cochine
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2015
- Messages
- 2,052
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
to be friend of ordinary, normal Chinese people.
South China Sea Forum
- Thread starter SinoChallenger
- Start date
to be friend of ordinary, normal Chinese people.
ahojunk
RETIRED INTL MOD
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2014
- Messages
- 5,118
- Reaction score
- 6
- Country
- Location
South China Sea: Did the ruling sink the rule of law?
Tan Keng Tat for The Straits Times
Published AUG 31, 2016, 5:00 AM SGT
Eight reasons why the tribunal ruling was troubling, especially the decision that turned Taiping Island into a "rock" devoid of its own exclusive economic zone.
On July 12, an arbitral tribunal, constituted under Annex VII of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (Unclos), ruled in favour of the Philippines at the Permanent Court of Arbitration at the Hague (PCA).
The tribunal made a landmark decision that, as between the Philippines and China, there was no legal basis for China to claim historic rights to resources, in excess of the rights provided for by Unclos, within the "nine-dash" line map that China has been using to assert its claims of sovereignty over territories in the South China Sea.
The tribunal also ruled, inter alia, that China had infringed on the Philippines' rights to fish stocks and resources within its 200-nautical-mile exclusive economic zone (EEZ).
China rejected the tribunal's ruling as null and void on substantive and procedural grounds.
Professor Myron Nordquist, of the University of Virginia School of Law, has opined that the ruling was a "huge mistake" and should be "criticised severely".
In my view as a private researcher who has researched the issue for years, the tribunal's ruling was also weighed down by a litany of controversies as there were eight troubling issues arising from the ruling.
First, some media reports wrongly attributed the ruling to a UN-backed PCA to elevate its impact but that ended when UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric confirmed that the PCA "has nothing to do with the UN". He added: "The UN doesn't have a position on the legal and procedural merits of the South China Sea arbitration case."
The PCA is not a court. It only provides a registry and secretarial assistance to "arbitral tribunals constituted to resolve specific disputes" for a fee.
Second is the question of sovereignty. In the 1887 Sino-Franco Convention, France agreed that all the isles east of the Treaty Delimitation Line were assigned to China. That included the Spratly Islands, among others. France attempted to occupy the Spratlys in 1930. China protested and reminded France of the 1887 convention.
In 1933, colonial Philippines contemplated annexing the Spratlys, but then US Secretary of State Cordell Hull cautioned that "the islands of the Philippine group which the United States acquired from Spain by the treaty of 1898, were only those within the limits described in Article III". He added: "It may be observed that no mention has been found of Spain having exercised sovereignty over, or having laid claim to, any of these (Spratly) islands."
Japan invaded China in 1937. In the fog of war, France occupied the Spratlys in 1938. Japan evicted the French and colonised the Spratlys in 1939.
After its defeat, Japan ceded its claim to the Spratlys, returning them to China.
According to Professor John Anthony Carty, British archives show that "there is no dispute regarding the Nansha (Spratly) Islands and that China is the sole title-holder."
Yet the tribunal ruled that Mischief Reef and Second Thomas Shoal lie in the EEZ of the Philippines, effectively awarding these two features to the Philippines.
How a pre-Unclos reef and shoal owned by China could be "awarded" to the Philippines this year by a tribunal was never convincingly explained. Unclos is only the law of the sea and it has no power to award any littoral state with sovereignty or extinguish its pre-existing sovereignty over any territory. Third is the issue of jurisdiction. The tribunal had no jurisdiction on matters involving maritime delimitation or historic titles, already excluded by a declaration by China in 2006, pursuant to Article 298 (1)(a).
Yet the tribunal ruled that China's historic rights were "extinguished by the entry into force of Unclos in 1994".
This begs the question: Why would China bother to ratify Unclos in 1996 if by doing so its historic rights were extinguished? Why not defer ratification indefinitely like the United States did?
Also, under Article 288(1), the tribunal's jurisdiction was limited to only disputes concerning the interpretation and application of Unclos.
The Philippines asserted that:
Mr Alberto Encomienda, former secretary-general of the then Maritime and Ocean Affairs Centre of the Philippine Foreign Affairs Department, told China's news agency Xinhua that "China has been for the negotiations all along, but from the beginning we are not".
Since no substantive negotiation between China and the Philippines took place, there could not be any dispute. The tribunal's ruling on these assertions could be ultra vires (beyond legal power), thus null and void.
Fourth is the question of bias. The rule against bias has to be strictly applied because justice must not only be done but must be seen to be done.
The Philippines appointed one member of the five-member tribunal. Since China did not participate in the proceedings, four members were appointed by Mr Shunji Yanai, a Japanese judge who was president of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea at the material time.
Judge Chris Pinto from Sri Lanka was originally appointed, but since his wife is from the Philippines he gracefully resigned to avoid any controversy.
The Chinese media have voiced a reasonable suspicion that none of the arbitrators were China- friendly. They also pointed out that Mr Yanai is a right-wing nationalist who is a close adviser to Japan's Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and should have recused himself, as Japan has a serious territorial dispute with China over the Diaoyu/Senkaku islands.
Fifth is the issue of reclamation on disputed features. The tribunal rebuked China for reclaiming land in reefs it considers its own. But according to Mr Encomienda, the Philippines "was the first to do reclamation in the South China Sea, so we cannot demonise China for reclamation". He revealed that their airfield situated on China's Zhongye Island, which the Philippines now occupies, "was built on top of live coral reefs".
Sixth, the tribunal rebuked China for blocking supplies from reaching some Philippine sailors staking a claim on Second Thomas Shoal by grounding a ship. But this shoal was itself one of eight features annexed by then President Ferdinand Marcos on June 11, 1978, using presidential decree No. 1596, which violated the United Nations Charter. That decree created the Kalayaan Island Group, whose boundary illegally extended over the Spratlys.
Seventh is the issue of conflict of interest over the tribunal's ruling on islands and rocks.
The Philippines' gambit was that no feature in the Spratlys could generate a 200-nautical-mile EEZ and therefore there is no overlapping of its own EEZ.
The tribunal stated that its jurisdiction over some of the Philippines' claims was barred "if a feature claimed by China in the South China Sea were found to be an island, entitled to a 200-nautical- mile EEZ".
In 2012, in the case of Nicaragua v Colombia, the ICJ ruled that an island was defined "by reference to whether it is 'naturally formed' and whether it is above water at high tide and would generate a (12-nautical-mile) territorial sea", and to qualify for a 200-nautical-mile EEZ, "it would need to be able to sustain human habitation or economic life on its own" under Article 121(3) of Unclos.
Taiping Island, occupied by Taiwan since 1946, is a naturally formed, 480,000-sq-m island which is able to sustain human habitation or economic life on its own as it has plenty of fresh water, lush vegetation, locally grown produce, buildings, a hospital, an airport, a harbour and a meteorological station, all supporting over 200 people.
Since the Philippines' entire raison d'etre and the tribunal's own "legitimacy" hinged on a "game changer" decision on whether Taiping Island is an island or a rock, under the rule of fairness the tribunal should have appointed an independent UN agency to make an impartial judgment, after proper field and hydrographic surveys.
Instead, the tribunal ignored the ICJ ruling in Nicaragua v Colombia, studied historical documents and maps, and ruled narrowly that Taiping Island is a rock, validating its own "legitimacy". An invitation to visit Taiping Island was rejected by the Philippines and ignored by the tribunal.
In my view, this ruling was not only absurd, it also violated the legal principle of Nemo judex in causa sua, meaning "no persons can judge a case in which they have an interest". To add insult to injury, Taiwan, which lost a 200-nautical-mile EEZ, was not even consulted. Taiwan rejected the ruling as baseless.
Former ICJ judge Abdul Koroma said such a complicated decision takes years to conclude. But here it took only a week during the merits stage in November last year.
Eighth is the implication if Taiping Island is not really a rock but can be classified as an island.
Taiping Island is about 204 nautical miles from the Philippines. If it is rightly ruled an island with a 200-nautical-mile exclusive economic zone under Unclos, Taiping's EEZ will reach the Philippines' coast and overlap with the latter's EEZ.
If Taiping Island, now occupied by Taiwan, has a 200-nautical-mile EEZ and is considered a part of China under the one-China policy, it would validate the nine-dash line map that shows China's sovereignty claims over the Spratly, Pratas and Paracel Islands, Macclesfield Bank and the Scarborough Shoal in the South China Sea.
Under Article 15 of Unclos, the new maritime boundary between Taiping Island and the Philippine coast is equidistant or about 102 nautical miles, revealing the eight features, annexed by president Marcos, are from China's Spratly Islands.
The tribunal defied conventional wisdom, overreached and arbitrarily ruled that Taiping Island is a rock. The coast was then clear for the tribunal to invalidate China's historic rights within the nine-dash line without the inconvenience of delimitation.
Some analysts have dismissed this as a political decision, which could undermine the integrity of Unclos because Japan now says the verdict's legal ramifications apply only to China and the Philippines. Japan insists that Okinotorishima, which is "a collection of tiny specks that are barely visible at high tide, located about 1,740km south of Tokyo, is an island with a 200-nautical-mile EEZ".
But despite the eight areas of controversy which will keep maritime lawyers and law students busy for many years to come, the good news is that China and Asean issued a joint statement in Vientiane on July 26 without mentioning the divisive arbitration case.
They have reached a new modus vivendi to resolve the South China Sea disputes "through friendly consultations and negotiations by sovereign states directly concerned".
The writer is a Singapore-based commentator on Asian affairs and a private researcher on the South China Sea disputes.
Tan Keng Tat for The Straits Times
Published AUG 31, 2016, 5:00 AM SGT
Eight reasons why the tribunal ruling was troubling, especially the decision that turned Taiping Island into a "rock" devoid of its own exclusive economic zone.
On July 12, an arbitral tribunal, constituted under Annex VII of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (Unclos), ruled in favour of the Philippines at the Permanent Court of Arbitration at the Hague (PCA).
The tribunal made a landmark decision that, as between the Philippines and China, there was no legal basis for China to claim historic rights to resources, in excess of the rights provided for by Unclos, within the "nine-dash" line map that China has been using to assert its claims of sovereignty over territories in the South China Sea.
The tribunal also ruled, inter alia, that China had infringed on the Philippines' rights to fish stocks and resources within its 200-nautical-mile exclusive economic zone (EEZ).
China rejected the tribunal's ruling as null and void on substantive and procedural grounds.
Professor Myron Nordquist, of the University of Virginia School of Law, has opined that the ruling was a "huge mistake" and should be "criticised severely".
In my view as a private researcher who has researched the issue for years, the tribunal's ruling was also weighed down by a litany of controversies as there were eight troubling issues arising from the ruling.
First, some media reports wrongly attributed the ruling to a UN-backed PCA to elevate its impact but that ended when UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric confirmed that the PCA "has nothing to do with the UN". He added: "The UN doesn't have a position on the legal and procedural merits of the South China Sea arbitration case."
The PCA is not a court. It only provides a registry and secretarial assistance to "arbitral tribunals constituted to resolve specific disputes" for a fee.
Second is the question of sovereignty. In the 1887 Sino-Franco Convention, France agreed that all the isles east of the Treaty Delimitation Line were assigned to China. That included the Spratly Islands, among others. France attempted to occupy the Spratlys in 1930. China protested and reminded France of the 1887 convention.
In 1933, colonial Philippines contemplated annexing the Spratlys, but then US Secretary of State Cordell Hull cautioned that "the islands of the Philippine group which the United States acquired from Spain by the treaty of 1898, were only those within the limits described in Article III". He added: "It may be observed that no mention has been found of Spain having exercised sovereignty over, or having laid claim to, any of these (Spratly) islands."
Japan invaded China in 1937. In the fog of war, France occupied the Spratlys in 1938. Japan evicted the French and colonised the Spratlys in 1939.
After its defeat, Japan ceded its claim to the Spratlys, returning them to China.
According to Professor John Anthony Carty, British archives show that "there is no dispute regarding the Nansha (Spratly) Islands and that China is the sole title-holder."
Yet the tribunal ruled that Mischief Reef and Second Thomas Shoal lie in the EEZ of the Philippines, effectively awarding these two features to the Philippines.
How a pre-Unclos reef and shoal owned by China could be "awarded" to the Philippines this year by a tribunal was never convincingly explained. Unclos is only the law of the sea and it has no power to award any littoral state with sovereignty or extinguish its pre-existing sovereignty over any territory. Third is the issue of jurisdiction. The tribunal had no jurisdiction on matters involving maritime delimitation or historic titles, already excluded by a declaration by China in 2006, pursuant to Article 298 (1)(a).
Yet the tribunal ruled that China's historic rights were "extinguished by the entry into force of Unclos in 1994".
This begs the question: Why would China bother to ratify Unclos in 1996 if by doing so its historic rights were extinguished? Why not defer ratification indefinitely like the United States did?
Also, under Article 288(1), the tribunal's jurisdiction was limited to only disputes concerning the interpretation and application of Unclos.
The Philippines asserted that:
- The Scarborough Shoal generates no exclusive economic zone.
- Five reefs are high-tide elevations.
- Two reefs are low-tide elevations.
Mr Alberto Encomienda, former secretary-general of the then Maritime and Ocean Affairs Centre of the Philippine Foreign Affairs Department, told China's news agency Xinhua that "China has been for the negotiations all along, but from the beginning we are not".
Since no substantive negotiation between China and the Philippines took place, there could not be any dispute. The tribunal's ruling on these assertions could be ultra vires (beyond legal power), thus null and void.
Fourth is the question of bias. The rule against bias has to be strictly applied because justice must not only be done but must be seen to be done.
The Philippines appointed one member of the five-member tribunal. Since China did not participate in the proceedings, four members were appointed by Mr Shunji Yanai, a Japanese judge who was president of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea at the material time.
Judge Chris Pinto from Sri Lanka was originally appointed, but since his wife is from the Philippines he gracefully resigned to avoid any controversy.
The Chinese media have voiced a reasonable suspicion that none of the arbitrators were China- friendly. They also pointed out that Mr Yanai is a right-wing nationalist who is a close adviser to Japan's Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and should have recused himself, as Japan has a serious territorial dispute with China over the Diaoyu/Senkaku islands.
Fifth is the issue of reclamation on disputed features. The tribunal rebuked China for reclaiming land in reefs it considers its own. But according to Mr Encomienda, the Philippines "was the first to do reclamation in the South China Sea, so we cannot demonise China for reclamation". He revealed that their airfield situated on China's Zhongye Island, which the Philippines now occupies, "was built on top of live coral reefs".
Sixth, the tribunal rebuked China for blocking supplies from reaching some Philippine sailors staking a claim on Second Thomas Shoal by grounding a ship. But this shoal was itself one of eight features annexed by then President Ferdinand Marcos on June 11, 1978, using presidential decree No. 1596, which violated the United Nations Charter. That decree created the Kalayaan Island Group, whose boundary illegally extended over the Spratlys.
Seventh is the issue of conflict of interest over the tribunal's ruling on islands and rocks.
The Philippines' gambit was that no feature in the Spratlys could generate a 200-nautical-mile EEZ and therefore there is no overlapping of its own EEZ.
The tribunal stated that its jurisdiction over some of the Philippines' claims was barred "if a feature claimed by China in the South China Sea were found to be an island, entitled to a 200-nautical- mile EEZ".
In 2012, in the case of Nicaragua v Colombia, the ICJ ruled that an island was defined "by reference to whether it is 'naturally formed' and whether it is above water at high tide and would generate a (12-nautical-mile) territorial sea", and to qualify for a 200-nautical-mile EEZ, "it would need to be able to sustain human habitation or economic life on its own" under Article 121(3) of Unclos.
Taiping Island, occupied by Taiwan since 1946, is a naturally formed, 480,000-sq-m island which is able to sustain human habitation or economic life on its own as it has plenty of fresh water, lush vegetation, locally grown produce, buildings, a hospital, an airport, a harbour and a meteorological station, all supporting over 200 people.
Since the Philippines' entire raison d'etre and the tribunal's own "legitimacy" hinged on a "game changer" decision on whether Taiping Island is an island or a rock, under the rule of fairness the tribunal should have appointed an independent UN agency to make an impartial judgment, after proper field and hydrographic surveys.
Instead, the tribunal ignored the ICJ ruling in Nicaragua v Colombia, studied historical documents and maps, and ruled narrowly that Taiping Island is a rock, validating its own "legitimacy". An invitation to visit Taiping Island was rejected by the Philippines and ignored by the tribunal.
In my view, this ruling was not only absurd, it also violated the legal principle of Nemo judex in causa sua, meaning "no persons can judge a case in which they have an interest". To add insult to injury, Taiwan, which lost a 200-nautical-mile EEZ, was not even consulted. Taiwan rejected the ruling as baseless.
Former ICJ judge Abdul Koroma said such a complicated decision takes years to conclude. But here it took only a week during the merits stage in November last year.
Eighth is the implication if Taiping Island is not really a rock but can be classified as an island.
Taiping Island is about 204 nautical miles from the Philippines. If it is rightly ruled an island with a 200-nautical-mile exclusive economic zone under Unclos, Taiping's EEZ will reach the Philippines' coast and overlap with the latter's EEZ.
If Taiping Island, now occupied by Taiwan, has a 200-nautical-mile EEZ and is considered a part of China under the one-China policy, it would validate the nine-dash line map that shows China's sovereignty claims over the Spratly, Pratas and Paracel Islands, Macclesfield Bank and the Scarborough Shoal in the South China Sea.
Under Article 15 of Unclos, the new maritime boundary between Taiping Island and the Philippine coast is equidistant or about 102 nautical miles, revealing the eight features, annexed by president Marcos, are from China's Spratly Islands.
The tribunal defied conventional wisdom, overreached and arbitrarily ruled that Taiping Island is a rock. The coast was then clear for the tribunal to invalidate China's historic rights within the nine-dash line without the inconvenience of delimitation.
Some analysts have dismissed this as a political decision, which could undermine the integrity of Unclos because Japan now says the verdict's legal ramifications apply only to China and the Philippines. Japan insists that Okinotorishima, which is "a collection of tiny specks that are barely visible at high tide, located about 1,740km south of Tokyo, is an island with a 200-nautical-mile EEZ".
But despite the eight areas of controversy which will keep maritime lawyers and law students busy for many years to come, the good news is that China and Asean issued a joint statement in Vientiane on July 26 without mentioning the divisive arbitration case.
They have reached a new modus vivendi to resolve the South China Sea disputes "through friendly consultations and negotiations by sovereign states directly concerned".
The writer is a Singapore-based commentator on Asian affairs and a private researcher on the South China Sea disputes.
Last edited:
terranMarine
BANNED
- Joined
- May 3, 2012
- Messages
- 7,597
- Reaction score
- -18
- Country
- Location
good, i like that. You do your best making friends with the Chinese people. We always welcome such a good attitude from our SEA neighbors
cochine
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2015
- Messages
- 2,052
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
I edited, friend of working class Chinese people, not to the neo-chinese imperialists.
grey boy 2
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2009
- Messages
- 6,484
- Reaction score
- -2
- Country
- Location
Perhaps you may have got him wrong, he meant "Ordinary Vietnamese to make friends with Ordinary Chinese"
However, he aint some "Ordinary Vietnamese, so he may be playing with his verbal games as usual bro, you're like playing music to a cow, wasting your kind friendship approach
terranMarine
BANNED
- Joined
- May 3, 2012
- Messages
- 7,597
- Reaction score
- -18
- Country
- Location
Perhaps you may have got him wrong, he meant "Ordinary Vietnamese to make friends with Ordinary Chinese"
However, he aint some "Ordinary Vietnamese, so he may be playing with his verbal games as usual bro, you're like playing music to a cow, wasting your kind friendship approach
If that was the case it's deeply regretful he has such a resentment towards the Chinese people in general.
cochine
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2015
- Messages
- 2,052
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Perhaps you may have got him wrong, he meant "Ordinary Vietnamese to make friends with Ordinary Chinese"
However, he aint some "Ordinary Vietnamese, so he may be playing with his verbal games as usual bro, you're like playing music to a cow, wasting your kind friendship approach
here is this.
grey boy 2
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2009
- Messages
- 6,484
- Reaction score
- -2
- Country
- Location
here is this.
Yawn..............
terranMarine
BANNED
- Joined
- May 3, 2012
- Messages
- 7,597
- Reaction score
- -18
- Country
- Location
cochine
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2015
- Messages
- 2,052
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
I copied it on PDF to answer your guy's trolling. I think the mode is fair.
check here. https://defence.pk/threads/south-china-sea-news-discussions.196058/page-714
ahojunk
RETIRED INTL MOD
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2014
- Messages
- 5,118
- Reaction score
- 6
- Country
- Location
@terranMarine
I am keeping track of as many threads as I can. If anyone posts insulting, no-value or off-topic material, I will issue infraction notice. Also, to be fair, I don't think English is kecho's first language, so he may not be able to express himself as well as others. I have to make some allowance.
By the way, I can assure you that I taken note of what you have said.
@kecho
Please try to put more info into your posts and make them more useful for others.
Most of your posts are one liners and may come across as trolling.
I understand that English is not your first language (forgive me if I am wrong), but please try.
Thanks.
cochine
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2015
- Messages
- 2,052
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Last update 07:03 | 29/08/2016
Persistently, resolutely protecting national sovereignty by peaceful measures
VietNamNet Bridge – Aside from establishing diplomatic relations with foreign countries, the diplomatic sector plays an important role in protecting the independence, sovereignty, unity, and territorial integrity of the country and ensuring a peaceful and stable environment for national growth. Vietnam’s foreign policy has been stated in documents of the 12th National Party Congress and reaffirmed at the ongoing 29th Diplomatic Conference in Hanoi.
Vietnam's fishing boats
Vietnam has insisted on a foreign policy of peace, national independence, democracy, cooperation, and development. In recent years, political and security situation in the Asia-Pacific region and Southeast Asia in particular has developed rapidly and unexpectedly. The East Sea issue has become a pressing topic regionally and internationally, particularly since the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) issued an award on the Philippines’ lawsuit against China which clearly interpreted controversial contents in the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea.
Responding to the situation Vietnam has affirmed its stance on national sovereignty and maritime sovereignty rights to persistently and resolutely protect the independence, sovereignty, territorial integrity, and interest of the nation, and guarantee a peaceful and cooperative environment for development.
Resolving disputes peacefully
The East Sea has been a “hot spot” in the region, and tensions have escalated due to territorial and sovereignty disputes and strategic competition among big countries.
Vietnam, with over 3,000km of coastline, is directly impacted by marine security in the East Sea. Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Pham Binh Minh said Vietnam has confirmed time and again its sovereignty and sovereign rights to the Hoang Sa (Paracel) and Truong Sa (Spratly) archipelagos. The diplomatic sector has closely followed the guidelines of the Communist Party of Vietnam to resolutely protect national sovereignty by peaceful means and resolve disputes through negotiations with respect for international law.
Deputy Prime Minister Minh said: “Vietnam insists on protecting its sovereign rights to islands under its control in accordance with international law. We have to defend our rights to our exclusive economic zone of 200 nautical miles. Disputes between two or more countries will be resolved bilaterally or multilaterally. I confirm that Vietnam defends its sovereignty by peaceful means in accordance with international law and requests that other countries respect international law.”
A peaceful, stable environment in the common interest
Responding to concerns about big countries’ escalation of tensions and appropriate responses by relevant parties, Deputy Prime Minister Minh said the East Sea is not an issue that should concern only claimants. Other countries in and beyond the region should take responsibility to ensure maritime security and safety and a peaceful environment for development. He added that a country’s provocations will influence its national growth and prestige on the international arena.
Vietnamese Ambassador to China Dang Minh Khoi said: “Although the East Sea has seen complicated developments, I’m positive about the situation. China is growing stronger while countries have strengthened themselves at all levels. But all countries have expressed their wish to maintain peaceful relations. China will benefit from peace and stability in the Asia-Pacific region. No country has talked about war. It shows that Vietnam and other countries share the same view of retaining a peaceful and stable environment for development.”
ASEAN and China recently agreed to finalize the Code of Conduct of Parties in the East Sea in mid 2017, which will be a legal tool guaranteeing maritime peace and stability.
Narrowing gaps, preventing conflict, and improving cooperation
Addressing the 29th Diplomatic Conference on Monday, Party General Secretary Nguyen Phu Trong said external work should have an effective remedy to narrow differences, prevent conflicts, improve cooperation, and create conditions for solutions. Vietnam’s diplomatic sector has thoroughly abided by the Party’s guidelines to defend national sovereignty and a peaceful environment for national development.
RELATED NEWS
Persistently, resolutely protecting national sovereignty by peaceful measures
VietNamNet Bridge – Aside from establishing diplomatic relations with foreign countries, the diplomatic sector plays an important role in protecting the independence, sovereignty, unity, and territorial integrity of the country and ensuring a peaceful and stable environment for national growth. Vietnam’s foreign policy has been stated in documents of the 12th National Party Congress and reaffirmed at the ongoing 29th Diplomatic Conference in Hanoi.
Vietnam's fishing boats
Vietnam has insisted on a foreign policy of peace, national independence, democracy, cooperation, and development. In recent years, political and security situation in the Asia-Pacific region and Southeast Asia in particular has developed rapidly and unexpectedly. The East Sea issue has become a pressing topic regionally and internationally, particularly since the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) issued an award on the Philippines’ lawsuit against China which clearly interpreted controversial contents in the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea.
Responding to the situation Vietnam has affirmed its stance on national sovereignty and maritime sovereignty rights to persistently and resolutely protect the independence, sovereignty, territorial integrity, and interest of the nation, and guarantee a peaceful and cooperative environment for development.
Resolving disputes peacefully
The East Sea has been a “hot spot” in the region, and tensions have escalated due to territorial and sovereignty disputes and strategic competition among big countries.
Vietnam, with over 3,000km of coastline, is directly impacted by marine security in the East Sea. Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Pham Binh Minh said Vietnam has confirmed time and again its sovereignty and sovereign rights to the Hoang Sa (Paracel) and Truong Sa (Spratly) archipelagos. The diplomatic sector has closely followed the guidelines of the Communist Party of Vietnam to resolutely protect national sovereignty by peaceful means and resolve disputes through negotiations with respect for international law.
Deputy Prime Minister Minh said: “Vietnam insists on protecting its sovereign rights to islands under its control in accordance with international law. We have to defend our rights to our exclusive economic zone of 200 nautical miles. Disputes between two or more countries will be resolved bilaterally or multilaterally. I confirm that Vietnam defends its sovereignty by peaceful means in accordance with international law and requests that other countries respect international law.”
A peaceful, stable environment in the common interest
Responding to concerns about big countries’ escalation of tensions and appropriate responses by relevant parties, Deputy Prime Minister Minh said the East Sea is not an issue that should concern only claimants. Other countries in and beyond the region should take responsibility to ensure maritime security and safety and a peaceful environment for development. He added that a country’s provocations will influence its national growth and prestige on the international arena.
Vietnamese Ambassador to China Dang Minh Khoi said: “Although the East Sea has seen complicated developments, I’m positive about the situation. China is growing stronger while countries have strengthened themselves at all levels. But all countries have expressed their wish to maintain peaceful relations. China will benefit from peace and stability in the Asia-Pacific region. No country has talked about war. It shows that Vietnam and other countries share the same view of retaining a peaceful and stable environment for development.”
ASEAN and China recently agreed to finalize the Code of Conduct of Parties in the East Sea in mid 2017, which will be a legal tool guaranteeing maritime peace and stability.
Narrowing gaps, preventing conflict, and improving cooperation
Addressing the 29th Diplomatic Conference on Monday, Party General Secretary Nguyen Phu Trong said external work should have an effective remedy to narrow differences, prevent conflicts, improve cooperation, and create conditions for solutions. Vietnam’s diplomatic sector has thoroughly abided by the Party’s guidelines to defend national sovereignty and a peaceful environment for national development.
RELATED NEWS
ohmrlobalobayeh
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2012
- Messages
- 3,388
- Reaction score
- -23
- Country
- Location
It's starting:
China building in disputed shoal: Philippines' Duterte
Beijing is expanding its large-scale land reclamation in the disputed South China Sea, Philippine president Rodrigo Duterte said Friday, despite an international court ruling rejecting most of China's claims in the resource-rich area.
A UN-backed tribunal ruled in July that China's claims to almost all of the strategic sea had no legal basis and its construction of artificial islands in disputed waters was illegal.
But Duterte said he received an "unsettling" intelligence report showing China had sent barges to the contested Scarborough Shoal and had appeared to begin construction in the area for the first time.
"There seem to be new barges coming in and they suspect that's going to be another construction."
China has sought to assert its claims in the South China Sea by building a network of artificial islands capable of supporting military operations.
Its massive land reclamation has prompted criticism from the US and claimant countries, with Washington warning it endangers freedom of navigation in international waters.
Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei and Taiwan also have claims to the sea, through which over $5 trillion in annual trade passes.
The Scarborough Shoal, a rich fishing ground within the Philippines' exclusive economic zone and far away from the nearest major Chinese landmass, is a particular flashpoint. China took control of Scarborough Shoal in 2012 after a stand-off with the country's navy.
Duterte's comments come a week before a regional summit in Laos where the South China Sea dispute will be on the agenda.
He said he would consider bringing up the construction work during bilateral talks with Beijing, adding it would affect global commerce.
"If (China) continues building military installations there ... insurance would go up for the ships and the goods they transport. Because then it would be a source of conflict and thereby the threat is always there."
Duterte, who took office two months ago, has vowed to mend ties with China after his predecessor Benigno Aquino angered Beijing by filing the arbitration case in 2013.
He has said he would not raise the matter of the ruling in Laos to avoid escalating tensions. But on Friday, Duterte he said he would insist on China's compliance with the verdict during direct talks with Beijing.
He criticised the Asian giant's statements saying it would ignore the ruling.
"We can only take so much but you cannot be slapped every day with (those) kinds of words."
China building in disputed shoal: Philippines' Duterte
Beijing is expanding its large-scale land reclamation in the disputed South China Sea, Philippine president Rodrigo Duterte said Friday, despite an international court ruling rejecting most of China's claims in the resource-rich area.
A UN-backed tribunal ruled in July that China's claims to almost all of the strategic sea had no legal basis and its construction of artificial islands in disputed waters was illegal.
But Duterte said he received an "unsettling" intelligence report showing China had sent barges to the contested Scarborough Shoal and had appeared to begin construction in the area for the first time.
"There seem to be new barges coming in and they suspect that's going to be another construction."
China has sought to assert its claims in the South China Sea by building a network of artificial islands capable of supporting military operations.
Its massive land reclamation has prompted criticism from the US and claimant countries, with Washington warning it endangers freedom of navigation in international waters.
Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei and Taiwan also have claims to the sea, through which over $5 trillion in annual trade passes.
The Scarborough Shoal, a rich fishing ground within the Philippines' exclusive economic zone and far away from the nearest major Chinese landmass, is a particular flashpoint. China took control of Scarborough Shoal in 2012 after a stand-off with the country's navy.
Duterte's comments come a week before a regional summit in Laos where the South China Sea dispute will be on the agenda.
He said he would consider bringing up the construction work during bilateral talks with Beijing, adding it would affect global commerce.
"If (China) continues building military installations there ... insurance would go up for the ships and the goods they transport. Because then it would be a source of conflict and thereby the threat is always there."
Duterte, who took office two months ago, has vowed to mend ties with China after his predecessor Benigno Aquino angered Beijing by filing the arbitration case in 2013.
He has said he would not raise the matter of the ruling in Laos to avoid escalating tensions. But on Friday, Duterte he said he would insist on China's compliance with the verdict during direct talks with Beijing.
He criticised the Asian giant's statements saying it would ignore the ruling.
"We can only take so much but you cannot be slapped every day with (those) kinds of words."
Cant take Japan Times serious when they don't even wait 2 Paragraphs until they start straight out lying.
It's an UN-unrelated tribunal that destroyed its own credibility by not abiding to its own rules to make that silly ruling in first place, not just with the silly judgement made turning entire natural islands into "rocks" under pressure from the U.S. connections and from U.S. controlled nations. But that doesn't fit into the false narrative they want to tell as that objectively false "UN-backed" thrown arround by all these rogue regime controlled propaganda papers to fool the silly sheep that blindly believe in the lie of "their" "free" press.
ahojunk
RETIRED INTL MOD
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2014
- Messages
- 5,118
- Reaction score
- 6
- Country
- Location
Good news these two neighbors are cooperating...
--------
27 August 2016
News Story: China-Vietnam maritime cooperation sets example for handling South China Sea disputes
BEIJING, Aug. 26 (Xinhua) -- Maritime cooperation between China and Vietnam has set an example for handling South China Sea disputes.
The coast guards of China and Vietnam on Friday held their first working meeting during which they signed a conference summary.
Friday's meeting is a key step in enhancing bilateral maritime cooperation between China and Vietnam, which, since 1992, have been negotiating the demarcation of territorial waters in the Beibu Gulf -- a half-closed bay surrounded by Chinese and Vietnamese territory and a traditional fishing area for the two countries.
Maritime cooperation has particularly been deepened since the two countries signed the Beibu Gulf Demarcation Agreement and the Beibu Gulf Fishery Cooperation Agreement in 2000.
China and Vietnam have also conducted joint patrols and joint oil exploration in Beibu Gulf in the past few years.
--------
27 August 2016
News Story: China-Vietnam maritime cooperation sets example for handling South China Sea disputes
BEIJING, Aug. 26 (Xinhua) -- Maritime cooperation between China and Vietnam has set an example for handling South China Sea disputes.
The coast guards of China and Vietnam on Friday held their first working meeting during which they signed a conference summary.
Friday's meeting is a key step in enhancing bilateral maritime cooperation between China and Vietnam, which, since 1992, have been negotiating the demarcation of territorial waters in the Beibu Gulf -- a half-closed bay surrounded by Chinese and Vietnamese territory and a traditional fishing area for the two countries.
Maritime cooperation has particularly been deepened since the two countries signed the Beibu Gulf Demarcation Agreement and the Beibu Gulf Fishery Cooperation Agreement in 2000.
China and Vietnam have also conducted joint patrols and joint oil exploration in Beibu Gulf in the past few years.
