• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

China says United States should 'brush up on' South China Sea history

Status
Not open for further replies.

Blablurn

Member
BEIJING - The United States needs to brush up on its history about the South China Sea, as World War Two-related agreements mandated that all Chinese territories taken by Japan had to be returned to China, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi said in Australia.

China has been upset by previous comments from the new U.S. administration about the disputed waterway.

In his Senate confirmation hearing, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said China should not be allowed access to islands it has built there. The White House also vowed to defend "international territories" in the strategic waterway.

However, last week U.S. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis suggested that diplomacy should be the priority in the South China Sea.

In comments carried on the foreign ministry's website late on Tuesday, Wang said he had a "suggestion" for this American friends. "Brush up on the history of World War Two," Wang was quoted as saying during a visit to Canberra, Australia.

The 1943 Cairo Declaration and 1945 Potsdam Declaration clearly state that Japan had to return to China all Chinese territory taken by Japan, Wang said.

"This includes the Nansha Islands," he added, using China's name for the Spratly Islands.

"In 1946, the then-Chinese government with help from the United States openly and in accordance with the law took back the Nansha Islands and reefs that Japan had occupied, and resumed exercising sovereignty," Wang said.

"Afterwards, certain countries around China used illegal methods to occupy some of the Nansha islands and reefs, and it's this that created the so-called South China Sea dispute."

China is committed to having talks with the parties directly involved, and in accordance with historical facts and international law to peacefully resolve the issue, and that position will not change, Wang said.

Countries outside the region should support the efforts of China and others in the region to maintain the peace and stability of the South China Sea, and not do the opposite, he added.

China sets great store on Mattis' comments stressing diplomatic efforts in the South China Sea, as this is not only the position set by China and Southeast Asia but also the "correct choice" for countries outside the region, Wang said.

China claims most of the South China Sea, while Taiwan, Malaysia, Vietnam, the Philippines and Brunei claim parts of the waters that command strategic sea lanes and have rich fishing grounds along with oil and gas deposits.

(Reporting by Ben Blanchard; Editing by Michael Perry)

Source: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-southchinasea-china-usa-idUSKBN15N04N

Time to brush up those history books, USA.
 

Shoeless

Member
Asking the current administration to use facts and diplomacy pretty much means this is doomed. Declaration of war on the horizon before 2020.
 

ZOONAMI

Junior Member
Well, they are somewhat right, but they really shouldn't be building artificial islands to put military installations on. I guess they are sort of like cheap aircraft carriers that don't move, but that doesn't really make it any better.
 

ezrarh

Member
Asking the current administration to use facts and diplomacy pretty much means this is doomed. Declaration of war on the horizon before 2020.

Trump just tweeted how everybody knows he takes in all the facts before making a decision though.
 

WaffleTaco

Wants to outlaw technological innovation.
The conversation about those islands are so damn stupid. China has no legimate right to them, if anything they belong to Vietnam or another closer power.
 
cbKqtCg.png
 

antonz

Member
If "History" has anything to say its that the little bits of sand poking above the water are claimed by a million people with Probably Vietnam or the Philippines really having the only legitimate claim to them by international law
 

4Tran

Member
Well, they are somewhat right, but they really shouldn't be building artificial islands to put military installations on. I guess they are sort of like cheap aircraft carriers that don't move, but that doesn't really make it any better.
True, but possession is 9/10ths of the law and all. As long as China is physically sitting on the claimed territory, it's basically impossible for anyone to push them off.
 

Madness

Member
Well, they are somewhat right, but they really shouldn't be building artificial islands to put military installations on. I guess they are sort of like cheap aircraft carriers that don't move, but that doesn't really make it any better.

They aren't right at all. Some historical fishermen venturing to those rocks some centuries ago doesn't mean they have economic and military rights thousands and thousands of miles from their coast where it is just a few hundred miles from Vietnam or the Philippines, even worse is that they are reclaiming acres of land for military outposts and airstrips.

There is a reason China has issues with almost all neighbors and not the other way round.

Also, they have no problem developing land and helping Pakistan in disputed Kashmir lands with India but then expect no one to say anything as they are literally stealing land. They like to use international laws and treaties when it benefits them but then want to declare invalid things like Geneva conventions and the UN conventions on land and sea etc.
 

Skunkers

Member
So what's the counter argument/historical case, I wonder? That it was intended to be returned to the Republic of China and not the communist People's Republic of China that took power a few years later?

Edit: Dammit zer0das.
 

Shadybiz

Member
Yes, Trump will get to that, right after he's done reading "All Quiet on the Western Front."

Asking the current administration to use facts and diplomacy pretty much means this is doomed. Declaration of war on the horizon before 2020.

Yep.
 

antonz

Member
So what's the counter argument/historical case, I wonder? That it was intended to be returned to the Republic of China and not the communist People's Republic of China that took power a few years later?

Edit: Dammit zer0das.

China pretty much accepts Taiwans claim to the land as China views its own supremacy over Taiwan So Taiwan ownership is Chinese ownership.

The Islands themselves were French Possession prior to WWII then Japan Invaded. Allies made a broad statement regarding Japanese possessions but never actually made an indication on who would get the Spratleys. So Taiwan took it upon itself to invade the Spratley's. They then were forced to abandon them when the Chinese Civil War went bad. Then some guy from the Philippines tried to claim the Islands forcing Taiwan to reinvade.

Whole thing is a cluster fuck over maybes. Geographically the surrounding region looks favorable to the prospects of oil deposits etc. but there is no firm answer yes or no. All this idiocy could be over nothing.

And as far as possession being 9/10ths of the law and all that. China only controls 1 of the 14 islands. Philippines has 7 Islands and Vietnam has 6.
 

Madness

Member
True, but possession is 9/10ths of the law and all. As long as China is physically sitting on the claimed territory, it's basically impossible for anyone to push them off.


They have pretty much made islands and military installations out of reclaimed reefs and rocks. So much pollution and garbage and such a violation of international and human rights. They will inevitably house a naval fleet there, fighter jets and bombers and threaten Vietnam and Philippines and others into submission as soon as they can challenge the US militarily.
 

4Tran

Member
They aren't right at all. Some historical fishermen venturing to those rocks some centuries ago doesn't mean they have economic and military rights thousands and thousands of miles from their coast where it is just a few hundred miles from Vietnam or the Philippines, even worse is that they are reclaiming acres of land for military outposts and airstrips.

There is a reason China has issues with almost all neighbors and not the other way round.

Also, they have no problem developing land and helping Pakistan in disputed Kashmir lands with India but then expect no one to say anything as they are literally stealing land. They like to use international laws and treaties when it benefits them but then want to declare invalid things like Geneva conventions and the UN conventions on land and sea etc.
To be fair territorial claims have always been determined by historical ownership, and not by who is closest to the land in question. Every party has a bit of a claim to it, and because China actually occupied the islands, they've made the question moot for now.

So what's the counter argument/historical case, I wonder? That it was intended to be returned to the Republic of China and not the communist People's Republic of China that took power a few years later?

Edit: Dammit zer0das.
Both Taiwan and China pretend that the other entity doesn't exist so they're effectively on the same side in this dispute. This can be seen most clearly in the Senkaku Dispute where China let Taiwan do most of the heavy lifting.
 
They will inevitably house a naval fleet there, fighter jets and bombers and threaten Vietnam and Philippines and others into submission as soon as they can challenge the US militarily.

Sooo.... sometime in the near future they will have a fleet capable of staring down the US Navy?

Okay then.
 

LQX

Member
China can go fuck themselves on this. It is no longer just about Japan and some tiny islands. Them getting full control will eventually fuck over many countries. How anyone on GAF can be for this is beyond me.
 

Lautaro

Member
If only the US had a really important tacit agreement with China that they could use as a bargaining token, maybe something about a one China... oh wait, that was already spent without getting any benefit from it.

Yep, China is wrong, that's why USA sent a fleet to patrol those waters some time ago. Sadly I don't see how your current administration can deal with this situation without escalating it in the most dumb way possible... maybe they'll be too busy with Iran.
 
South-China-Sea-e1468327169555.jpg


So do GAFers think China should get all the islands they claim are their territorial waters? Thats what it sounds like from most of these posts. Looks like they may be stealing some from Malaysia, the Phillipines, and Nam but what do I know
 

shira

Member


Is there any chance that Trump hires Miss South Carolina 2007 to brush up on our history education in South China and the Iraq, everywhere such as. And to help South China and the Iraq and the Asian countries.
 
If only the US had a really important tacit agreement with China that they could use as a bargaining token, maybe something about a one China... oh wait, that was already spent without getting any benefit from it.

US can join China's Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership


Yep, China is wrong, that's why USA sent a fleet to patrol those waters some time ago. Sadly I don't see how your current administration can deal with this situation without escalating it in the most dumb way possible... maybe they'll be too busy with Iran.

Nah I think China is going to deal (just promise no more new island or whatever) because geopolitically it's best for China to sit back and do business right now when the current US administration try to start a fight with everyone else including half of the people in the US.
 

4Tran

Member
South-China-Sea-e1468327169555.jpg


So do GAFers think China should get all the islands they claim are their territorial waters? Thats what it sounds like from most of these posts. Looks like they may be stealing some from Malaysia, the Phillipines, and Nam but what do I know
At a glance it looks bad, but territorial claims aren't based on the proximity to one's country. For example, the UK controls the Falkland Islands and Denmark controls Greenland.
 

Madness

Member
To be fair territorial claims have always been determined by historical ownership, and not by who is closest to the land in question. Every party has a bit of a claim to it, and because China actually occupied the islands, they've made the question moot for now.

Except China tries to pretend they own everything at the height of their power and try and downplay others. Will China give Inner Mongolia back to Mongolia proper? This isn't a territorial claim. China is fabricating lies about how they had fishermen land near these atolls and reefs, and under that pretense have dredged acres and acres of land into unsinkable aircraft carriers in a sense.

Sooo.... sometime in the near future they will have a fleet capable of staring down the US Navy?

Okay then.

Yes. I said challenge the US. This means prevent a steamrolling of their navy by the US. The US is conventionally superior right now. 10 or 20 years from now at the rate of Chinese military spending and double digit jumps every year, unless the US will want to have an all out war, they wouldn't be able to do much in the South China Sea and they know it. The biggest deterrent against the US is nuclear Chinese submarines around the pacific and installations like this which will almost certainly be fitted with ballistic missiles and radars to monitor and threaten other navies.
 

Lautaro

Member
Nah I think China is going to deal (just promise no more new island or whatever) because geopolitically it's best for China to sit back and do business right now when the current US administration try to start a fight with everyone else including half of the people in the US.

I'm not that optimistic, we are talking about a totalitarian state. Those are all about looking strong and the members of the party that make such a concession would be eaten alive by more hawkish politicians.
 

4Tran

Member
Except China tries to pretend they own everything at the height of their power and try and downplay others. Will China give Inner Mongolia back to Mongolia proper? This isn't a territorial claim. China is fabricating lies about how they had fishermen land near these atolls and reefs, and under that pretense have dredged acres and acres of land into unsinkable aircraft carriers in a sense.
That's where the "possession is 9/10ths of the law" comes into play. China is laying claim to all of the territories at the height of the Qing, with some slight concessions. Taiwan lays claim to all Qing territories, and this would include Outer Mongolia as well.
 
South-China-Sea-e1468327169555.jpg


So do GAFers think China should get all the islands they claim are their territorial waters? Thats what it sounds like from most of these posts. Looks like they may be stealing some from Malaysia, the Phillipines, and Nam but what do I know

Most of the posts have no idea what they're talking about, but they're agreeing with China because China is posing themselves as an adversary to the Trump-led United States. If this story came out 6 months ago, while Obama was president (who also opposed Chinese expansion in the South China Sea) then you'd have as many posts saying, "Get fukt China" and photos of TIanamen square.

China can go fuck themselves on this. It is no longer just about Japan and some tiny islands. Them getting full control will eventually fuck over many countries. How anyone on GAF can be for this is beyond me.

Yep, and individuals in those countries are already being fucked over. Chinese commercial fishermen have been overfishing waters that are distinctly not-Chinese territorial waters and it's only expanding. It's not just about the military or a distinct military aggressive/offensive action... It's, let's say there's two boats in "disputed" territorial waters, one of then Chinese and one of them Phillipino, and the two boats are having a dispute over the territorial fishing... And then one boat can get Chinese fighter jets to buzz over the other boat, or can have a Chinese war ship sail within a few miles of the dispute. It's not offensive, it's not a military action, it's not any suggestion of war. But it steadily reinforces "this is Chinese territory," when it never has been and isn't recognized as such.

People in this thread aren't "for it," but they're just automatons who hate Donald Trump so much that they will laugh along with China's joke and side with China in a dispute that goes back well over a decade and had been an issue throughout the entire Obama presidency as well.
 

Pancake Mix

Copied someone else's pancake recipe
At a glance it looks bad, but territorial claims aren't based on the proximity to one's country. For example, the UK controls the Falkland Islands and Denmark controls Greenland.

Yeah, but those actually had populations throughout the ages, plus the Falkland Islands have no indigenous population. The Falkland Islands is a case of the nation of the first permanent colony having control, Argentina has no basis in international law for their claim to the Falklands.

China's case is mostly bullshit, partially because of how records were kept, but when there's no real ties other than "we never planted a flag, but we uh fished there", well so did the Vietnamese and everyone else in the surrounding area.

China is a big bully.

Here is the UK's territory:

RBWzcHy.jpg

No. It's looks nothing like that. First of all, you're including the Republic of Ireland in that bubble....Again, the exclusive economic zones and territorial claims don't look like that... The UK has many remaining territories in the Atlantic Ocean, owing to history. The Falklands had no indigenous population. The UK landed early on and eventually stayed with the first permanent colony. Spain/Argentina have no claim. Nearest neighbour is not relevant, but when China's claims are "well we uhhh, fished, we fished", so did everyone else. Much of those "islands" in the South China Sea aren't really islands or above water most of the time. China is seriously just being a dick, and how appropriate given the shape of their claim.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom