What's new

China Vs. Vietnam: Next Up At The International Court On The South China Sea

Viet

ELITE MEMBER
Joined
Jun 18, 2012
Messages
29,950
Reaction score
0
Country
Viet Nam
Location
Germany
http://www.forbes.com/sites/andersc...al-court-on-the-south-china-sea/#136b279d2887


960x0.jpg


Nguyen Van Hung, captain of Vietnamese Coast Guard vessel No. 8003, speaks over a walkie-talkie while being flanked by a Chinese Coast Guard ship, left, in disputed waters claimed by both China and Vietnam west of the Paracel islands, Vietnam, on May 15, 2014. Vietnam’s demand that a Chinese oil rig be removed from contested waters near the Paracel Islands reflected a renewed chill and continuing between the two Communist nations. Photographer: Oanh Ha/Bloomberg


Now that the Hague’s Permanent Court of Arbitration voted resoundingly in Philippines’ favor on the South China Sea, it is Vietnam’s turn to bring an arbitration case. China has interfered massively in Vietnam’s economic development — not only against its fishing, but against its offshore oil and gas exploration and extraction. China justifies its interference in Vietnam’s exclusive economic zone (EEZ) based on China’s recently-claimed 9-dash line — the same 1930s line that the Court invalidated yesterday in the Philippine legal victory.

In 2012, China cut the cables of seismic equipment used by Vietnam to explore its own EEZ for oil and gas. Starting in 2014, China repeatedly explored for oil within Vietnam’s 200 nautical mile EEZ, with its high-tech $1 billion HS 981 drilling rig. Subsidized Chinese steel-hulled boats regularly sink wooden Vietnamese fishing boats in disputed areas of the South China Sea, most recently last weekend. In what the Vietnamese describe as a “merciless and pitiless” incident, Chinese boats tried to prevent rescuers from retrieving fishermen thrown overboard.

With the Court’s ruling yesterday, nothing stops Vietnam from bringing a similar arbitration case against China — and getting an almost certain win. Vietnam has done a great job of patching up its differences with countries more reasonable than China. Vietnam even submitted a joint submission with Malaysia on their shared continental shelf — a model of cooperation and reason. Vietnam still claims all of the Spratlys and Paracel Islands, but one senses none of the stridency and intensity regarding these claims that was exhibited by China on their 9-dash line claim.

My prediction is that Vietnamese leaders simply want — and will soon petition — the Court to ascertain the limits of their EEZ, based on 200 nautical miles from the coastline, plus additional continental shelf. Once this is settled, Vietnam will be theoretically free to fully utilize its EEZ.

Enforcement of Vietnam’s claim is another matter. China’s reaction to the Philippine’s successful case over the coming months will help Vietnam know what to expect after a new ruling in its favor. But there is now every reason for Vietnam to bring an arbitration case. As President Rodrigo Duterte of the Philippines discovered, there is no reason to bargain with China prior to a PCA ruling, as the PCA ruling strengthened the bargaining position of the Philippines. China knew this, which is why China was so desperate for bilateral negotiations prior to yesterday’s ruling. Vietnam’s bargaining position with China will be similarly strengthened by bringing a case and receiving a ruling from the Hague tribunal.

Let’s hope Vietnam now takes action.
 
. .
The United Nations clarified on its Chinese microblog yesterday that the tribunal that ruled against China’s historic claims over the disputed South China Sea was not a UN agency.

The statement came amid apparent public misunderstanding of the tribunal’s operations.

The UN said the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague, which issued the decision on the case on Tuesday, operated out of the same building, the Peace Palace, as the UN’s primary justice branch, the International Court of Justice, but the two agencies were unrelated.
United Nations stresses separation from Hague tribunal
The Permanent Court of Arbitration rents space in the same building as the UN’s International Court of Justice, but the two organisations are not related

PUBLISHED : Thursday, 14 July, 2016


Key rulings to watch out for in South China Sea case

“The UN makes donations to the Carnegie Foundation (the building’s owner) every year for using the building,” the UN post said.

“Another renter of the Peace Palace is the Permanent Court of Arbitration established in 1899, but [it] has nothing to do with the UN.”

The post came a day after the tribunal dismissed China’s sweeping claims to contested waters in the South China Sea, adding that it violated the Philippines’ sovereign rights by building artificial islands and caused irreparable harm to the coral reef ecosystem.


China has long claimed almost all of the South China Sea, including reefs and islands that also claimed by other Southeast Asian countries, including the Philippines and Vietnam.

The Chinese government reacted angrily to Tuesday’s decision, calling the ruling invalid.

Some internet users also lashed out at the UN, apparently thinking the international body was linked to the tribunal.

“When we make such sacrifices to keep peace, a subsidiary of the UN makes a ruling against China’s sovereign rights. So what do you want to do?” a Chinese microblogger wrote in response to a UN post after the ruling was announced.

China has no intention of challenging international order, say former diplomats

China was a founding member of the United Nations in 1945 and one of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council, along with the United States, Britain, France and Russia.

China has pledged to be more engaged in the UN, and is the second-biggest contributor to the organisation’s peacekeeping operations, paying 10.2 per cent of the UN’s peacekeeping operations budget.

Established by treaty, the Permanent Court of Arbitration is an intergovernmental organisation that provides various dispute resolution services to the international community, according to its official website.
 
. .
What international court? under the UN? you bet your worthless paper will be thrown out less than 1 minute after your submission, together with your errand boy.
 
. . .
What international court? under the UN? you bet your worthless paper will be thrown out less than 1 minute after your submission, together with your errand boy.

In my opinion it is the time China and Vietnam solve the EEZ disputes of Xisha isalnds ( they call paceral) via negotiation or court. Otherwise, the Vientamese will set fire to our company there again in some future.
 
.
In my opinion it is the time China and Vietnam solve the EEZ disputes of Xisha isalnds ( they call paceral) via negotiation or court. Otherwise, the Vientamese will set fire to our company there again in some future.
why bother so much? just pushing down the missle-launching button, SCS will immediately become quite, calm and peaceful!!!
 
.
But please apply for a professional and authorized international court. The bogus SCS arbitration court sucks.
and where is that "professional and authorized international court" ?
 
. .
Only when two parties authorized to the ruling and accept. Unilateral rule is an abuse of power and should be avoid at all cost.
So, according to you, if you hit someone badly on his face, the victim should approach the court only when the offender agrees for it? I must say, this must be happening only in China!!
 
.
So, according to you, if you hit someone badly on his face, the victim should approach the court only when the offender agrees for it? I must say, this must be happening only in China!!
Nobody hits nobody face. Your analogy sucks. The analogy is if you are having dispute over a piece of property, should a third outside decided to rule who it belong to without one the party agreeing to the settlement by a third party arbitration? Think Indian, think! I expect a lot out of you Indian intelligent. LOL
 
.
Nobody hits nobody face. Your analogy sucks. The analogy is if you are having dispute over a piece of property, should a third outside decided to rule who it belong to without one the party agreeing to the settlement by a third party arbitration? Think Indian, think! I expect a lot out of you Indian intelligent. LOL

this is a matter of international sea for which there are already clear laid down guidelines and china is one of the signatory of that treaty....China is running away from UN authorized court because it knows it is the invador country which comes with some shit from its so called history which no one acknowledges in 21st Century !
 
.
this is a matter of international sea for which there are already clear laid down guidelines and china is one of the signatory of that treaty....China is running away from UN authorized court because it knows it is the invador country which comes with some shit from its so called history which no one acknowledges in 21st Century !
We have not stop any ships, commercial or military or otherwise, from trespassing in international water of the SCS.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom