South China Sea Forum

[Zero_wing]

Well good luck for china being international law breaker

 

[Rechoice]

Hull sections of China Coast Guard‘s 1st 12000-tonne vessel being assembled at JNS：

You guys will see a lot of this monster in the SCS in a couple of years。

what you can masturbate yourselves with such fake toys. Philippine have do necessary counter measures to against China bully action. US army will stationer in Phil.

 

[Zero_wing]

The already did but its US Marines and the US National Guard Units and we are getting more and more assets now so in few years time we can meet chiense imperialist agression with some capacity

 

[levi_laufner]

Heh, "international court" with jurisdiction over what? What are they going to enforce their kangaroo decisions with?

Only monkeys get orgasms from it.

I mean we are talking about the UNCLOS here signed and ratified by every country in asia. I mean if we don't give any authority to this international treaty what is the point of International treaties in the first place?

It is always good to look for inescapable admission in a bias/one-sided article that revealed the truth.
The above line tell you that there are no precedent in international laws despite the repeated chanting of such.

So because there is no precedent suddenly nothing is wrong?

Whatever the "court" decides, China will just gesticulate with its finger.

But that would make their international image suffer, "great china not following international treaties". The people who made these treaties and laws did line up punishment for offenders.

 

[armchairPrivate]

But that would make their international image suffer, "great china not following international treaties". The people who made these treaties and laws did line up punishment for offenders.

What international treaty?

If you are talking about the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, (I have said it a thousand times) this treaty only governs the sea, not land. China is contesting the islands, shoals, reefs. Those are land, not water.

One has to apply some logical thinking to this matter, instead of saying those islands are closer to the Philippines and within its EEZ, so they belong to the Philippines. In this case, the EEZ arguments cannot be applied when land disputes are involved.

 

[Sanchez]

I mean we are talking about the UNCLOS here signed and ratified by every country in asia. I mean if we don't give any authority to this international treaty what is the point of International treaties in the first place?



So because there is no precedent suddenly nothing is wrong?


But that would make their international image suffer, "great china not following international treaties". The people who made these treaties and laws did line up punishment for offenders.

Chinese claim was long before the birth of the so called treaty while Phillis claim was recent long after the treay. Shall we give a dam#?

 

[JSCh]

I mean we are talking about the UNCLOS here signed and ratified by every country in asia. I mean if we don't give any authority to this international treaty what is the point of International treaties in the first place?

This is the declaration made by Philippine upon signing of the UNCLOS. FYI, Kalayaan islands is the Philippine given names for the islands in dispute.

http://www.un.org/Depts/los/convention_agreements/convention_declarations.htm#Philippines Understanding made upon signature (10 December 1982) and confirmed upon ratification

Philippines

Understanding made upon signature (10 December 1982) and confirmed upon ratification (8 May 1984) 8/ 9/

1. The signing of the Convention by the Government of the Republic of the Philippines shall not in any manner impair or prejudice the sovereign rights of the Republic of the Philippines under and arising from the Constitution of the Philippines.

2. Such signing shall not in any manner affect the sovereign rights of the Republic of the Philippines as successor of the United States of America, under and arising out of the Treaty of Paris between Spain and the United States of America of 10 December 1898, and the Treaty of Washington between the United States of America and Great Britain of 2 January 1930.

3. Such signing shall not diminish or in any manner affect the rights and obligations of the contracting parties under the Mutual Defence Treaty between the Philippines and the United States of America of 30 August 1951 and its related interpretative instruments; nor those under any other pertinent bilateral or multilateral treaty or agreement to which the Philippines is a party.

4. Such signing shall not in any manner impair or prejudice the sovereignty of the Republic of the Philippines over any territory over which it exercises sovereign authority, such as the Kalayaan Islands, and the waters appurtenant thereto.

5. The Convention shall not be construed as amending in any manner any pertinent laws and Presidential Decrees or Proclamation of the Republic of the Philippines; the Government of the Republic of the Philippines maintains and reserves the right and authority to make any amendments to such laws, decrees or proclamations pursuant to the provisions of the Philippines Constitution.

6. The provisions of the Convention on archipelagic passage through sea lanes do not nullify or impair the sovereignty of the Philippines as an archipelagic State over the sea lanes and do not deprive it of authority to enact legislation to protect its sovereignty, independence and security.

7. The concept of archipelagic waters is similar to the concept of internal waters under the Constitution of the Philippines, and removes straits connecting these waters with the economic zone or high sea from the rights of foreign vessels to transit passage for international navigation.

8. The agreement of the Republic of the Philippines to the submission for peaceful resolution, under any of the procedures provided in the Convention, of disputes under article 298 shall not be considered as a derogation of Philippines sovereignty.
​

​

 

[S10]

I mean we are talking about the UNCLOS here signed and ratified by every country in asia. I mean if we don't give any authority to this international treaty what is the point of International treaties in the first place?

When China signed the UNCLOS, it did not agree to arbitration by any UN tribunal. China explicitly stated that any such court has no jurisdiction, same as most countries that signed it. The world works on laws of the jungle, which means might makes right. If UN was so useful, Israel and US would have been sanctioned to death by now. Philippines will learn the hard way when they get slapped around.

 

[Maxtini]

What international treaty?

If you are talking about the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, (I have said it a thousand times) this treaty only governs the sea, not land. China is contesting the islands, shoals, reefs. Those are land, not water.

One has to apply some logical thinking to this matter, instead of saying those islands are closer to the Philippines and within its EEZ, so they belong to the Philippines. In this case, the EEZ arguments cannot be applied when land disputes are involved.

Since when did the arbitration concern about land? It is about the sea. The so called Nine-land dash is impossible to drawn even if all rocks, islands, and reefs belongs to China. UNCLOS explicitly stated that only island that could support human habitation deserve EEZ.

Philippines main island can support human habitation, so it deserves 200 nm EEZ, while those contested island don't deserve it. But China insisted it could by drawing Nine-Dash Line~ and hence the essence of the arbitration forwarded by Philippines, eschewing the problem of islands/reefs/rocks/ possession and instead focusing on the problematic nature of nine-dash line.

Here is the precedence set by ICJ in 2012 regarding Nicaragua vs Colombia, which is relevent to Philippines' case. The ICJ rule that, since Quitasueno and Serrana cannot support human life, it doesn't deserve EEZ but only 12 nm territorial zone surrounded by Nicaragua's EEZ 200 nm from mainland.
Given this precedence, it would be highly possible that the Permanent Court of Arbitration will also give similar ruling to the Philippines.

 

[Zero_wing]

the only one whos breaking consistently laws is america

Wow other false flagger

When China signed the UNCLOS, it did not agree to arbitration by any UN tribunal. China explicitly stated that any such court has no jurisdiction, same as most countries that signed it. The world works on laws of the jungle, which means might makes right. If UN was so useful, Israel and US would have been sanctioned to death by now. Philippines will learn the hard way when they get slapped around.

chinamen talk with no logic what so ever

 

[armchairPrivate]

Since when did the arbitration concern about land? It is about the sea. The so called Nine-land dash is impossible to drawn even if all rocks, islands, and reefs belongs to China. UNCLOS explicitly stated that only island that could support human habitation deserve EEZ.

Philippines main island can support human habitation, so it deserves 200 nm EEZ, while those contested island don't deserve it. But China insisted it could by drawing Nine-Dash Line~ and hence the essence of the arbitration forwarded by Philippines, eschewing the problem of islands/reefs/rocks/ possession and instead focusing on the problematic nature of nine-dash line.

Here is the precedence set by ICJ in 2012 regarding Nicaragua vs Colombia, which is relevent to Philippines' case. The ICJ rule that, since Quitasueno and Serrana cannot support human life, it doesn't deserve EEZ but only 12 nm territorial zone surrounded by Nicaragua's EEZ 200 nm from mainland.
Given this precedence, it would be highly possible that the Permanent Court of Arbitration will also give similar ruling to the Philippines.

Learn some law and practice logically thinking. It is good for you.
There is no law in this world a country or a person can claim purely water as territory unless there is land in that body of water.
When you own a tiny piece of land, then you can claim water territory and EEZ surrounding that land.
China is not claiming all body of water within the nine dash line. China is claiming the land within the nine dash line. When that claim is established, China can in turn claim the water surrounding those land (islands, shoal, etc).
China is NOT claiming all the water within the nine dash line.

Study. Go to school. It is good for you.

 

[Maxtini]

Learn some law and practice logically thinking. It is good for you.
There is no law in this world a country or a person can claim purely water as territory unless there is land in that body of water.
When you own a tiny piece of land, then you can claim water territory and EEZ surrounding that land.
China is not claiming all body of water within the nine dash line. China is claiming the land within the nine dash line. When that claim is established, China can in turn claim the water surrounding those land (islands, shoal, etc).
China is NOT claiming all the water within the nine dash line.

Study. Go to school. It is good for you.

"China is NOT claiming all the water within the nine dash line" ~That is the question the Philippines seek through arbitration~
If everything goes by UNCLOS and China is not claiming all the water within the nine dash line, the Philippines should have its EEZ 200 nm westward from its main islands regardless of who possess the rocks/island/reef in spratly (save 12nm territorial sea). But it is not the case unfortunately as China deter any possible exercise of juridiction of EEZ by the Philippines.

Please educate yourself about UNCLOS;
"REGIME OF ISLANDS
Article 121. Regime of islands

1. An island is a naturally formed area of land, surrounded by water, which is above water at high tide.

2. Except as provided for in paragraph 3, the territorial sea, the contiguous zone, the exclusive economic zone and the continental shelf of an island are determined in accordance with the provisions of this Convention applicable to other land territory.

3. Rocks which cannot sustain human habitation or economic life of their own shall have no exclusive economic zone or continental shelf."

Most of the reefs/shoal/ and island cannot sustain human habitation or economic life and most are under water at high tide. Only Itu-Aba Island (occupied by Taiwan) can, and only that island can have the EEZ.
Please refer to the case of Okinotorishima by Japan, which has been declared as "rocks" and dont deserve EEZ.

And because of that, china has been ambiguous to state what exactly the nine-line dash is. This is evident in numerous "stand-off" between China/Vietnam, China/Philippines, China/Indonesia, and China/Malaysia in which China act as if the nine-dash line is its EEZ.

Philippines seeks clarification through PCA (Permanent Court of Arbitration), That is the essence, Look at the word "maritime jurisdiction". It is not even talking about the islands/reefs/rocks.

Please take a look at the arbitration press release.
http://www.pca-cpa.org/showfile.asp?fil_id=2311

"The Philippines v. China arbitration was commenced on 22 January 2013 when the Philippines served China with a Notification and Statement of Claim “with respect to the dispute with China over the maritime jurisdiction of the Philippines in the West Philippine Sea.” On 19 February 2013, China presented the Philippines with a diplomatic note in which it described “the Position of China on the South China Sea issues,” and rejected and returned the Philippines’ Notification. "

As presented by Justice Antonio T. Carpi:
"The Philippines’ arbitration case against China is solely a maritime dispute and does not involve any territorial dispute. The Philippines is asking the tribunal if China’s 9-dashed lines can negate the Philippines’ EEZ as guaranteed under UNCLOS. The Philippines is also asking the tribunal if certain rocks above water at high tide, like Scarborough Shoal, generate a 200 NM EEZ or only a 12 NM territorial sea. The Philippines is further asking the tribunal if China can appropriate low-tide elevations (LTEs), like Mischief Reef and Subi Reef, within the Philippines’ EEZ. These disputes involve the interpretation or application of the provisions of UNCLOS.

The Philippines is not asking the tribunal to delimit by nautical measurements overlapping EEZs between China and the Philippines. The Philippines is also not asking the tribunal what country has sovereignty over an island, or rock above water at high tide, in the West Philippine Sea.

Under UNCLOS, every coastal state is entitled to a 200 NM EEZ, subject to boundary delimitation in case of overlapping EEZs with other coastal states. The EEZ is the area extending to 200 NM measured from the baselines of a coastal state. Under UNCLOS, EEZs must be drawn from baselines of the coast of a continental land or island capable of human habitation of its own. This basic requirement stems from the international law principle that the “land dominates the sea” – or to put it another way, areas in the seas and oceans can be claimed and measured only from land."

 

[Zero_wing]

Learn some law and practice logically thinking. It is good for you.
There is no law in this world a country or a person can claim purely water as territory unless there is land in that body of water.
When you own a tiny piece of land, then you can claim water territory and EEZ surrounding that land.
China is not claiming all body of water within the nine dash line. China is claiming the land within the nine dash line. When that claim is established, China can in turn claim the water surrounding those land (islands, shoal, etc).
China is NOT claiming all the water within the nine dash line.

Study. Go to school. It is good for you.

Says the stupid person

 

[Sergi]

Well I am waiting for the result

You don't need a crystal ball to tell that China will not accept the result. So the question is what purpose will it serve
1. Philippines gets international sympathy
2. It will put China in bad light and paint it as bully
3. Disrespect for International decision will unite the opposing parties.
4. And USA might want ti hatch a condition from it to control Chinese growth by controlling market and economy.
5. Japan's expansion in defence will go well with rest of the world.

So its Chinese lost both ways

 

[armchairPrivate]

Says the stupid person

Should you be on the cross like sweet baby jesus?