• 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.

July 12th - Philippines v. China: Court Ruling on South China Sea case coming

Status
Not open for further replies.

Blablurn

Member
south-china-sea-philippines.jpg


Tomorrow is the big day. The Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague will deliver an award in the South China Sea arbitration initiated by the Philippines.

The NYTimes made a good summary what it's about.

What is this case about?

The Philippines filed a complaint in 2013 after China took control of a reef about 140 miles from the Philippine coast
. It accused China of violating international law by interfering with fishing, endangering ships and failing to protect the marine environment at the reef, known as Scarborough Shoal.But the Philippines also went further, asking an international tribunal to reject China’s claim to sovereignty over waters within a “nine-dash line” that appears on official Chinese maps. The dashes encircle as much as 90 percent of the South China Sea, an area the size of Mexico that is vital to global trade and rich in natural resources, including potential oil deposits.The Philippines also accused China of violating international law by dredging sand to build artificial islands out of several reefs in the South China Sea, including one it says is in its waters.

What does international law say?

The Philippines filed its complaint under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea,
which lays out rules for the use of the world’s oceans. The treaty came into force in 1994 and has been ratified by both China and the Philippines, as well as 165 other states and the European Union.The treaty says a country has sovereignty over waters extending 12 nautical miles from its coast, and control over economic activities in waters on its continental shelf and up to 200 nautical miles from its coast, including fishing, mining, oil exploration and the construction of artificial islands.

The treaty sets out detailed rules for defining these zones, what to do when two nations’ zones overlap and how to resolve disputes.China’s nine-dash line includes waters beyond these zones, and Beijing has cited what it calls historical evidence to support it.The treaty does include exceptions for historic rights, but the Philippines says China’s claims in the South China Sea do not qualify.The Obama administration has backed the Philippines on this question, saying historic rights can apply only to bays or other coastal waters, not the high seas. But the United States has not ratified the treaty.

What does China say?

China has boycotted the international tribunal that was set up to hear the case.It says the panel of five judges and legal experts has no jurisdiction because the sovereignty of reefs, rocks and islands in the South China Sea is disputed
.The argument goes like this: If you don’t know what countries these specks of land belong to, you can’t use the treaty to draw territorial and economic zones in the waters around them. And the judges can’t decide whom the specks of land belong to because the Law of the Sea deals only with maritime disputes, not land disputes.

China also says it reached a deal with the Philippines years ago to settle disputes in the South China Sea through negotiations. That agreement, it says, prohibited the Philippines from taking the case to the tribunal.

Why is this case important?

In addition to China and the Philippines, five states — Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, Taiwan and Vietnam — claim parts of the South China Sea. Their differences sometimes escalate into skirmishes, and people are worried that an incident could erupt into a broader conflict.Tuesday’s ruling will be the first time an international tribunal has ruled on any of these disputes. It could set a precedent or establish principles for easing tensions. It could also alter the political dynamic in the region, restraining some countries while emboldening others.China probably has the most at stake. Since the case was filed, it has conducted enormous dredging operations to transform reefs into artificial islands with military runways and naval harbors, over the objections of countries with competing claims as well as those of the United States. The tribunal could declare some of this construction illegal, or it could leave the question unresolved.Either way, China’s response to the ruling will be seen as a test of what kind of country it is becoming — a global leader committed to international law and institutions, or a superpower willing to take unilateral action against its neighbors.

Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/11/world/asia/south-china-sea-philippines-hague.html

Shit could go down tomororw or China doesn't care and just ignore it (well, they announced already that they will ignore the ruling but i'm sure there will be verbal reactions in some kind or form). That this is years in the making. Could be huge!
 

Blablurn

Member
Leading up to the decision China kept saying that they don't care. I wonder if they do a 180 if Den Haag rules in favor of China.
 

Blablurn

Member
So what are the odds of China being pretty uncool about this and just doing stuff on those islands anyways?

they just did stuff on those islands. they built several buildings and lighttowers. supporting the international maritime traffic in the south chinese sea and showing their support for the transport of goods.
 

Sotha_Sil

Member
So what are the odds of China being pretty uncool about this and just doing stuff on those islands anyways?

Extremely likely. Rules are only rules if they can be enforced. Who is going to challenge China on this?

Certainly not the Philippines by themselves.
 

Blablurn

Member
Extremely likely. Rules are only rules if they can be enforced. Who is going to challenge China on this?

the phillipines unilateraly engaged that case but there are rumours that a third country from the west might be behind all this because they fear of getting dethroned as a global world power. and they might be interested in the ressources in the south chinese sea.
 
the phillipines unilateraly engaged that case but there are rumours that a third country from the west might be behind all this because they fear of getting dethroned as a global world power. and they might be interested in the ressources in the south chinese sea.

I believe this, china and Korea are Philippines biggest tourists economy...
 

Blablurn

Member
A commentary by Xinhua, Chinas State News Agency:

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2016-07/10/c_135502221.htm

MEXICO CITY, July 10 (Xinhua) -- The United States should stay away from the South China Sea issue and avoid repeating its history of military intervention and political manipulation in the Caribbean in the past century.

The Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) in The Hague will announce its award on Tuesday in an arbitration case filed unilaterally by the Philippines against China on disputes over the South China Sea.

Looking back at the drama, it's not difficult to see that the United States has played an important role in disturbing the once peaceful waters since it adopted a "pivot to Asia" strategy.

And it's not the first time for the nation to do so. Having been regarding Latin America as its backyard, the United States has never stopped making waves in the Caribbean.

Cuba is one of the biggest victims. The United States occupied the country during the 1898 American-Spanish War and forced it to sign a contract to indefinitely lease Guantanamo Bay, which later became the first overseas military base of the United States and has never been returned.

Later on, the United States dispatched troops to Cuba three times after the establishment of the republic in 1902, and has adopted a hostile attitude toward the country ever since the victory of the Cuban revolution in 1959.

After failing to topple Cuba's regime in April 1961 by sending over 1,500 mercenaries, the United States started imposing economic and financial blockade and trade embargo on Cuba, which have not been completely lifted as of today.

In 1903, the United States instigated Panama's independence from Colombia, and forced the new government to sign an unequal treaty on building the Panama Canal.

Over half a century later, in a bid to seize control over the canal, the George H.W. Bush administration sent an army of 26,000 to Panama on Dec 20, 1989 in the name of "protecting American lives there from political instability." The same reason had been used to justify the U.S. occupation of Haiti from 1915 to 1934.

In August 1926, U.S. Marines invaded Nicaragua to bolster the pro-American conservative government when a civil war torn the small central American country apart. While in April 1965, when a civil war broke out in the Dominican Republic and overturned a U.S.-installed government, the United States sent nearly 40,000 troops to "restore order" in the country.

The same tragedy also happened to Grenada, one of the smallest countries in the Caribbean. In October 1983, the Reagan administration sent 5,000 Marines to Grenada to topple its Communist regime. In little more than a week, the government was overthrown.

Throughout the 20th Century, the United States has been incessantly cruising its warships on the Caribbean waters, trying to assert its influence over the region.

Its interference that blocked the path of independent development for Caribbean countries, and resulted in long time of turmoil as well as social stagnation in some of the countries.

Obviously all the military operations, political interference and economic sanctions made by the United States are only for one purpose -- defending, if not wanting more, its interests in the region.

As former U.S. President Ronald Reagan once put it, "the Caribbean region is a vital strategic and commercial artery for the United States."

Since it began to enjoy a rapid rise of political eminence at the end of the 19th century, the United States has been driving wedges in the Caribbean countries so that it could gain dominance over the entire region.

And now it is using the same strategy in the Asia-Pacific, specially, the South China Sea.

Since a U.S. strategy shift in 2009 toward Asia-Pacific, tensions and disputes between countries in the South China Sea have been increasing dramatically.

Recently the situation has been worsened due to a string of provocative actions made by the U.S. Navy under the banner of "free navigation."

U.S. warplanes and warships have been patrolling dangerously close to Chinese territory, emboldening some nations, even though the region is thousands of miles away from the U.S. homeland.

It seems like a habitual behavior of the United States to boss around. However, the South China Sea is not the Caribbean and U.S. hegemony will not work there.

This is not only because China's claim of sovereignty over the islands in the South China Sea is legitimate, but also because China has always been a firm advocate for peace and prosperity in the region.

With regard to the current disputes in the South China Sea, China proposes a "dual-track" approach, namely peacefully and properly handling the disputes through direct talks between the parties involved and jointly maintaining peace and stability in the South China Sea with the members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations.

There has been peace and prosperity in the South China Sea for most of the time in past centuries and will prevail in the future unless outside forces come to interfere.

So the United States should stop treating the South China Sea as the next Caribbean and quit the habit of meddling in other countries' business.

Pretty straight forward...
 

Pachimari

Member
It's gonna be interesting yeah. There's talk about all the time in the Philippines. In fact it's a historic week for the Philippines no matter, but that's because multiple things are happening on their end.
 

random25

Member
So what are the odds of China being pretty uncool about this and just doing stuff on those islands anyways?

They ignored the arbitration since day 1. I'm sure they'll just dismiss it when it's against them. I'm pretty sure they'll be smug about it when they win it though.
 

Blablurn

Member
New report about the topic.

Quotable quotes on S. China Sea arbitration: tribunal's arbitration is unlawful



BEIJING, July 11 (Xinhua) -- Western media have hyped up the South China Sea issue for a long time, with reports full of prejudice and distortion.They have purposely created rumors, smeared China and deliberately overlooked voices of justice.

However, the truth is apparent. China has gained wide support from politicians, experts and scholars in the South China Sea arbitration unilaterally initiated by the administration of former Philippine President Benigno S. Aquino III.

They reached consensus that the so-called arbitration on the South China Sea is unreasonable and unlawful,
that the U.S. involvement hampers resolving the issue, and that China's proposal of dialogue is vital to the stability in Asia.

Makoto Taniguchi, former Japanese ambassador to UN

-- Even if the Philippines proposes the arbitration request to the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA), but its counterpart China does not participate in it, the tribunal should not hear the case. Unfortunately, the United States is backing the Philippines.

John Ross, well-known columnist in Britain, former deputy mayor of London

-- You can not have arbitration if one side says it does not participate, because arbitration is between two parties who want to participate.

This is particularly ridiculous when it comes to the United States because it does not adhere to a large number of international treaties.

This is ridiculous that the United States comes to the South China Sea about 8,000 km from the U.S. shore for political motives. It's deliberately trying to create problems.

Li Mingjiang, associate professor of S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies at Nanyang Technological University in Singapore

-- The core disputes in the South China Sea will still need to be resolved through negotiations. An international legal mechanism is unlikely to resolve these disputes, unless all the parties concerned are willing to take this approach.

The fact China does not participate in arbitration is entirely legal. International laws and even the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) allow countries not to participate. So there is really no disagreement, no dispute on that observation.

Zheng Yongnian, director of East Asian Institute at National University of Singapore

-- The U.S. navy, the strongest in the world, will go wherever it wishes.

There are hostile forces in the United States, and they work together with the Philippines to make the arbitration case.

The United States is not part of the UNCLOS yet, but China has been a part of it.

The Philippine leadership made a mistake and misjudgment.

China and Vietnam have successfully solved the border dispute issue and Beibu Gulf issue. The same principle can be applied in the South China Sea issue.

Juan Carlos Capunay Chavez, Peruvian ambassador to China

-- The base and beginning of any dialogue or negotiation is the bilateral dialogue, because definitely when you go through some bilateral negotiation there are many details the court does not know, which is not part of the problem.

Let's solve the Asian problems through Asian dialogue.

Masood Khalid, Pakistani ambassador to China

-- China advocates a peaceful neighborhood. The South China Sea dispute should be addressed by the sovereign states which are directly concerned through negotiation and peaceful means.

Catherine West, shadow secretary of state for Foreign Affairs of the British Labour Party

-- We need to have a grown-up approach to dialogue. We just need to see the Middle East to understand how hard it is once we go down a particular route to get back to normal life.

Source: http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2016-07/12/c_135505503.htm
 
The only way out of this is if the Philippines grow enough economically as to be a prickly thorn on China's side. Anything less is just the status quo. They can talk and talk but nothing will happen until they have a better navy and ships.
 

commedieu

Banned
We're the Phillipines not invited to put up a nato defense system?

The usa clearly support the Philippines on this one, right?
 

Qvoth

Member
so this court doesn't have the powers to empower their ruling? makes the whole thing pointless imo
new philippines president seems to be more pro china as well so the 2 countries will probably have some kind of agreement
 

Blablurn

Member
Spotlight: Long history of illegal land reclamation at sea by Philippines, Vietnam

For years, the Philippines and Vietnam have built infrastructures on islands and reefs or even artificial islands in the South China Sea, in an attempt to consolidate their illegal occupation, justify their claims for "sovereignty" or exclusive economic zones and continental shelves.

Facts speak louder than words. Xinhua correspondents have recently conducted a series of interviews and research to expose such illegal activities by the two nations.

More here: http://www.china.org.cn/world/Off_the_Wire/2016-07/12/content_38862266.htm
 

Davilmar

Member
I have a great fear of accidental escalation, whether military or economic, by both China and the Philippines. Both Duterte and Xi Jinping have flexed their muscles in bravado, and I hope nothing terrible comes from it. I still can't understand how the leadership in China can stand behind Xi. They would have to know that this would bring nothing but bad perceptions of China being as actor that simply disregards what they can't personally control.
 

orochi91

Member

The Vietnamese claim is pretty outrageous, lol
They would have to know that this would bring nothing but bad perceptions of China being as actor that simply disregards what they can't personally control.

China is a major world-power, and a regional super-power.

Countries that powerful tend to not give a shit about their neighbours or what external political entities think about them; national interests trump all other concerns.
 

Pancake Mix

Copied someone else's pancake recipe
pretty harsh and unneeded words considering chinas claims are based on historical facts.

It's uncalled for to make a blanket statement like that, sure, sorry.

But you're wrong about China having a leg to stand on in legitimately owning that dick they drew in the sea, and quoting Chinese propaganda solves nothing.
 

Blablurn

Member
I still can't understand how the leadership in China can stand behind Xi.

I can oboviously neither confirm or deny the following information but according to news reports in the last years, Xi made sure that the people behind him are folks he can trust. Others, who seemed otherwise, disappered or ended up in prison. That's just stuff I read on the internet. Please don't blame the messenger.
 
pretty harsh and unneeded words considering chinas claims are based on historical facts.

Based on what 'historical facts'? China, by all intents and purposes, probably has the weakest claim based on modern, geographical and current realities. Imean, just look at the map,for chrissake. The only true legitimate claim they have at the moment is that they have the biggest dick and they are waving it. The Philippines is just trying to buy time while they build up their economy before they can start throwing their weight around, and using alliances to their best advantage.
 

Simplet

Member
pretty harsh and unneeded words considering chinas claims are based on historical facts.

On what historical facts? They have historical facts proving that they own the high sea, thousands of miles away from any body of land that anyone recognize is theirs?

They can't even draw their own fucking claim on a map, and hav to resort to the “nine dash line”. That's some really compelling historical evidence.
 

bobbytkc

ADD New Gen Gamer
Historic assholes.

But to be serious, that's a disgusting amount of territory that China is claiming.


I don't know who is in the right, but it is not disgusting at all if historically they are the first to claim it before the Philippines. The decision of which nation a piece of land belongs to is not decided by the distance to their largest landmass. The borders between nations are drawn by history.

Philippines probably have the upper hand though, since they are the ones who requested the ruling in the first place.
 
I don't know who is in the right, but it is not disgusting at all if historically they are the first to claim it before the Philippines. The decision of which nation a piece of land belongs to is not decided by the distance to their largest landmass. The borders between nations are drawn by history.

Philippines probably have the upper hand though, since they are the ones who requested the ruling in the first place.


Does Italy get to claim the whole of the Mediterranean, too?
 

Simplet

Member
I just love listening to the Chinese radio:

"In other knews, China has had historical claims on the south China sea since time immemorial. These claims are as solid as iron, they are indisputable facts."

Well ok then
 

Quick

Banned
I don't know who is in the right, but it is not disgusting at all if historically they are the first to claim it before the Philippines. The decision of which nation a piece of land belongs to is not decided by the distance to their largest landmass. The borders between nations are drawn by history.

Philippines probably have the upper hand though, since they are the ones who requested the ruling in the first place.

You don't just draw a dick in the ocean just because of history.

If several countries are claiming parts of this Chinese ocean dick, then history alone shouldn't be the sole reason to draw said ocean dick.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom