What's new

South China Sea Arbitration News & Discussion

When China lost the control of the SCS then the real danger of foreign invader will occupy mainland China, 1st fight over maritime security to prevent fighting a war on land.

Over Chinese dead body before China honor the verdict.

China has always been exposed from the seas. SCS and ECS is the key to China's national security. China can never allow to be exposed from seas ever again. The PLA Navy will do every thing to keep China safe and protected.
 
.
This is the first case they use the Anx VII. This is a bad start. When the SCS arbitration court rule all objects in SCS are not islands, they have lost the basic theory of law of UNCLOS. By the way, those 5 judge and chief judge receive salary from the Philippines government not from UN or ITLOS, ICJ...

Firstly, I’m not sure if you are trying to deceive people or you are a deceived victim. UNCLOS stipulations says that when article 287 and annex VII is invoked to set up an arbitration tribunal, then it is the dispute parties that must pay for all the expenses of that Tribunal, including the fees for the arbitrators/judges. Since China didn’t participate, it is the Phillippines that needed to pay fro all the cost. So yes, technically their “salary was paid by the Philippines”, but this is not something unusal, it is part of UNCLOS’ rule.

Secondly, whether this is the first time annex VII was used or not is irrelevent. What is revelant is that the aribitration tribunal and its ruling is legal and in compliance to UNCLOS.

As for the ruling that all features in the Spratly are not islands: most of them are indeed just reefs or exposed rocks, so it is correct that they are ruled as not being habitable islands. As for the bigger features like Itu Aba, I do not know the real status of them since I have never been there and public info about Itu Aba is very limited.

But it is still easy to see why the Philippines won that ruling:

1. There was a lack of cooperation between PRC and Taiwan. If they would work together, share info and data and present a common argument, then maybe the judges would change their views. But this did not happened. PRC leaders cannot reach an agreement with Taiwan to cooperate on this case, and both PRC and Taiwan eventually lose the legality of their claims. This is exactly the same like the 1940s CCP and KMT who could not agree with each other and allowed foreigners to hurt their country.

2. Even if both PRC and Taiwan can agree to cooperate, PRC has put itself at a very big disadvantage by refusing to participate in the tribunal. This means that the tribunal only needs to listen to one side of the arguments, the Philippines’ arguments. Its like you want to fight a court case with your business rival but then you allow your rival to say everything and you staying quiet, so of course your rival will have more chance of winning. So in fact, your CCP leaders basically has given the Philippines all the advantages. Refusing to participate is a good idea if it means that the case will be forced to cancel. But it is a stupid idea under UNCLOS because it has legal clauses saying that if one party refuse to participate, then the tribunal can legally continue and issue its judgement. Your leaders was simply stupid.

But then, if your country had participated, then it means that it recognise that the Tribunal has authority and jurisdiction over the dispute. So your leaders got your country in a dilemma, a bad situation. The CCP was simply stupid and short sighted for provoking the Philippines to file this case...when they should have foreseen that China will lose the legal case. And even if China now announce that it does not agree that the Tribunal has jurisdiction, it is still meaningless because the UNCLOS has a clause saying the court/Tribunal gets to decide if it has jurisdiction or not, UNCLOS gives the tribunal the power to make that final decision about jurisdiction. So you can now see how stupid and short-sighted your CCP leaders are.

What I don't understand is this..........

If China really like the PDF Chinese here say it's about definance and refuse to accept the ruling, then why these people continue to talk about it as if it is a big deal??

You think this ruling is stupid, you think the order is a toilet paper, you don't care about the ruling, then you should basically let it go as if it never existed. WHat we can see about PDF Chinese here is the exact opposite of not caring......

I would not say giving these so called "illegal" ruling 840 message is what we can defined as "Not Caring" about the verdict.
I like this man and expression in his eyes, we don't care the arbitration.8-)

View attachment 317788

China care about this arbitration tribunal for sure. Not just the PDF Chinese members cared enough to write 840 messages to argue agaisnt the tribunal, but China itself cared so much that it was going around the world, to all four corners of earth, trying to seek countries to voice their support to China and all the PR stuff that China had tried to do the past months. Hell, I even remembered Chinese members here creating a new thread everytime someone voiced something slightly positive about China’s stance lol. I could only smile (and then saddened) at their naivete.
 
.
.
Can anyone post the map of South China sea before and after 1940. Because Chinese claim goes back to 1940 demarcation .
@cnleio
 
.
Many countries, world organizations question ruling on South China Sea Source: Xinhua | 2016-07-14 20:50:14 | Editor: huaxia

BEIJING, July 14 (Xinhua) -- Many countries and world organizations have expressed support for China's position on the South China Sea and called for solving relevant disputes though dialogue and negotiations.

On Tuesday, the arbitral tribunal issued an award over a case unilaterally initiated by the former Philippine government, denying China's long-standing historical rights over the South China Sea.

China had from the very beginning refused to participate in the proceedings, insisting that the tribunal has no jurisdiction over the case, which is in essence related to territorial sovereignty and maritime delimitation.

Chinese President Xi Jinping said China will not accept any proposition or action based on the award, and that China's territorial sovereignty and maritime interests in the South China Sea will under no circumstances be affected by it.

"Negotiation must start immediately. And the arbitral ruling is both useless and irrelevant," said Butch Valdes, former undersecretary of Philippine Department of Education.

Valdes said former Philippine President Benigno S. Aquino III led the country in the wrong direction. He said most Philippine people don't want to enter conflicts with China.

Although the arbitral tribunal has announced its so-called final award, the decision won't have any serious consequences, Croatia's former President Stjepan Mesic told Xinhua on Wednesday.

"Only when both countries agree to appear before an international tribunal can the ruling be acceptable," he added.

In an e-mail to Xinhua on Wednesday, Croatian President Kolinda Grabar Kitarovic expressed the belief that the best solution is one to which both sides agree.

The Sudanese parliament on Wednesday declared its support for China's call to resolve the South China Sea dispute through dialogue.

"Sudan's Parliament stands with justice and right, and we encourage dialogue as a means for resolving international issues," Mohamed Mustafa Al-Daw, head of the external relations committee in the Sudanese parliament, told Xinhua.

Ashfaqur Rahman, former Bangladeshi ambassador to China, found it very funny to see the work of the tribunal. "What the tribunal has done can never be called an arbitration," he said.

"Arbitration is a process in which both the disputed parties agree to argue their cases and agree to accept a verdict whatever it is," he explained. In this case, "we all know that China was not a party. It did not take part in the process. So how can it be called an arbitration?"

The award of the South China Sea arbitration solves nothing and the dispute between the Philippines and China can only be solved through bilateral dialogue, Nirj Deva, vice chairman of the European Parliament's Development Committee and chairman of the EU-China Friendship Group in the European Parliament said Tuesday.

The lawmaker said Aquino III made "a wrong decision" to have started the arbitration. It broke the country's own commitment made in the 2002 Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea (DOC).

Deva praised China for abiding by its international commitments.

"On the whole, if you look at China' s history, China has been a very good obeyer of international laws and has kept to all international treaties that it has signed," he said.

The Serbian foreign ministry said in a press release late Tuesday that the country supports interested parties in the South China Sea to have a dialogue.

"Directly interested parties should settle peacefully the dispute in the South China Sea," ministry stated.

"The full and effective implementation of the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea should by all means be stressed," said the government of Thailand in a statement on Tuesday.

Thailand believes that the ultimate goal should be to render the South China Sea a sea of peace, stability and sustainable development, it said.

UN spokesperson Stephane Dujarric on Tuesday said UN chief Ban Ki-moon has consistently called on all parties to resolve their dispute in a peaceful and amicable way through dialogue.

"I think while the dialogue continues, it's important for states to exercise restraint on the conduct and contentious activities in the South China Sea," he said.

Can anyone post the map of South China sea before and after 1940. Because Chinese claim goes back to 1940 demarcation .
@cnleio

This map is from 1947.

1947_Nanhai_Zhudao.jpg
 
.
Many countries, world organizations question ruling on South China Sea Source: Xinhua | 2016-07-14 20:50:14 | Editor: huaxia

BEIJING, July 14 (Xinhua) -- Many countries and world organizations have expressed support for China's position on the South China Sea and called for solving relevant disputes though dialogue and negotiations.

On Tuesday, the arbitral tribunal issued an award over a case unilaterally initiated by the former Philippine government, denying China's long-standing historical rights over the South China Sea.

China had from the very beginning refused to participate in the proceedings, insisting that the tribunal has no jurisdiction over the case, which is in essence related to territorial sovereignty and maritime delimitation.

Chinese President Xi Jinping said China will not accept any proposition or action based on the award, and that China's territorial sovereignty and maritime interests in the South China Sea will under no circumstances be affected by it.

"Negotiation must start immediately. And the arbitral ruling is both useless and irrelevant," said Butch Valdes, former undersecretary of Philippine Department of Education.

Valdes said former Philippine President Benigno S. Aquino III led the country in the wrong direction. He said most Philippine people don't want to enter conflicts with China.

Although the arbitral tribunal has announced its so-called final award, the decision won't have any serious consequences, Croatia's former President Stjepan Mesic told Xinhua on Wednesday.

"Only when both countries agree to appear before an international tribunal can the ruling be acceptable," he added.

In an e-mail to Xinhua on Wednesday, Croatian President Kolinda Grabar Kitarovic expressed the belief that the best solution is one to which both sides agree.

The Sudanese parliament on Wednesday declared its support for China's call to resolve the South China Sea dispute through dialogue.

"Sudan's Parliament stands with justice and right, and we encourage dialogue as a means for resolving international issues," Mohamed Mustafa Al-Daw, head of the external relations committee in the Sudanese parliament, told Xinhua.

Ashfaqur Rahman, former Bangladeshi ambassador to China, found it very funny to see the work of the tribunal. "What the tribunal has done can never be called an arbitration," he said.

"Arbitration is a process in which both the disputed parties agree to argue their cases and agree to accept a verdict whatever it is," he explained. In this case, "we all know that China was not a party. It did not take part in the process. So how can it be called an arbitration?"

The award of the South China Sea arbitration solves nothing and the dispute between the Philippines and China can only be solved through bilateral dialogue, Nirj Deva, vice chairman of the European Parliament's Development Committee and chairman of the EU-China Friendship Group in the European Parliament said Tuesday.

The lawmaker said Aquino III made "a wrong decision" to have started the arbitration. It broke the country's own commitment made in the 2002 Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea (DOC).

Deva praised China for abiding by its international commitments.

"On the whole, if you look at China' s history, China has been a very good obeyer of international laws and has kept to all international treaties that it has signed," he said.

The Serbian foreign ministry said in a press release late Tuesday that the country supports interested parties in the South China Sea to have a dialogue.

"Directly interested parties should settle peacefully the dispute in the South China Sea," ministry stated.

"The full and effective implementation of the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea should by all means be stressed," said the government of Thailand in a statement on Tuesday.

Thailand believes that the ultimate goal should be to render the South China Sea a sea of peace, stability and sustainable development, it said.

UN spokesperson Stephane Dujarric on Tuesday said UN chief Ban Ki-moon has consistently called on all parties to resolve their dispute in a peaceful and amicable way through dialogue.

"I think while the dialogue continues, it's important for states to exercise restraint on the conduct and contentious activities in the South China Sea," he said.



This map is from 1947.

View attachment 317850
can't understand the map. If post the map with with Chinese claim and rest of countries claim. If you use your pen.
 
.
can't understand the map. If post the map with with Chinese claim and rest of countries claim. If you use your pen.

Te title of the map is called South Sea Island Map.

Check the dotted lines. Shown in this map is original 11 dotted lines claimed by Republic of China (ROC). People's Republic of China (PRC) later changed it to 9 dotted lines as good will to the then North Vietnam. The 2 dotted lines disappeared are in between Hanoi and Hainan island because PRC decided to cede some islands in that area to North Vietnam.

Those lines joint one sea port (Hong Kong) to other ports are commercial sea lanes.

1947_Nanhai_Zhudao.jpg
 
Last edited:
.
Firstly, I’m not sure if you are trying to deceive people or you are a deceived victim. UNCLOS stipulations says that when article 287 and annex VII is invoked to set up an arbitration tribunal, then it is the dispute parties that must pay for all the expenses of that Tribunal, including the fees for the arbitrators/judges. Since China didn’t participate, it is the Phillippines that needed to pay fro all the cost. So yes, technically their “salary was paid by the Philippines”, but this is not something unusal, it is part of UNCLOS’ rule.

Secondly, whether this is the first time annex VII was used or not is irrelevent. What is revelant is that the aribitration tribunal and its ruling is legal and in compliance to UNCLOS.

As for the ruling that all features in the Spratly are not islands: most of them are indeed just reefs or exposed rocks, so it is correct that they are ruled as not being habitable islands. As for the bigger features like Itu Aba, I do not know the real status of them since I have never been there and public info about Itu Aba is very limited.

But it is still easy to see why the Philippines won that ruling:

1. There was a lack of cooperation between PRC and Taiwan. If they would work together, share info and data and present a common argument, then maybe the judges would change their views. But this did not happened. PRC leaders cannot reach an agreement with Taiwan to cooperate on this case, and both PRC and Taiwan eventually lose the legality of their claims. This is exactly the same like the 1940s CCP and KMT who could not agree with each other and allowed foreigners to hurt their country.

2. Even if both PRC and Taiwan can agree to cooperate, PRC has put itself at a very big disadvantage by refusing to participate in the tribunal. This means that the tribunal only needs to listen to one side of the arguments, the Philippines’ arguments. Its like you want to fight a court case with your business rival but then you allow your rival to say everything and you staying quiet, so of course your rival will have more chance of winning. So in fact, your CCP leaders basically has given the Philippines all the advantages. Refusing to participate is a good idea if it means that the case will be forced to cancel. But it is a stupid idea under UNCLOS because it has legal clauses saying that if one party refuse to participate, then the tribunal can legally continue and issue its judgement. Your leaders was simply stupid.

But then, if your country had participated, then it means that it recognise that the Tribunal has authority and jurisdiction over the dispute. So your leaders got your country in a dilemma, a bad situation. The CCP was simply stupid and short sighted for provoking the Philippines to file this case...when they should have foreseen that China will lose the legal case. And even if China now announce that it does not agree that the Tribunal has jurisdiction, it is still meaningless because the UNCLOS has a clause saying the court/Tribunal gets to decide if it has jurisdiction or not, UNCLOS gives the tribunal the power to make that final decision about jurisdiction. So you can now see how stupid and short-sighted your CCP leaders are.




China care about this arbitration tribunal for sure. Not just the PDF Chinese members cared enough to write 840 messages to argue agaisnt the tribunal, but China itself cared so much that it was going around the world, to all four corners of earth, trying to seek countries to voice their support to China and all the PR stuff that China had tried to do the past months. Hell, I even remembered Chinese members here creating a new thread everytime someone voiced something slightly positive about China’s stance lol. I could only smile (and then saddened) at their naivete.

"But then, if your country had participated, then it means that it recognise that the Tribunal has authority and jurisdiction over the dispute."

The disputes is what dispute? If it is EEZ disputes, I guess China governement would like to join in the arbitration case, why not, UNCLOS is mainly order to solve EEZ disputes. Obviously Philippines is referring to territory disputes, China government insist the arbitration court has no jurisdiction, this is supported by UNCLOS. The issues Philippines illegally invading and occupying SCS islands in 1970's-1980's has not been solved, they can't start further any arbitration based on Phillipines has already territory title of SCS islands. As I once made a analogy to another member, one rob a bank, his sons later in court how to inherit his money. The money is illegal income, they should return the money, not discuss how to inherit it.
China in 2002 has signed <Declaration on the Code of Conduct on the South China Sea> with ASEAN ( Phillipines included ), this is a political document, a part of international law, it has legal effect. According to the Declaration, all parties agree to solve the SCS disputes via negotiations between relevant nations. This is another reason China reject the arbitration. When China signed this declaration with those nations, China had make compromises and release great interests to Southeast Asia nation they were hit badly by 1997 Asian Financial Crisis. The DOC is based on equal negotiation, it is the future of the regional cooperation and peace. It is very important. Even the arbitration case is happening, China and ASEAN nations still have high devotion of DOC. Some ASEAN membe publicly insist in applying DOC to solve the SCS disputes.
 
. .
That according to Indian government's official statement. Of course, referring to some Indian media or PDF Indians, if they represent authorized India voice, India should not be counted in. Wonder how they call it is uncredible India.

this is the india official announcement jointed with China and Russia on 2016 4 19

2016 4月18日,中国外交部王毅和俄罗斯外长拉夫罗夫印度外长斯瓦拉吉在莫斯科举行中俄印外长第十四次会晤。根据19日发布的联合公报,围绕南海问题,俄罗斯、印度承诺维护基于国际法原则的海洋法律秩序,认为所有相关争议应由当事国通过谈判和协议解决。




王毅表示:中俄印用一个声音说话,世界都会倾听。三国可以合作,应该合作的领域十分宽广。新形势下,中俄印合作只能加强,不应削弱。中方愿与俄、印共同努力,保持三国外长会晤积极势头,推动三方合作进一步走实、走深、走远。
签联合公报挺中国南海立场
据《北京青年报》20日报道,19日,外交部公布的中俄印外长第十四次会晤联合公报中提到,中国、俄罗斯、印度承诺维护基于国际法原则的海洋法律秩序,该秩序显著体现在《联合国海洋法公约》中。所有相关争议应由当事国通过谈判和协议解决。外长们呼吁全面遵守《联合国海洋法公约》、《南海各方行为宣言》及落实《南海各方行为宣言》后续行动指针。
中-俄-印三方会议发布关于 “南海问题” 的联合声明,概要如下:


“Russia, India and China are committed to maintaining a legal order for the seas and oceans based on the principles of international law, as reflected notably in the UN Convention on the Law of Sea (UNCLOS). All related disputes should be addressed through negotiations and agreements between the parties concerned. In this regard the Ministers called for full respect of all provisions of UNCLOS, as well as the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea (DOC) and the Guidelines for the implementation of the DOC.”


三方坚定主张在国际法框架下,“All related disputes should be addressed through negotiations and agreements between the parties concerned”,一切相关纠纷由相关国家协商解决。
32e2962397dda144f70e9e29b5b7d0a20df486df.jpg



很明显这是对g7南海声明的回应,


其实想想也正常,印度一直对印度洋有野心,米帝的重返亚太和亚太再平衡侧面上也刺激了印度。

it is easy to understand the India doesn't like so called court to judge the issues in indian ocean when time is coming as india has the ambitions on Indian Ocean.


on the other hand, India's jointed statement with the US in June 2016,

In June, India and the US dropped a direct mention of the South China Sea disputes in a joint statement issued after a meeting between Prime Minister Narendra Modi and President Barack Obama. This was done after both countries mentioned the disputes in two previous joint statements. But the June statement did mention “freedom of navigation and overflight and exploitation of resources as per international law, including the UNCLOS, and settlement of territorial disputes by peaceful means”.

does india have two faces?
I don't think so.

idrw.org . Read more at India No 1 Defence News Website , Kindly don't post our articles on other copycat websites http://idrw.org/india-back-china-south-china-sea-beijing-seems-convinced/ .
 
.
And I also want to remind you and the other cheerleaders that america will do nothing to stop Chinese activities in the SCS simply because they have no capability.

No need, because extending the rocks wont affect the status of the area.
 
.
I want to remind You that
  • Water is wet.
  • Ice is cold.
  • The sun is hot.
if you need more obvious statements, feel free to ask...
Glad to see we finally agree on that international common water way. I don't want to hear anymore of your western bias when our ships operated in international water,
 
. . . .
Back
Top Bottom