Taiwan Conducts Live Fire Drills on Spratlys, Angering Vietnam

[ChineseTiger1986]

Nihonji san, im afraid i have to agree with Genesis on this one, No country is a saint like i said several times before. Any country who claims to be a saint/innocent/pure or whatever is bullshit, its just because they dont have the capabilities to do so. I already disproved that theory as well on here with another chinese members who were saying China is honest/innocent etc and that the U.S is all war mongering/evil/murderer for the arms it uses and its invasions in Iraq , Afghanistan, Vietnam, Pakistan(drones) etc.... Any country who says that is because they have no other choice, same like when China was a hegemon in asia with its tributary states from Korea, to Japan, to mongolia, to Malysia to Nepal to its 1000 year colonization of Vietnam etc etc. same with Japans own period of power from its colonization/invasion of Korea to Taiwan, to east/coastal china to almost all of Asia etc, same with Portugal, Spain, France, dutch etc, they all look like saint/peaceful today, but when they had the power/capabilities to project power/subjugate others , they did exactly that. The hell even little/small Vietnam with its little power it got it invaded Cambodia and Laos few times. Imagine of they had the power of say China or Vietnam, by the words of one Vietnamese member on here(VIET), they would have long conquered invaded even China, Vietnam and all of south east Asia.

So thats why when i hear memebers here say they are peaceful while other countries are hegemonistic/evil i just

Well, if Vietnam has the power of China, they would already steamroll over the entire Asia.

Back in 1979, we were getting constantly provoked by those ungrateful/lawless Vietcongs, and we were forced to fight them.

Have you seen the behavior of those Vietnamese keyboard warriors? Even with less than 1/100 of China's strength, still so much insolence coming from them.

China knows its little Asian neighbors like Japan/Korea/Vietnam very well, since they never once had their own proper empire in the past, that's why they are by far more power hungry/wannabe than China itself.

 

[William Hung]

China cited article 298 because China claims that the dispute involves "historic bays or titles"



PREAMBLE TO THE UNITED NATIONS CONVENTION ON THE LAW OF THE SEA

Article 298

Optional exceptions to applicability of section 2

1. When signing, ratifying or acceding to this Convention or at any time thereafter, a State may, without prejudice to the obligations arising under section 1, declare in writing that it does not accept any one or more of the procedures provided for in section 2 with respect to one or more of the following categories of disputes:

(a) (i) disputes concerning the interpretation or application of articles 15, 74 and 83 relating to sea boundary delimitations, or those involving historic bays or titles,...

My friend, China can only depend on the blue part of the provisions because the part you hightlighted in red is even weaker for China to invoke. The arbitration case that the Philippines is bringing to the tribunal is not a dispute concerning or involving historic bays or historic titles.

Firstly, China does not possess anything in the Spratly that can be regarded, under UNCLOS's legal definition, as a "bay." Here is how UNCLOS defines a bay in article 10:

Article10

Bays

1. This article relates only to bays the coasts of which belong to a single State.

2. For the purposes of this Convention, a bay is a well-marked indentation whose penetration is in such proportion to the width of its mouth as to contain land-locked waters and constitute more than a mere curvature of the coast. An indentation shall not, however, be regarded as a bay unless its area is as large as, or larger than, that of the semi-circle whose diameter is a line drawn across the mouth of that indentation.

Everything currently in China's possession are technically "reefs" under UNCLOS definition. I was being very lenient to consider the possibility of declaring 3 of those reefs as being "islands" because they have a few rocks exposed during high tide. But that's even really stretching it a bit. It's likely that the tribunal would declare them all as reefs. So to even consider them as "bays" is out of the question. The arbitration case will not be a dispute concerning or involving historic bays.

Now, let's look at the second part of that clause. Is the arbitration case dealing with a dispute concerning or involving "historic titles"? The answer is no. Some Chinese and Viet members here were debating about historical evidences and the historical territorial entitlement of their country, and that is what you would call a dispute concerning historic titles. But the Philippines'arbitration case will not involve any dispute on historic titles.

So if this arbitration case does not concern or involve "historic bays or titles", then China cannot invoke their 2006 declaration based on article 298 to reject the tribunal ruling.

In any case, any dispute on historic bays or titles would be excluded from the procedures in Section 2 by a declaration under article 298 excluding disputes concerning historic bays or titles.

Source: Robert Beckman, "UNCLOS Part XV and the South China Sea" in Tommy Koh, S.
Jayakumar and R. Beckman, eds., The South China Sea Disputes and Law of the Sea (Northampton MA: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2014), pg. 247.

The best option China has is to invoke their 2006 declaration based on the clause that I've hightled in blue:

... does not accept any one or more of the procedures provided for in section 2 with respect to one or more of the following categories of disputes:

(a) (i) disputes concerning the interpretation or application of articles 15, 74 and 83 relating to sea boundary delimitations, or those involving historic bays or titles,...

But article 15 (22.2km territorial water delimitation between adjacent coasts), article 74 (EEZ delimitation between adjacent coasts) and article 83 (continental shelf delimitation between adjacent coasts) are not involved in this arbitration case at all. As argued earlier, all of the reefs currently in China's possession does not have any EEZs, Continental shelves or water boundaries.

Summary: China is depending on its 2006 declaration to declare that the arbitration tribunal does not have jurisdiction over the dispute and so China can reject the tribunal's ruling. However, China used article 298 to make it's 2006 declaration. And article 298 is too specific such that it only applies to a few specific kind of disputes. As I have argued here, it is unlikely that the tribunal would accept that article 298 can be applied to the dispute that the Philippines is currently raising. Simply, the dispute does not concern or involve water boundary delimitations between adjacent coasts, historic bays or titles.

@Chinese-Dragon @kyle Chiang

 

[Aepsilons]

Its same today, which country can be said to be an equal to the U,S? China? Russia? Japan(dont even mention this one.lol), India? Brazil? NO COUNTRY(well for now though).

Equal to the United States in terms of geopolitical and economic clout? None in this list comes to mind.

 

[Huaren]

Well, if Vietnam has the power of China, they would already steamroll over the entire Asia.

Back in 1979, we were getting constantly provoked by those ungrateful/lawless Vietcongs, and we were forced to fight them.

Have you seen the behavior of those Vietnamese keyboard warriors? Even with less than 1/100 of China's strength, still so much insolence coming from them.

China knows its little Asian neighbors like Japan/Korea/Vietnam very well, since they never once had their own proper empire in the past, that's why they are by far more power hungry/wannabe than China itself.

About our smaller neighbors I see them all as hardworking, proud and ambitious, though those are positive qualities in general overdose would cause far more misundertsanding, tension and false hope, especially with pride and ambition which defines all eastasian nations (in this regard viets are indeed more like us). The turbulence in historical China had its part in contribution as well, the moment we couldnt maintain the top position inevitably made them doubt the order of heavenly mandant for civilized world, and by which they must be better representative of civilized world (as in east asia),at that point they have find overwhelming pride and divine conviction for greatness, all that which is left is distrusts and tensions.

 

[dichoi]

(a) (i) disputes concerning the interpretation or application of articles 15, 74 and 83 relating to sea boundary delimitations, or those involving historic bays or titles, provided that a State having made such a declaration shall, when such a dispute arises subsequent to the entry into force of this Convention and where no agreement within a reasonable period of time is reached in negotiations between the parties, at the request of any party to the dispute, accept submission of the matter to conciliation under Annex V, section 2; and provided further that any dispute that necessarily involves the concurrent consideration of any unsettled dispute concerning sovereignty or other rights over continental or insular land territory shall be excluded from such submission;

SCS is sea, not bay, bro.
Nine - dashed claim of China is baseless.

 

[William Hung]

Bro as much as i sympathise with Vietnam's position in spratlys islands case/dispute. I must say you people should be realistic as well. Of course the U.S is looking out only for its own interests, why wouldnt it? Every country is only out for their own interests(philippines included). If you people want the U.S to intervene and shed its blood(and pput its own territory/economy in danger as well) for Vietnam/philippines, then you people have to first solve your problems among yourselves, afterall, Philippines and Vietnam still claim the same islands as well, same with Taiwan, Vietnam, Philippines , Malaysia, Indonesia etc, you all have competing cliams with each other one way or another. So why will the U.S intervene to help you people when you cant even help yourselves/solve your issues among yourselves? If you people had solve your disputes among yourselves, then it will be much more easier for the U.S to look at things from a China vs YOU ALL perspective, but as of now, its not the case and there wont be any direct intervention from the U.S no matter the situation(that's something im sure about).

So get your acts together first among you people, that will be a good first step to face china later and more pragmatically. Else you people are not much different from China, since you all seem to be looking out for yourselves/own interests instead of acting for each other/as a group. That doesn't help things. No hard feelings though. Just my 2 cents.

Mate, why are you talking in that diplomatic voice as if you are mediating a dispute between two head of state? We are all just keyboard warriors here on PDF and has barely any influence on our country's foreign policy. We do not have any influences on the outcome of this arbitral tribunal either.

What I'm trying to deal with here are facts that needs to be backed by sources.

I'm trying to first establish these facts:

1. Does the arbitral tribunal have jurisdiction over the dispute?

2. What kind of defence can China put up against this jurisdictional debate?

3. What implication would there be if the arbitral tribunal declares jurisdiction over the dispute?

4. What implication would there be if the Philippines wins its case? would the US-Philippines MDT be triggered?

There's no point in advising @Carlosa to do this or that. He does not have any say in Vietnamese foreign policy. In fact, hes not a Viet at all.

 

[Aepsilons]

Nihonji san, im afraid i have to agree with Genesis on this one, No country is a saint like i said several times before. Any country who claims to be a saint/innocent/pure or whatever is bullshit, its just because they dont have the capabilities to do so. I already disproved that theory as well on here with another chinese members who were saying China is honest/innocent etc and that the U.S is all war mongering/evil/murderer for the arms it uses and its invasions in Iraq , Afghanistan, Vietnam, Pakistan(drones) etc.... Any country who says that is because they have no other choice, same like when China was a hegemon in asia with its tributary states from Korea, to Japan, to mongolia, to Malysia to Nepal to its 1000 year colonization of Vietnam etc etc. same with Japans own period of power from its colonization/invasion of Korea to Taiwan, to east/coastal china to almost all of Asia etc, same with Portugal, Spain, France, dutch etc, they all look like saint/peaceful today, but when they had the power/capabilities to project power/subjugate others , they did exactly that. The hell even little/small Vietnam with its little power it got it invaded Cambodia and Laos few times. Imagine of they had the power of say China or Vietnam, by the words of one Vietnamese member on here(VIET), they would have long conquered invaded even China, Vietnam and all of south east Asia.

So thats why when i hear memebers here say they are peaceful while other countries are hegemonistic/evil i just

Mike,

Your message carries weight in it, definitely in regards to the proverbial saying, "Might is Right", however, given the fact that we live in modern times, there should be some kind of credence towards jurisprudence. The World Order was built upon the ashes of the last Great War (WWII) where the might of nations and empires was used as pretext to conquer territories. Where one's military power and radical views was leveraged against those whom were not in the position to oppose. Imperial Japan and Nazi German/ Fascist Italy did this, to even a certain extent, so did Fascist Bulgaria, Romania and Hungary, Spain.
There is an International Body, the United Nations and the United Nations Security Council, which has been the conduit to which all major military conflict has been ameliorated or at least reduced in extremity, or humanitarian means forrayed.

I am an avid supporter of diplomatic resolution to differences in political views. We see how diplomacy can result in victory; we saw this in the 2010 Cambodian-Thai Border skirmish regarding the varying positions Bangkok and Phnomh Penh had on Preah Vihear. In the end, the United Nations as well as through diplomatic channels vis-a-vis ASEAN had led to the amelioration of relations and thus normalcy returned. Why, even the situation in Ukraine can be used as an example of how diplomacy can be the conduit to which damage control can be processed. It was through the UNSC that led to the ceasefire between Kiev and rebels in Eastern Ukraine.

There are benefits , invaluable at that, in the use of diplomatic processes to secure a resolution to a political problem. This includes territorial differences. Most recent example of this is the Japanese-Chinese agreement (through 4 Point Proposal) to restore political relations and to reduce the tensions in the East China Sea regarding Senkakus/ Diayutai. This is an example of how bilateral intergovernmental approach can lead to restitution of issues. There is no reason why the Philippines and Vietnam cannot avail of these provisions and resources.



I Remain,
@Nihonjin1051

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

About our smaller neighbors I see them all as hardworking, proud and ambitious, though those are positive qualities in general overdose would cause far more misundertsanding, tension and false hope, especially with pride and ambition which defines all eastasian nations (in this regard viets are indeed more like us). The turbulence in historical China had its part in contribution as well, the moment we couldnt maintain the top position inevitably made them doubt the order of heavenly mandant for civilized world, and by which they must be better representative of civilized world (as in east asia),at that point they have find overwhelming pride and divine conviction for greatness, all that which is left is distrusts and tensions.

Only working hard is not enough, you need the proper wisdom.

Since they don't possess the proper wisdom of China which was a civilization originator by itself.

For example, China always has the proper wisdom such as 欲速则不达, which is translated as the Rome was not built in one day. We are patient, even we want to build our own empire, we know how to plan it carefully step by step.

And let's compare with the Japan in the modern era, they got a good opportunity to take on a weakened China. However, they were too hasty to build up their empire in just one shot. When they have annexed Manchuria, they didn't even take some time to digest it, then they immediately invaded the entire China.

This kind of immature behavior will not lead them towards the path of a superpower, and they even will never learn their mistakes in the past.

The US as a young nation was born as a genius, even they were very lucky, but they have the wisdom to seize the opportunities passed in front of them. The USSR was born as a powerful warlord with the superhuman strength, which also qualified them as being a superpower.

However, China's little Asian neighbors don't have those natural born talents of the USA or USSR, nor they possess China's ancient wisdom, so it is better for them to calm down a little bit, and stop acting like an immature hothead.

 

[William Hung]

Dudes, you guys are not diplomats or in any position to influence your country's foreign policy. Stop acting like you're head of states talking to each other on the negotiation table. And stick to the topic, this thread is about Taiwan, Vietnam and the SCS dispute, not Russia, Germany or the UK.

you be wrong, China won't go to war any time soon. We have a very strict time line, we are waiting for quite a few system to roll off the assembly line and for our economy to be able to properly support our men. So the closest date would be around 2020, and by then our economic and political power may very well be enough to take care of things without force.

The middle east is very different, rich, poor, or destitute, it's always war. There is no long term planning, there's just no planning period, from the look of things.



No, there isn't, but what makes you think China definitely wants war. Having said what I said, do you doubt our ability to rain death on any ASEAN nation without suffering much in return.

In terms of coast guard moves, we can do more, I seen calculations, and Chinese coast guard tonnage pretty much equals Japan + ASEAN combined. But we don't, is that not a signal.

For all the talk of aggressive China, we could be doing so much more.

That's why I said earlier that China would definitely want to avoid any clashes from now until 2020, or perhaps uptil 2025, or further. Having internal stability is vital at this of development for China. The question is, can it become vital for someone else to disrupt this regional stability?

But before we get ahead of ourselves, I want to establish some facts first, such as:

Does the arbitral tribunal have jurisdiction over the dispute? what would be the legal implication if the Philippines win? would the US-Philippines MDT be legally triggered? etc.

 

[ChineseTiger1986]

Dudes, you guys are not diplomats or in any position to influence your country's foreign policy. Stop acting like you're head of states talking to each other on the negotiation table. And stick to the topic, this thread is about Taiwan, Vietnam and the SCS dispute, not Russia, Germany or the UK.

I am just interpreting the fact.

Vietnam is just another Japan-like power hungry punk. With a bloody nose after the Vietnam War, they immediately invaded the Southeast Asia. This kind of behavior has no wisdom at all.

Even the Vietnamese members here like NiceGuy have openly admitted that they hate us because we have successfully sabotaged their plan of conquering the entire Indochina.

 

[Aepsilons]

Good read my friend Nihonji San alias diplomat. Always a pleasure to read your valuable/respectful replies.

Our nations suffered greatly in war some 70 years ago. I'm sure you had a grandfather, or granduncle who fought against the Axis. My grandfather fought against America and the West, I had grand-uncles who also died fighting in that war. War , and I mean a World War, is not small business. Conflict in such epic proportion results in the collateral damage of not only military personnel but civilians. Long may this world be free of such kind of conflict. Long may the US-NATO-Japan-ROKN Alliance keep this world stable and free.

 

[William Hung]

I am just interpreting the fact.

Vietnam is just another Japan-like power hungry punk. With a bloody nose after the Vietnam War, they immediately invaded the Southeast Asia. This kind of behavior has no wisdom at all.

Even the Vietnamese members here like NiceGuy here has openly admitted that they hate us because we have successfully sabotaged their plan of conquering the entire Indochina.

Whether VN is wise or not, aggressive or not, bloodthirsty or not, will not be considered or judged by UNCLOS. The UNCLOS only cares about rules and laws.

I want to know your opinions on the arbitration tribunal case that the Philippines is currently raising. Will the 2006 declaration that China made to UNCLOS legally allow China to reject the tribunal's ruling?

That is the most important question because that 2006 declaration is the only way China can legally protect itself from the arbitration ruling.

 

[William Hung]

I agree bro. i myself had my grand dads elder brother fought in the war and died unfortunately during the war, in france. War is never a good thing.
Just a correction with you last point, it should be : Long may this world be free of such kind of conflict. Long may all big world powers/countries in the world Alliance keep this world stable and free. its not just the role of 4 countries /powers to keep the world safe/peaceful. we all need the great/major powers role/collaboration as well.

I've reported this for off-topic.

 

[Aepsilons]

I agree bro. i myself had my grand dads elder brother fought in the war and died unfortunately during the war, in france. War is never a good thing.
Just a correction with you last point, it should be : Long may this world be free of such kind of conflict. Long may all big world powers/countries in the world Alliance keep this world stable and free. its not just the role of 4 countries /powers to keep the world safe/peaceful. we all need the great/major powers role/collaboration as well.

Yes, you're right, there must be collaboration and participation of the Great Powers. Cheers to that, buddy.

 

[mike2000]

I've reported this for off-topic.

OFF topic? lol i was correcting Nihonji's comment, whats off topic on there bros?