What's new

Scarborough Shoal: Phl facts vs Beijing fiction

Philippines should stay away from Huangyan Island (Scarborough shoal).

Build up a navy with nuclear submarines and heavy warships, and an air force with the latest generation stealth fighters. Then try to take it from us, again.
No amount of psywar, intimidation, and bullying can stop the case at the UN.

Let's just be honest here: if you thought you had a strong case, then you would've just participated and presented your evidence in front of an international tribunal. Your avoidance of the tribunal shows that you don't.
 
No amount of psywar, intimidation, and bullying can stop the case at the UN.

Let's just be honest here: if you thought you had a strong case, then you would've just participated and presented your evidence in front of an international tribunal. Your avoidance of the tribunal shows that you don't.

:lol:

No one is going to take our land by force, not without fighting a full scale nuclear war for it.

Let the Tribunals go forward, China has already stated we do not recognize their authority over our territorial affairs.
 
Never in history of any civilized country in the world where a nation claimed to own an entire body of Ocean or a Sea, except now China.
 
Well you've given a lot of time to explain, if you really own this shoals as you claim then you have nothing to fear and you should face us in the UN court. Anyway we can also discuss about history there not just laws, before the eyes of the world.

I don't get it, why do we need to "face you in the court" when you don't have a case to start with?
 
Never in history of any civilized country in the world where a nation claimed to own an entire body of Ocean or a Sea, except now China.


Not true. We claim the northern Pacific Ocean and the islands in it, such as Guam, wake islands and Midway Islands.
 
UN law of the sea never say you can use the 200n miles EEZ to claim territories. That is one thing that many in Philippines do not understand.

If that is the case, can the ROC claim these Japanese islands ?


You can scream about maps or historical records but in the end territories are claimed base on who actually has control. Malaysia lost Pulau Batu Puteh to Singapore because they were in control. Indonesia lost Sipadan and Ligitan to Malaysia because we controlling the island. Similarly Philippines will never get back Sabah because we control it. GET IT !!!!!!!!
 
The Treaty of Paris (1898)
ARTICLE III
Spain cedes to the United States the archipelago known as the Philippines Islands, and comprehending the islands lying within the following line:

A line running from west to east along or near the twentieth parallel of north latitude, and through the middle of the navigable channel of Bacchi, from the one hundred and eighteenth to the one hundred and eighteenth to the one hundred and twenty-seventh degree meridian of longitude east of Greenwich, thence along the parallel and forty-five minutes north latitude to its intersection with the meridian of longitude one hundred and nineteen degrees and thirty-five minutes east of Greenwich to the parallel of latitude seven degrees and forty minutes north to its intersection with the one hundred and sixteenth degree meridian of longitude east of Greenwich, and thence along the one hundred and eighteenth degree meridian of longitude east of Greenwich to the point of beginning.

The United States will pay to Spain the sum of twenty million dollars, within three months after the exchange of the ratifications of the present treaty.
------------------------------------------------------------

For the cheap land sold, huangyan island is not in the map.
 
I can see that a lot of PDF Chinese here are not knowledgeable about UNCLOS (which nearly all Asian countries are signatories to) nor do they know about the Philippines' arbitration case.

I suggest these PDF Chinese to drink less from the domestic propaganda coolaid machine and read more from third party analysis. Otherwise, you might be in for a big surprise when the tribunal declares its ruling. There are plenty of analysis published by law professors and international experts, some of whom are acquaintances to these arbitrators currently working for the tribunal, so you should get some clue on how their rulings will turn out.

Or you can be like C-Dragon, and declare that China will just simply ignore the future tribunal rulings. This is the most likely outcome.


- The bottom line is, it is not up to China to decide if the tribunal has authority over the dispute or not. It will be up to the tribunal arbitrators to decide and their decision will be legally binding. This has been clearly stipulated in UNCLOS.

- The Philippines do have a legal case. If they don't, then the tribunal would have sent them home a long time ago.

- All these talks about China's historical case is useless because China is not participating in the tribunal to present its own "historic case." Since the deadline for China to declare its participation has ended, the tribunal will now move forward and it will be a one-sided affair. The tribunal will listen to all of the Philippines'arguments and zero counter-arguments from China. Good luck China, gg.
 
I can see that a lot of PDF Chinese here are not knowledgeable about UNCLOS (which nearly all Asian countries are signatories to) nor do they know about the Philippines' arbitration case.

I suggest these PDF Chinese to drink less from the domestic propaganda coolaid machine and read more from third party analysis. Otherwise, you might be in for a big surprise when the tribunal declares its ruling. There are plenty of analysis published by law professors and international experts, some of whom are acquaintances to these arbitrators currently working for the tribunal, so you should get some clue on how their rulings will turn out.

Or you can be like C-Dragon, and declare that China will just simply ignore the future tribunal rulings. This is the most likely outcome.

I didn't really want to comment, I been deleting a few of my posts after posting, but this one, I will.

First I only read third party analyst, but I don't consider the Philippines, Japan or the US to be third party, would you. But I read from them anyways.

Nothing at this point is 100%, but let's assume it is, so what.

As a side note, judging from your tone, you have no idea what China is actually saying in the domestic media do you. You are also assuming people under 40 watch the news.

- The bottom line is, it is not up to China to decide if the tribunal has authority over the dispute or not. It will be up to the tribunal arbitrators to decide and their decision will be legally binding. This has been clearly stipulated in UNCLOS.

Sure it is. We said it is, and so it is.

- The Philippines do have a legal case. If they don't, then the tribunal would have sent them home a long time ago.

- All these talks about China's historical case is useless because China is not participating in the tribunal to present its own "historic case." Since the deadline for China to declare its participation has ended, the tribunal will now move forward and it will be a one-sided affair. The tribunal will listen to all of the Philippines'arguments and zero counter-arguments from China. Good luck China, gg.

Bottom line, what is Aquino's end game here, all this tribunal is going to do is place more pressure on him to deliver the islands, which he can't. The next government will need to demand the islands again and maybe forced to take action for votes, which at this point is nothing but good news for us.


Your whole argument is this tribunal will magically do something to China, we are communist, asian, and many other things, yet we are still the biggest trading nation in the world, which should really tell you something about what international opinion really does.

Even if Philippines gets a Causes Beli, so what, you still need the military power to push it.



Since you said you follow the Chinese military development more closely than me, you don't need me to tell you what's coming up next for China.
 
Or you can be like C-Dragon, and declare that China will just simply ignore the future tribunal rulings. This is the most likely outcome.

China has already officially stated we do not recognize it.

It's done and dusted. If Philippines wants to try again, they'll need to boost their defence spending by about 1000%.
 
UNCLOS prescribes that all member nations are entitled to 200 n. miles or 370 km EEZ ( Exclusive Economic Zone ) measured from the base line sea shore of the country. UNCLOS also gives these member countries, the sovereign rights to exploit all the marine resources ( including fish, turtles, oil, gas, sand, corals, etc ) within the EEZ of the country.

Falkland Islands
 
Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China Is Authorized to Release the Position Paper of the Government of the People's Republic of China on the Matter of Jurisdiction in the South China Sea Arbitration Initiated by the Republic of the Philippines

2014/12/07

On 7 December 2014, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China is authorized to release the Position Paper of the Government of the People's Republic of China on the Matter of Jurisdiction in the South China Sea Arbitration Initiated by the Republic of the Philippines. The Position Paper reiterates its firm standing that the Chinese Government will neither accept nor participate in the arbitration, and elaborates at length on the legal basis for its position that the Arbitral Tribunal does not have jurisdiction over this case.

On 22 January 2013, the Philippines unilaterally initiated compulsory arbitration proceedings with respect to the relevant issues between China and the Philippines in the South China Sea. Since then, the Philippines has obstinately pushed for the above-mentioned arbitration proceedings despite repeated objections of China.

The Position Paper states that the essence of the subject-matter of the arbitration is the territorial sovereignty over several maritime features in the South China Sea, which is beyond the scope of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and the jurisdiction of the Arbitral Tribunal.

The Position Paper states that China and the Philippines have agreed, through bilateral instruments and the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea, to settle their relevant disputes through negotiation and that by unilaterally initiating the present arbitration, the Philippines has violated its obligation under international law.

The Position Paper states that the subject-matter of the arbitration constitutes an integral part of maritime delimitation between the two countries, thus falling within the scope of the declaration filed by China in 2006, which excludes, inter alia, disputes concerning maritime delimitation from compulsory arbitration and other compulsory dispute settlement procedures.

The Position Paper emphasizes that the Arbitral Tribunal manifestly has no jurisdiction over the present arbitration and that, by virtue of the freedom of every State to choose the means of dispute settlement, China's rejection of, and non-participation in, the present arbitration stand on solid ground in international law.

The Position Paper further notes that the issue of the South China Sea involves a number of States. Its final resolution demands patience and political wisdom from all parties concerned. The parties concerned shall seek proper ways and means of settlement through consultation and negotiation on the basis of respect for history and international law. Pending its final settlement, all parties concerned should engage in dialogue and cooperation to preserve peace and stability of the South China Sea, enhance mutual trust, clear up doubts, and create conditions for the eventual resolution of the issue.

The Position Paper concludes that the unilateral initiation of the present arbitration by the Philippines will not change the history and fact of China's sovereignty over the South China Sea Islands and the adjacent waters; nor will it shake China's resolve and determination to safeguard its sovereignty and relevant maritime rights and interests; nor will it affect China's policy and position of resolving the disputes in the South China Sea by direct negotiation and working together with other States in the region to maintain peace and stability in the South China Sea.

***
 
I didn't really want to comment, I been deleting a few of my posts after posting, but this one, I will.

First I only read third party analyst, but I don't consider the Philippines, Japan or the US to be third party, would you. But I read from them anyways.

Nothing at this point is 100%, but let's assume it is, so what.

So what? lots of things. Here's one for you:

-Assuming the Philippines win, then China will be officially declared as illegally occupying foreign territory/waters under international law. Yeah, and you still think that China will rise and draw Asian countries voluntarily under its sphere of influence when China is going to have this status of being an illegal occupying force?

But anyway, I'm not here to argue about the geopolitical implications or consequences of the tribunal. I'm only here to argue about the legal status of the tribunal and its ruling.

As a side note, judging from your tone, you have no idea what China is actually saying in the domestic media do you. You are also assuming people under 40 watch the news.

What Chinese state media say about the tribunal is pretty clear to all. As for the average PRC Joe and Jane, can you provide any discussions from Baidu Tieba or Tianya forums where people suggest something like, "wait a minute, the Philippines might have a really good legal case and the CPC might have legally shot themselves in the foot!"??? (that is, a pro- Philippines discussion or analysis that many international legal experts have been saying or like what I have summarised here a while ago)


Sure it is. We said it is, and so it is.

I'm not really sure what you're saying here. I assume you are saying what C-Dragon is saying below:

China has already officially stated we do not recognize it.

It's done and dusted. If Philippines wants to try again, they'll need to boost their defence spending by about 1000%.

If you're talking about the geopolitical, military or other practical consequences of the tribunal's ruling, then I don't care. What I'm here to argue is the legal status of the Tribunal's ruling.

Check my post in the China Jurisdiction position thread where I pasted my earlier summary. UNCLOS has specifically stipulated in article 288 that when two dispute parties disagree whether the tribunal has any authority over the dispute or not, the tribunal judges will decide for themselves if they have any authority or not. Their decisions will be legally binding on China. China actually cannot dictate whether the tribunal have authority or not.

Article 288 (4):

4. In the event of a dispute as to whether a court or tribunal has jurisdiction, the matter shall be settled by decision of that court or tribunal.


Bottom line, what is Aquino's end game here, all this tribunal is going to do is place more pressure on him to deliver the islands, which he can't. The next government will need to demand the islands again and maybe forced to take action for votes, which at this point is nothing but good news for us.

Your whole argument is this tribunal will magically do something to China, we are communist, asian, and many other things, yet we are still the biggest trading nation in the world, which should really tell you something about what international opinion really does.

Even if Philippines gets a Causes Beli, so what, you still need the military power to push it.

In this thread, I haven't discussed (nor am I interested in) the geopolitical or military implications of the tribunal's final ruling. My concern here is the legal status of the tribunal and the Philippines' legal case. I'm here to refute uninformed or misleading opinions (see tranquilium's comment a few post above) that say the Philippines has no legal case or that the tribunal has no legal authority over the dispute.

Since you said you follow the Chinese military development more closely than me, you don't need me to tell you what's coming up next for China.

Again, I'm not here to discuss the military implications of the tribunal so this is irrelevant for our legal discussion. (I've actually discussed about this issue in another thread a few months ago).

Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China Is Authorized to Release the Position Paper of the Government of the People's Republic of China on the Matter of Jurisdiction in the South China Sea Arbitration Initiated by the Republic of the Philippines

2014/12/07

On 7 December 2014, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China is authorized to release the Position Paper of the Government of the People's Republic of China on the Matter of Jurisdiction in the South China Sea Arbitration Initiated by the Republic of the Philippines. The Position Paper reiterates its firm standing that the Chinese Government will neither accept nor participate in the arbitration, and elaborates at length on the legal basis for its position that the Arbitral Tribunal does not have jurisdiction over this case.

On 22 January 2013, the Philippines unilaterally initiated compulsory arbitration proceedings with respect to the relevant issues between China and the Philippines in the South China Sea. Since then, the Philippines has obstinately pushed for the above-mentioned arbitration proceedings despite repeated objections of China.

The Position Paper states that the essence of the subject-matter of the arbitration is the territorial sovereignty over several maritime features in the South China Sea, which is beyond the scope of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and the jurisdiction of the Arbitral Tribunal.

The Position Paper states that China and the Philippines have agreed, through bilateral instruments and the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea, to settle their relevant disputes through negotiation and that by unilaterally initiating the present arbitration, the Philippines has violated its obligation under international law.

The Position Paper states that the subject-matter of the arbitration constitutes an integral part of maritime delimitation between the two countries, thus falling within the scope of the declaration filed by China in 2006, which excludes, inter alia, disputes concerning maritime delimitation from compulsory arbitration and other compulsory dispute settlement procedures.

The Position Paper emphasizes that the Arbitral Tribunal manifestly has no jurisdiction over the present arbitration and that, by virtue of the freedom of every State to choose the means of dispute settlement, China's rejection of, and non-participation in, the present arbitration stand on solid ground in international law.

The Position Paper further notes that the issue of the South China Sea involves a number of States. Its final resolution demands patience and political wisdom from all parties concerned. The parties concerned shall seek proper ways and means of settlement through consultation and negotiation on the basis of respect for history and international law. Pending its final settlement, all parties concerned should engage in dialogue and cooperation to preserve peace and stability of the South China Sea, enhance mutual trust, clear up doubts, and create conditions for the eventual resolution of the issue.

The Position Paper concludes that the unilateral initiation of the present arbitration by the Philippines will not change the history and fact of China's sovereignty over the South China Sea Islands and the adjacent waters; nor will it shake China's resolve and determination to safeguard its sovereignty and relevant maritime rights and interests; nor will it affect China's policy and position of resolving the disputes in the South China Sea by direct negotiation and working together with other States in the region to maintain peace and stability in the South China Sea.

***


This Position Paper released by the CPC was expected and is actually pretty weak.

I had already anticipated a few months ago what kind of defense the CPC would put up and I've dissected and refuted those defenses.

Check my posts in this, where I predict the CPC's defense and refute it:

Taiwan Conducts Live Fire Drills on Spratlys, Angering Vietnam | Page 14

Actually, it's not entirely my own analysis. I've been reading and copying the analysis made by law professors and International legal experts.
 
If we win here, I expect China will sanction us like what the West is doing with Russia while Obama will do nothing but let the US continue to shoot its feet. I also expect Malaysia isn't going to be happy with this.
 
UN law of the sea never say you can use the 200n miles EEZ to claim territories. That is one thing that many in Philippines do not understand.

If that is the case, can the ROC claim these Japanese islands ?


You can scream about maps or historical records but in the end territories are claimed base on who actually has control. Malaysia lost Pulau Batu Puteh to Singapore because they were in control. Indonesia lost Sipadan and Ligitan to Malaysia because we controlling the island. Similarly Philippines will never get back Sabah because we control it. GET IT !!!!!!!!
The issue is, if China is claiming historic title to most of SCS through its 9-dash-line then it has to prove it in court hence, the need to settle these issues peacefully, like our current arbitration case.

ninedash.jpg


Falkland Islands
Falklands was effectively occupied by the British for a long period of time and the inhabitants practiced self determination which is in some way is eerily similar to what is taking place in Crimea. Habitable islands have different rules in comparison EEZ where countries will have to determine the extent of their continental shelf to assert the rights on those resources.

If we win here, I expect China will sanction us like what the West is doing with Russia while Obama will do nothing but let the US continue to shoot its feet. I also expect Malaysia isn't going to be happy with this.
The really dire issue is for the Chinese leadership as it will have to explain to the Chinese public how they lost territories (which was not their's on the first place). The Chinese public has been so brain washed of their expectations on the Spratly's as if it is reality to them
 

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom