Chitchat Good summary on South China Sea Hague Ruling

[winners]

you are totally blind by your deep hatred of china and chinese.
the world is in its present situation is solely due to actions by the evil US Ass.

these are what the US give you :
the financial system - fiat US$ , Fed Reserve , fractional reserve banking system , ever increasing foreign and domestic debts
how come the garberbment of a so called powerful nation allows a private entity to control its money system ?
this is ok if US$ is not the world reserve currency. unfortunately it is.

oil and wars in middle east countries - who is the main actor involved ?

you think US is a benevolent country helping japan to recover after WW2 , giving aids to african countries in order
to improve the life the countries ?
japan is the largest (besides china) US debt holder. japan is willing to keep on acquiring US debt without any grumble.
not the case with china , and this worry the US.
after various helps from IMF , World Bank and what not , do you see improvement in life, even a little bit , of the africians ?
the sole purpose of the aids is for US to exploit the natural reserves.

US is just an evil empire ,doing everything and anything just to stay in power and control other countries.

Thanks for the long and winding summary. I can only conclude 2 things about you: either you are a Tiong yourself, or a converted Sinkie from Tiong origin.

Apart from Russia, tell me which MAJOR POWER today accepts what China is doing in the South China Sea? Just name me any MAJOR POWER who agrees.

 

[yellowarse]

Apart from Russia, tell me which MAJOR POWER today accepts what China is doing in the South China Sea? Just name me any MAJOR POWER who agrees.

What's your point?

Tell me, apart from the US, which MAJOR POWER today accepts what Israel is doing in Gaza and the West Bank?

Tell me, apart from the US (and its allies), which MAJOR POWER accepts what the US did in Iraq in the name of weapons of mass destruction?

Tell me, apart from Russia, which MAJOR POWER today accepts what Russia is doing in Ukraine?

My point: Big powers don't play by conventional rules.

 

[enterprise2]

What's your point?

Tell me, apart from the US, which MAJOR POWER today accepts what Israel is doing in Gaza and the West Bank?

Tell me, apart from the US (and its allies), which MAJOR POWER accepts what the US did in Iraq in the name of weapons of mass destruction?

Tell me, apart from Russia, which MAJOR POWER today accepts what Russia is doing in Ukraine?

My point: Big powers don't play by conventional rules.

At the end of the day, what end result u want? U want China to be dominant power in region or US? Me, I want US as they don't interfere and allow us to grow and prosper.

 

[yellowarse]

At the end of the day, what end result u want? U want China to be dominant power in region or US? Me, I want US as they don't interfere and allow us to grow and prosper.

It's not up to you or me or even the Singapore govt to say. Who are we? Best is to hedge our bets and make friends with the powers that be.

The big boys will work out their spheres of influence, and split the spoils. Has been so historically, still is the same today, and will be so in future. We don't even know whether the US will be a superpower 100 years from now. Up till 1850, China was the world's largest economy, followed by India, then Britain. See what happened to China and India?

 

[winners]

What's your point?

Tell me, apart from the US, which MAJOR POWER today accepts what Israel is doing in Gaza and the West Bank?

Tell me, apart from the US (and its allies), which MAJOR POWER accepts what the US did in Iraq in the name of weapons of mass destruction?

Tell me, apart from Russia, which MAJOR POWER today accepts what Russia is doing in Ukraine?

My point: Big powers don't play by conventional rules.

My point is very simple. I'll never trust Chinks and also Sinkies. The Chinese race will betray their own kind (for the sake of their own advantage and benefit) at the end of the day.

If the Chinks can be magnanimous and harmonious, there will be no more protests and illegal captures in Hongkong today. Enough said.

 

[winners]

At the end of the day, what end result u want? U want China to be dominant power in region or US? Me, I want US as they don't interfere and allow us to grow and prosper.

Those who believe that China can be a good guardian angel are apparently living in hegemony.

 

[scroobal]

You probably get the same comments from Singapore Indians about India Indians and likewise from Singapore Malays about Malaysia. In a way it is good as we certainly have advanced in many ways.

My sense is that China has learnt its lesson and will treat its immediate smaller neighbours better. It was a strategic error and I don't think even Asean including Singapore thought that the Philippines would go for arbitration.

It is also a signal to the US, that this neighbourhood can sort of look after itself. Remember it was the Philippines that threw out the Americans out of their strategic base in Asia - Subic Bay and Clark, Not only was it shock to the Americans it was a shock to political observers.

As to HK, you got to give it to the HongKongers - that lot will go down fighting if they have to.

My point is very simple. I'll never trust Chinks and also Sinkies. The Chinese race will betray their own kind (for the sake of their own advantage and benefit) at the end of the day.

If the Chinks can be magnanimous and harmonious, there will be no more protests and illegal captures in Hongkong today. Enough said.

 

[winners]

You probably get the same comments from Singapore Indians about India Indians and likewise from Singapore Malays about Malaysia. In a way it is good as we certainly have advanced in many ways.

My sense is that China has learnt its lesson and will treat its immediate smaller neighbours better. It was a strategic error and I don't think even Asean including Singapore thought that the Philippines would go for arbitration.

That zone will become a center of confrontation soon if China refuses to acknowledge their mistakes. Otherwise, Duterte can become their dog and accept whatever concession China will throw to the Philippines to resolve this conflict. What kind of bilateral talks can succeed if China had insisted that the tribunal's report be totally disregard in order to proceed with any bilateral talks. It's like saying: heads I win, tails you lose.

It is also a signal to the US, that this neighbourhood can sort of look after itself. Remember it was the Philippines that threw out the Americans out of their strategic base in Asia - Subic Bay and Clark, Not only was it shock to the Americans it was a shock to political observers.

I would say that the Philippines had made a grave mistake. China would not have been that daring if the American forces were still in Subic Bay today.

As to HK, you got to give it to the HongKongers - that lot will go down fighting if they have to.

The Chinks are fucking cunning in the sense that they gave Hongkongers 50 years of autonomy after the handover. That's because they must have thought that by that time, most of those born under the British rule would have already died and it'll be a piece of cake to formally take over and rule Hongkong as they would have like to.

.......................

 

[enterprise2]

It's not up to you or me or even the Singapore govt to say. Who are we? Best is to hedge our bets and make friends with the powers that be.

The big boys will work out their spheres of influence, and split the spoils. Has been so historically, still is the same today, and will be so in future. We don't even know whether the US will be a superpower 100 years from now. Up till 1850, China was the world's largest economy, followed by India, then Britain. See what happened to China and India?

For us we must unite behind our neighbors and US and international community. Never accept the Chinese nine dash line!

 

[winners]

For us we must unite behind our neighbors and US and international community. Never accept the Chinese nine dash line!

ASEAN will be disunited on this matter due to Cambodia and Laos, which have already been bought over by the Chinks. And now, they are even considering letting in Timor Leste (which is another country dependent on benefits from China) to join. It's a mistake to have allowed these 3rd world countries to join ASEAN. Eventually, it may disintegrate, just like the EU in future, due to the entry of inappropriate member countries as it expands.

 

[cuckoldoolittle]

Friday, July 15, 2016, 10:21
[h=1]UN International Court had no role in Philippines case[/h] By Wang Qingyun
The International Court of Justice rushed to dispel the myth that it was involved in the South China Sea arbitration case filed by the Philippines, just as the United Nations made a similar online clarification.
The ICJ, the UN's principal organ of justice, issued a notice on its website that it is "a totally distinct institution" from the Permanent Court of Arbitration, which offered secretarial assistance to the Arbitral Tribunal that ruled on the case. The ICJ said it "has had no involvement in" that case.
It pointed out that it has posted no information about the case on its website and said that anyone seeking such information must refer to the PCA's website.
On Wednesday, the UN said on its Sina Weibo micro blog that it "has nothing to do with" the PCA, though the ICJ is located in the Peace Palace in The Hague, as is the PCA.
Foreign Ministry spokesman LuKang said on Thursday that these clarifications "show there is no legitimacy or representativeness to how the temporary tribunal was composed and operated, as well as show that its so-called ruling has no authority or credibility at all, and is totally invalid and not binding.
"It seems that this also is the reason why after this illegal ruling came out, only three or four countries wishfully claimed that it was 'legally binding'," Lu said.
Zhao Jianwen, a researcher at the Institute of International Law of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, said the reason the UN and the ICJ made such statements is that they "want to stay clear" of the ruling in the arbitration case, which, as Zhao said quoting Vice-Foreign Minister Liu Zhenmin, might become "a notorious case".
Zhao said "All of the tribunal's expenses were paid by the Philippines, including its arbitrators' wages, and these experts' opinions are not neutral". Also, the tribunal has no substantive relation with the PCA, he added.
The only relation between them is that the PCA offered secretarial service to the tribunal and the tribunal was held in the PCA's hall, Zhao explained.
Zhao pointed out that the Arbitral Tribunal was a temporary one set up specially for proceeding the South China Sea case, and its work was "virtually done" once the ruling was issued.

http://www.chinadailyasia.com/nation/2016-07/15/content_15463455.html

 

[Force 136]

The 9 dash line was NOT a creation of the PRC,

Its'origins was the Republic of China under Chang Kai Shek. It was drawn in 1944 and submitted to the Allied powers at Yalta. USA implicitly recognised the 9 Dash Line when they asked China for permission to use the waters at the Spratleys just after the war.

The PRC inheirited the 9 Dash Line from the Nationalist KMT government. They did not bring up the issue until pressed by the actions of Malaysia and Vietnam. They are obliged to maintain borders dictated by their predecessors.

Similarly, if the KMT were to regain power in China, they would have to accept that Outer Mongolia was given independence by the CCP, although the KMT never recognised the giving up of all claims by the CCP on Mongolia.

Go back to history and Stop listening to rubbish from the West.

Thank you

 

[Semaj2357]

.......................

well said! come what may and at the end of the day, who would you want in your backyard - the yanks or the chinks? same for the honkies, (after the elder ones have passed on) between their colonial masters, who'd they want? the answer my friend, is blowing in the wind but the resultant grandstanding is like an ill wind that blows nobody any good...

 

[winners]

The 9 dash line was NOT a creation of the PRC,

Its'origins was the Republic of China under Chang Kai Shek. It was drawn in 1944 and submitted to the Allied powers at Yalta. USA implicitly recognised the 9 Dash Line when they asked China for permission to use the waters at the Spratleys just after the war.

The PRC inheirited the 9 Dash Line from the Nationalist KMT government. They did not bring up the issue until pressed by the actions of Malaysia and Vietnam. They are obliged to maintain borders dictated by their predecessors.

Credible sources? And even then, is China today ruled by the KMT? Isn't it for Taiwan to lay its claim instead? And until the day that the CCP administers and officially occupies Taiwan, only then can they justify that Taiwan is PRC.

 

[yellowarse]

A realistic assessment.

---

The Hague ruling: New great power contest over global norms

Angela Poh and Collin Koh For The Straits Times

The much anticipated award on the South China Sea(SCS) case filed by the Philippines against China was issued by the Arbitral Tribunal at The Hague on Tuesday. While most observers had expected Manila to prevail, the tribunal's rebuke of China still came as a surprise.

In particular, the ruling nullifies China's claims to the waters in the SCS based on historical rights and demarcated by its controversial nine-dash line. It also threw down the gauntlet on Beijing's behaviour in the SCS, including its island-building programme and the damage caused to the marine environment.

Passionate advocates of international law may hail the award as a significant step forward on the SCS disputes. However, reality will soon seep in after the initial euphoria dies down.

Beijing has repeatedly declared its intent to ignore the ruling, which it has characterised as "waste paper". A possible positive outcome will be if the ruling propels subsequent bilateral talks. But regional peace and stability can slide down the path of greater uncertainty if an angry China decides to adopt an even more assertive stance in the SCS, such as continuing or even enhancing its fortification and militarisation works on occupied features.

Beyond the near-term rhetoric and actions that the respective parties might undertake, the ruling could also have other far-ranging ramifications. This arbitration case would have prompted Beijing to reconsider its longer-term strategic position, especially as it strives towards what it considers as its "rightful place" in the world.

Manila's move back in January 2013 to launch arbitral proceedings as provided for under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (Unclos) put China on the defensive. Plausibly, nobody within China's circles of policy elite had expected a much smaller and weaker neighbour to take it to court. The passive-reactive Chinese stance towards the Philippines' legal action was reflected not just in Beijing's absolute refusal to partake in the proceedings, but also in its media overdrive to denounce the legitimacy of the arbitration as the date of the final award neared.

As the arbitration case proceeded, Beijing has in parallel gradually shifted its discourse and position on military activities in the exclusive economic zones (EEZs) of other countries. Under Unclos, a country's EEZ stretches 200 nautical miles from the coast and gives that country the sole right to exploit resources within the zone.

Beijing vehemently opposes American military activities in its EEZs. Yet, it has invoked legal interpretations of Unclos - including the rights of innocent and transit passages - when its own naval intelligence-gathering vessels prowled waters close to Japan's shores and sailed through the Miyako Strait leading to and from the distant Western Pacific waters. Despite China's interpretation of Unclos to serve its own strategic and operational purposes in the East China Sea, China seems to have found its legal expertise sorely lacking when it came to the SCS. That weakness has been magnified by the arbitration case.

For decades, the predominant focus of China's attempt to groom itself into a great power has been double-pronged, premised on accumulating economic and military power. This formula is a step ahead of the arms race between the Soviet Union and the US during the Cold War. The Soviet Union's failure to keep pace with the US in economic terms arguably led to its eventual collapse.

Beijing has shown determination not to follow in the Soviet Union's footsteps. However, having succeeded in building economic and military power, the Chinese elite now find themselves facing an enormous normative hurdle that they need to leap over to make progress in the great power game.

The United States, on its part, is determined to stay ahead. At last month's Shangri-La Dialogue, US Defence Secretary Ashton Carter spoke for the first time of a "principled security network", a new phrase he used to describe the US-led security network in the Asia-Pacific. The US, he said, "welcomes the emergence of a peaceful, stable and prosperous China that plays a responsible role in the region's principled security network". Beijing is not thrilled by this new rhetoric, seeing it as the latest attempt by the US to entrench its alliance structure in the region and diplomatically isolate China.

In the coming weeks, the US is also likely to step up its rhetoric by urging Beijing to abide by the tribunal's ruling.

From here on, the strategic rivalry between China and the US could plausibly take on a new character. After the first phase of military competition that dominated the Cold War scene and the second, post-Cold War phase of economic competition, we might now see the US and China entering a third phase of normative rivalry.

There are already signs of that, one of which was the announcement in March by China's Supreme Court that it was setting up its own international maritime judicial centre to handle territorial disputes. That was likely prompted by the SCS arbitral proceedings. It reveals China's realisation of the need to more actively shape global rules and norms.

On a more strategic level, China's recent "Asian Security Concept", which puts forth the argument that Asia's security issues should be resolved by Asians, also represents a stark contrast to the US vision of what should be the long-term security architecture in this region.

In the last few decades, decision makers and analysts worldwide have celebrated efforts to socialise China into the existing international norms and structures. It is becoming apparent, however, that Beijing is no longer content with being socialised. China may soon embark on a normative race with the US, and there will be significant policy implications should this occur.

At the regional level, it will be increasingly challenging for countries to manoeuvre between the US and China. Asean countries already have existing differences in their interpretations of key Unclos provisions. These disagreements could play into the hands of the US and China, which could further threaten Asean's unity.

There is also a possibility that the US and China will increasingly manipulate global norms and rules for their own agendas, especially in their respective attempts to outperform each other. That would severely undermine the core idea of global norms and rules being designed for the greater common good of the international community, instead of the parochial interests of great powers. The creeping of the US-China rivalry into this aspect could threaten international security, to no one's benefit.

Given that preserving international rule of law is pivotal for the survival and well-being of smaller states such as Singapore, this is an emerging phenomenon that we will have to monitor, instead of being fixated on the sensational cacophony surrounding the arbitration ruling.

---

• Angela Poh is a PhD candidate at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), Nanyang Technological University. Collin Koh is a Research Fellow at the Maritime Security Programme, RSIS.

 

[winners]

In my opinion, China and its leaders are shits. Given their government's wealth and large landmass, which they can't even control adequately, China should have instead look sincerely into building good and cordial relations with its neighbors without having to reciprocate in any kind or benefits. However, they go about brandishing their strength with threats and harassment, not to mention bribing those poorer nations to gain their oblivious support. Just analyze their communist methods of containment of Hongkong, as well as the suppression of Taiwan through political and trade implications, it can never gain respect from the world proper, except from its communist counterpart, Russia.

It will be a respected super power had it utilizes its supremacy correctly. However, their leaders and generally their population, are corrupted and totally obsessed with greed and power. They will always have the mentality that "we had been bullied by others for so many years, so it is now our turn to bully others". Fucking barbaric ideologies indeed.

 

[Force 136]

1958 Letter from Vietnam's Prime Minister Pham Van Dong to China's PM Zhou Enlai recognising China's ownership of the Paracels and the Spratleys. China gave up one of her islands to Vietnam.

The Viets later changed their minds - As usual, the Viets cannot be trusted.

 

[scroobal]

China invaded Vietnam in 1978 but were repulsed. Would you talk to your neighbour again if they burned down your front door and trashed your home.I will be surprised if you did. I will be even more surprised if you agreed to forget the matter and go back to the old days.

1958 Letter from Vietnam's Prime Minister Pham Van Dong to China's PM Zhou Enlai recognising China's ownership of the Paracels and the Spratleys. China gave up one of her islands to Vietnam.

The Viets later changed their minds - As usual, the Viets cannot be trusted.

 

[winnipegjets]

My sense is that China has learnt its lesson and will treat its immediate smaller neighbours better. It was a strategic error and I don't think even Asean including Singapore thought that the Philippines would go for arbitration.

China learned its lessons? How? They remained on the offensive. They continued to insists on their stance and shows no willingness to compromise.

It is also a signal to the US, that this neighbourhood can sort of look after itself. Remember it was the Philippines that threw out the Americans out of their strategic base in Asia - Subic Bay and Clark, Not only was it shock to the Americans it was a shock to political observers.

How? The Philippines now embrace the Amerricans; they have learned their lessons of being anti-American.
The territorial disputes have been there for decades. China decided that it is strong enough to forcefully takeover the dispute territories and the other parties can kpkb but China won't give a damn.

 

[Force 136]

Bach Long Vi Island - China surrendered all claims in return for Viet recognition of Paracels and Spratleys as belonging to China.

In 1887, a convention between China (Qing Dynasty) and France made Qing government ceded the island to French Indochina (Annam Protectorate).[5] However, this was not an acceptable result for China. In the contemporary published map of People's Republic of China and other nations, this island still remained a part of China(Goode's World Atlas, Rand McNally, 1933). Besides, some foreign scholars regarded this island had been China's territory at least to 1950.[6]

During the World War II, Japanese army forced the French out of Indochina and seized the island.

In 1949, the Chinese Communist won the Chinese Civil War against the Chiang Kai-shek's army.

In 1955 the People's Republic of China drove the Chiang Kai-shek's army away and seized the island.[4]

On January 16, 1957, China's government transferred the island to North Vietnam's government.[4] On that day, the Prime Minister of Vietnam signed Decree number 49/Ttg which stipulated that Bạch Long Vĩ island is a “Xã” (village) and belongs to Haiphong City.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B%E1%BA%A1ch_Long_V%C4%A9_island