expectations in the region. It’s no secret Moscow has opted to play up threats of ISIS in the region – with Central Asian presidents more than willing to fan the fears, if only to obtain Western military largesse. Terrorist organizations, per WantChinaTimes, offer “Russia a perfect excuse to strengthen its military influence in Central Asia.” Moreover, China has sailed to economic dominance in the region, towering in both trade relations and infrastructural investments. While Russia’s Eurasian Economic Union continues to stumble, China’s Silk Road Economic Belt is surging ahead, offering Central Asian governments an out as remittances continue collapsing.

But digging a bit beyond the prima facie claims, the report presents some stark question. First, WantChinaTimes cites its source as a report from China’s Global Times. However, no recent report appears on China’s Global Times website. (A request for clarification sent to WantChinaTimes went unanswered.) Likewise, a few months ago, WantChinaTimes reported that China would be delivering surface-to-air missile components to Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan, Beijing’s largest military allocation in Central Asia to date. But nothing has been heard of the delivery in the four months since.

To be sure, Russia’s recent drone deployment may well serve as something of a subtle deterrent to encroaching Chinese influence in the region. Russia’s security card remains its strongest – or perhaps only – play in the region, and the recent uptick in military presence in Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan hasn’t gone unnoticed in Beijing. Likewise, Chinese-Russian relations in the region have proven questionable, with the largest issue remaining Russia’s reticence to see its dominion ceded to Beijing.

However, without any further evidence at this point, it’s best to pause the notion that Russia’s flying drones as a deterrent to China. That may be the motive, and it may jibe with certain trends, but we’d need something more than a one-off rumor to say for certain.