South CHina Sea map before 1990

[LvpAK]

[/IMG]

more earlier map

[/IMG]

It belongs to China - Manila Standard Today - Daily news, current events, latest news in the Philippines - Manila Standard Today

It belongs to China
Posted April 28th, 2012 by Manila Standard Today & filed under Opinion.

Tweet

By Victor N. Arches II

The Scarborough Shoal does belong to China which discovered it and drew it in a map as early as 1279 during the Yuan Dynasty. Chinese fishermen, from both the Mainland and Taiwan, have since used it. As a matter of fact, Guo Shoujing, (the Chinese astronomer, engineer and mathematician who worked under the Mongol ruler, Kublai Khan) performed surveying of the South China Sea, and the surveying point was the Scarborough Shoal which is considered part of the Zhongsha Islands (renamed Huangyan Island in 1983).

By contrast, the “old maps” being relied upon by our Department of Foreign Affairs in its spurious claim on the same territory were drawn up only in 1820, or 541 years after China’s. I am surprised that Senator Edgardo Angara—supposedly a renowned lawyer—can claim that a map drawn 5 centuries and 4 decades after, takes precedence over the much earlier map of China.

But I am all the more astonished that Fr. Joaquin Bernas, in his April 22 article in another newspaper, being one of the main framers of the 1987 Constitution, uses the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea as his basis to defend the Philippine claim. This, despite and after acknowledging the fact that, indeed, “the Scarborough Shoal is OUTSIDE THE LIMITS set by the Treaty of Paris for Philippine territory.” What kind of double-speak is that?

So, what exactly was the territory we declared independence from the US in 1946? Why is it that NONE of our constitutions, past and present, from 1899, 1935, 1943, 1973, 1986 and 1987, include either the Spratlys or the Scarborough Shoal within our declared national territory? Where, or from whom, did we, all of a sudden, acquire title to these? Out of thin air?

In the late 1970s, China organized many scientific expeditions in the Shoal and around that area. In fact, in 1980, a stone marker reading “South China Sea Scientific Expedition” was installed by China on the South Rock. This Chinese marker was removed, without authority, by the Philippines in 1997.

All official maps published by the Philippines until the 1990s excluded both the Spratlys and Scarborough Shoal from its territorial boundaries. Our own Republic Act No. 3046, passed by our Congress and approved in 1961, stopped us from our claim. Yet, we had the temerity to amend this law on March 10, 2009, after 48 long years, to unilaterally include the disputed territories.

But what takes the cake is the fact that China holds three international treaties in support of its claim over the territories in question—namely, the 1898 Treaty of Paris between the US and Spain, the 1900 Treaty of Washington between Spain and the US, and the 1930 Treaty between Great Britain and the US, all limiting Philippine territorial limits to the 118th degree meridian of longitude east of Greenwich.

On the other hand, the basis of the Philippine claim is restricted to proximity, relying solely on the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. As far as I know, a mere “convention” cannot overturn or supersede a treaty or an agreement reached between colonial powers. And even if it were considered a “law”, it cannot be made to take effect retroactively.

Whom are we fooling?

Mr. Arches is from San Juan City. He is a retired investment and merchant banker, a retired Certified Public Accountant, and a retired economist who loves to dabble in history and political science, among many other interests.

------------------=======================
English is not native languish for CHina ,and CHina's network is very abundance. So few Chinese visit abroad site. and this leave the English Speak louder INDian and Philippeans much more stage to have some funny show. distort the truth while few Chinese refute.

 

[WuMaoCleverbot]

Article about Victor Arches:

China’s propaganda war
By Rodel Rodis
Philippine Daily Inquirer
5:51 pm | Wednesday, May 16th, 2012

The most popular Filipino in China today is “a retired investment and merchant banker, a retired Certified Public Accountant, and a retired economist who loves to dabble in history and political science, among many other interests”. His name is “Victor N. Arches II” and he is the reported author of an op-ed article that appeared in the Manila Standard Today on April 28, 2012. The article, “It belongs to China”, has been reproduced in its entirety in hundreds, if not thousands, of print publications and online news sites all over China.
“Even Filipino admits Huangyan Island belongs to China!” is typical of the introduction to the article in English or in Chinese Pinyin character.
Just who exactly is this “Victor N. Arches II”? Ever since it appeared in the Manila Standard Today, I have been scouring the Internet to find out who he is anything but I found nothing. I could not even find a single Filipino with that surname. The closest I got was a “Victor Arch” from Indonesia who graduated from a university in Jakarta in 1994 but his postings in Facebook are in Bahasa Indonesia.
He could be a real person but if he had written an article in the past, it would surely have surfaced in the Internet. If he graduated from any college or university in the Philippines or if he ever worked as a CPA in the Philippines, his name would invariably have appeared somewhere in the Internet and a search engine would have surely tracked it.
It is also suspicious that he would use “II” instead of “Jr.” which is what most Filipinos are accustomed to.
My suspicion about the true identity of the author was also aroused by the style and substance of the article which was uncannily similar to the way Chinese articles have dealt with the subject.
Consider his opening paragraph: “The Scarborough Shoal does belong to China which discovered it and drew it in a map as early as 1279 during the Yuan Dynasty. Chinese fishermen, from both the Mainland and Taiwan, have since used it. As a matter of fact, Guo Shoujing, (the Chinese astronomer, engineer and mathematician who worked under the Mongol ruler, Kublai Khan) performed surveying of the South China Sea, and the surveying point was the Scarborough Shoal which is considered part of the Zhongsha Islands (renamed Huangyan Island in 1983). By contrast, the “old maps” being relied upon by our Department of Foreign Affairs in its spurious claim on the same territory were drawn up only in 1820, or 541 years after China’s.”
An article which recently appeared in the official China government publication, Xinhua News, entitled “Solid evidence supports China’s sovereignty claim over Huangyan Island” starts with similar information and was written in the same prose style: “In the 13th century, Emperor Kublai Khan of China’s Yuan Dynasty assigned an astronomer named Guo Shoujing to conduct a territory survey to unify the calendar nationwide, said Li Guoqiang, deputy director of the Research Center for Chinese Borderland History and Geography of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, a government think tank.”
Ironically enough, China’s claim to ownership of the Scarborough Shoal — based on historical maps — was debunked by the Philippines top Maoist, Jose Maria Sison, founder of the Communist Party of the Philippines, who described the claim as an “absurdity”. “This would be like Italy claiming all areas previously occupied by the Roman Empire,” Sison said.
It would be like Macedonia laying claim to the Persian Empire (Iran) based on a map drawn by Alexander the Great in 338 B.C. It would be like China laying claim to America based on an old map drawn by Admiral Zheng He, for Emperor Zhu Di, in 1421as described in the New York Times bestseller by Gavin Menzies entitled “1421: The Year China Discovered America”.
China can plant “It belongs to China” articles in Philippine publications but the Philippines cannot hope to have even one article published anywhere in China that questions China’s claim to the Scarborough Shoal or to the Spratlys. That is the decided advantage of a totalitarian dictatorship – which does not allow freedom of the press - over a democracy.
Writers from China can regularly post their comments in articles critical of China that appear in online Philippie publications such as this comment about my article which appeared last week (“Stand up to China or kneel and beg for mercy&#8221: “we don’t need Filipino care workers’ product too, we don’t know why Ph export to china more than china export to Ph and Ph earn much money from china do not use to Improve the people’s livelihood instead of oppose with china, how stupid Ph pigs, you can choose kneel and beg for mercy to USA, and you do, you are always the dog of USA, we don’t wanna feed you again.”
While the 1.3 billion people of China are unified behind their government’s claim to the Scarborough Shoal, the same cannot be said for the 100 million people of the Philippines at home and abroad.
In an interview with ABS-CBN Balitang America on May 8, San Francisco-based Racquel Redondiez, former Secretary-General of Bayan USA and current Gabriela USA Chair, said that her group would boycott the May 11 global protest against China because the dispute with China is just “a conflict between siblings or friends”.
“The China threat is being used by the U.S. to actually further trample on the Philippines’ national sovereignty,” Redondiez charged.
But Redondiez is mild compared to Washington DC-based Adolfo Paglinawan who has been apoplectic in his vitriolic denunciations of Filipinos critical of China’s intrusion in the Scarborough Shoal. In his email comments posted in various elists, Paglinawan has blamed the US Pinoys for Good Governance (USP4GG) for provoking China into imposing economic sanctions against the Philippines.
He has demanded that President Benigno S. Aquino (whom he derisively calls “Penoy&#8221 purge his cabinet of officials who have been critical of China starting with Commission on Filipinos Overseas (CFO) Chair Imelda Nicolas because she is the sister of USP4GG national chair, Loida Nicolas-Lewis.
Paglinawan told ABS-CBN Washington DC correspondent Rodney Jaleco in a TV interview on May 11: “I would not be surprised if China files a diplomatic protest for the obvious conspiracy between the government and its fronts in foreign lands.” If China heeds Paglinawan’s advice, he would be China’s main witness against the Philippines.
Paglinawan’s cohort in Canada, Romy Marquez, described in his YouTube postings the May 11 protest of Filipino-Canadians in front of the China Consulate in Toronto as “less than two dozen marching in a circle” in a “lacklustre rally”. Marquez claimed that because of the low participation, the protest rally “failed to live up to its billing as a global protest”.
Marquez failed to understand that it was a “global protest” because there were simultaneous protest rallies against China on May 11 by Filipinos in cities all over the world, from Makati and Angeles City to Guam, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Vancouver, Chicago, New York, Washington DC, Paris, Switzerland, Ireland, South Africa, South Korea, Hong Kong and other world cities.
While the formidable challenge of China can be daunting and intimidating, I take comfort from an email message from a Philippine Science High School classmate, Vince Ragay, who expressed appreciation of our global efforts “applying an approach taken from Sun Tzu himself: gathering sympathy and support from neighbors and allies to pre-empt an enemy attack”.
“Yes, it can come to a bloody turn as it has done so in the past,” Vince wrote. “But I believe that God in Heaven protects our shores and our people. Just as David claimed victory even before he struck Goliath, we, as believers, can also claim the same victory we will have if we remain faithful and steadfast. It is not a mere test of our political, legal or military capabilities but also of our inner stability as children of God. Will God forsake His children when the infidels surround them? History has many lessons we still haven’t truly learned and applied.”
“We have friends and sympathizers within China, for certain. Prayers and protests may seem like incongruous twins in this issue; but I dare say that whatever the Lord has put in your heart to do on this matter, please do it with all of your might.”

China

 

[sweetgrape]

All arguments are wasting time for SCS, I have gave up, Now, I just believe in power!! Let PLA solve the problem!

 

[WuMaoCleverbot]

Go here if you want to see more of our old Philippine maps showing Scarborough shoal as territory of the Philippines.

Em Esber Blog 2: Three Hundred Years of Philippine Maps 1598-1898


1734 Murillo Map

Mapa General, Islas Filipinas, Observatorio de Manila by the US Coast and Geodetic Survey, also included Bajo de Masinloc as part of the Philippines.

Scarborough shoal and the Spratlys are within the EEZ of the Philippines

To sum up China's 9-dash claim:

1. No International Law supports China's 9 dash claim

2. No Legitimate country supports China's 9 dash claim

3. Modern Historical and Archaeological findings contradicts with China's Historical Claim

 

[WuMaoCleverbot]

English is not native languish for CHina ,and CHina's network is very abundance. So few Chinese visit abroad site. and this leave the English Speak louder INDian and Philippeans much more stage to have some funny show. distort the truth while few Chinese refute.

You and readers who haven't encountered a Wu Mao or paid commie stooges should read this:

50 Cent Party Crashers
posted by Megan on Mon, 11/09/2009 - 11:25

I spend a lot of time reading about China on the Internet. It's my job, but even before it was my job it was a very serious hobby. I also like to look through readers' comments. Articles on China often hit a nerve with readers, Chinese and American (or otherwise) alike, and generate fierce debates, sometimes hundreds of comments even on a relatively brief article. But in the past few years these debates have been hijacked by the 五毛党(wu mao dang), or 50 Cent Party. They are the legion of young Chinese Internet users (some estimate there are 280,000 of them) who are paid 50 mao (roughly 7 cents) to post comments on blogs, news articles, bulletin boards, etc. that are pro-Communist Party, essentially to drown out critical voices. While they are most active on Chinese-language sites, the 50 Cent Party has found its way onto message boards, blogs and other forums in Western media, too, even spearheading the campaign against CNN's Jack Cafferty for calling the leadership in Beijing a bunch of "goons and thugs." David Bandurski wrote a great article in the Far Eastern Economic Review last year about this phenomenon.

I take issue with the 50 Cent Party for many reasons, not the least of which is the fact that it intimidates Chinese netizens into witholding their true opinions (not only do they drown out dissenting voices, the 50 Cent Party report back to their Communist Party bosses on exactly who is making the critical comments). But what is most frustrating for me personally is the way the 50 Cent Party has made genuine debate online about China virtually impossible. First of all, the tactics of the 50 Cent Party are tried and true debate-killers -- "You can't talk, America had slavery" and the like -- trying to shift the focus of the debate away from the issue at hand and questioning anyone's right to even discuss China outside of China. What's worse, I find myself assuming that any pro-government comment is paid for by the Communist Party, thus dismissing what could in fact be genuine comments that deserve a closer look. The world -- and China -- would benefit from honest, rigorous debate about Chinese government policy and its impact beyond its borders. But the 50 Cent Party is rendering this impossible. (Read more)

And, if I haven't depressed you enough, this quote from the aforementioned Bandurski article makes the prospect of genuine debate online even more grim:

"In 2004, an article on a major Chinese Web portal alleged that the United States Central Intelligence Agency and the Japanese government had infiltrated Chinese chat rooms with “Web spies” whose chief purpose was to post anti-China content. The allegations were never substantiated, but they are now a permanent fixture of China’s Internet culture, where Web spies, or wangte, are imagined to be facing off against the Fifty Cent Party."

None of this is to say I will stop reading the online commentary. In fact, despite the 50 Cent Party, despite the Great Firewall, I still see the Internet as an exciting force in Chinese society. I just wish the legions of paid pro-Communist Party commentators would quit crashing the party so the rest of us could have a more serious, productive debate.

 

[Fanling Monk]

LOL Look who's talking about the 50 cent party.

 

[WuMaoCleverbot]

All arguments are wasting time for SCS, I have gave up, Now, I just believe in power!! Let PLA solve the problem!

Wow, that is really a language of the bully!!! Do not test the Filipino people's SOLID resolve. Our solid belief and resolve that we will fight if pushed, and we will ultimately prevail no matter the odds.

 

[Riteon]

Now ..the might of PRC navy and PLAAF will be the posts below

 

[WuMaoCleverbot]

Now ..the might of PRC navy and PLAAF will be the posts below

Threat of force is all China has to back up its claim.

 

[sicsheep]

Article about Victor Arches:
“applying an approach taken from Sun Tzu himself: gathering sympathy and support from neighbors and allies to pre-empt an enemy attack”.

Hahaha, they actually sound like they have a choice, Please tell me what plan B is aside from gathering sympathy.

well, not much since your air force is ALL AIR NO FORCE

 

[3starsandasun]

Now ..the might of PRC navy and PLAAF will be the posts below

dont pressure martian2. he'll post them pics anyway haha

 

[LvpAK]

YOUR map are draw by Spanish, It's colony Philippean. If you think the map is nice ,THen where your balintang batan Islands near Taiwan?
China's 9-dash claim were admitted by many authorities maps in 1950s. but 1970, the Internation Sea Law, the EEZ enlarge , this makes your greedy Philippean begun to grab China's ISlands.
Your official maps before 1970 don't back your now maps. the PHilip Govt claimed your Philippean discovered Spartly ISlands in 1970s, LOL
Though CHina's land is vast , there is no an inch is superabundance.
WE have patient and determination to get back the things belonged to us.

 

[gpit]

Article about Victor Arches:

China’s propaganda war
By Rodel Rodis
Philippine Daily Inquirer
5:51 pm | Wednesday, May 16th, 2012

“Even Filipino admits Huangyan Island belongs to China!” is typical of the introduction to the article in English or in Chinese Pinyin character

...


China

LOL!

Illiterates, wtf is "Chinese Pinyin character"?

Pinyin is not in character, where as Chinese language is written in character. Pinyin is just a system to help to pronounce the Chinese characters.

Is the Philippines only capability to produce such kind of laughing stock, lacking even the basic knowledge of the talking subject?

Boo to poor, illiterate yet hostile Filipinos!

 

[WuMaoCleverbot]

China's 9-dash claim were admitted by many authorities maps in 1950s.
.

No International Law supports China's 9 dash claim. No Legitimate country supports China's 9 dash claim.

YOUR map are draw by Spanish, It's colony Philippean. If you think the map is nice ,THen where your balintang batan Islands near Taiwan?

.

Why don't you visit Batanes Island and ask the natives there if they are Filipinos or Chinese??? Batanes group of islands is recognized internationally as Philippine territory.

Probably you read this article:

Manila's weak claim to the Batanes

By Chen Hurng-yu ???

The Batanes Islands, controlled by the Philippines, are a territorial problem left over from the colonial period. When Spain and the US signed the Treaty of Paris in 1898, the islands were not adequately addressed and this led to irresolution.
Taiwan challenges the Philippines' possession of the Batanes Islands for the same reasons that it challenges Manila's claim to the Spratly Islands.
Territorial issues should be discussed on a case-by-case basis. It is necessary to look at the issue of the Batanes Islands based upon international conventions rather than conjecture.
Philippine commentators say that Taiwan is not a sovereign state and therefore cannot claim territory controlled by Manila.
This point of view is hardly worth discussing. Diplomatic relations between Taiwan and the Philippines lasted until 1975. Although the two states have not maintained official diplomatic relations, this is not evidence of whether Taiwan is a nation or not. Anyone even vaguely familiar with international law should understand this. Non-recognition of another state does not affect its status; the Philippines has no authority to decide whether Taiwan is a country.
Philippine citizens require visas issued by the Taiwanese government to work or travel in Taiwan, which is in itself proof of Taiwan's sovereignty.
Philippine academic Carlos Agustin believes that a seaway treaty signed by Taiwan and the Philippines constitutes recognition of the Philippine territory.
This argument has many flaws: The treaty, signed in July 1991 -- not 1993, as Agustin believes -- concerns Taiwanese fishing boats traveling through two Philippine seaways, not border issues between the two states. Furthermore, the Philippine government does not consider the treaty to be an agreement between states, but defines it as a conference record and abolished part of it in 1998.
Another Philippine academic, Pervagus, suggests that Section 4 of the UN Convention on the Law of the Seas (UNCLOS) justifies the Philippines' possession of the Batanes Islands. But section 4 of UNCLOS concerns archipelagic states only and the Philippines does not qualify.
He also says Japan and Taiwan never occupied or controlled the Batanes Islands, whereas the US did. This argument is based on military occupation and not on international treaties. If we must choose between occupation and treaties to base our borders on, treaties should win.
International law and its implementation supports the regulations of international treaties and opposes military occupation.
Apolonio Anota presents a similar argument. Because the Philippine government holds congressional elections on the Batanes Islands, Manila clearly controls the territory, he says. The people on the islands choose to be citizens of the Republic of the Philippines by complying with its laws, participating in its national elections and identifying themselves as Philippine, he says.
Anota is completely ignoring the fact that the US violated the 1898 treaty.
Another Philippine commentator has argued that the Ivatans of the islands were claimed by Spain in 1782, which is dubious. Although Spain claimed the main island of the Batanes, Basco, in 1782, it did not set up administrative centers on the islands because of their remoteness and the strong northerly winter winds that made life on the islands difficult.

Manila's weak claim to the Batanes - Taipei Times