What's new

Philippines scores against China in UN arbitration

. .
I guess Xi Jinping will not come here for the 2015 APEC summit.
 
. .
No, "here" is only a place in which APEC will be held.

I don't understand you? :pop:

Last time I check, 2015 APEC summit will be done here in Manila, and with this arbitration case and the recent USS Lassen passing over the islands, I wonder if the Xi Jinpinh will come here. :coffee:
 
.
I don't understand you? :pop:

Last time I check, 2015 APEC summit will be done here in Manila, and with this arbitration case and the recent USS Lassen passing over the islands, I wonder if the Xi Jinpinh will come here. :coffee:

APEC decides to held this summit in Malina. It's not Philippines who decide the place of conference.
Xi Jingping is attending APEC summit, not officially visiting the country. (maybe he will make official visit, I have not yet read the news. ) Got it, now?
 
.
I'm also expecting some to become "UN Tribunal guru" to the extent that they know what the result is even if no hearing to the case has been made yet.

Case and point. V





I'm not sure how you concluded that the red part means "can't". I don't think the word "considered" translates well to Chinese.

Anyway, here's the context submitted by PH.
Red texts are the ones the UN Tribunal has jurisdiction with.
Black texts - may be considered by the UN.
Blue texts - needs some explaining to do.

(1) China’s maritime entitlements in the South China Sea, like those of the Philippines, may not extend beyond those permitted by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (“UNCLOS” or the “Convention”);

(2) China’s claims to sovereign rights and jurisdiction, and to “historic rights”, with respect to the maritime areas of the South China Sea encompassed by the so-called “nine-dash line” are contrary to the Convention and without lawful effect to the extent that they exceed the geographic and substantive limits of China’s maritime entitlements under UNCLOS;

(3) Scarborough Shoal generates no entitlement to an exclusive economic zone or continental shelf

(4) Mischief Reef, Second Thomas Shoal and Subi Reef are low-tide elevations that do not generate entitlement to a territorial sea, exclusive economic zone or continental shelf, and are not features that are capable of appropriation by occupation or otherwise;


(5) Mischief Reef and Second Thomas Shoal are part of the exclusive economic zone and continental shelf of the Philippines;

(6) Gaven Reef and McKennan Reef (including Hughes Reef) are low-tide elevations that do not generate entitlement to a territorial sea, exclusive economic zone or continental shelf, but their low-water line may be used to determine the baseline from which the breadth of the territorial sea of Namyit and Sin Cowe, respectively, is measured;

(7) Johnson Reef, Cuarteron Reef and Fiery Cross Reef generate no entitlement to an exclusive economic zone or continental shelf;


(8) China has unlawfully interfered with the enjoyment and exercise of the sovereign rights of the Philippines with respect to the living and non-living resources of its exclusive economic zone and continental shelf;

(9) China has unlawfully failed to prevent its nationals and vessels from exploiting the living resources in the exclusive economic zone of the Philippines;

(10) China has unlawfully prevented Philippine fishermen from pursuing their livelihoods by interfering with traditional fishing activities at Scarborough Shoal;

(11) China has violated its obligations under the Convention to protect and preserve the marine environment at Scarborough Shoal and Second Thomas Shoal;


(12) China’s occupation and construction activities on Mischief Reef (a) violate the provisions of the Convention concerning artificial islands, installations and structures; (b) violate China’s duties to protect and preserve the marine environment under the Convention; and (c) constitute unlawful acts of attempted appropriation in violation of the Convention;

(13) China has breached its obligations under the Convention by operating its law enforcement vessels in a dangerous manner causing serious risk of collision to Philippine vessels navigating in the vicinity of Scarborough Shoal;

(14) Since the commencement of this arbitration in January 2013, China has unlawfully aggravated and extended the dispute by, among other things: (a) interfering with the Philippines’ rights of navigation in the waters at, and adjacent to, Second Thomas Shoal; (b) preventing the rotation and resupply of Philippine personnel stationed at Second Thomas Shoal; and (c) endangering the health and well-being of Philippine personnel stationed at Second Thomas Shoal; and

(15) China shall desist from further unlawful claims and activities
I knew it all along. None of the one in Red concern us at all. LOL
 
.
Who cares? China has nothing to lose here. If the final ruling is against China, China can simply withdraw from the UNCLOS by saying abusement of the law and Chinese sovereignty by UN Tribunal court. Since this is not approved by United States, there will be more damage to UNCLOS and tribunal courts since both the strongest two countries do not respect them.

When China signed on UNCLOS, there was a pre-condition that this law couldn't be used for sovereignty disputes. It the court doesn't respect China, why does China need to respect them? Without the endorsement of both China and United States, the credibility of UNCLOS and Tribunal Court will be in trouble. Even League of Nations could be disbanded, why not this law and this court?

Law and court will only be respected when there is an enforcement. A law and a court always treaded by the strongest powers will soon become meanless. UN Security Council avoided this and the fate of League of Nations by adding veto power to permanent members.

This tribunal court clearly is mindless. It may try to slap a face on China, instead it will find itself slapped.
 
.
Wow imperials are running ther keyboard likw crazy the sea patrol now this china this all on you so thank you for being so arrogant and stupid
 
.
@Vietnamese and PH members here, is there any plan to resolve the overlap in claims between PH and Vietnam (and other ASEAN countries), so a united front can be projected against China?
 
.
China dare not join in to arbitration, is not educated to understand what is this, empty head, so like this.:pleasantry:
The mindsets of ruler and ruled are completely different. No one can rule on Chinese sovereignty. China is here to write international rules and orders, not be ruled against.

The conflicts of USA and China are about the rule writing, rules about IMF, SDR, SCS, trades, tribunal courts,sovereignty, navigation, sea et al. Since most rules are written when China was weak, they need to be modified since China is getting stronger. USA clearly knows the problem. It also suggests something like G2 model for modification. It simply uses Japan, Vietnam, Phillipine, tribunal court as bargain chips. When USA and China reaches some consensus, all of these can be sacrificed. Whether you like it not, the world is ruled by P5, with USA having dominant shares. With USA weakening, it needs give more rule writing powers to other P5 members such as China and Russia. Otherwise, China and Russia can build BRICS and AIIB to change or even overturn current rules. Anyway, international laws are used by P5 to rule this planet, not to be ruled against P5.

Only P5 can determine the enforcement of international laws, as stated by veto power in UNSC. This is the most critical component in the current international order. This power sharing mechanism make human kind avoid 3rd world war and allows Untied Nations to avoid the fate of League of Nations.
 
. .
China could also using the ruling of the tribunal court as a chance to take islands back from Philippine by force. This will be a clear slap on the court and the Philippine and send a clear message to countries as Philippine and international organizations such as tribunal court. USA will be forced to make clear if it comes to defend Philippine sovereignty or defend freedom of Navigation. If it comes to defend FON, it cannot do anything; if it comes to defend Philippine sovereignty, all of its endeavour done by now will be meanless. USA has to tolerate the take-back of Mischeef by China; it will have to tolerate Chine to take back other islands from Philippine. USA is a law-based and interest-oriented country; it has to be self-consistent on the surface and as long as China awards USA interests on other fronts, it will accept Chinese action.

With the falling of USA, USA is making strategic retreat from West Pacific because US economy cannot support the current expansion. Pivot to Asia is just a cover for this action and optimizes the gain from this retreat. It will sell many interests in West Pacific to China as long as China can offer a good price.
 
.
@Vietnamese and PH members here, is there any plan to resolve the overlap in claims between PH and Vietnam (and other ASEAN countries), so a united front can be projected against China?
We can have some agreement with PH, but not with anothers.

We simply strong enough to take back all isls there. But most of isls are just useless rocks without fresh water, so no need to take action now.
 
.
Japan is clearly the first choice for USA to sell interests in West Pacific. But Japanese economy is falling crazily. It even doesn't want to pay the price in the TPP. It may even have the trouble to sustain its industrial power due to lack of resources, man power and market. If USA wants a good deal, it will have to sell to China.

We can have some agreement with PH, but not with anothers.

We simply strong enough to take back all isls there. But most of isls are just useless rocks without fresh water, so no need to take action now.
Because both Vietnam and Philippines are not efficient at resource utilization. Those are useless rocks to Vietnam and Philippines, but are huge resources to China. When China has the SCS fully militarized like Guam of USA, China can make or save billions of dollars from negotiation tables with Japan, USA et al. Vietnam and Philippines are really bad buys. They'd like to occupy other people's golden stuffs and let them sit rotten.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom