South China Sea Forum

[ahojunk]

Commentary: China-Vietnam maritime cooperation sets example for handling South China Sea disputes
Source: Xinhua 2016-08-26 22:01:00

BEIJING, Aug. 26 (Xinhua) -- Maritime cooperation between China and Vietnam has set an example for handling South China Sea disputes.

The coast guards of China and Vietnam on Friday held their first working meeting during which they signed a conference summary.

Friday's meeting is a key step in enhancing bilateral maritime cooperation between China and Vietnam, which, since 1992, have been negotiating the demarcation of territorial waters in the Beibu Gulf -- a half-closed bay surrounded by Chinese and Vietnamese territory and a traditional fishing area for the two countries.

Maritime cooperation has particularly been deepened since the two countries signed the Beibu Gulf Demarcation Agreement and the Beibu Gulf Fishery Cooperation Agreement in 2000.

China and Vietnam have also conducted joint patrols and joint oil exploration in Beibu Gulf in the past few years.

In December 2015, the two countries launched a joint inspection in which Chinese and Vietnamese experts have inspected the terrain and geological conditions outside the mouth of the Beibu Gulf.

Since the Beibu Gulf Fishery Cooperation Agreement took effect in 2000, by the end of 2013, China has handled more than 300 fishing disputes, rescued more than 440 fishing boats in distress, investigated several hundred cases such as maritime theft and smuggling, as well as repelled some illegal foreign fishing boats, according to China's Maritime Safety Administration.

Through joint inspection, China and Vietnam have established a platform for smooth communication, which has created a harmonious and stable environment for their fishing sectors and enhanced the mutual trust and exchanges between their maritime law enforcement departments.

The success story of maritime cooperation between China and Vietnam shows that both countries are committed to solving their maritime differences via cooperation instead of confrontation, which will produce win-win results for the two parties.

In fact, Beijing has been calling on related parties to peacefully solve territorial disputes in the South China Sea through direct negotiations.

Any act that is intended to illegally occupy Chinese territories using the influence of some outsiders or coercing international courts are doomed to failure.

In order to make the South China Sea a sea of peace, friendship and cooperation, China and members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations have been endeavoring to implement the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea, and striving for the signing of a full code of conduct in the waters as soon as possible. This is the correct path that related parties should take.

 

[cochine]

ast update 10:04 | 13/08/2016
0


ASEAN aims for East Sea code

VietNamNet Bridge – Foreign Affairs Deputy Minister Le Hoai Trung speaks to the press about the role of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) in resolving the simmering East Sea (South China Sea) dispute.

How is ASEAN handling the East Sea dispute so far, in your opinion?

ASEAN has reached a consensus on the East Sea dispute, one of which is that maintaining peace, stability and co-operation in the East Sea plays a key and inseparable role for peace, stability and co-operation in the whole Southeast Asia region.

The East Sea, therefore, is in the mutual interests of all ASEAN member nations and even of the international community, judging from its geographical strategic location for global transportation, the economy and security, both for countries inside and outside the region.

As a matter of fact, the East Sea is deemed by governments, researchers and the media as one of the places most significantly at risk of conflict, as there have been tensions concerning the international community.

And the second consensus of ASEAN regarding the principle to resolve the East Sea dispute is that all countries have to abide by international law, including the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) 1982. Particularly, parties must not resort to threat or use of force, but only dialogues and other peaceful means to resolve their disputes.

ASEAN and China have to effectively follow the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea (DOC), of which there are three key contents. Item number four is about peaceful dispute resolution principles, while numbers five and six, respectively, are about exercising self-restraint to avoid the escalation of disputes and further co-operation towards establishing a Code of Conduct (COC) in the East Sea.

ASEAN’s task is determining how to bring about measures that both ASEAN and China can carry out together to more effectively implement the DOC. The DOC is just a non-binding principle and ASEAN wants to negotiate with China to reach the COC, which is legally binding between signed parties. That would help to further sustain peace, stability and co-operation in the East Sea.

Has the work on the COC achieved any practical progress so far?

ASEAN nations really want to advance to the next stage of negotiations, but unfortunately, the COC so far is still at the consultation level.

The countries have exchanged their views on the new elements of a potential COC since last year, but ASEAN countries and Viet Nam in particular are hoping that all parties can further discuss a framework for the COC.

We also want to have a specific schedule - for example, trying to set the targets of what we can achieve in 2017 and a detailed working agenda on the COC. The exchange of views is a good start, but ASEAN is looking forward to taking one step closer to the COC.

Some ASEAN countries have expressed thoughts different to the rest of ASEAN regarding the East Sea dispute. Are such differences challenging the solidarity of ASEAN?

I have to state again that ASEAN considers the East Sea dispute a matter of common interest and agreed to find a peaceful solution to the dispute and to strengthen co-operation via a variety of forums and mechanisms in diplomacy, defence and maritime law enforcement co-operation, as well as the DOC and the COC.

However, it is true that some differences remain. ASEAN is an intergovernmental organisation and its members joined on a voluntary basis for the sake of their national interests. It is understandable that a country only participated in ASEAN when its interests matched those of the organisation. Yet when it became a member, it also agreed to uphold a common cause. This is not applied to ASEAN only, but to any other international organisation.

We should be reminded of how confrontations in Southeast Asia in the 60s and 70s have badly damaged the countries involved. ASEAN now is actually an opportunity to prevent such kind of tensions and conflicts from being repeated again.

A united and strong ASEAN is in the long-term interests of its partners. ASEAN is an element to promote regional peace, stability and co-operation, which will consequently be weakened if that element is undermined.

But ASEAN is also alike other international organisations like the United Nations or the European Union in terms of how its outside partners always want to pressure them when it comes to their interests and issues they care about.

If ASEAN is divided during this difficult period, some members will have to choose other partners.

The solidarity of ASEAN is what helps promote the position of each member country, and allows them to be more independent and have their own voice on issues with less dependence on the outside. A weakened ASEAN will force some members to seek new partners because they can’t rely on ASEAN for what it has initially brought to them any longer. The differences between the members will increase and there will be more risks of tensions and confrontations in the region.

ASEAN’s consensus principle is even more needed during times of differences because all member countries will get to discuss as a group rather than just in bilateral meetings.

But the bottom line here is that ASEAN members should have a long-term vision to see that a strong ASEAN is in their own interests.

As one ASEAN foreign minister said, we will all have to pay for what was not done right.

 

[ahojunk]

More drills between Russia and China, this time in the SCS.

--------
Russia-China South China Sea drills to be held on September 12-19
August 22, 2016 ALEXANDER KORABLINOV, RBTH
Cultural events will also be held within the framework of the drills.

Russia and China have agreed to hold their planned joint drills in the South China on September 12-19, Vladimir Matveyev, a spokesman for the Russian Navy’s Pacific Fleet told TASS on August 22. Sporting and cultural events will also be held within the framework of the drills, he added.

Matveyev said the exercises would focus on organized efforts to protect merchant ships in the South China Sea. There will also be landings on islands, he added.

In July, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Yang Yujun said the drills were “not directed against third countries.”

However, some Chinese analysts have interpreted Russia’s willingness to take part in the exercises as an endorsement of Chinese claims in South China Sea maritime territorial disputes.

Earlier in August, the Sydney Morning Herald reported that Australia is likely to have military assets in the South China Sea to gather vital intelligence on the Sino-Russian drills.

The paper cited an anonymous defense source as saying that assets were expected to be used to collect information.

Information from a Kommersant report was used in this article

 

[cochine]

Maritime security issues generate challenges, opportunities in Asia
An international symposium took place at Shangri-La Hotel in Jakarta, Indonesia, on August 22 to look into maritime security in Asia, along with challenges and opportunities for peace, stability and sustainability.

At the three panel discussions, scholars analysed current maritime security challenges, especially in the East Sea where China has ramped up activities threatening peace, security and stability in the region.

They underscored the need to comply with the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea so as to resolve sea-related security challenges, thereby helping maintain peace, stability and sustainable development.

Many opinions shared the view that as ASEAN is an important stakeholder in the East Sea issue, the bloc’s member nations should promote their cooperation and optimise such frameworks as the ASEAN Regional Forum and the ASEAN Defence Ministers’ Meeting.

They called on the regional countries to actively settle East Sea disputes through peaceful negotiations, which will also help ASEAN affirm its central role and growing stature in the world.

At the symposium, participants also talked about ASEAN cooperation in fisheries, disaster prevention, navigation and customs.

The event was held following The Hague tribunal’s ruling on the East Sea-related lawsuit filed by the Philippines against China.

Arif Havas Oegroseno, Indonesia’s Deputy Coordinating Minister for Maritime Affairs and Resources, told Vietnam News Agency that ASEAN nations which are involved in East Sea disputes need to take stronger actions by making clear commitments on conduct in the waters.

Sea-related matters are mentioned in legal documents, and countries who violate them can be sued if they are parties to commitments stated in international law on the sea, he added.

VNA

 

[hoangsa74]

Vietnam's Fishermen Stranded After Toxic Spill Destroys An Industry


The toxic spill that devastated the marine environment in four central Vietnamese provinces earlier this year has also ripped the livelihood from some 200,000 people – local fishermen and their families.

Most of these coastal areas were recently deemed to be safe for swimming, but at the moment authorities are still debating about how and where commercial fishing activities can resume.

The Ministry of Agriculture announced on August 27 it was looking at four options restricting the areas available for fishing. These ranged from a ban on fishing within 10 nautical miles of the coast along the entirety of the four provinces, a 20 nautical mile ban only in certain areas, or allowing the resumption of commercial fishing everywhere apart from three sites deemed to still be too polluted.

The ministry said it was also continuing to beef up spot checks of catches in other areas to test for any contamination of seafood. However, health authorities in the country are still warning people it is not safe to eat seafood from the central coast region. It’s estimated that total seafood catches have fallen by around 1,600 tons per month.

Formosa Ha Tinh Steel, the operator of the plant that was the source of the spill, has already paid the first half of a $500 million fine, with the balance due to be handed over in the coming weeks. Much of the money, in addition to paying for continued clean-up and monitoring of the affected areas, is meant to go to compensate fishermen and their families.

There has been little in the way of details about how exactly these funds will be dispersed, with local and provincial authorities tasked do draw up plans and submit them to the central government. There has been some mention of a portion of the funds be used to retrain fishermen for jobs in other industries.

This is going to be a difficult task to accomplish. These are communities and families that have been fishing for generations. Perhaps they can work in the steel mill? Time will tell how the fishing industry recovers, but the damage to the reputation of the quality of Vietnamese seafood may be irreparably damaged.

------------------------------------
http://www.forbes.com/sites/davisbr...oxic-spill-destroys-an-industry/#3848caf3a107


No more eez, no more fish. no more fishermen's presence at sea. this plays well into china's strategy.

 

[cochine]

Tue Aug 30, 2016 3:00am EDT

Philippines says China must recognize South China Sea ruling

A Philippine flag flutters from BRP Sierra Madre, a dilapidated Philippine Navy ship that has been aground since 1999 and became a Philippine military detachment on the disputed Second Thomas Shoal, part of the Spratly Islands, in the South China Sea March 29, 2014. Picture... REUTERS/Erik De Castro

China will be the "loser" if it does not recognize an international court ruling against its territorial claims in the South China Sea, Philippine Foreign Minister Perfecto Yasay said on Tuesday.

An arbitration court in The Hague infuriated China in July when it ruled that China had no historical title over the South China Sea and it had breached the Philippines' sovereign rights.

China has ignored the ruling that none of its claims in the disputed Spratly Islands entitled it to a 200-mile (320 km) exclusive economic zone. Its construction work on reefs there has alarmed other claimants, as well the United States and Japan.

"We are trying to make China understand especially when the dust settles that unless they respect and recognize the arbitral tribunal, they will be the losers at the end of that day on this matter," Yasay told a congressional hearing.

Prior to starting bilateral talks, the Philippines plans to seal a deal for China to allow Philippine fishermen to access the resource-rich waters, Yasay said.

China seized Scarborough Shoal in 2012, denying Philippine fishermen access, one of the factors that prompted Manila to seek arbitration.

"When we start formal negotiations or bilateral engagements with China, we will have to do it within the context of the arbitral decision. There are no buts or ifs insofar as our policy on this matter is concerned," Yasay said.

ALSO IN SOUTH CHINA SEA

• Philippines says sea dispute not led to shift in ties with China or U.S.
• Philippines' Duterte says talks with China on sea dispute 'within the year'
• Philippines gets first coastguard boat from Japan to boost security

 

[cochine]

You can call and remind them to honor international law .. but, what can you do if China don;t want to listen you? ...

Key item here for us is that: China is loser an arbitration court in The Hague

 

[cochine]

Legality is not a key issue for any "super power' ..... most important is who are "effectively control"... .

illegally is meaningless.

 

[bobsm]

27.08.2016 Author: Tony Cartalucci
US “International Court” Ruling on China Falls Short


A recent “international tribunal” ruling regarding China’s claims in the South China Sea was more than just anticlimactic – it was indicative of the United States’ waning influence as well as the waning legitimacy of the many international institutions it has used, abused, and thus undermined for decades.

The New York Times in an article titled, “Tribunal Rejects Beijing’s Claims in South China Sea,” would claim:

An international tribunal in The Hague delivered a sweeping rebuke on Tuesday of China’s behavior in the South China Sea, including its construction of artificial islands, and found that its expansive claim to sovereignty over the waters had no legal basis.

The landmark case, brought by the Philippines, was seen as an important crossroads in China’s rise as a global power and in its rivalry with the United States, and it could force Beijing to reconsider its assertive tactics in the region or risk being labeled an international outlaw. It was the first time the Chinese government had been summoned before the international justice system.

Despite the NYT’s claims that the case was “brought by the Philippines,” it was in fact headed by an American lawyer, Paul S. Reichler, of US-based law firm, Foley Hoag. Just like the court case itself, the apparent conflict in the South China Sea may be portrayed as being between China and its neighbors, but it is in reality a conflict cultivated by the US explicitly as a means of maintaining “primacy in Asia.”

Facing Threats to “US Primacy in Asia”

The corporate-financier funded and directed policy think tank, the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) published a paper titled, “Revising U.S. Grand Strategy Toward China,” penned by Robert Blackwill – a Bush-era administrator and lobbyist who has directly participated in Washington’s attempts to maintain hegemony over Asia.

Blackwill’s paper states clearly what interests the US has in Asia (emphasis added):

Because the American effort to ‘integrate’ China into the liberal international order has now generated new threats to U.S. primacy in Asia—and could result in a consequential challenge to American power globally—Washington needs a new grand strategy toward China that centers on balancing the rise of Chinese power rather than continuing to assist its ascendancy.

The CFR paper constitutes a US policymaker openly admitting that the US perceives itself as possessing and seeking to maintain “primacy in Asia,” primacy being defined by Merriam-Webster as, “the state of being most important or strongest.”

The notion that the United States, from an entire ocean away from Asia, should proclaim itself “the most important or strongest” nation in Asia is in itself every bit in reality a threat to intentional peace and stability as the US claims Chinese primacy in Asia would be.

The South China Sea “Conflict” as a Pretext

More specifically, Blackwill would mention the South China Sea conflict as the primary pretext with which to further tighten American control over an Asia the paper admits is slipping away.

The paper then enumerates a list of self-serving measures the US should take predicated on the alleged conflict, which include:

• Defense reform within the Armed Forces of the Philippines to develop a full range of defense capabilities that would enable the government to deter and prevent intrusions on or possible invasion of Philippine territory;
• Boost Indonesia’s role in joint exercises and expand its scope, symbolically indicative of Jakarta’s growing centrality to security in the Asia Pacific, and gear military aid, training, and joint exercises with Indonesia toward air-sea capabilities;
• Help Singapore upgrade its current air force capabilities from F-16s to F-35s;
• encourage Malaysia to fully participate in the Proliferation Security Initiative, which it agreed to join in April 2014, and promote more active Malaysian involvement in combined exercises, domain awareness architectures, and the like;
• Seek to expand the scope of activities during the annual U.S.-Vietnam naval exercises to include joint humanitarian assistance and disaster relief, and/or search and rescue exercises, and make more frequent stops at the port at Cam Ranh Bay in the short term;
• Establish strategic International Military Exchange Training (IMET) programs with Myanmar, with a focus on professionalizing the military, and continue to integrate the Myanmar military into, and
• Expand its participation in, joint international military exercises;
• Advocate substantial IMET expansion throughout Southeast Asia;
• Help build domestic democratic political capacity throughout the region.

It is clear that this sweeping military expansion the US proposes not only lends to the United States unwarranted influence over the military forces, governments, and very sovereignty of each respective Southeast Asian state, but includes the transparently self-serving requirement of purchasing immense amount of US weapons to threaten China with. In fact, Blackwill openly suggests Singapore’s F-16s be upgraded to the scandal-ridden, grossly overpriced F-35.

The paper, 70 pages in total, expounds in immense detail this, the latest chapter in Washington’s decades-long effort to encircle and contain China.

It is clear then why the US took the Philippines by the hand to the Hague for its court case against China.

An International Tribunal Not Internationally Recognized

While the US media attempted to stampede public opinion with the supposed gravity of the tribunal’s decision, it was met by silence worldwide.

China outright rejected the entire proceeding before the ruling was even read, while other nations in Southeast Asia have continued drawing closer still in economic, political, and military cooperation with China.

Thailand, the second largest economy in Southeast Asia’s ASEAN bloc, has recently announced its intentions to buy up to 100 VT-4 main battle tanks from China and has continued exploring the possibility of purchasing several Chinese-made diesel electric submarines. Many of the trains now running in Thailand are Chinese-made as will be new rail lines built across the country. Thailand has also begun conducting joint-military exercises with China to rebalance its fading relationship with the United States.

Thailand, along with other Southeast Asian nations have insisted that they have no stake in the South China Sea dispute, and have refused categorically to take sides in it despite pressure from each nation’s respective US ambassador. Beyond Asia, Europe too has refused to intervene, and failed to decisively recognize the tribunal’s recent ruling.

Reuters in its article, “Discord over South China Sea clouds Asia-Europe summit,” would report that:

A key summit between Asian and European leaders in Mongolia ended on Saturday without direct mention of the South China Sea dispute in its closing statement, with diplomats describing intense discord over the issue between Europe and Asia.

It would also add that:

On Friday, the European Union issued a statement noting China’s legal defeat but avoided direct reference to Beijing, reflecting discord among EU governments over how strongly to respond to the court ruling.

One must wonder then, just how “international” a tribunal is, whose ruling is not recognized internationally.

International Tribunal Serves US, Not Philippine Interests

Even in the Philippines, whose name the case was brought to the tribunal in, reactions were muted, with the newly elected president, Rodrigo Duterte, calling for calm in the aftermath of the ruling. The Financial Times in its article, “Duterte calls for calm as SE Asia grapples with sea ruling,” would state:
[President Duterte’s] call for peaceful talks instead, echoed across Southeast Asia, highlights the region’s difficult position following this week’s international tribunal ruling at The Hague. Several countries in the 10-member Association of Southeast Asian Nations have territorial quarrels with Beijing, but none want to spark an unwinnable war or alienate a superpower to which they are tied by aid, trade or cultural affinities.

In other words, the ruling and the expected confrontation the US had hoped to spark, benefits Southeast Asia in no shape, form, or way and despite the considerable influence the United States still holds over the Philippines, it is apparent that the will for peace, prosperity, and progress is more considerable still.

Indeed, according to Harvard University’s Atlas of Economic Complexity, the Philippines’ leading trade partner is China, with 26% of its exports and 19% of its imports accounted for amid the two nations’ economic ties. The United States on the other hand, accounts for only 12% of the Philippines exports, and 9% of all imports. It is upon Asia, by far, that the Philippines economy depends – an Asia enjoying peace and stability. And it is this peace and stability that is directly threatened by America’s openly declared plan to militarize the region and confront China.

It is clear that America’s closest allies in the region are disinterested in confronting China, and while the US emphasizes the need to confront Chinese “coercion,” it is clear that the United States has resorted to coercion itself to punish nations unwilling to help it uphold its “primacy in Asia.”

While the US is sure to resort to an array of punitive measures against the Philippines, as well as the rest of Southeast Asia for failing to enable its “primacy in Asia,” one thing is certain. An “international tribunal” the entire world fails to recognize is no longer “international.” The irrelevance of the US-backed tribunal is a harbinger of what’s to come for the “international order” itself that the US poses as head of.

One only hopes that China has paid careful attention to the brutal, bloody, and shameful spread of American hegemony, and its now ignominious retreat – and decides to take another path on its way toward global power – one that bypasses aspirations for global hegemony, and one that instead arrives at leading by example. For Southeast Asia’s part, ensuring their economies, societies, and armed forces remain strong and vigilant, can help guide China toward that destination peacefully and without temptation.

http://journal-neo.org/2016/08/27/us-international-court-ruling-on-china-falls-short/

 

[terranMarine]

When Vietnam threatened to file a U.N. arbitration claim against China in mid-2014 as maritime tensions flared, China responded by freezing credit lines for ongoing Vietnamese energy and infrastructure projects, forcing some projects into restructuring and leaving others stranded. China also choked off tourism, depriving Vietnam of its largest single tourist market. China's message was clear: the costs of challenging China’s maritime claims are literally too high for Vietnam to afford thus Vietnam decided not to file the claim at last minute. Now after witnessing the aftermath of the case filed by the "Philippines" which turned out the US was the mastermind behind all of this containment game, it has become clear to Vietnam the option of challenging China not only does it not achieve a thing (let alone a decisive victory) to start with the instigator also has to pay a huge price for such a disastrous political move (be it the 30 mln dollar fees covering the whole circus show or the economic blunder with the biggest trading nation). The prospect of filling another arbitration case by the Philippines or any other SEA countries who has territorial issues with the Dragon does not look all too promising.

 

[Yuyukangkang]

Legality is not a key issue for any "super power' ..... most important is who are "effectively control"... .

I agree ... de facto surpass de jure ..., we've been learn harshly about this things. That's why our gov tried to put hammer and anvil in Natuna, still far from enough tough.

 

[cochine]

When Vietnam threatened to file a U.N. arbitration claim against China in mid-2014 as maritime tensions flared, China responded by freezing credit lines for ongoing Vietnamese energy and infrastructure projects, forcing some projects into restructuring and leaving others stranded. China also choked off tourism, depriving Vietnam of its largest single tourist market. China's message was clear: the costs of challenging China’s maritime claims are literally too high for Vietnam to afford thus Vietnam decided not to file the claim at last minute. Now after witnessing the aftermath of the case filed by the "Philippines" which turned out the US was the mastermind behind all of this containment game, it has become clear to Vietnam the option of challenging China not only does it not achieve a thing (let alone a decisive victory) to start with the instigator also has to pay a huge price for such a disastrous political move (be it the 30 mln dollar fees covering the whole circus show or the economic blunder with the biggest trading nation). The prospect of filling another arbitration case by the Philippines or any other SEA countries who has territorial issues with the Dragon does not look all too promising.

its disclosed true mentality of China.

 

[terranMarine]

its disclosed true mentality of China.

you mad? don't be like the rest of the Viets writing few words. If you have something to share go ahead but don't be such a sad Viet only using verbal insults

 

[cochine]

you mad? don't be like the rest of the Viets writing few words. If you have something to share go ahead but don't be such a sad Viet only using verbal insults

telling the truth, not insults, we do know what is china's dream.

 

[terranMarine]

telling the truth, not insults, we do know what is china's dream.

It's good to know that you know what China's dream is, but do you know what Vietnam's dream is?