The thing about this is that if only China didn't claim the area like a bully they are, there wouldn't be a big dispute in the first place. That area has been disputed by many countries a long time ago, but that area has remained "open", as in fishermen from the claimants can openly fish there without hostilities. So even if many are stating that they own the place, there's really no tension or aggression of this scale from the nearby countries.
-
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
- Thread starter Blablurn
- Start date
- Status
The international courts do not agree with you. This is precisely what the court ruling in Hague will be based on. Historical claims.
Pancake Mix
Copied someone else's pancake recipe
Greece and Italy actually controlled populated areas.
Control is the key. That China drew the dick through the waters of several other countries prior means absolutely nothing and they're only getting away with this because they're China. They don't actually have a leg to stand on.
it's not really open now, China has been harassing fishermen that are not their own
There's a dick joke to be made here, but I'll keep it to myself.
The ironic thing is that there has also been disputes with Italy, the United Kingdom, Spain and France over rocks in the Mediterranean:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graham_Island_(Sicily)#Dispute
Why would the UK, Spain and France claim sovereignty over such rocks? Based on historical claims on who landed on the rocks first, as that is the established rule. This is the same reason why the UK has sovereignty over islands throughout the world.
The ruling today will say at a baseline say that historical claims are very important, but they may assess certain historical claims as being unreliable, inaccurate or faulty.
Greece and Italy actually controlled populated areas.
Control is the key. That China drew the dick through the waters of several other countries prior means absolutely nothing and they're only getting away with this because they're China. They don't actually have a leg to stand on.
The british colonising north america also had no leg to stand on. But here we are. That's history for you. If China decides the strong arm their way and philipines loses. They will own the island. They are not going to do that because they are not really worth it though.
Yeah, that's what I'm saying. It's been disputed but open before China planted military ships in there to drive away the local fishermen.
Pancake Mix
Copied someone else's pancake recipe
I think you're misunderstanding what most of the "islands" here were. Nobody really landed on them, and every country and colonial power nearby probably thought they were theirs.
Control. That's a leg to stand on. China is claiming what have essentially been nothing but neutral fishing waters for a very long time.
The Chinese claims are based on historical landings and even Chinese artifacts on the rocks/islands. Is your claim that they are lying that they landed on them, or that they are not claiming they landed on them? They certainly are claiming that they landed on them. The claim for control over the seas in the area are derived from the claim for the islands/rocks in the area, since a country's territorial sea boundary extends from its land mass (including its islands).
Pancake Mix
Copied someone else's pancake recipe
China's claim on Scarborough Shoal is literally because of one point on an ancient map which was very likely in Central Vietnam, which China also has no right to. In fact, China has claimed that point to be in the Paracel Islands in the past. It means nothing, and China didn't control the area.
Also, got any (non-Chinese) receipts for any significant concentration of Chinese (and only Chinese for that matter) artifacts on the islands?
Those islands aren't actually China's, so they have no right to the waters. Unfortunately, China will ignore The Hague's decision.
yup, there are already Chinese ports, airfields, lighthouse on the disputed islands, no one is going to make them leave
I am not making an argument that their claim is correct, just that their claim is based on landings and Chinese artifacts.
You said I was misunderstanding the claim by making an analogy to the claims by the UK, Italy, Spain and France over Graham Island (which was based on landings on the rock).
I have no interest in arguing one side or the other, just that we understand what the claims are.
Well your analogy is still misleading, because China is not claming that the "islands" （since most of the actual bodies of land in the south China sea are not actually islands, since they are submerged during high tide）are theirs because they recently lqnded on it, they're claiming they are theirs because some Chinese people might have landed on them centuries ago, and then left them untouched for hundreds of years. Those are two very different types of claims.
titiklabingapat
Member
Chinese artifacts? You do know these things are barely islands, right?
WaterAstro
Member
inb4 China has "ancient artifacts" detailing their control over the entire world, the moon, and Mars.
chinadon'tcare.gif
chinadon'tcare.gif
Pancake Mix
Copied someone else's pancake recipe
The Philippines also presented maps dating as far back as the Ming Dynasty in China along with their thousands of pages. The documentation doesn't really favour China and we'll probably see that come through in the verdict here.
https://twitter.com/cnnphilippines/status/752748221529624577
https://twitter.com/cnnphilippines/status/752748221529624577
No, you are misunderstanding the claim. I think the analogy is correct because the Graham Island claim is based on historical landings.
The Chinese claim is that they had landed on the islands/rocks in the past and had continually exercised sovereignty over them. Now, we may dispute whether or not that is accurate factual accounting, but we should not misconstrue the claim.
Graham Island was also just a basalt rock. I have used the term "rocks/islands" often to acknowledge that they may just be rocks.
Pancake Mix
Copied someone else's pancake recipe
Again, you're misunderstanding, most of these are submerged at high tide...we're not talking about rocks.
titiklabingapat
Member
This claim wouldn't be so disingenuous if they were only claiming some parts of it. But the Chinese is claiming all of it, using historical reasons when that goes back centuries, or thousands of years. I find it hard to believe that there has been a continuous Chinese presence on these islands for how many long years they are claiming when even the Chinese themselves have had various empires and fiefdoms in their history. Not to mention the various polities, kingdoms and other political units geographically closer to the area that rose and fell during this time that no longer exist but are part of modern day nation states in the area. The current Chinese claim was literally drawn on the map and someone said 'these are ours'.
The claim that they had continous sovereignty over the area is completely self-defeating. The "closed door" was official policy for much of the qing dynasty, and after they abandonned that they were under the unequal treaties with the western powers, they had no capacity whatsoever to maintain sovereignty.
That goes with out saying, but that viewpoint is myopic. China would be incredibly stupid to openly dismiss and thumb their noses at their neighbors. That attitude will only further push its neighbors into the hands of the United States. If anything else, having more cooperation with disputing nations would go a long way to building good will, and further pushing its economic and military interests without the headaches of international bad will.
From what I have been gathering, Xi has made numerous moves to remove loyalists to both Hu Jintao and Jiang Zemin. That would further expand his influence over both the military and political apparatus of the Chinese Communist Party. I have nothing at all to blame you for. It is just hard to get good and reliable information out of China.
The actual display of control is actually not as relevant with regard to sovereignty under international law, the intention to be sovereign and the recognition of others states with regard to that sovereignty (including lack of protest) is more relevant (and of course on these points, I don't think they really fall in China's favor, in my opinion). The easy example would be Hong Kong--China continually displayed an intention to include it as sovereign territory and other nations recognized the claim, even when it was controlled by the UK. A more controversial example, is Taiwan, which is recognized by other nations as Chinese territory even though it is not controlled by China.
The same Permanent Court of Arbitration stated this in the Las Palmas case:
http://legal.un.org/riaa/cases/vol_II/829-871.pdf
Will you stop with the fucking countdown? We all have clocks.
Here is the press release and decision:
https://pca-cpa.org/en/news/pca-pre...-philippines-v-the-peoples-republic-of-china/
TLDR: The "islands" are rocks and are not capable of extending sovereignty.
https://pca-cpa.org/en/news/pca-pre...-philippines-v-the-peoples-republic-of-china/
TLDR: The "islands" are rocks and are not capable of extending sovereignty.
ruh oh!
And nothing changes.
MisterFalcon
Member
And the International Police will arrest the Chinese leadership if they try to do anything in la-la land.
nephilimdj
Member
How does the rock logic work for silly places like The Principality of Sealand?
edit on wiki says
edit on wiki says
MisterFalcon
Member
Sealand is a 100% artificial structure which probably means it's got even less ground for extending sovereignty then a bunch of rocks.
Going to dive into reading it but I worry this sets a bad precedent. Now China just needs to make them bigger than other existing islands. Once it does that, it can say there was no sovereignty there previously (as established internationally) and they were the first ones to step upon the newly built island.
It would be interesting to see how this plays out. With the current Philippine administration and the Chinese ambassador to the country getting all mushy in the background, I'm expecting some "joint venture" happening on those resources-rich areas because of this decision. Not that the Philippines have the firepower to even drive the trespassers away or that China respects these court rulings anyway.
And of course there's this "what would the US do now?" question.
And of course there's this "what would the US do now?" question.
Artificial islands don't count.
You act as if the US has ever needed UN approval to do anything. The answer is of course, nothing. They'll continue their freedom of navigation missions and nothing will change.
John Dunbar
correct about everything
it looks like malaysia is the only one with a somewhat reasonable claim, and even they are fucking over brunei (who are themselves very ambitious).
They have their own interest in this, obviously. But it's more on how the US will take a stand in this issue now that the ruling has been handed down. I don't doubt that they also are interested in the resources there, aside from their ties between the two Asian countries. If the decision favored China, they won't really do anything about it. But now that the decision favored the Philippines, we might see them get a little more involved than ever on this issue as it may affect their interests on the matter.
Kenshin001
Member
I love the Xinhua headline.
Lol. A global chorus! Chinese state media always comes across as so shrill and hysterical, like children having a temper tantrum.
Lol. A global chorus! Chinese state media always comes across as so shrill and hysterical, like children having a temper tantrum.
they are creative
Because pissing off their biggest trading partner is totally worth a few gas fields right? Even a minor conflict would send ripples through both country's economies.
I'm not saying that their only course of action is to go sinking those Chinese vessels out there. For all we know, they might be planning to be a part of sharing the pie, so to speak. That's why it would be interesting to see what they'll do because while China is their current biggest ally, they are also their biggest threat especially in their influence in the East Asian regions.
"#CHexit" is the top trend on Twitter. https://twitter.com/hashtag/CHexit?src=tren
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked