South China Sea Forum

[jhungary]

The America still sail and fly around, still has no effect upon China.

do you really want to play this game around and around??

I can say the US is flying over and sailing over "supposedly" your island and China had not been able to do anything about it lol.

 

[Place Of Space]

do you really want to play this game around and around??

I can say the US is flying over and sailing over "supposedly" your island and China had not been able to do anything about it lol.

China do the islands work, this is originally what China has been doing.

 

[DoTell]

Sure, the U.S. punked China 1:0. 2:0 if you count their bomber fly over China's Diaoyu Islands. But there is a no real gain from such childish acts other than earning them a little bragging right for a while. The islands are not going anywhere. China is not to take back their claims or stop building the islands. Provoking China will only strengthen our wills to further protect our claims.

Makes no mistake about it, no one likes to be punked. But China's reactions has been proper. We are not going to lose control over our core interest right in our backyard. We understand we have the resources and means to protect it. But we need to be patient. Time is on our side.

 

[jhungary]

China do the islands work, this is originally what China has been doing.

You do know the US patrol these island long before the island was being constructed, right? Trace back all the way to 1980s, were you building Island in SCS back then?

 

[Place Of Space]

You do know the US patrol these island long before the island was being constructed, right? Trace back all the way to 1980s, were you building Island in SCS back then?

Not long enough, America is very young since 1773. (limited to the Atlantic coast).

 

[jhungary]

Not long enough, America is very young since 1773. (limited to the Atlantic coast).

lol what's how long has US been established matter in SCS, by the way, US independence is in 1776, not 1773

 

[danger007]

Actually, according to UNCLOS, there are no different between transiting and conducting military operation


. China can hold a military Drill in US EEZ as much *** the US having the same right to hold a Military Drill in China EEZ.

The definition of "Rules" is that it Applies to EVERYBODY and no one was in exception.

Even the US observe this "rules" even tho the US has not ratified the UNCLOS.

The problem with what you and most Chinese thinking is, since China wasn't "Around" when the rules was set, the China should not by all account respect and obey the rules and instead having their "Own" set of rules.

Well, I did not say China cannot do that, but you cannot do that and say China is not escalating anything. You can change the rules by having it heard internationally, and then when all other party agree to and ratified the amendment, then the rules can be change. You cannot unilaterally change the "rules" when you deem fits and call other aggressive. When you change the rules unilaterally, you are the party that act aggressively.

Baseline is, if you don't play nice, you automatically refused the right to call other foul.

China got naval exercise between US, India and Japan in Indian Ocean let alone exercise in China EEZ..... lolz

 

[Place Of Space]

lol what's how long has US been established matter in SCS, by the way, US independence is in 1776, not 1773

All right, 3 years younger. I don't care how long has been, US itself just started since 1776. When China travelled through SCS, find, manage their islands, into the Indian ocean. There is nobody America.

 

[thesolar65]

The battle of rhetoric between the US and China continues to escalate over the disputed South China Sea, with state-linked newspapers claiming Beijing is "not frightened to fight a war in the region".

The threat in an editorial of the Global Times comes after the US said it did sail a Navy ship near to China's artificial islands in the Spratly archipelago - and that it will do it again.

But just what is it that has led the two nations, who are otherwise working to forge closer ties, to such a diplomatic impasse?

Located at a maritime crossroads between Malaysia, Vietnam, the Philippines and China, the Spratly Islands are sliced through by a confusion of different claims to sovereign territory.

Areas of open sea in the archipelago have been aggressively dredged by the Chinese Government, however, and in barely two years more than 2,000 acres of new land has been created.

The activity has proved highly controversial because China is accused of creating new land to extend its sea borders. As if to sure up its claims, the Communist state has piled military bases, docks and even a runway on the new islands.

Why is the US involved?

The US has said it does not have a position on the land reclamation projects that have incited such anger from China's neighbours.

But the US defence secretary, Ash Carter, implied that the mission to sail the USS Lassen missile destroyer within 12 nautical miles of the Subi Reef was an expression of the right to freedom of navigation.

He told a congressional hearing: "We will fly, sail and operate wherever international law permits." Mr Carter has previously demanded an "immediate and lasting halt" to the reclamation projects in the area.

The Philippines, which has conducted its own land-building efforts on a smaller scale, welcomed the US sail-by as a way of helping maintain "a balance of power" in the region.

How has China reacted?

China says it tracked and then warned the USS Lassen as it sailed by the Subi Reef, which only lay above sea level at low tide before Chinese military installations appeared there around 2012.

It has since summoned the American ambassador, Max Bacaus, in protest. China's foreign ministry said on its website that ministers told Mr Bacaus the US had acted in a "provocative" manner which threatened China's sovereignty and security.

Chinese newspapers linked to the Communist party expressed outrage in more colourful terms. According to the Guardian, a Global Times editorial suggested Beijing "should deal with Washington tactfully and prepare for the worst".

"This can convince the White House that China, despite its unwillingness, is not frightened to fight a war with the US in the region, and is determined to safeguard its national interests and dignity."

China's main military newspaper, the People's Liberation Army Daily, reportedly made examples of the US's chaotic interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan.

It said: "Cast-iron facts show that time and again the United States recklessly uses force and starts wars, stirring things up where once there was stability, causing the bitterest of harm to those countries directly involved."

What are the long-term implications?

Top Comment
Chinese are in great trouble....USA challenging China at it's door step will pave way for many more countries joining against China.Valid Sach
China has reacted defiantly, saying it will continue to develop its island-building projects and add new buildings, harbours, helipads and runways on them.

But, according to the Associated Press, other countries in the region have greeted the intervention and could use it as encouragement to stand up to China's assertiveness.

Further afield, regional powers including Singapore and Indonesia are wary of being caught up in the increasingly bitter dispute - and all sides are calling for negotiations on a long-term solution to head off the possibility of conflict.

 

[ahtan_china]

Sure, the U.S. punked China 1:0. 2:0 if you count their bomber fly over China's Diaoyu Islands. But there is a no real gain from such childish acts other than earning them a little bragging right for a while. The islands are not going anywhere. China is not to take back their claims or stop building the islands. Provoking China will only strengthen our wills to further protect our claims.

Makes no mistake about it, no one likes to be punked. But China's reactions has been proper. We are not going to lose control over our core interest right in our backyard. We understand we have the resources and means to protect it. But we need to be patient. Time is on our side.

The USA is weaker.
So many follower and younger brothers joined the Korea war with USA in 60+ years ago.
Now USA navy warship should patrol reef of China by himself in SCS. Where is his follower and younger brothers?
Even USA navy can not close to the reef of China and destroy the illegal building of China as the world police!
Do you think USA is a qualified world police?

 

[mike2000 is back]

You make very good point. The US just won't tolerate China in its own shoreline. This is a pure humiliation yet the Chinese navy's weak stance underscore their cowardness.

I heard people are jumping about their Chinese dream? A small incident can make you feel like back in 1990s your days of being bullied. It's hard to imagine a might industrial nation(the largest actually) like China is making such stupid mistakes. You should get some inspiration from Russia. You weak response could make Putin looks downing on you.

EAsian could be the only sane Chinese member in the forum. Others look like a bunch of braggart boy showing off your economic wonders on daily basis(what a shame). Remember those wonders and wealth made by your people's hard work only turn into other's prey if you can not defend your interest.

True. Well you cant blame some Chinesemembers here. Afterall, China went from being a third world country with warlords/rebels reigning in their own territories, with foreign powers all having their sphere of influence in China, to being an economic powerhouse. So obviously those Chinese who felt insecure and humiliated by foreign powers and being isolated from the world all this past century rightly feel boastful that their country is now rising to the world stage. Reason you see some of them being so boastful and posting any small news about China like its the end of the world. There was on their member on here @j20blackdragon who was even saying the warm welcoming visit we gave to the chinese president and his wife meant we are now subsevient to China and that they are now our master. lool This is just another sign of somebody who has been and is still insecure. Since you dont see countries like Germany, Japan, australia, France etc saying such things no matter the grandiose visit/welcome we give their presdient.lol

They should calm down, but i do think the U.S needs to give them some space in their own immediate shores thoiugh.

 

[F-22Raptor]

Australia Prepares Option of Sail-Through to Test China

CANBERRA, Australia—Australian defense planners are looking at the possibility of a naval sail-through close to China’s artificial islands in the South China Sea, in case the government decides to follow its close ally the U.S. in testing Beijing’s territorial claims.

“Australia has been looking at options,” said one official in Australia’s military familiar with operational planning.

The official spoke after the American guided-missile destroyer USS Lassen sailed early Tuesday within 12 nautical miles of Subi Reef, one of seven sand and rock outcrops in the Spratly chain on which China has built artificial islands. The U.S. considers the area international waters, and fears China is trying to enforce territorial claims and gain greater control over major shipping lanes.

Another defense official, who has been involved in a military blueprint about the South China Sea for Australia’s Defense Minister Marise Payne, confirmed that plans for possible naval operations or flights by maritime patrol aircraft had been prepared, though said there is no immediate intent to put them into play. “At this stage, it’s only been looking at what we could do,” the second official said. The military had been looking at options including a sail-through for months, the person said, as tensions in the South China Sea intensified.

Ms. Payne didn’t address a question by The Wall Street Journal on Wednesday about whether Australia has plans under way to test China.

“Australia has a legitimate interest in the maintenance of peace and stability, respect for international law, unimpeded trade and freedom of navigation and overflight in the South China Sea,” she said. “As they do now, Australian vessels and aircraft will continue to exercise rights under international law to freedom of navigation and freedom of overflight.”

China’s Foreign Ministry didn’t respond to a faxed request for comment. The U.S. Embassy in Canberra couldn’t be reached.

China, Australia’s largest trading partner, lays claim to nearly all of the South China Sea, where 60% of Australia’s trade passes. Other Asia-Pacific countries also have high stakes in China’s growing assertiveness in the contested waters. None has publicly said it would openly challenge China with its military following the U.S. naval operation.

Peter Jennings, the executive director of the government-backed security think tank the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, said he expected most U.S. regional allies would follow with their own exercises to assert freedom of navigation, although few would telegraph movements in advance for operational security reasons.

“I think it is now critical we follow this up so that we don’t just leave it to the United States on what is an issue worrying countries from the Philippines to Vietnam,” said Mr. Jennings, a former Australian intelligence analyst.

“We won’t know about it until it happens because no one wants to attract a load of Chinese opprobrium in advance,” said Mr. Jennings, who is advising the Australian government of preparation of a new strategic planning blueprint that will grapple with China’s muscle-flexing in the South China Sea.

Australia has two naval frigates in the South China Sea region—the HMAS Arunta and HMAS Stuart—which have been scheduled to carry out exercises alongside Chinese warships over the next week, as a naval confidence-building exercise.

Ms. Payne told The Wall Street Journal there has been no change in plans on those movements following the USS Lassen’s passage.

She said on Tuesday that Australia hadn’t joined the sail-past to challenge to China’s territorial assertions. The possibility was understood to have been informally discussed among military officials alongside talks this month in Boston between Ms. Payne and Foreign Minister Julie Bishop and their U.S. counterparts Ash Carter and John Kerry.

After those talks, Ms. Payne played down the likelihood of Australia joining the U.S. on a freedom of navigation sail-through, but said Canberra had agreed to boost cooperation and exercises alongside the U.S. Navy. Those comments and criticism of Chinese actions earned a rebuke from Chinese envoys in Canberra, who issued a statement saying Australian and the U.S. should not “light a fire and add fuel to the flames.”

“It is important to recognize that all states have a right under international law to freedom of navigation and freedom of overflight, including in the South China Sea. Australia strongly supports these rights,” Ms. Payne said in a statement on Wednesday after the USS Lassen’s passage.

Australia’s government has so far asserted that it will keep carrying out patrols in the South China Sea. These include maritime overflights by long-range Australian reconnaissance aircraft based out of an air base in Malaysia. The frigate Arunta passed through the South China Sea with an Australian navy supply ship two weeks ago.

Australia Prepares Option of Sail-Through to Test China - WSJ

 

[帅的一匹]

Yes, we will be impressed. But that will be the extent of China's effects on US. The SCS will be available for ALL to sail, and there is not a damn thing China can do about it.

only US navy dare to sail, who the else? you just put up a political show to flatter those congress men. what the heck you can do to our island construction? American is paper tiger as known in Korean War.

 

[xperia]

China to US(like kids): aj mari tabbiyat kharab thee. kal ana to main maron ga tumhain

 

[Zsari]

Article 87(1). But if your questioning the verbatim definition of 'Navigation' then yes it is defined in definition.

Navigation is defined as passage of ship. Is conducting military mission considered navigation? China obviously disagrees.

The Spartys aren't recognized as Chinese Territory, if they were the Chinese would have the 12 mile territorial claim around them. This is the real dispute.

Yes, that's my point. Most of the media points to the keyword of "artificial island" as the basis for legality of US patrol, which is completely false. It is Chinese ownership of the island that US disputes, not the construction.

You did not get my point at all.

First of all, there ARE written rule defining the freedom of navigation. Both Navigation Right and Freedom of Navigation were defined as per UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). While US did not sign in at the convention, the US operate on US Law of Navigation (Or US Navigation Rights) but we are talking about the former, not the later, which China belong to the former convention as a Signed and Ratified Parties.

Both navigational right and freedom of navigation is defined as per Article 87 (FON) and Article 88 (Nav Right)

But this is not my point.

My point is as follow.

China can protest or they can ignore the law by its own merit. To be honest, the only thing Chinese Government need to do is to withdrew from the UNCLOS once and for all and issue their own Navigation Right, as per US. The problem is. You can do either one but not both.

You can withdrew from the Convention, then use your own law, but then you cannot protest other being "aggressive" as you lost the right to be protected by the convention, should you choose to leave. And if you are going to do what you do unilaterally, then what do you expect on other party response?

You can protest against the US aggression, if you stick by the UNCLOS. If you think the US is the aggressor per international law, you can speak up in the international forum you belong to. But by doing so, you would be need to respect and abide to the law as we speak. Building Island on an international waterway is not permitted as per UNCLOS.

You can leave, or you can protest, but you cannot do both. Doing one will concede the right of doing the other. What Chinese Government and to some extend PDF Chinese member here doing at this moment is they are doing both.

Wait a minute. Where does it say building island on the high sea is not permitted? Per freedom of the high seas in article 87 specifically states the freedom to construct artificial islands in the same status as the freedom of navigation. Moreover, China is not even building artificial island on the high sea, but conducting land reclamation on the existing island that it claims sovereign over.

Article87
Freedom of the high seas

1. The high seas are open to all States, whether coastal or land-locked. Freedom of the high seas is exercised under the conditions laid down by this Convention and by other rules of international law. It comprises, inter alia, both for coastal and land-locked States:
(a) freedom of navigation;
(b) freedom of overflight;
(c) freedom to lay submarine cables and pipelines, subject to Part VI;
(d) freedom to construct artificial islands and other installations permitted under international law, subject to Part VI;
(e) freedom of fishing, subject to the conditions laid down in section 2;
(f) freedom of scientific research, subject to Parts VI and XIII.
2. These freedoms shall be exercised by all States with due regard for the interests of other States in their exercise of the freedom of the high seas, and also with due regard for the rights under this Convention with respect to activities in the Area.