What's new

South China Sea Forum

The moral of the story is, if your penis is not big enough, do not buy magnum sized condoms. You are aware that it was the Vietnamese and Phillippines who started island reclamation in SCS first? China has just recently began land reclamation. IT's just that big China can reclaim land 100x faster and more efficient than the Viet Congs and Pinoys.
The only solution the Viets and Pinoy have now is to cry to the international community. :enjoy:

Being the most powerful country in South China Sea Region, China has shown great restraint to the world for the past 20 years. China could have resort to force to evict foreign invaders from each and every her islands; China could have put more outposts on more reefs; China could have used force to stop Vietnam and Philippine from land reclamation. China did none of these, because China wants to be a "responsible big power". Did international community give a sh1t to what China sacrificed? Just look at the map of SCS, how many reefs have been occupied by the little countries like Vietnam since 1988?

Enough is enough! China will not back down, China can't afford to back down.
 
.
Being the most powerful country in South China Sea Region, China has shown great restraint to the world for the past 20 years. China could have resort to force to evict foreign invaders from each and every her islands; China could have put more outposts on more reefs; China could have used force to stop Vietnam and Philippine from land reclamation. China did none of these, because China wants to be a "responsible big power". Did international community give a sh1t to what China sacrificed? Just look at the map of SCS, how many reefs have been occupied by the little countries like Vietnam since 1988?

Enough is enough! China will not back down, China can't afford to back down.
China is learning that they need to do all those things you mentioned. Being a Yao Ming style country is not the way for people to take you seriously.
 
. .
.
Vietnam calls for responsible actions in East Sea
VNA THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 2016 - 20:08:00
ttxvn_20160225_Lehaibinh_1.jpg

Hanoi (VNA) – Vietnam calls on relevant sides to take responsible and constructive actions in maintaining peace and stability in the East Sea, said Foreign Ministry’s Spokesperson Le Hai Binh.

The spokesperson made the appeal on February 25 in reply to reporters’ queries on Vietnam’s response to China’s deployment of warplanes to Phu Lam (Woody) Island in Vietnam’s Hoang Sa (Paracel) archipelago and its construction of a high frequency radar facility on several features in Vietnam’s Truong Sa (Spratly) archipelago, as well as news released by the US media that the country may put mobile artillery weapons in the East Sea.

At the ministry’s regular press conference, Binh noted Vietnam’s hope that the parties will respect the UN Charter and international law, especially the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the East Sea (DOC).

“Vietnam has indisputable sovereignty over Hoang Sa and Truong Sa archipelagoes,” the Foreign Ministry’s spokesperson said.

The spokesman said China’s acts, regardless of objections and concerns raised by Vietnam and the international community, not only seriously violate Vietnam’s sovereignty and accelerate militarisation in the East Sea, but also threaten peace and stability in the region as well as maritime and aviation security, safety and freedom in the Sea.

“Vietnam strongly opposes to the actions that seriously infringed its sovereignty and demands China have responsible and constructive words and deeds in maintaining peace and stability in the region and the world in respect for international law,” Binh said.

Maintaining peace, stability, and maritime and aviation security and safety in the sea is the shared interest of all countries in and outside the region, Binh noted.

Asked what Vietnam’s viewpoint would be if it is suggested the country should join a patrol with the US and its allies, the diplomat said Vietnam has conducted normal activities in the region in line with the country’s law, and international law, particularly the 1982 UNCLOS.

The activities, which are performed by Vietnamese competent agencies, have always contributed to peace and stability in the region and the world at large.

Vietnam has repeatedly voiced its viewpoint of respecting innocent passage through the country’s territorial waters in tune with relevant rules stated in international law, especially the UNCLOS, he said.

Vietnam suggested countries make constructive and pragmatic contributions to peace and stability in the East Sea, and respect international law.

The country’s foreign policy of independence and self-reliance has contributed to keeping peace and stability in the region, and received high appraisals from countries in and outside the region, Binh said.

Regarding ongoing tensions in the East Sea, the spokesman said the recent developments in the region, especially in Hoang Sa and Truong Sa archipelagoes, show that the region’s status quo is being broken, and what is most worthy of worry is the militarisation of the East Sea.

According to him, the tensions would harm peace, stability, and maritime and aviation security and safety in the region.-VNA
 
.
screw your crying baby theory,is dis all youv got.come on show me where your country were when south china sea is called china sea.your country is a puppet of china since 982 AD and before that the north viet land is a part of our dynasties,and after that you were a colony kept changing masters.who the heck you think you are to against china and steal our islands,this is a crime which will make you all die.and who will you choose this time for papa helping me.the america?

Your ancestor recognized there is Jiaozhi Ocean, 交趾洋 Vietnamese Ocean. Chinese stolen our Island in 1956, 1974, 1988 with force. Chinese is invader there.

Nanhai 南海 doésn't mean china sea.
 
.
The moral of the story is, if your penis is not big enough, do not buy magnum sized condoms. You are aware that it was the Vietnamese and Phillippines who started island reclamation in SCS first? China has just recently began land reclamation. IT's just that big China can reclaim land 100x faster and more efficient than the Viet Congs and Pinoys.
The only solution the Viets and Pinoy have now is to cry to the international community. :enjoy:

Why do you have to ask? If you looked at the link with the graphic, you would have seen that on that particular website directly underneath the graphic it reads"
"Vietnam began construction of its airstrip on Spratly Island in 1976, making this the first runway in the Spratly island group. In 1978, the Philippines incorporated Thitu Island after airstrip construction had already begun. In 1983, Malaysia built a resort and airstrip atop Swallow Reef. The Nationalist Chinese government occupied Itu Aba in 1946, but did not begin constructing its airstrip until 2006, and construction finished in 2008. China is the most recent Spratly claimant to build an airstrip, which it began on Fiery Cross Reef in late 2014 after it reclaimed the former low-lying feature."

Reclamation of Fiery Cross Reef began in 2006, which coincides with the start of construction of the strip by RoC on Itu Aba, which is a natural island. At that time, Vietnam's demanded RoC cease building airstrips on the disputed Spratly archipelago. A Vietnamese Foreign Ministry spokesman warned that construction on Taiping Island, also known as Itu Aba (Malay for "What's that?"), would violate Vietnamese sovereignty and create a "negative impact" on peace, stability and regional cooperation. Taiping Island Airport is for military use only but, apparently [and rather remarkable if true], has no refueling facilities. If that is so, you could ferry F-16s or Mirage 2000 aircraft in from Taipei but you couldn't use them from there. To date, once every two months, a C-130 transport aircraft arrives from Taiwan island and provide personnel transportation and material supplies for the entire island.

Thitu Island is also a natural island. It's Rancudo Airfield is an unpaved, dirt surface with large, dirt aprons and is extremely worn. No major construction or engineering has been observed near this runway in recent years. The Thitu Island airstrip allows Manila to land C-130 Hercules cargo planes, BN-2 Islander unarmed Maritime patrol aircraft / Light transport aircraft (i.e. not the armed Defender version) and North American Rockwell OV-10 Bronco Light attack aircraft / Surveillance aircraft. The latter can be lightly armed (mg's, unguided rockets, small dumb bombs) for ground attack. PAF flies Broncos on search-and-rescue and COIN operations.

Spratly island is also a natural island. Truong Sa Airport is stricly for military use but the short landing strip can only accommodate small fixed-wing propeller aircraft such as unarmed PZL M28 maritime patrol aircraft and DHC-6 Twin Otter transport.

Swallow reef is an oceanic atoll. A coral atoll is a ring-shaped coral reef including a coral rim that encircles a lagoon partially or completely, sometimes with coral islands/cays on the rim. Swallow Reef had an original land area of approximately 6.2 hectares (15 acres), but with reclaimed land now covers 35 hectares (86 acres). Layang-Layang Airport. It serves a Royal Malaysian Navy naval station (Station Lima), a marine research facility called MARSAL (Marine Research Station Pulau Layang-Layang) and a 3-star diving resort. The airport is a dual-use airport, serving both military and civilian aircraft. Layang Layang Aerospace operates Nomad N22C aircraft while the Royal Malaysian Air Force operates C130 Hercules transport planes and CN-235 maritime patrol aircraft. These are all maintained on landbases, not on the island. Su-30 could use this strip, but it is qustionable whether the existing infrastructure can support them.

Fiery cross reef was a group of three reefs. During 2014 the PRC government began reclamation activities to construct a large artificial island to support an airstrip and seaport. This to rectify China's "distinct disadvantage" compared with other claimants in the Spratly Islands, in that it was the only claimant that did not have an island hosting an airfield.

220px-Fiery_Cross_Reef_LANDSAT_2000.jpg

Fiery cross reef (2000)

Suggest to read UNCLOS part 2, section 2 and part 8 for the difference between natural island, atol and reef etc.
UNCLOS - Table of Contents

An island is a naturally formed area of land, surrounded by water, which is above water at high tide. Ambiguity in the UNCLOS definition of an island is that it could mean islands formed by natural processes or islands composed of naturally occurring objects. If the second definition is correct, reclaimed land would be entitled to all the maritime zones of an island. But this expansive interpretation just does not hold water. The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties says that we must give treaty provisions their “ordinary meaning” while remaining mindful of their context, purpose and, if necessary, negotiating history

Let’s start with ordinary meaning. The New Oxford American Dictionary’s first entry for the verb ‘form’ defines it as to “bring together parts or combine to create (something).” So UNCLOS’ requirement that an island be naturally formed should mean that an island be created naturally.

It would not make sense to interpret “naturally formed” as a noun. We can see this is true by looking at other UNCLOS provisions. For example, Article 60 says that countries may “establish reasonable safety zones around … artificial islands” and that “[a]rtificial islands, installations and structures do not possess the status of islands.” UNCLOS does not define “artificial island” explicitly, but a definition is suggested by the fact that Article 60 differentiates artificial islands, installations, and structures. Installations and structures ordinarily include objects built of non-natural materials (like concrete and steel in an oil rig). By using “artificial islands” as a separate term, UNCLOS states that this is a different type of landmass, one that is made of natural objects (i.e. sand) and not man-made objects (i.e. steel).

If artificial islands are made of natural objects, it would not make sense for UNCLOS to define islands as a landmass also made of natural objects. The only solution, therefore, is for “naturally formed” to indicate the process by which an island is created.
...
scholars have agreed that artificially formed islands should not be granted maritime entitlements.
...
The China-Philippines arbitration implicates a region in which nearly all neighboring states have sovereign claims. But while there are a number of difficult legal and strategic issues for the Permanent Court of Arbitration to consider, the legal character of PRC-controlled reefs is not one of them. Here, if anywhere, a straightforward application of UNCLOS should prevail. No amount of land reclamation can change a reef into an island, nor entitle them to an island’s maritime zones.
What Makes an Island? Land Reclamation and the South China Sea Arbitration | Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative

Being the most powerful country in South China Sea Region, China has shown great restraint to the world for the past 20 years. China could have resort to force to evict foreign invaders from each and every her islands; China could have put more outposts on more reefs; China could have used force to stop Vietnam and Philippine from land reclamation. China did none of these, because China wants to be a "responsible big power". Did international community give a sh1t to what China sacrificed? Just look at the map of SCS, how many reefs have been occupied by the little countries like Vietnam since 1988?

Enough is enough! China will not back down, China can't afford to back down.
As a UN member, signatory to the UN Charter, PRC too shall act in accordance with the following Principles:
  1. The Organization is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members.
  2. All Members, in order to ensure to all of them the rights and benefits resulting from membership, shall fulfill in good faith the obligations assumed by them in accordance with the present Charter.
  3. All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered.
  4. All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.
  5. All Members shall give the United Nations every assistance in any action it takes in accordance with the present Charter, and shall refrain from giving assistance to any state against which the United Nations is taking preventive or enforcement action.
  6. The Organization shall ensure that states which are not Members of the United Nations act in accordance with these Principles so far as may be necessary for the maintenance of international peace and security.
  7. Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state or shall require the Members to submit such matters to settlement under the present Charter; but this principle shall not prejudice the application of enforcement measures under Chapter Vll.
 
.
As a UN member, signatory to the UN Charter, PRC too shall act in accordance with the following Principles:
  1. The Organization is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members.
  2. All Members, in order to ensure to all of them the rights and benefits resulting from membership, shall fulfill in good faith the obligations assumed by them in accordance with the present Charter.
  3. All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered.
  4. All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.
  5. All Members shall give the United Nations every assistance in any action it takes in accordance with the present Charter, and shall refrain from giving assistance to any state against which the United Nations is taking preventive or enforcement action.
  6. The Organization shall ensure that states which are not Members of the United Nations act in accordance with these Principles so far as may be necessary for the maintenance of international peace and security.
  7. Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state or shall require the Members to submit such matters to settlement under the present Charter; but this principle shall not prejudice the application of enforcement measures under Chapter Vll.

If you have been lecturing Vietnam and Philippine in the past 40 years on the same ground, when they were grabbing islands and reefs in SCS like no tomorrow, I would've just said you are an UN Charter Nerd. Now you are just being hypocritical.

SCS is the "Core National Interest" for China, and CPC is not about to give it up unless it wants to be overthrown by the people of China.
 
.
If you have been lecturing Vietnam and Philippine in the past 40 years on the same ground, when they were grabbing islands and reefs in SCS like no tomorrow, I would've just said you are an UN Charter Nerd. Now you are just being hypocritical.

SCS is the "Core National Interest" for China, and CPC is not about to give it up unless it wants to be overthrown by the people of China.

Sorry, as a 10 year old, I had other interests. Possibly, you weren't even born. But surely there were people back in 1975 who talked about this too. But.... we didn't have internet fora back then, did we?

Really, you should read this.
What Makes an Island? Land Reclamation and the South China Sea Arbitration | Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative
 
.
Sorry, as a 10 year old, I had other interests. Possibly, you weren't even born. But surely there were people back in 1975 who talked about this too. But.... we didn't have internet fora back then, did we?

Really, you should read this.
What Makes an Island? Land Reclamation and the South China Sea Arbitration | Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative

The internet has been around for the past quarter century, and you just discovered your newly found expertise on UN Charter these days? You know this is exactly what upset Chinese people, whenever China is involved in any disputes, it MUST be China that is at fault. China has always been under the scrutiny from the west, and has been always criticized no matter what she dose.

Just exactly what China should do to make others happy? Let its small neighbors to chew her alive? Divide herself up into pieces to satisfy the west? China may as well give a finger to everyone else and make Chinese people happy.
 
.
Certain facts:

1. Vietnam and the Philippines have been engaged in island build-up for over 30 years now. China is a late comer. If China's might and capabilities outsize theirs, that's their own problem. In every Vietnamese and Philippines move, we see a desire to further expand and build. The only thing is they do not have the capability. We won't stop just because they do not have the capability and capacity.

2. China (Taiwan) claims and construction work is to ensure freedom and safety of navigation in the SCS. This is so until the opposite is proven. If there is one country challenging SCS safety and security, it is the US, as historically been proven.

3. China's Taiping is an island (there is scientific and visual evidence, including two papers by the very professor (Schofield) who, now on the PH's Court team, says he did not mean that) with full entitlement status, including 200NM and CS, hence, PH's Arbitration is moot as eight of the 9 features they mentioned in their Memorial lay within the 200NM of Taiping Island.

4. China does not claim individual EEZs for every single island in Nansha; China claims 200NM and CS for the entire Nansha as an island group. Delimitation is to be made based on this and bilaterally. For delimitation and sovereignty are outside the jurisdiction of the UNCLOS.

5. The U-shaped line is not a solid line, there is a reason for that. Just China erased two lines (it was 11-dashed line) after delimitation with Vietnam (and one with covering Taiwan), it will erase the dashes as sovereignty issues are solved and delimitation agreements are signed between related parties. So, China will make sure: Sovereignty --> Delimitation ---> Law enforcement and exploration/exploitation activities. PH's Court case is illogical because it attempts to start from the last; sort of trying to put the cart before the horse. It will not work.

6. China's historic rights over the entire four island groups in SCS (not the entire water) cannot be denied and taken away. This is a core national interest enshrined in the Constitution and, in line with China's growing capabilities, it will be forcefully executed, if required. Outside actors' intervention will be ignored and brushed off.

@Chinese-Dragon , @xunzi , @Dungeness , @Jlaw , @sicsheep , @Nihonjin1051 et al.
 
Last edited:
.
Sorry, as a 10 year old, I had other interests. Possibly, you weren't even born. But surely there were people back in 1975 who talked about this too. But.... we didn't have internet fora back then, did we?

Really, you should read this.
What Makes an Island? Land Reclamation and the South China Sea Arbitration | Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative

I think you are missing the point, the reclamation is not about drawing territorial water or EEZ from that island or reef.

now this is Vietnamese West London Reef .

west_london_reef_afp.jpg




We only do it in way bigger scale.

fiery_cross_the_new_harbour_afp.jpg


and that is no more artificial than this :omghaha:

r
 
.
Can't do that, you see, since our philosohpy is not 'might makes right'


If that is your concern, proper channels are international court and diplomacy. Not artificial structures on shoals or reefs (around which you then claim a 12nm territorial zone and/or a 200nm EEZ in which China beliefs no warships may enter without persmission, although that is not the common understanding of rules pertaining to EEZ) and militarization of areas (port facilities, airfields, able to accommodate significant surface and air combattants, coupled to radars, some of which OTH).

As for doing the same as e.g. Vietnam, or others, this comparison just an example:
150730_airstrips.png

Airpower in the South China Sea | Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative

Evolution of Fiery cross reef since 2006

The moment J11, JH-7, H6, Y-8 etc and/or surface combattants start making appearances here, there is effectively control over the shipping lanes
Our philosophy on dispute is mutual respect of each other sovereignty and dispute shall be resolve through bilaeral negotiation which is the international norm.

The international court is not the proper channel to resolve territorial dispute. If that is the case, there would be no territorial dispute in the world. Our diplomatic channel continue to be open for talk; yet nobody wants to come to us to talk but engage in tit-for-tat, then we will accept that kind of engagements.

Like I said, we are the last to fortify our position because we sense you are backing these claimants to provoke our national security through the back channel support. It is within our international rights to defend our position. The size of islands does not matter. What matter is everyone does it and we are the last to do it. It shows our great restraint in the past.
 
.
Your ancestor recognized there is Jiaozhi Ocean, 交趾洋 Vietnamese Ocean. Chinese stolen our Island in 1956, 1974, 1988 with force. Chinese is invader there.

Nanhai 南海 doésn't mean china sea.
nonsense,those seas were belong to china in the winner meetings which the agreement was signed.
there were no vietnam as a country at that time.
and the 交趾 means a city in the han dynasty belong to chinese han.
jiaozhi ocean is wrong,it is jiaozhiwan means a gulf around jiaozhi city.
and also when jiaozhi is found there were no vietnam as a country too.
we give you people a name,give you language and help you against america,and you steal our islands in return
this is called shameless.
 
.
oh my god where's your evidence you people claim stuff which does not belong to your country your country is trying to catch up to the other superpowers which you're not in even in the same league as your country if you must know your only regional power and not as experience and strong as the others like Japan, Korea, or India. So make your nonsense claims to the rest of the Planet it's simply a big nation trying to take from its smaller less powerful neighbours and annoying the rest of the people in the neighbourhood
 
.
The internet has been around for the past quarter century, and you just discovered your newly found expertise on UN Charter these days? You know this is exactly what upset Chinese people, whenever China is involved in any disputes, it MUST be China that is at fault. China has always been under the scrutiny from the west, and has been always criticized no matter what she dose.

Just exactly what China should do to make others happy? Let its small neighbors to chew her alive? Divide herself up into pieces to satisfy the west? China may as well give a finger to everyone else and make Chinese people happy.
Balony. Don't put yourself or China in the victim role. The suggestion that I must be against China is based on nothing. I have nothing against China and - frankly - am far more concerned about Russia under Putin. G'day.

I think you are missing the point, the reclamation is not about drawing territorial water or EEZ from that island or reef.

now this is Vietnamese West London Reef .

west_london_reef_afp.jpg




We only do it in way bigger scale.

fiery_cross_the_new_harbour_afp.jpg


and that is no more artificial than this :omghaha:

r

We started out here with a discussion concerning HQ-9 onto the Paracels. We then looked at the different parts of that area, notable Woody Island. Discussion is now shifting to Spratleys and the whole issue of reclamation. The issue is not whether or not one can reclaim land or build structures. The issue is what you can derive from them e.g. rights e.g. where you can station weapons. A state can do so on its sovereign territory. But, what if sovereignty is disputed? UNLOCS links this sovereignty issue with islands. It has a clear definition of what are and what are not islands. Likewise, structures and articially formed land. From the latter do you cannot derive territorial waters or EEZ etc. Putting a 100-200km SAM on naturally formed Woody Island defeats the purpose of self defence, and is unproportional, because e.g. MANPADS or a 10-15km point defence SAM can provide air defence for Woody Island. The choice for the much londer range HQ-9 is clearly motivated by construction of articifial land about 68 km away from Woody Island. But that is not where China is sovereign.

I know perfectly well that legal status aside, having a naval and/or airbase ('unsinkable carrier') in an area allows for better monitoring and controlling (if necessary by force) an area. A large nation clearly has advanteges here over a small nation. Still, China has pledge itself to the UN, and by UN charter is bound to recognize all its neighbouring states as having equal rights. It is also bound to not resort to military solutions.

That is, of course, assuming that the member nation honors the international treaties it has entered into, knowlingly, willingly and voluntarily.

Our philosophy on dispute is mutual respect of each other sovereignty and dispute shall be resolve through bilaeral negotiation which is the international norm.

The international court is not the proper channel to resolve territorial dispute. If that is the case, there would be no territorial dispute in the world. Our diplomatic channel continue to be open for talk; yet nobody wants to come to us to talk but engage in tit-for-tat, then we will accept that kind of engagements.

Like I said, we are the last to fortify our position because we sense you are backing these claimants to provoke our national security through the back channel support. It is within our international rights to defend our position. The size of islands does not matter. What matter is everyone does it and we are the last to do it. It shows our great restraint in the past.
Indeed, it is not the size of the island that matters. What matters is whether it is an islands under the law i.e. naturally formed. A terraformed reef - whatever its size - is not recognized as such. No sovereignty claims can be derived from it. That includes self-defence.

As for the "everybody does it, so it is ok for us to do so" argument, that's a fine philosophy. If 'everybody' steals, it is therefor ok for you to do so (in spite of both the law and morals) . If everybody jumps of a cliff, so should you? The point here is of course that it is a fallacy that everybody does it.

Face up to it, it is all about - increasingly scarce - resources. But then again, that's what everybody has been blaming US for in relation to Middle East. So, just admit it is about recources and don't complain when others (Russia > on the pole, US > in the MidEast,) do so.

HAWAII is a naturally formed Island, part of the US. Where's the land reclamation?

The rest of the world (and I don't mean the US) just sees a game of landgrab in the SCS. Naturally, governments are concerned, for obvious reasons.
 
Last edited:
.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom