South China Sea thoughts?

[Ananda]

My Gosh..ancient maps...?? Is anybody realise how dangerous it is if the global community now allowed any nation claim sovereignty based on ancient maps..and not based on recognise teritorial right of what that nation build upon ?

Most of nation in the world build based upon their post collonial entity their originated..thus you can say post WW2 borders agreement..it's not perfect..but something that everybody must based on their sovereign right claim..not some ancient/traditional claim..

Indonesia build based on what Netherland East Indies teritory..that's why its invasion on East Timor can't get most International recognition..since East Timor never part Netherland East Indies..even tough traditionall/historically it's share same origin and roots as West Timor that internationally recogniseable as part of Indonesia.

Any attempt to make any teritorial claimant based on Ancient maps or Tradional rights..and get any International recognition..it's opening 'Pandora Box'..

Just in SEA region..if Indonesia begin to make claim as Inheritant right of old Srivijaya Kingdom..or Majapahit Kingdom..then it can claim Malayan Peninsula and Singapore Island..Vice versa if Malaysia begin to claim as inheritant rights of old Malaca Sultanate..then it can claim big part of Indonesian Western Sumatra coast..

The list can go on and on in every part of World if everybody allowed to claim based on Ancient maps or Tradional/historical rights..

Thus no matter how powerfull military or economically China is..its claim on SCS based only on Tradional/Historical right should never ever be recognise by any International body or any Nation that want to preserve International order.
It's a very dangerous moved by China that can open similar situation on other part of the world..once it's moved being recognise on anything Internationally.

The Global community must stand up and stop this Ancient based claim..simply because it's a very dangerous precedence once it allowed to happen..

 

[Black Aces]

Based on the Chinese warped argument, the moon is US sovereign territory since Americans were the first to set foot there.

Need more historical proof? Whose flag was planted on the moon?

Btw, the vast expense of space from Earth to Pluto are US Space territory since the NASA-operated Voyager space craft travelled that distance and beyond.

 

[ngatimozart]

Based on the Chinese warped argument, the moon is US sovereign territory since Americans were the first to set foot there.

Need more historical proof? Whose flag was planted on the moon?

Btw, the vast expense of space from Earth to Pluto are US Space territory since the NASA-operated Voyager space craft travelled that distance and beyond.

Welcome to the forum cobber. Please read the rules and also introduce yourself. Is the Chinese argument warped? And if so, how do you define warped? What is it warped against? They would argue that the concept of a rules based international order that is not subservient to the Party as warped.

 

[swerve]

... today's PRC can safely rely on historical records to support her claims!

With all of the above, it would be absurd to think that these islands & reefs in the S. China Sea were not explored and claimed by China in those times!

Ah, so all the Mediterranean islands belong to Lebanon! But does the coastline of Africa belong to the Phoenician sailors who sailed right round it, or Egypt because they were commissioned by Pharoah Necho?

Obviously Iceland is Irish, because of the hermits the first Norse settlers found there.

I'm illustrating the inapplicability of ancient claims.

 

[Bonza]

I never said China behavior is right, when looking at what Vietnam did in the 70/80s, or what Phillippine did on Second Thomas Shoal, China seem doing the same with much bigger scale.

No, you've been careful to avoid saying that, you're just intimating it through every single statement you make where you equate actions taken by other claimants as functionally the same as the Chinese actions, which they're not, for the reasons I already stated.

Lord save us...

 

[STURM]

Malaysia has good relationship with China despite dispute between them, mostly likely due to China carrot tactic.

These articles will give you a better idea on Malaysia/China relations and how they reached the present level. The Malaysians are very frustrated that despite ''close'' ties; Chinese ships are still entering Malaysian waters. Note that Malaysia was the first ASEAN [of the original 6] country to establish official ties with China and that Malaysia is China's largest trading partner in ASEAN.

[Why Malaysia Isn’t Afraid Of China - For Now]
http://www.aspistrategist.org.au/why-malaysia-isnt-afraid-of-china-for-now/

[Will China-Malaysia Relations Remain a Model for Asia?]
http://cogitasia.com/will-china-malaysia-relations-remain-a-model-for-asia/

[Malaysia Between The U.S. And China: What Do Weaker States Hedge Against?]
http://cwp.princeton.edu/news/malay...and-china-what-do-weaker-states-hedge-against

[A Malaysia ‘Pushback’ Against China In The South China Sea?]
http://thediplomat.com/2016/03/a-malaysia-pushback-against-china-in-the-south-china-sea/

[First China-Malaysia Joint military Exercise Held In Malacca Strait]
http://english.chinamil.com.cn/news-channels/china-military-news/2015-09/17/content_6686306.htm

The best scenario I see is china and other dispute countries made some agreement on resource sharing, and get these dispute solved soon

Which is precisely what various countries have been trying to do .........

The problem is that China wants to deal on it's terms or not deal at all. Before even commencing negotiations it seems that the other claimants have to first agree to Chinese pre-conditions such as acknowledging that the reefs/islands they claim and occupy are an undispustable part of China. When China doesn't get its way it talks about the possibility of war, about outside powers meddling in the issue [granted in the past the U.S. and Japan did push for the various claimants to take a tougher stand] and has gone so far as to declare that establishing an ADIZ is well within its rights [this despite China's claims that its not the one creating tensions]. Judging by its actions and its statements; its clear that as far as China is concerned, it can do no wrong and that the fact that things are at an impasse is solely the fault of others.

Beijing banks on fractured ASEAN - Al Jazeera English

 

[Tsavo Lion]

Regarding the Moon & space, treaties cover it & the oceans, so US flag there or the Russian 1 on the Arctic bottom can't be used to legally claim them. OTH, the British, for their own interests, gave India control over the Nicobars & Andamans which are ~ as far from the mainland as the areas under discussion are from PRC held Hainan island. Borders were drawn by colonial powers in Asia, Africa & the ME resulting in continuation of "divide & conquer" situation today. Borders were also changed in Europe & Asia after both World Wars; more to the point, Germany & Japan lost islands in the Pacific to the victors.
After all this, it's hypocritical to refer to int'l law set up by those same powers (or their legal successors) & accuse their former victims of aggression! It's all about containing China- hence "Freedom Of Navigation" slogan, which is really about freedom for warships to sail In the Yellow, East & South China Seas. China is a continues 5,000 years old civilization, still standing & getting stronger today, so they feel justified to claim those areas regardless how they may be perceived abroad. BTW, those island groups in the SE Asia were 1st settled during the last ice age, when most, if not all, weren't even islands.
For more recent documents, see the already posted quora blog discussion-
"What evidence does China offer to substantiate its claims of sovereignty in the South China Sea?" I don't want to post big quotes from it + the pics won't show here. Also see "South China Sea: Storm In A "Far Larger" Indian Ocean Teacup", "The South China Sea Is Really a Fishery Dispute", & "China and the South China Sea dispute: The $5 trillion lie"
I agree with this VOA article:
Why Location of China-Russia South China Sea Drill Matters
Also, the fleet needs to train in that region as RF-flagged ships & planes transit it regularly since it's the shortest route between Pacific & Indian Oceans. Moreover, the naval/air activity of USA there must be monitored for intel. purposes.

 

[Ananda]

So...?? In that 5000 years civilization..is there any Chinese Settlement in South China Sea ? Where are they now ?
What's your point that in Ice Age that SEA Arcihipelago is not islands ?..google a bit and everybody knows that Java, Sumatra and Borneo is part of Asiatic landmass and Papua is part of Australian landmass..in the last Ice Age..

So are you saying because of that China as the 'lord' of Asia can also claim Sumatra, Java and Borneo..While Australia can claim Papua ?

Like I said..and others already point..nothing legitimate can be derived on claiming sovereignty on ancient maps..or traditional claim..yes post WW2 border is not perfect for everybody..but does not mean anybody who disliked it can throw it away and set their own border based on some 'ancient' claim..

If based on Ancient Claim..than Mongolia can claim much part of Northern China..and much of Siberia..instead has to settle on their present border which only small fraction of their once huge empire..
China's Inner Mongolia teritory is traditionally belong to Mongolian Tribes/Nation..will China willing to give back Inner Mongolia to Ulan Bator sovereignty..??

If China wants to claim something based on ancient claim..whille many parts of western teritory or northern teritory is not part of Ancient Chinese empire of old..whether it is Qi, Han, Tang, Song, or Ming..Will China wants to carved its teritory based on someone else ancient claim ?

The truth is simple..China think now it's strong enough to push everybody in the region to recognise its claim on SCS..and got angry..because turn out..many still not willing and stand up against its claim.

With that attitude..well it's every nations (that still want to preserved International order) duty..to 'contain' China SCS ambition.

 

[tonnyc]

I always thought that the UNCLOS covers the South China Sea too. But apparently when it comes to the moon, the existence of the Outer Space Treaty stops the US from claiming sovereignty over the moon, but when it comes to the South China Sea, the fact that there is this internationally recognized thing called the UNCLOS doesn't prevent China from claiming sovereignty over the Eleven Dash Line.

And then China gets puzzled when people don't accept that kind of argument.

Look, Tavos, if you want to use a particular point to argue your case, you must also accept others using the same point to argue against your case. What you have been doing is trying to say, "this point applies when it benefits China, but obviously it doesn't apply when it puts China at a disadvantage". In fact, that is what China has been doing. You are just repeating their talking points.

 

[tonnyc]

After thinking about this some more, is there any point in discussing the validity of China's claim? We are all familiar with the Chinese arguments and their rebuttals. All we are doing when we talk about that is rehashing the same things over and over again.

I am calling on the moderators to consider severely limiting further discussion on whether anyone's claim is valid or not and focus more on the current events in the South China Sea and discussion on what can be done.

 

[Bonza]

After thinking about this some more, is there any point in discussing the validity of China's claim? We are all familiar with the Chinese arguments and their rebuttals. All we are doing when we talk about that is rehashing the same things over and over again.

I am calling on the moderators to consider severely limiting further discussion on whether anyone's claim is valid or not and focus more on the current events in the South China Sea and discussion on what can be done.

Hi Tonnyc, I can certainly take it into consideration. I don't feel as though people would be satisfied with the mods locking the discussion entirely, however we could look at separating them. How about I leave this thread for current events and news regarding the South China Sea, and I establish a separate thread specifically for discussing territorial claims and ambitions in the region? That would seem to serve all parties to the two discussions, and would make it easy to refer people to the appropriate conversation.

Incidentally if anyone else in the thread has an opinion on this, now's the time to voice it...

 

[Tsavo Lion]

Sounds good, but then we may need to change the word in title from "thoughts" to "current events" or something like that!
just let me clear this up: I don't insist that China is legally "the 'lord' of Asia ". De facto, PRC is behaving like 1 already! What I mean is that treaties often are interpreted differently, violated and discarded whenever it suits any particular party. In today's world, for better or worse, it's still "might makes right!" Ananda says:

In that 5000 years civilization..is there any Chinese Settlement in South China Sea ? Where are they now?

The Chinese had colonies in Vietnam, Korea & Japan but they don't claim them now as it's not in their interest to do so. OTH, how many Caucasian Americans, British, French, Norwegians & Danes settled in Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, Aleuthians, S. Georgia, Tahiti, New Caledonia, Clipperton, Bouvet & Greenland islands, respectively? Noone in these "non-imperialist" nations except Denmark offered those areas "home rule", & they didn't lift a finger to pressure Turkey about its Kurds, Japan about its Okinawans & Ainus, Ukraine about its Donbass, UK about Diego Garcians, & India (the largest democracy!) about its Kashmir & Assam!
Btw, USA still claims Wrangel Island, populated by mostly polar bears & held by Russia, by the right of discovery!- Correction: I was wrong here! But, Greenland is still Danish & is being used to claim shelf areas around the N.Pole & the Hans Island!
All the oceans except the Arctic are dominated by NATO members with the help of Japan, India & Australia; it's no surprise that RF & PRC are securing their coastlines & surrounding areas by deploying & upgrading sea denial forces in the Baltic, Barents, Black, Okhotsk, & Y/E/S. China Seas! In the Arctic, if Russia doesn't get its way, she'll just withdraw from the treaty & claim the areas she considers should belong to her. Only here & in the SC Sea can SLBMs be safely deployed!

 

[tonnyc]

I don't think it is necessary to lock the thread either. Separating the issue into two separate topics sounds like a good compromise.

If anyone has any suggestion regarding whether to split the thread into two different topics, please post your thoughts.

 

[ngatimozart]

I don't think it is necessary to lock the thread either. Separating the issue into two separate topics sounds like a good compromise.

If anyone has any suggestion regarding whether to split the thread into two different topics, please post your thoughts.

The Moderators are discussing it at the moment. When we reach a decision we will advise.

 

[SouthernSky]

Given the topics fluid nature, I'm not sure the thread needs any adjustment.

Yes, China's stance is solid.

The countries around China don't have the same luxury though.

All that anyone can honestly provide here are their own thoughts.

 

[Bonza]

Given the topics fluid nature, I'm not sure the thread needs any adjustment.

Yes, China's stance is solid.

The countries around China don't have the same luxury though.

All that anyone can honestly provide here are their own thoughts.

The advantage I can see in having two threads is essentially avoiding Groundhog Day - by which I mean a new member registers, clicks on the topic and immediately re-hashes the argument, either for or against China's claims. This kicks off responses from various members, until the discussion dies down for a little while, long enough to be missed by the next new member looking to express their view on what is for some a rather emotive topic. It can be frustrating for those members invested in the topic for other reasons, and to be honest it's also a pain for the mods who watch the thing go around and around without end. I think it would be much simpler for that particular discussion if it had it's own thread, and in addition anyone mistakenly posting here or there can be easily referred to the appropriate thread instead of getting a dressing down for re-posting on a circular argument.

Do you see why the separation of topics might help?

 

[SouthernSky]

The advantage I can see in having two threads is essentially avoiding Groundhog Day - by which I mean a new member registers, clicks on the topic and immediately re-hashes the argument, either for or against China's claims. This kicks off responses from various members, until the discussion dies down for a little while, long enough to be missed by the next new member looking to express their view on what is for some a rather emotive topic. It can be frustrating for those members invested in the topic for other reasons, and to be honest it's also a pain for the mods who watch the thing go around and around without end. I think it would be much simpler for that particular discussion if it had it's own thread, and in addition anyone mistakenly posting here or there can be easily referred to the appropriate thread instead of getting a dressing down for re-posting on a circular argument.

Do you see why the separation of topics might help?

Sino Defence has already implemented such threads with the net result being two opposing camps that occasionally get on each others threads to antagonise each other. I'm not sure dividing the discussion is the best alternative.

 

[gf0012-aust]

Sino Defence has already implemented such threads with the net result being two opposing camps that occasionally get on each others threads to antagonise each other. I'm not sure dividing the discussion is the best alternative.

you've seen how savage and quick we are to get rid of people who bait - so, although its a possibility, they'd get one chance and then run the risk of getting their trolling deleted as part of general housekeeping.

we don't have patience for trolls and dique-heads in here

 

[SouthernSky]

we don't have patience for trolls and dique-heads in here

I know and appreciate that.

Your call guys.

 

[swerve]

The Chinese had colonies in Vietnam, Korea & Japan but they don't claim them now as it's not in their interest to do so. OTH, how many Caucasian Americans, French, Norwegians & Danes settled in Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, Aleuthians, Tahiti, Clipperton, Bouvet & Greenland islands, respectively? Btw, USA still claims Wrangel Island, populated by mostly polar bears & held by Russia, by the right of discovery!.

China never had a colony in Japan. It conquered Vietnam, but was eventually thrown out by the Vietnamese, & Korea accepted Chinese 'suzerainty' at times.

The whole southern half of China, the west, Inner Mongolia & Manchuria used to be separate from China, & with no Chinese population. China's done exactly the same as European countries, & has kept doing it for the last 2000 years.

The USA has no claim to Wrangel Island. A few US citizens have laid claim to it on behalf of the USA, but the US State Department has repudiated their claim. A few nutters, disowned by the government, are not the USA.

Greenland has a majority of indigenous people, & they elect its government. When they chose autonomy, the Danish government said "if that's what you want, fine". Greenland has as much self-government as it's asked for. Compare that with Tibet & Sinkiang.

The difference between China & western countries is that while both have imperialist pasts, China also has an imperialist present.