Taiwan Conducts Live Fire Drills on Spratlys, Angering Vietnam

[SamDNguyen]

Why are Vietnamese always posting this map if they can't read the title?

It reads: “Hoàng triều trực tỉnh địa dư toàn đồ”

Why you Vietnamese are so obsessed with ancient maps? Why you Vietnamese always use modern ideology on something that happened in ancient time? Ancient territories were never as clear as today. Ancient maps were very rough and inaccurate. And the most important matter is: Ancient people knew about that. They didn't take the map as a serious territory law.
When referring to the water territories, things are even worse. We should put the maps aside. Take the traditions into account. For instance: Who found the islands first. Who was more active in this water area.

Please elaborate more on this.
Thank you first in advance.

 

[Grand Historian]

It reads: “Hoàng triều trực tỉnh địa dư toàn đồ”

Then you would know why its missing lands

 

[SamDNguyen]

Then you would know why its missing lands

This is the complete territory map of the dynasty. However, I would like your explanation on this.

 

[Grand Historian]

This is the complete territory map of the dynasty. However, I would like your explanation on this.

No it isn't why do you think the northeastern provinces.Xinjiang,Xizang etc. are missing?

 

[Aepsilons]

Then according to this map of Qing Dynasty-China would have legal basis to their claim sovereign over the whole world?

View attachment 147436

We all can agree that during the Imperial Classical Period, in regards to East Asian History, of course, the name of China or "Zhongguo" did carry significant weight. It was, in all tense and purposes, the middle kingdom. I'm not arguing on their defense over the Paracel Islands here , or even the Spratly's, I'm conjecturing that they , as the oldest civilization in East Asia, had purveyed territories long before ours.

Japan was discovered by them and what we know of Japan is through analysis of the Book of Han. There was no written language prior to the influence of China's learned scholars who came to Japan in the succeeding centuries around the 1st to 2nd centuries C.E. All the early written documents , texts in Ancient Japan are in Hanzi / Kanji.

If they can discover our islands, as early as the 1st century BCE, who's to say that they could not venture and discover the islands in the South Seas?

The point is, we cannot deny that they (Chinese) have some historical leverage here. And even trying to argue of the historical legacy of their claims is unattainable. We just can't. It is moot trying to argue historical basis for claimants here, arguement should be based on International Law as that is the only leverage you will have. An equal footing so to say.

Arguments should be made based on EEZ claims as elaborated vis-a-vis UNCLOS. Historical debate will only go so far. Because the Chinese are the oldest civilization in the region. And they have historical maps that justify their claims. You will not win historical debates with them.

 

[William Hung]

Arguments should be made based on EEZ claims as elaborated vis-a-vis UNCLOS. Historical debate will only go so far.

This begs the question: Why dont they both go to an international court or tribunal to settle their territorial dispute?

If both parties keep saying that they have indisputable historical evidences for their sovereignty claims, then why not prove it at an international court?

Unless, those "indisputable" evidences doesnt meet the standards of an international court so they won't dare to bring it there?

To me, these historical "evidences" are worthless if they are not used.

 

[Aepsilons]

This begs the question: Why dont they both go to an international court or tribunal to settle their territorial dispute?

If both parties keep saying that they have indisputable historical evidences for their sovereignty claims, then why not prove it at an international court?

Unless, those "indisputable" evidences doesnt meet the standards of an international court so they won't dare to bring it there?

To me, these historical "evidences" are worthless if they are not used.

The Republic of the Philippines instituted arbitral proceedings against the People’s Republic of China under Annex VII to the UNCLOS (the “Convention”), “with respect to the dispute with China over the maritime jurisdiction of the Philippines in the West Philippine Sea.” China then sent a Note Verbale of its decision to decline any participation on arbitration proceedings. The reasons for doing so is something that I want to know. Perhaps a little more research is needed.

As per Vietnam, I don't know if they presented any complaints for International Arbitration.

 

[dichoi]

@dichoi ,

Compare that map to this, which the French had produced. Notice the parallel.

View attachment 147443

What do you mean about this map in parallel ?

The title of map is "Carte L'Empire Chinois at du Japon", as I see there is border of china with pink color line and Taiwan, Korea is part of China ( ? ). Japan is bordering with dark-green line and South Sakhalin is part of of Japan.

Pls explain to me what do you like to say ?

 

[Aepsilons]

What do you mean about this map in parallel ?

The title of map is "Carte L'Empire Chinois at du Japon", as I see there is border of china with pink color line and Taiwan, Korea is part of China ( ? ). Japan is bordering with dark-green line and South Sakhalin is part of of Japan.

Pls explain to me what do you like to say ?

The point is, we cannot deny that they (Chinese) have some historical leverage here. And even trying to argue of the historical legacy of their claims is unattainable. We just can't. It is moot trying to argue historical basis for claimants here, arguement should be based on International Law as that is the only leverage you will have. An equal footing so to say.

Arguments should be made based on EEZ claims as elaborated vis-a-vis UNCLOS. Historical debate will only go so far. Because the Chinese are the oldest civilization in the region. And they have historical maps that justify their claims. You will not win historical debates with them.

 

[deltaforce81]

Just about everyone is angering Vietnam at the moment :/

 

[dichoi]

The point is, we cannot deny that they (Chinese) have some historical leverage here. And even trying to argue of the historical legacy of their claims is unattainable. We just can't. It is moot trying to argue historical basis for claimants here, arguement should be based on International Law as that is the only leverage you will have. An equal footing so to say.

Arguments should be made based on EEZ claims as elaborated vis-a-vis UNCLOS. Historical debate will only go so far. Because the Chinese are the oldest civilization in the region. And they have historical maps that justify their claims. You will not win historical debates with them.

I do not understand you.

apply your analogy, Colombos discovered America, there is historical legacy and America continent belong to Portugal, where is native people ?

Our position on this disputed Islands in SCS is base on rules of internal law and UNCLOS which document China has been signed, when Chinese try to lie about such historical notes with fabrication.

Vietnam is the first state has been officially controlled Islands in SCS by our Dynsties in our history. It is a historical legacy of us.

 

[Aepsilons]

I do not understand you.

apply your analogy, Colombos discovered America, there is historical legacy and America continent belong to Portugal, where is native people ?

Our position on this disputed Islands in SCS is base on rules of internal law and UNCLOS which document China has been signed, when Chinese try to lie about such historical notes with fabrication.

Vietnam is the first state has been officially controlled Islands in SCS by our Dynsties in our history. It is a historical legacy of us.

The point I'm trying to emphasize is that the over-competing historical claims does not vouchsafe only Vietnam's case, the same can be said for the Philippine side which claims ownership of their Kalayaan Group of islands by the historical precedent that Spain had administrative control over the area. The Chinese then have their own competing claims. Incidentally, Vietnam's claim also violates the Philippines' own claims.

The only way to settle this is to apply EEZ as emphasized through UNCLOS. And to prevent a powder keg in the South China Sea, there should be the passing of a binding Code of Conduct of the Seas. This should be signed by competing claimants in the South China Sea.

One has to be responsible about this. That is my objective analysis and advice.

 

[Rechoice]

No it isn't why do you think the northeastern provinces.Xinjiang,Xizang etc. are missing?

don't lie, it is "full map" of China, Tibet and East Turkistan is in the map too, This map made by chinese with help of white men.

 

[dichoi]

The point I'm trying to emphasize is that the over-competing historical claims does not vouchsafe only Vietnam's case, the same can be said for the Philippine side which claims ownership of their Kalayaan Group of islands by the historical precedent that Spain had administrative control over the area. The Chinese then have their own competing claims. Incidentally, Vietnam's claim also violates the Philippines' own claims.

I don't aggree with you. Vietnam do not claim all islands in SCS, Zhongsha Islands group belong to China where Nguyen Dynasty didn't controlled it. and part of Spratly should belong to Philippine too, It should be overlapped claiming and we can follow the peaceful negociation to solve this dispute.

The only way to settle this is to apply EEZ as emphasized through UNCLOS. And to prevent a powder keg in the South China Sea, there should be the passing of a binding Code of Conduct of the Seas. This should be signed by competing claimants in the South China Sea.
One has to be responsible about this. That is my objective analysis and advice.

I can agree with you.

 

[William Hung]

The Republic of the Philippines instituted arbitral proceedings against the People’s Republic of China under Annex VII to the UNCLOS (the “Convention”), “with respect to the dispute with China over the maritime jurisdiction of the Philippines in the West Philippine Sea.” China then sent a Note Verbale of its decision to decline any participation on arbitration proceedings. The reasons for doing so is something that I want to know. Perhaps a little more research is needed.

Why did the PRC declined to participate? Im not sure, but I suspect that they probably dont feel confident that they could win against the Philippines in this arbitration case. Otherwise, if the PRC has sufficient historical evidences and legal basis for their claims (like they always say), then why not settle it in the tribunal once and for all?

I've debated this with several PRC members already in the "China's Island and International Law" thread but I'll mention one thing here:

The naive PRC members get excited about the land reclamation work in the SCS. China's doing it at such a fast pace and on such a large scale that it amazes a lot of people. But little did they know that the PRC is doing the land reclamation with the Filipino's arbitration case in mind and is actually a sign of the PRC's desperation. Let me explain:

The ruling of the arbitration tribunal will be legally binding. But in 2006, China made a declaration relying on article 298 (under UNCLOS provisions) to affirm that they will not accept any arbitration.

But article 298 only applies to disputes surrounding EEZ, continental shelves and territorial water boundaries. However, most of the natural reefs or rocks that are currently in the possession of the PRC are totally submerged under water during high tide. And according to UNCLOS, such reefs cannot have any claims for any EEZs, continental shelves or any territorial water boundary. They must be fully emerged during high tide and must be able to sustain human habitation to have those water boundaries.

This means that the PRC cannot invoke article 298 to declare that they dont need to accept any arbitration.

So now, you can begin to see why they are desperately working on land reclamation. They want to turn those natural reefs and rocks into artificial Islands that doesnt fully submerge below water during high tide. Thus the PRC will claim that these "islands" now have EEZs, a continental shelf and can invoke article 298 to reject the Philippines' arbitration case.

And they are doing this at such a fast and large scale simply because the arbitration tribunal will be making their decision about the dispute's jurisdiction soon.

@Cossack25A1 @Ayan81, etc. you guys may want to give your input from a Filipino's perspective.

As per Vietnam, I don't know if they presented any complaints for International Arbitration.

I'm not sure why VN didnt join the Philippines in the arbitration case but I suspect that they want to wait and see the initial outcome first. There are actually other avenues to settle the dispute such as taking it to the ICJ or ITLOS. The Philippines decided to go for the Arbitration Tribunal. If the tribunal decide that they do have jurisdiction over the dispute, I suspect that VN will go ahead and submit an arbitration case of their own. If the arbitration tribunal decide that they do not have jurisdiction over such dispute, then VN would probably explore the ICJ or ITLOS option. Hence, they will wait for this arbitration outcome first before they decide their option.

@Rechoice @Soryu @BoQ77, @Carlosa, @Viet, etc. you want to give your opinions?