What's new

Special Report: China's military hawks take the offensive

Zero_wing

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
May 3, 2012
Messages
4,296
Reaction score
-2
By David Lague

HONG KONG | Thu Jan 17, 2013 10:11am EST

(Reuters) - It was supposed to be a relaxed evening for a group of senior international military chiefs. Gathered at Melbourne's Crown Casino, they had changed out of uniform for dinner and discussion.

China's Lieutenant-General Ren Haiquan took the podium in a room overlooking the Yarra River last October 29 and began diplomatically enough. But as he neared the end of his speech, he went on the offensive.

"Some people" had ignored the outcome of World War Two and were challenging the post-war order, he told counterparts from 15 other nations. It was a pointed reference to Japan's claim over islands in the East China Sea that Beijing insists are Chinese.

"One should never forget history and (should) learn from history," Ren said, according to a copy of his speech. "Flames of the war ignited by fascist countries engulfed the whole region, and many places, including Darwin in Australia, were bombed."

In a jarring coincidence, say officers in the audience, fireballs belched into the sky as he spoke, part of the casino's hourly fireworks display.

Visibly displeased at the dig, the senior Japanese officer present, army Lieutenant General Yoshiaki Nakagawa, left with his fellow officers as soon as the speeches concluded, people in the audience said.

Neither Ren nor Nakagawa were available for comment.

"KILL A CHICKEN"

Ren's provocative dinner talk was no isolated outburst. His message was typical of the increasingly hawkish rhetoric coming from senior officers in the People's Liberation Army.

At issue these days are the disputed islands known as the Diaoyu (in China) or Senkaku (in Japan) and a string of islets in the South China that China is contesting with various Southeast Asian nations.

But the combative streak speaks to profound shifts in Chinese politics and foreign policy that transcend the heat of the moment. The more provocative of these officers call for "short, sharp wars" to assert China's sovereignty. Others urge Beijing to "strike first", "prepare for conflict" or "kill a chicken to scare the monkeys".

They routinely denounce the Obama administration's recent "pivot" to Asia - without naming the United States, Ren in his Melbourne speech accused "external countries" of complicating disputes in Asia.

In a political system where civilian officials hew to tightly scripted public positions, these uniformed pundits, both serving and retired, appear free to go well beyond the official line. Almost all of the most-outspoken generals are military academics or theorists.

Foreign military analysts are uncertain if the hawks represent a majority opinion in the 2.3 million-strong military or exercise real influence over foreign policy. It is also unclear if operational commanders share the views of these so-called "activist officers."

However, there is one generally agreed explanation for their prominence: The PLA now has something to talk about. The military budget has soared to almost $200 billion, according to some Western estimates - the world's second-highest military budget behind the United States. That money has paid for the warships, strike aircraft and missiles allowing the PLA to plan for distant conflict. For the first time in its modern history, China has the firepower to contest control of disputed territory far from its coastal waters.

Over the same period, China has emerged from decades of isolation to become a powerful trading nation with a complex global web of commercial and diplomatic ties. That means military planners are increasingly concerned with security of sea lanes - particularly in the South China Sea - that carry manufactured exports and imports of vital energy and raw materials.

"Until quite recently, China didn't have a lot of overseas interests," said Li Nan, an analyst of the Chinese military at the United States Naval War College. "It didn't get involved in foreign-policy crises."

"PEACEFUL RISE"

For some Chinese foreign policy researchers, the emergence of the hawks is part of Beijing's "good cop-bad cop" strategy to influence diplomatic negotiations over the disputed territory.

For anxious neighbors, though, the tough talk backed up with firepower delivered over a three-decade military buildup, is sending an unnerving signal that a rising China may be ready to use force. It also conflicts with repeated assurances of a "peaceful rise" from the civilian leadership in Beijing.

"There appears to be a discord between this peaceful rise language and the comments from senior PLA officers," said Li of the U.S. Naval War College. "There is no doubt about that."

A Japanese Foreign Ministry official, noting Lt-Gen Ren's remarks in Melbourne and similar comments from China, stressed Japan's own peaceful rise from the ashes of World War Two.

"China itself clearly stated in the Japan-China joint statement, issued in May 2008, that it highly regards Japan's history as a peaceful nation for more than 60 years after the war," the official said.

Japan's Defense Ministry has flagged the Chinese armed forces' growing role in shaping foreign policy as a security risk. in its annual Defense white paper last July, Tokyo said some believe relations between the PLA and the Communist Party leadership were "getting complex". The degree of military influence on foreign policy decisions could possibly be changing, the paper said, adding: "The situation calls for attention as a risk management issue."

STRONG NATIONALIST

The relationship will be closely watched as China's new leader, Xi Jinping, begins to stamp his authority on the Communist Party and the military. Xi, the "princeling" son of late party leader, military commander and economic reformer Xi Zhongxun, has clearly signaled he will be a strong nationalist. His first speeches after taking power in November had a strong patriotic flavor, with appeals for a "renaissance" of the Chinese nation.

As chairman of the Central Military Commission and head of the party, Xi takes command of the PLA after years of cementing close ties with influential senior officers.

One of his jobs after graduation from university was personal secretary to Geng Biao, a revolutionary military commander who became Defense minister after the Cultural Revolution.

Xi is close to two influential and outspoken officers who like him are themselves princelings, or offspring of senior leaders: army general Liu Yuan, and air force general Liu Yazhou. (The two are not related.)

Xi can even be said to be married to the military. His wife, celebrity folk singer Peng Liyuan, is a civilian member of the PLA, holding a rank equivalent to major general.

Some analysts say Xi's family background and his own experience will enable him to exert more control over the PLA than his predecessors, Hu Jintao and Jiang Zemin.

"Xi has nothing to prove to the military," said former Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, a Mandarin speaking ex-diplomat who has held talks with the new Chinese leader on several occasions. "There is no reason for him to overcompensate for them."

While it is too early to say if Xi will encourage or tolerate his outspoken generals, political analysts agree the hawks can be silenced when it suits the political leadership. When Chinese President Hu Jintao visited the United States in early 2011, it was important to Beijing that the high profile visit go smoothly and Hu receive state honors in Washington. Hawkish talk among the officer pundits died down in the run-up to that trip.

"All of a sudden, bam, these guys got turned off," said Scott Harold, a China analyst for the Santa Monica, California-based Rand Corporation.

STAR MEDIA PERFORMERS

Ren, the vice president of China's Academy of Military Science, is far from the most hawkish officer in the PLA.

Among the most bellicose are in a group of about 20 military officers who have become star media and online performers in recent years, including Air Force Colonel Dai Xu, retired army Major General Luo Yuan and Rear Admiral Zhang Zhaozhong.

Their commentary and blogs get widespread coverage in state-owned media, military publications and specialist websites that cater to a vast domestic audience eager for news and opinion about China's growing military power.

"It also serves to instill a sense of pride and patriotism that China under the present government has become strong and a force to be reckoned with by the big powers," said Sun Yun, an expert on Chinese foreign and security policy at the Washington-based Stimson Centre.

Their commentary is in demand as part of the extensive coverage devoted to the new warships, tanks, missiles and strike aircraft now entering service with the PLA. The impact of these new weapons is endlessly analyzed, particularly in scenarios where China is at war with the United States and its regional allies.

For retired officers on modest PLA pensions, this market for commentary and analysis provides extra income and the gratification of a high profile in the media, Chinese military experts say. And, serving officers can advance their careers if their views strike a chord with the military hierarchy.

SHORT, DECISIVE WAR

The Air Force Colonel, Dai Xu, is renowned for his regular calls to arms. With China in dispute for much of last year with Japan in the East China Sea and Vietnam and the Philippines in the South China Sea, Dai argued a short, decisive war, like China's 1962 border clash with India, would deliver long-term peace. He also said Washington would not risk war with China over these territorial spats.

"Since we have decided that the U.S. is bluffing in the East China Sea, we should take this opportunity to respond to these empty provocations with something real," he wrote in an August 28 commentary published in the Chinese-language edition of the Global Times, a nationalistic tabloid published by the Communist Party organ, the People's Daily.

"This includes Vietnam, the Philippines and Japan, who are the three running dogs of the United States in Asia," added Dai, a researcher at Beijing University's China Centre for Strategic Studies. "We only need to kill one, and it will immediately bring the others to heel."

An animated speaker with a shock of thick black hair that's slightly long for a military man, Dai sometimes appears for television interviews in fashionable civilian clothes. On other occasions he appears on the state-controlled military channel, CCTV 7, in his neat, sky-blue air force uniform giving lectures to junior officers on air power or conflicts in the Middle East.

He is also the author of popular books on China's strategic outlook. His 2009 best seller, "Sea Totem, China's Carrier," argues that China's new aircraft carrier, commissioned in September, is a symbol of the nation's maritime rejuvenation.

In "C-Shaped Encirclement," published in 2010, Dai describes how an entrapped China must break out from the curving perimeter around China the United States and its allies have established from northern Japan, through South Korea, Taiwan, South East Asia, India and up to Afghanistan. Dai did not respond to a request for comment on this article.

"EXPRESS YOUR BOTTOM LINE"

Retired army Major General Luo Yuan is a gruff, plain-speaking member of China's top government advisory body, the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference. Luo, who often appears in uniform for his television appearances or panel discussions, has built up a strong online and media following with frequent hard-line advice for dealing with maritime disputes.

His suggestions, however, that Taiwan and mainland China should send hundreds of fishing boats to the Diaoyu islands to fight a "people's war at sea" and to turn the tiny, uninhabited islands into a firing range appear to have been tongue in cheek.

"Chinese aircraft can bomb the islands on Monday, Wednesday and Friday," Luo said at a seminar in Hangzhou on September 29, "while the Taiwanese can launch attacks on Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday."

Mixed in with his sometimes combustible rhetoric are practical suggestions, including his recent recommendation that China form a coastguard on the U.S. model to unify the nine government agencies that have overlapping jurisdiction over maritime policing.

In a telephone interview, Luo told Reuters from Beijing all soldiers had a duty to be "hawks".

The chance of conflict in the South China Sea and East China sea this year is arguably high because rival claimants had enacted domestic laws to legitimize overlapping sovereignty claims and had deployed forces to prevent encroachments, he said. This meant China must take precautions to prevent clashes.

"It's crucial to express your standpoint and bottom line so others will know that China is committed to the use of diplomatic measures to resolve the dispute but China is also not afraid of conflict," he said.

That was basically the line from the Chinese Defense Ministry in a written reply to questions about the hawkish officers. The government would never waver in its determination to maintain China's sovereignty and territorial integrity, the ministry said. "At the same time, we have always upheld the peaceful resolution of international disputes and resolving problems with relevant countries through dialogue, negotiation and equal consultations."

For some PLA watchers, the scope for these officers to voice controversial opinions is further evidence of expanding freedom of speech in China.

"It is a genuine debate," said Patrick Ho, chief executive of the Hong Kong-based China Energy Fund Committee, a mainland-funded think tank that lists some outspoken military officers as consultants. "Even within the higher echelons of the military, there are conservatives and liberals, just like America and Europe. There are extreme views from each end," added Ho, a former senior Hong Kong government official and now an advisor to Beijing.

A robust debate over national security is "normal" for a major power, Australia's Rudd says. "In the U.S., the national security debate rages all the time. But we find it strange when it happens in another country."

SCARBOROUGH SHOAL STANDOFF

Rear Admiral Zhang Zhaozhong is the best-known of the hawk commentators, appearing frequently as a program host on CCTV 7 and other state-run television outlets.

Virulently anti-American, he has a low opinion of U.S. military capabilities and willingness to suffer casualties. The United States would "run like a rabbit" if China went to war with Japan over the Diaoyu Islands, he told state television on August 12.

Zhang, a professor at Beijing's National Defense University who has studied at Britain's Royal Military College of Science, is also disparaging about neighboring countries' fighting capabilities.

Last year, during the Scarborough Shoal standoff, he told participants of a People's Daily Internet forum it would be a one-sided fight if China clashed with the Philippines. Manila's most potent warship was a 3,000-tonne, 1960s vintage former U.S. coast guard cutter, while China could deploy the 18,000-tonne amphibious landing ship, Kunlun Shan, he said.

"If there is a clash in the South China Sea, the possibility that foreign countries would intervene is low, and any conflict would not last long," he confidently predicted.

Zhang's reputation as a prognosticator, however, has taken a few lumps. He warned of a series of calamities for the 2003 U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, predicting the attackers would be "engulfed in the vast ocean of a people's war." Later, in the face of online ridicule, Zhang was forced to concede on television he had insufficient "intelligence" about the disposition and strength of Iraq's forces other than what he learned on the Internet. More recently, Zhang also wrongly predicted Libyan dictator Muammur Gaddafi would prevail over the rebels seeking his overthrow.

Zhang was not available for comment.

WELCOMING THE "PIVOT"

On occasion, a battery of belligerent top brass will concentrate their firepower on a perceived challenge to China's territory or dignity. In September, three days after Tokyo outraged Beijing with its decision to buy the Diaoyu/Senkaku islands from a Japanese citizen who owned them, China's state media unleashed a propaganda broadside in a joint commentary from 10 generals including Dai Xu, Luo Yuan and Zhang Zhaozhong. Calling for a tough stand against Tokyo, they accused rightists in Japan of moving the country dangerously toward a revival of its World War Two militarism.

The drumbeat of threats and warnings from uniformed officers is contributing to regional apprehension about China's territorial intentions. Southeast Asian nations have welcomed the U.S. "pivot", Washington's stated intention of shifting more attention and military assets back to the region. They are strengthening ties with Washington and boosting military spending.

Right-wing voices in Japan calling for re-armament are gaining ground - a trend that solidified with December's landslide election of the hawkish Shinzo Abe as prime minister. Abe has proposed the first increase in Japan's Defense budget in 11 years, citing repeated Chinese incursions into disputed waters.

In Melbourne, Ren explained that Beijing's military buildup was purely aimed at preventing a repetition of earlier foreign aggression that China had been too weak to resist. "To prevent a repetition of this historical tragedy, China has no other choice but to develop proper military strength," he said.

As PLA firepower mounts, China's political leaders will need to be careful the uniformed hawks don't go too far and increase the risk of conflict, security experts said. It might be difficult to make concessions or compromise in negotiations over disputed territory once public opinion gets whipped up.

"As nationalism is a double-edged sword," says Shen Dingli, a security expert at Shanghai's Fudan University, "the government could get hurt."

(Reporting By David Lague; additional reporting by Charlie Zhu; Editing by Bill Tarrant and Michael Williams)

Special Report: China's military hawks take the offensive | Reuters
 
.
The bellicose and bullying attitude of the Chinese especially against countries that it perceives as small and weak militarily would be met with forceful alliances with even those of former aggressors. I know China would not vow down to political resolution, because Chinese wants resources their neighbors has possession of, mainly oil reserves. With that in their control, they will immensely increase their position over the World Powers, refusing to yield to International Law other than what is favorable to itself.
 
.
The nine-dotted boundary lines were formerly claimed by Chinese National Government from 1947-1948, while none of the other states had objections nor actions. Where were you guys? So called territory conflicts all started from 1970s by various ASEAN countries when oil/gas reserves became known to the world. You Phils should stop playing innocent kids by painting China as a monster. So far it's VN which has sucked out the oil and gas from South China Sea the most. Check up the oil wells around South China Sea and you would find no Chinese flags.
 
.
I hope after reading this article all the members here will recongnise ( especailly Paksitani Members) that all this talk AND claim by China ...of PEACEFUL RISE and PEACEFUL COUNTRY ....is just bull-**** to hoodwink gullibles. Chinese are as treacherous as anyone can be if one observes the recent history. Whether it is their statistics or any assurances ....they are all concealed lies.
 
. .
The nine-dotted boundary lines were formerly claimed by Chinese National Government from 1947-1948, while none of the other states had objections nor actions. Where were you guys? So called territory conflicts all started from 1970s by various ASEAN countries when oil/gas reserves became known to the world. You Phils should stop playing innocent kids by painting China as a monster. So far it's VN which has sucked out the oil and gas from South China Sea the most. Check up the oil wells around South China Sea and you would find no Chinese flags.
So I have the question:
_ What's nine-section-lines (11-section-lines in past)!? What's you based on for your nine-section-lines!?
I never heard anyone can explain those things.
 
.
So I have the question:
_ What's nine-section-lines (11-section-lines in past)!? What's you based on for your nine-section-lines!?
I never heard anyone can explain those things.

I find Chinese logic funny.
1) As per them, If any China every visted / ruled ny part of teh world than it should belong to them. By this logic India should have claim on Afghanistan, Pakistan, and many other countries AND UK should have claim on every other country.

2) Chinese never accept international laws but always go about telling world that we should follow International laws.
 
.
China's claim based on their Communist Party version only backfires at them. China did not exist when the Mongolians captured it in the 1200's. China may want to return their "motherland" to the Mongolians.

The reality is, the Chinese evil Communist Party "draw" the "9-dotted map" only so they can control the navigation of the entire South "China" Sea, and stake their claim on the stumbled vast oil and gas reserves to feed their power hungry economy. They want to project their naval power as a defense and offense strategy, as well as suck out all the oil and gas that is not theirs. The one big factor they are doing these aggressive behavior is because of their military capability that is superior to their neighbors. So they want to "teach" their neighbors a lesson.

All is said, if the Communist Party's claim is legitimate, then why are they not willing to settle the dispute with a legitimate body which is the UNCLOS? Is the evil Communist leadership afraid to bring their "evidence" to the world for scrutiny? One only wonders how legal their claim is. Maybe Mao just picked up a pencil and draw the 9 dashes and say, "voila, it's China's now! Oh sh1t give me a break.
 
.
More attempts to attack China.

By the way peaceful rise or aggressive rise... does it really matter as long as you are advancing. Also assertiveness comes with economic growth. It was also stated in the book Clash of Civilizations. Eventually things will cool down. In the meantime I wonder why no one bothers to protest the how many 736 military bases of US in 200+ nations?

If a superpower from our Asia rises and possibly confronts the world order... it would be quite an honor to be on its side. Western colonialism is a bigger threat than our useless border disputes. And only for countries like Pakistan, Afghanistan and Japan an issue called terrorism trumps it. For the rest-guess its time to challenge prevailing dominance of US. People in Pakistan look very favorably to the rise of China.
 
. .
Haven’t have the time, or rather the patience, to finish the bvllshit article completely but ready to comment, as what in the piece is nothing new and nothing more but decade old China-bashing cr@py rhetoric by a mental patient suffering from a bipolar disease.

In these patients’ disease logic, they can constantly invading a China that proclaims to want a “peaceful rise”. Some monkeys and chickens, and perhaps some pigs (which are of course chubbier than former two species ) around China mistakenly think as long as China wants a peaceful rise, they can keep poking China, infringe China’s sovereignty, and getting a piece from China, even subverting the world order established on WWII legacy. Frankly, anybody should get benefited from China’s rise, including those monkeys and chickens. But to dream getting benefits by beating China down is a wrong way: you will suffer. Example? Even the United States claims China as “stake holder”.

When wanting to belittle China, the disease sufferers would point out that a useless China has spent only a fraction what US is spending on military. When the other side of their bipolar nerve surges, they would whine that China’s military spending itself is too high and is a threat.

On one polar surge, they are chuckling that Xi cannot control the army. On next polar rush, they rant
"All of a sudden, bam, these (military) guys got turned off". The change of the polar status is only a few lines apart. :lol:

In their bipolar disease, they would complain that 20 pro-China hawks are too many, and they totally forget there are 20000000 more reckless anti-China hawks all over their own countries, each running amuck.

About “short decisive war”, which military personals/warlords don’t do that as their daily job, in addition to taking embezzlement in Africa (William Ward ) and having extramarital affairs in N. America (David Petraeus and others)?

Dudes, can't you guys be more serious? You could make more honest livings.
 
.
The bellicose and bullying attitude of the Chinese especially against countries that it perceives as small and weak militarily would be met with forceful alliances with even those of former aggressors. I know China would not vow down to political resolution, because Chinese wants resources their neighbors has possession of, mainly oil reserves. With that in their control, they will immensely increase their position over the World Powers, refusing to yield to International Law other than what is favorable to itself.
Greediness in the most complex flavor in life as really the cause of major destruction in this planet earth. If China didn't think wisely and stand for their stubbornness to continuously claim the disputed territory. The most dangerous and worst of all games may flare up that no one will get benefit from it. China maybe isolated as against all nations which will send a very bad signal that will affect our future as the lyrics of the song says, “If tomorrow never come" maybe due to man's greediness. :azn:
The nine-dotted boundary lines were formerly claimed by Chinese National Government from 1947-1948, while none of the other states had objections nor actions. Where were you guys? So called territory conflicts all started from 1970s by various ASEAN countries when oil/gas reserves became known to the world. You Phils should stop playing innocent kids by painting China as a monster. So far it's VN which has sucked out the oil and gas from South China Sea the most. Check up the oil wells around South China Sea and you would find no Chinese flags.
China's position is ancient times when people are using stones as tools. I don't know where they get evidence from fake history. Everybody here in this world can create history. Bring us your evidence and nothing more. Philippine position is more legal and binding in all perspective.
I hope after reading this article all the members here will recongnise ( especailly Paksitani Members) that all this talk AND claim by China ...of PEACEFUL RISE and PEACEFUL COUNTRY ....is just bull-**** to hoodwink gullibles. Chinese are as treacherous as anyone can be if one observes the recent history. Whether it is their statistics or any assurances ....they are all concealed lies.
These are all a circus. With China insisting on its indisputable territory claim, nothing will happen. In fact, it's China who is the real problem here. This country just came into the scene and everything just went haywire. You take the China equation out and there will be no problem. :no:
China's outrageous demand of nine dotted line is laughable and nobody accepts that since against UNCLOS.
That’s right. Actually when China ratified the UNCLOS in 1996, she made a statement that it enjoys sovereign rights over its exclusive economic zone of 200 nm and the continental shelf. China also stated a law it passed in 1992 claiming islands in South China Sea including Taiwan and other disputed islands. Keep in mind that the UNCLOS was written in 1982. In both statements, China also stated that she will abide and respect the international law.

If others are to respect China's 200nm EEZ and continental shelf, then it should in return respect its neighbors' territories. China is establishing itself as a major player in the world. But if China wants the whole world to listen, she should not treat its neighbor like this. If China really wants to settle the dispute then there are several choices.

1. Choice of procedure under article 287 of the Convention
2. International Court of Justice
3. International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea
4. Arbitrators and Conciliators

Clearly, China does not want any international involvement because China does not want the international community to see her for what she really is. :bunny:
So I have the question:
_ What's nine-section-lines (11-section-lines in past)!? What's you based on for your nine-section-lines!?
I never heard anyone can explain those things.
According to Wikipedia’s History

Nine-dotted line - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Nine-dotted line was originally an "eleven-dotted-line" first indicated by the then Kuomintang government of the Republic of China in 1947 for its claims to the South China Sea.[3] After the Communist Party of China took over mainland China and formed the People's Republic of China in 1949, the line was adopted and revised to nine as endorsed by Zhou Enlai.[3] After evacuating to Taiwan, the Republic of China has continued its claims, and the nine-dotted line remains as the rationale for Taiwan's claims to the Spratly and Paracel Islands.

The dotted line has been used by China as the maximum extent of its claim.[3] However, the dotted lines do not show how the lines would be joined if it was continuous and the extent of area claimed by China.[3] The 9-dotted-line has been officially protested by the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei and Indonesia.[4] Immediately after China submitted to the UN a map including the 9-dotted lines territorial claim in the South China Sea on May 7, 2009, the Philippines lodged a diplomatic protest against China for claiming the whole of South China Sea illegally. Vietnam and Malaysia filed their joint protest a day after China submitted its 9-dash line map to the UN. Indonesia also registered its protest, even though it did not have a claim on the South China Sea.


More attempts to attack China.
By the way peaceful rise or aggressive rise... does it really matter as long as you are advancing. Also assertiveness comes with economic growth. It was also stated in the book Clash of Civilizations. Eventually things will cool down.
In the meantime I wonder why no one bothers to protest the how many 736 military bases of US in 200+ nations?
If a superpower from our Asia rises and possibly confronts the world order... it would be quite an honor to be on its side. Western colonialism is a bigger threat than our useless border disputes. And only for countries like Pakistan, Afghanistan and Japan an issue called terrorism trumps it. For the rest-guess its time to challenge prevailing dominance of US. People in Pakistan look very favorably to the rise of China.
The Chinese government is desperate to control the territory using illegal tactics. How ashamed for them to condition the mind of its citizens using a crook, immoral and illegal means. China is the one who has made this issue flare up. That's why it's a good thing that the presence of a big US force in the region will balance and hold in check China's unlawful thievery. Especially now, China is making enemies with almost all countries in the region in a bid to expand its territory. :sick:
 
.
The nine-dotted boundary lines were formerly claimed by Chinese National Government from 1947-1948, while none of the other states had objections nor actions. Where were you guys? So called territory conflicts all started from 1970s by various ASEAN countries when oil/gas reserves became known to the world. You Phils should stop playing innocent kids by painting China as a monster. So far it's VN which has sucked out the oil and gas from South China Sea the most. Check up the oil wells around South China Sea and you would find no Chinese flags.
Envy with our oil rigs again?u can't find ur rigs on the map coz ur Army is weaker than Vn.Go home,get more training and experience before going to SCS(east sea)and compete with us.:coffee:

China govt. Should stop making more funny propaganda to fool Chinese abt its strength now.
 
.
Greediness in the most complex flavor in life as really the cause of major destruction in this planet earth. If China didn't think wisely and stand for their stubbornness to continuously claim the disputed territory. The most dangerous and worst of all games may flare up that no one will get benefit from it. China maybe isolated as against all nations which will send a very bad signal that will affect our future as the lyrics of the song says, “If tomorrow never come" maybe due to man's greediness. :azn:

China's position is ancient times when people are using stones as tools. I don't know where they get evidence from fake history. Everybody here in this world can create history. Bring us your evidence and nothing more. Philippine position is more legal and binding in all perspective.

These are all a circus. With China insisting on its indisputable territory claim, nothing will happen. In fact, it's China who is the real problem here. This country just came into the scene and everything just went haywire. You take the China equation out and there will be no problem. :no:

That’s right. Actually when China ratified the UNCLOS in 1996, she made a statement that it enjoys sovereign rights over its exclusive economic zone of 200 nm and the continental shelf. China also stated a law it passed in 1992 claiming islands in South China Sea including Taiwan and other disputed islands. Keep in mind that the UNCLOS was written in 1982. In both statements, China also stated that she will abide and respect the international law.

If others are to respect China's 200nm EEZ and continental shelf, then it should in return respect its neighbors' territories. China is establishing itself as a major player in the world. But if China wants the whole world to listen, she should not treat its neighbor like this. If China really wants to settle the dispute then there are several choices.

1. Choice of procedure under article 287 of the Convention
2. International Court of Justice
3. International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea
4. Arbitrators and Conciliators

Clearly, China does not want any international involvement because China does not want the international community to see her for what she really is. :bunny:

According to Wikipedia’s History

Nine-dotted line - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Nine-dotted line was originally an "eleven-dotted-line" first indicated by the then Kuomintang government of the Republic of China in 1947 for its claims to the South China Sea.[3] After the Communist Party of China took over mainland China and formed the People's Republic of China in 1949, the line was adopted and revised to nine as endorsed by Zhou Enlai.[3] After evacuating to Taiwan, the Republic of China has continued its claims, and the nine-dotted line remains as the rationale for Taiwan's claims to the Spratly and Paracel Islands.

The dotted line has been used by China as the maximum extent of its claim.[3] However, the dotted lines do not show how the lines would be joined if it was continuous and the extent of area claimed by China.[3] The 9-dotted-line has been officially protested by the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei and Indonesia.[4] Immediately after China submitted to the UN a map including the 9-dotted lines territorial claim in the South China Sea on May 7, 2009, the Philippines lodged a diplomatic protest against China for claiming the whole of South China Sea illegally. Vietnam and Malaysia filed their joint protest a day after China submitted its 9-dash line map to the UN. Indonesia also registered its protest, even though it did not have a claim on the South China Sea.



The Chinese government is desperate to control the territory using illegal tactics. How ashamed for them to condition the mind of its citizens using a crook, immoral and illegal means. China is the one who has made this issue flare up. That's why it's a good thing that the presence of a big US force in the region will balance and hold in check China's unlawful thievery. Especially now, China is making enemies with almost all countries in the region in a bid to expand its territory. :sick:

You worked hard making a crap like this, I think you are respectful but I don't find your argument is of any logic or interests.
 
.
You worked hard making a crap like this, I think you are respectful but I don't find your argument is of any logic or interests.

See now that's trolling no counter argument> ? you attack with out cause see this why china does not want an International forum does not want to solves this diplomatically and peacefully because they have no counter arguments for a perfectly legal and logical argument.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom