South China Sea Forum

[Soryu]

No, it is reality. Look again you troll, pic was taken at sundown. Here is another pic of our twin defence platforms in the SCS:

Keep post it bros, great pic. I want see what could China do with some big mouth here!
It's just fool troll, let he act for this thread more funny a bit with this China clown.

 

[WuMaoCleverbot]

Aquino alleges China harassed Philippine boats

Agence France-Presse
6:41 pm | Saturday, January 26th, 2013

MANILA, Philippines—President Benigno Aquino has accused China of harassing two Philippine fishing boats in disputed West Philippine Sea (South China Sea) waters, allegedly driving out one that had sheltered from rough seas.

Speaking on the sidelines of the World Economic Forum in Switzerland, Aquino said the two Scarborough Shoal incidents had led to Manila seeking United Nations arbitration this week over the territorial dispute.

Aquino, who did not say when the incidents occurred, said “Chinese vessels” approached to within nine meters (10 yards) of a Filipino fishing boat near the shoal.

“While they (Chinese vessels) were approaching, their horns were supposedly blaring at full blast, causing apprehension to our fishing vessel,” he said, according to a transcript released by the government on Saturday.

A second Filipino boat was driven out by Chinese vessels shortly after it took shelter near the shoal, he added.
“According to the affidavit (crew’s depositions), they were told to go back to the rough waters.”

The shoal, located closer to the Philippine island of Luzon than the Chinese mainland, has been a source of friction since April last year when Chinese vessels stopped the Philippine Navy from arresting alleged Chinese poachers.

Aquino, saying only that the incidents were the latest in a series of assertive Chinese actions in the area, stressed the Scarborough Shoal — which Manila calls “Bajo de Masinloc” and China calls “Huangyan island” — and its surrounding waters are part of the Philippines’ “exclusive economic zone”.

China claims most of the West Philippine Sea, including waters and islands close to the shores of its neighbours.
Foreign Secretary Albert del Rosario however this week said Manila had taken China to a UN tribunal to challenge its claim to most of the sea, including territory belonging to the archipelago, and would ask the arbitration panel to declare Chinese claims in the area invalid.

Aquino said he could not allow China to claim “effective control over Bajo de Masinloc by ordering our vessels out”, as this could encourage Beijing to move into the Philippine-claimed and allegedly resource-rich Reed Bank.

“We are not threatening anybody, but if we don’t stand up for our rights, who do we expect will be standing up for our rights?” Aquino said.

China’s embassy spokesmen could not be reached for comment Saturday.

Aquino alleges China harassed Philippine boats | Inquirer Global Nation


"Isole Dell' Indie, diuise in Filippine, Molucche, e della Sonda..."
created in the 1690s by Vincenzo Maria Coronelliin in Venice

Isole Dell' Indie, diuise in Filippine, Molucche, e della Sonda . . . - Barry Lawrence Ruderman Antique Maps Inc.

A 1690"s map showing Spratlys as part of the Philippines.

 

[WuMaoCleverbot]

Arbitration
SKETCHES By Ana Marie Pamintuan | Updated January 28, 2013 - 12:00am

People are asking whether the Philippine case has any chance of success. Perhaps the Aquino administration was inspired by the success of Bangladesh in taking its maritime dispute with Myanmar to the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS).

After 38 years of feuding with Myanmar, Bangladesh brought the case to the ITLOS in October 2009. On March 14 last year, the tribunal, voting 21 to 1, handed down its final verdict, which cannot be appealed: Bangladesh has an exclusive economic zone (EEZ) in the Bay of Bengal covering 111,000 square kilometers, plus an exclusive 12-mile territorial sea around St. Martin’s Island.

The Philippines, according to the DFA, also got tired of talking with the Chinese and getting nowhere.

Bangladesh is waiting for another ITLOS ruling, expected next year, in its dispute with India over the western part of the Bay of Bengal.

As far away as South America, where Peru has brought Chile to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague, the progress of the Philippine action is being watched.

The case filed by Peru two years ago involves moving national boundaries drawn in the sea and based on a continental shelf shared by the two countries. If this dispute can be resolved, our claim should be easier to settle.

The Philippines chose the UN arbitral tribunal over the ICJ, ITLOS and special arbitral tribunal.

Last Wednesday DFA officials briefed foreign ambassadors about the Philippine move. The diplomats mostly wanted to know if the decision of the arbitral tribunal would be binding on China. Yes, according to the DFA, although some neutral diplomats aren’t so sure if this is the case in matters involving China’s national security, for example.

A Q&A released by the DFA explained the goals of the case: “We hope that the arbitral tribunal will issue an award in accordance with international law that will direct China to respect our sovereign rights and jurisdiction over our EEZ, continental shelf, contiguous zone, and territorial sea over the West Philippine Sea, and to desist from undertaking unlawful acts that violate our rights.”

I’ve been told that the Philippine challenge is meant chiefly to clarify the country’s maritime entitlements and not to settle the territorial dispute. But winning the case will bolster our territorial claims, allow us to freely exploit all resources within our EEZ, and keep out intruders, whose EEZ we don’t encroach on or claim as our own.

All countries should welcome peaceful mechanisms, based on rules agreed upon by the international community, to settle such disputes. Armed conflict is costly; only the defense industry benefits from it.

Even China should support this mechanism, which it can tap to settle its maritime dispute with its neighbor Japan.

A news report from Davos, Switzerland last week said senior Chinese planning official Zhang Xiaoqiang had told the World Economic Forum that his country wanted to “build up more global development partnerships.”

Zhang said China would “continue to play an important role as a responsible developing country.”

Responsible players on the world stage should have no problem abiding by international rules.

As the dinner hosted by the Chinese for Basilio showed, the maritime dispute should not stop other aspects of friendly bilateral relations from moving on.

Arbitration | Opinion, News, The Philippine Star | philstar.com

P-Noy’s actions on Panatag based on law, sovereignty
GOTCHA By Jarius Bondoc | Updated January 28, 2013 - 12:00am

Tummy before sovereignty. That’s an emerging line against Philippine repulsion of China’s sea incursions. Tycoon Manny Pangilinan reissued his statement for joint economic use of marine resources. This, after President Noynoy Aquino decided to take the sovereignty issue to the United Nations arbitral tribunal.

Pangilinan says his is a practical and moral question: “Are you prepared to set aside, but not surrender, your claim of sovereignty over the area, so you could go on and develop the area jointly? Or should you stick to the moral position that this is ours, no matter what happens? In which case, quite likely, it will never be developed, at least not in our lifetime.”

Pangilinan is referring to the Recto (Reed) Bank west of Palawan, an oil reserve where Malacañang has allowed his firm to extract. China is claiming the entire South China (West Philippine) Sea, and has been chasing Filipino scientific and fishing vessels out of the area. Pangilinan is in preliminary talks for China’s offshore oil state firm jointly to mine his concession.

Aquino took the UN route last week due to China’s invasion of Panatag (Scarborough) Shoal, west of Zambales. Invoking a baseless nine-dash line map, China has been driving Filipino fishermen away from their traditional fishing grounds. Panatag is closer to Luzon than Recto is to Palawan.

The President explains his decision: “If we don’t do this approach then, what is the next step (in China’s seizure of Philippine reefs and shoals)? Is it Recto Bank next? What else? We’ve been, I think, very patient. We believe we’ve been complying with the request in the interest of maintaining good relations. But unfortunately, there has been no reciprocation. Hence, I am, by workings of the Constitution, and by the oath that I undertook, I swore to defend this country, and we are doing this under international law, in a peaceful manner.”

Aquino knows that the Baselines Law expressly declares Panatag as part of the national territory. The President is sworn to defend the national territory. The President does so either by going to war against the invader or bringing it to UN dispute settlement. He has chosen the peaceful route that is in fact preferred by international law. It is a wise decision. For, the Philippines can defeat China in the legal arena, but not (yet) in naval war in the South China Sea.

Recto Bank is within the Philippines’ 200-mile exclusive economic zone under the UN Law of the Sea. The Constitution deems the resources in the EEZ to belong to the State (read: Filipino people). It mandates the State to protect the marine wealth in the nation’s archipelagic waters, territorial sea, and EEZ, for the exclusive use of Filipinos.

Joint use has been China’s slogan for two decades about Panatag and Recto. Meaning, it wants 50-percent share in the resources within the Philippine EEZ. Yet it reserves exclusively to itself its own EEZ. In effect, China is telling the Philippines: “What is yours is mine, but what is mine is mine alone. If you disagree, then my Navy will stop you from enjoying your own resources.”

Must Filipinos repel China’s bullying? Some disagree, arguing that the hungry hordes cannot eat sovereignty. For them, sating the mortal tummy is nobler than securing the nation. Such line is so pathetically patay-gutom (desperate).

http://www.philstar.com/opinion/2013/01/28/901865/p-noys-actions-panatag-based-law-sovereignty

 

[Viet]

Spratlys (Vietnam) - landing on a defence platform, taking the sick to the hospital on a Spratly Island.

 

[Malaya]

East Sea tensions heat up as Philippines approaches UN tribunal

China stands to either lose the propaganda war or get embroiled in an awkward tussle neither party is likely to win as the Philippines prepares to ask that a UN tribunal intervene in the long-festering territorial dispute in the East Sea, analysts say.

Vietnam, another claimant to part of the potentially resource-rich East Sea (internationally known as the South China Sea), should wait for the outcome of the Philippines' move before deciding if it would follow suit, they say.

“If I were Vietnam I would wait to see how this plays out – China's reaction may be fierce, or the tribunal may not accept the case, or the effort may be futile,” said Mark Valencia, a Hawaii-based expert on the East Sea dispute.

Manila will ask a tribunal of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), to which both China and the Philippines are signatories, to order a halt to China's activities that the Philippines says violates its sovereignty, Reuters reported Wednesday (January 23).

During the last two years, Vietnam and the Philippines have accused China of wanton aggression in staking out its claims in the area, which is thought to hold vast untapped reserves of oil and natural gas. The area also straddles key shipping lanes through which more than half the globe’s oil tanker traffic passes.

China and four members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) – Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia and Brunei – are parties to sovereignty disputes over the East Sea.

China brazenly claims the largest area, covering most of the sea’s 1.7 million square kilometers.

Though this has been emphatically rejected by the other claimants and independent experts, analysts warn that Beijing is unlikely to back down from its expansive claims in the region, stretching from the eastern Himalayas to the East Sea.

Manila says the Chinese stance led to a standoff last year over rich fishing grounds around the Scarborough Shoal, a formation much closer to the Philippine coast than to China’s shores, AFP reported Tuesday.

The Philippines demands in its submission that China “desist from unlawful activities that violate the sovereign rights and jurisdiction of the Philippines under the 1982 UNCLOS.”

China hit back Wednesday, with Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei saying the Philippines move would only worsen the status quo. He also accused Manila of “occupying some of China's islands in the South China Sea,” according to Reuters.

Under international law, China is entitled to opt out of compulsory arbitration on sovereignty or boundary delimitations. It could simply say that it is not going to participate in arbitration; if it agreed to arbitration, then the decision of the tribunal would be binding.

“If the UNCLOS Arbitral Tribunal took up the case – which it can do with or without China's participation – and ruled favorably for the Philippines, this would undermine the legal basis of China's claim to ‘indisputable sovereignty’ over the entire South China Sea,” Carl Thayer, a maritime expert at the University of New South Wales in Australia, said.

“A legal decision of this nature would carry enormous normative and moral weight with the international community. It would provide legal grounds for any action the Philippines felt necessary to defend its sovereignty.

“China has thirty days to respond and name its representative to the tribunal. If it does not respond, the chairman of the International Tribunal on the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) has the authority to appoint four of the five members of the tribunal.”

While the UN tribunal would have no mandate to enforce its decisions, analysts said it could be at least a propaganda victory for the Philippines, especially if China plays this badly, leaving Beijing in between a rock and a hard place.

“If [China] decides to opt out of arbitration, it loses the PR war, but if it decides to respond, then it would get into a very messy process in which no one might be a winner,” Sam Bateman, a maritime expert at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies in Singapore, said.

The move by the Philippines would be “a bold political gesture anticipating a negative response from China that would lead to a further round of criticisms of China's lack of cooperation and assertiveness,” he said.

Tough tone

The Philippines is a staunch ally of the US and so is Japan, which has also been caught up in a territorial dispute with China in the East China Sea.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, meeting last week with Foreign Minister Fumio Kishida of Japan's new right-leaning government, issued a veiled warning over the islands known as the Senkakus in Japanese and the Diaoyu in Chinese, AFP reported.

The US opposes "any unilateral actions that would seek to undermine Japanese administration" of the largely uninhabited islands, Clinton was quoted by the newswire as saying in response to growing accounts of Chinese ships and planes in the area.

China said it was "strongly dissatisfied with and resolutely opposes" Clinton's remarks and the state-run Xinhua news agency said that Obama "failed to significantly enhance strategic trust" between the countries in his first term, AFP said.

Since President Barrack Obama announced a “pivot” toward the economically resilient Asia-Pacific region in late 2011, the US has maintained it will play a neutral role in both the East China Sea and South China Sea disputes.

But critics say the US “rebalance” toward Asia in foreign and defense policy has seen Obama starting his second term with his administration adopting a tough tone on China over the East China Sea dispute. The “pivot” has already aggravated the South China Sea dispute and increased tensions between the two superpowers, analysts say.

The analysts expected no major shift in foreign policies during Obama’s second term – that appears to be as much military strategy as political. China will remain a major US concern – and likewise for China, they said.

“In 2013, the two new teams, in Washington and Beijing, will

test each other's nerves and muscles,” said Alexander Vuving, a security analyst at the Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies in Hawaii.

“One thing is for sure, in my view, that the US will go ahead

with its ‘rebalance’ to Asia. Also, I think [Chinese party chief] Xi Jinping will not be a dove, either,” Vuving said.

“So tensions in the South China Sea will continue to increase. But much will depend on how things go in terms of economics in both China and the US.”

Vietnam latest news - Thanh Nien Daily | East Sea tensions heat up as Philippines approaches UN tribunal

 

[Fsjal]

Will there be peace in the region?

 

[NiceGuy]

Will there be peace in the region?

If U want Peace, then prepare for War

 

[Soryu]

Will there be peace in the region?

Not with your fool! (and nothing with your troll)

Maps at Sparty Islands:

 

[Malaya]

Aquino stands by UN arbitration of dispute with China

DAVOS, Switzerland—President Benigno Aquino stood firm on the Philippines’ decision to seek United Nations arbitration of its territorial dispute with China, saying this action was backed by a consensus among the three branches of government.
In a chat with Philippine journalists on the sidelines of the World Economic Forum annual meeting, Aquino shrugged off concerns that taking the arbitration route would complicate gas exploration activities in the West Philippine Sea, as the Manila government calls part of the South China Sea that it claims to be part of Philippine territory. Aquino was specifically asked about the concern aired by businessman Manuel V. Pangilinan, chair of Philex Petroleum Corp. which is in talks with the state-owned China National Offshore Oil Corp. (CNOOC) on Recto Bank gas exploration subject to a framework acceptable to both the Philippine and Chinese governments.

In the first place, Aquino said, the partnership offer of CNOOC to Pangilinan’s group was still at a very early stage.
Secondly, the President said, the Philippines had justifiable reasons to take the arbitration route given recurring incidents of intrusion by Chinese vessels into Philippine seas. The President cited two separate maritime incidents in Bajo de Masinloc. ‘
Based on affidavits shown to him, the President said, two Chinese vessels were just about 10 yards away from the demarcation line. “And when you’re talking about ships, they don’t have brakes, right? Ten yards is just too close. While they were approaching, their horns were at full blast,” Mr. Aquino said.

On incident No. 2, the allegation of the affiant was that while sheltering inside Bajo de Masinloc, they were “observed,” and eventually approached and ordered out of the shoal when they were taking shelter from rough waters, the President said.
Citing the affidavit, the President said the Filipino vessels were told to go back to the rough waters even as Bajo de Masinloc, under UNCLOS (United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea), was part of of the country’s exclusive economic zone .
“So I think the record is very clear. From the incident in Bajo de Masinloc, we have tried to de-escalate the situation. We have tried to adhere to all of their request…. And instead of a de-escalation, there seems to be an escalation on their end,” the President said.

“With all due respect to Mr. Pangilinan, what am I supposed to do? I consulted the leadership of both chambers of Houses, both chambers, to include the minority leadership of both and (they were) okay,” he said.
Before taking this route, Mr. Aquino said the Executive branch invited the judiciary, which unfortunately was in an en banc session on the day a meeting was called on the issue. The President said even past presidents like Fidel V. Ramos and Joseph Estrada were invited to share their experiences. “So we brought the matter before them and there was unanimity. I won’t exaggerate, but really, nobody objected to going into this arbitration mode. I think, the choice is very, very clear,” Aquino said.
One option for the Philippines is to let the status quo remain whereas China was claiming effective control over Bajo de Masinloc and ordering Philippine vessels out.

“And if we don’t do this approach then, what is the next step? Is it Reed Bank next or Recto Bank? What else? We’ve been, I think, very patient. We believe we’ve been complying with the request in the interest of maintaining good relations but unfortunately, there has been no reciprocation. Hence, I am, by workings of the Constitution, and by the oath that I undertook, I swore to defend this country, and we are doing this under international law, in a peaceful manner” he said.
Aquino said the Philippines was not trying to threaten anybody. “But if we don’t stand up for our rights, who we do expect will be standing up for our rights?” he said.

But Pangilinan, in a statement, aired what he said was a very practical and moral question: “Are you prepared to set aside, but not surrender, your claim on sovereignty over the area, so you could go on and develop the area jointly or should you stick to the moral position that this is ours and no matter what happens this is ours? In which case, quite likely, it will never be developed, at least not in our lifetime.”

Aquino stands by UN arbitration of dispute with China | Inquirer Global Nation

 

[Malaya]

Let all the peace-loving Filipinos and Asians pray for a truly peaceful and fair resolution of the case in the U.N. In the meantime, China must refrain from aggravating the issue by restraining all its military adventurism.

 

[Fsjal]

If U want Peace, then prepare for War

Are you a warmonger?

Would you let your soldiers die just because of an island?

Let all the peace-loving Filipinos and Asians pray for a truly peaceful and fair resolution of the case in the U.N. In the meantime, China must refrain from aggravating the issue by restraining all its military adventurism.

If China was to stop, should'nt we do the same, including Vietnam and Malaysia.

 

[NiceGuy]

Are you a warmonger?

Would you let your soldiers die just because of an island?

U dont know abt that motto ?its the only way to bring peace back to the region

Si vis pacem, para bellum is a Latin adage translated as, "If you wish for peace, prepare for war" (usually interpreted as meaning peace through strength—a strong society being less likely to be attacked by enemies). The adage was adapted from a statement found in Book 3 of Latin author Publius Flavius Vegetius Renatus's tract De Re Militari (4th- or 5th-century),[1] although the idea it conveys is also present in earlier works, such as Plato's Nomoi (Laws)
Si vis pacem, para bellum - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

. If China was to stop, should'nt we do the same, including Vietnam and Malaysia

but first of all,can u speak Filipinos?

 

[Malaya]

If China was to stop, should'nt we do the same, including Vietnam and Malaysia.

You think they will?

U dont know abt that motto ?its the only way to bring peace back to the region
but first of all,can u speak Filipinos?

He's not a Filipino

 

[Malaya]

Legal route to resolve South China Sea dispute a political minefield

Simon Tay says the Philippines' decision to take its South China Sea island dispute with China to UN arbitration will set in motion a legal process that, unless carefully managed, could lead to political fallout

The legal process begun by the Philippines to challenge claims by China to the South China Sea surprised the region. International arbitration is allowed under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, but the move adds urgency and new elements to a trying political scene.

Relations between the two nations over competing claims have been tense in the past year, with vessels standing off for months near Scarborough Shoal. The issue also affected Asean unity last year, when then chairman Cambodia could find no compromise wording for an official statement.

What does this new move portend? At first glance, it is a legitimate step, supported by the various calls for parties to use international law, rather than force. China has accepted the UN convention and now faces a difficult choice.

Arbitration for this sea treaty is compulsory and a timeline will unfold in the coming weeks in which the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea will require arbitrators to be nominated and a schedule set out for the case. If Beijing refuses to participate, these proceedings can still go ahead without it.

If China does take part, it can challenge the questions that can be addressed. The scope of jurisdiction in this particular provision is limited and cannot include issues like sovereignty over the rocks.

Even if China participates and loses, it can refuse to comply and there will be no penalties or police to enforce the ruling. Global public opinion could, however, be affected. Manila's legal move must therefore be seen in a broader political context.

Some Chinese will suspect a conspiracy or concert against them. The United States' rebalancing to the region has co- incided with the resurgence of the long-standing disputes in the South China Sea. Philippine President Benigno Aquino has invited American forces to consider arrangements to visit his country for extended periods. This is in sharp contrast to the past Corazon Aquino administration that ordered the closure of US bases.

Japan's role will also be questioned. Representing the new Shinzo Abe administration, Foreign Minister Fumio Kishida chose Manila as his first overseas visit. There, he promised to provide coast guard vessels and found a welcome for the idea that Japan should re-arm.

This comes amid increased tension between Tokyo and Beijing over the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands. Some will therefore question the coincidence that the legal challenge has come so soon after the visit. Another coincidence is that the tribunal for the law of the sea has a Japanese national as its president - Shunji Yanai - although he is not under instruction from Tokyo.

It is therefore for the better that steps be taken to stabilise relations. The new Chinese Communist Party chief, Xi Jinping , has called for co-operation to handle "sensitive" issues effectively and in a timely manner. This came when China received Natsuo Yamaguchi, leader of the New Komeito party, the junior coalition member in the current government.

The future tenor of US-China ties is harder to read as key appointments to the state and defence departments are still pending and new Chinese leaders are settling in. President Barack Obama did, however, set clear priorities in his inaugural address that focus on domestic issues. Moreover, having trumpeted the coming end to a decade of war, Obama should be cautious about engaging in potential Asian conflicts, even if allies wish otherwise.

In this context, it is critical that the Association of Southeast Asian Nations maintains its neutrality. Although the Philippines is a member of the group, others in Asean - whether collectively or individually - were not consulted on the legal challenge. The Singapore government, for example, has said it first heard about it through the media. Manila's right to take this route was also acknowledged as its own national decision.

However, Asean neutrality cannot mean inactivity. On the contrary, the current Asean chair - Brunei - must work with others in the group to rebuild trust, with the aim of beginning negotiations on a code of conduct for activities in the contested areas.

Last year's July 12 statement on Asean's six-point principles on the South China Sea bears reiteration. It will be critical that China is a part of this negotiation - as much as the Philippines and other claimants - and not feel that the 10 smaller countries are ganging up.

The legal process will move ahead - quickly and quite inexorably. It must also be expected that China will use economic and other levers to express its displeasure with Manila. The Philippines is testing China's intentions in law but its own endurance will be tested in economic and political spheres.

Challenging China under the UN convention is a decision by the Aquino administration that international law allows and no other country can stop. But what others in the region can and must do is help prevent the legal process from creating a political mess.

http://www.scmp.com/comment/insight...ute-resolve-south-china-sea-dispute-political

 

[Malaya]