The international-law Irony of U.S. Provocations in South China Sea

[TaiShang]

The international-law Irony of U.S. Provocations in South China Sea
2016-01-31

In disregard to China's call not to disturb peace in the South China Sea, the United States has carried out another "freedom of navigation" mission there, with a U.S. Navy destroyer sailing within 12 nautical miles off Zhongjian Dao, part of China-owned Xisha Islands.

Washington has long claimed that the so-called freedom of navigation operations by the U.S. military aims to safeguard public access to waters and airspace as allowed by the international law.

However, citing seemingly lofty motives will not obscure the fact that the U.S. maneuvers in South China Sea threaten China's sovereignty and security interests, endanger regional peace and stability and constitute a grave violation of the international law.

As ironic as it is, Washington has always defended its arbitrary move by referring to international law, but it has so far not approved the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, which establishes legal order and regulations on international waters.

The calculation behind such a move is crystal clear: The United States is unwilling to be bound by an international treaty, which it claims as severely flawed, because the sole superpower has already controlled such maritime resources as oil and gas deposits through military power.

Another irony is that US asserts that it maintains freedom of navigation in the South China Sea on the legal basis of international law, but it applies standards unilaterally defined by itself.

In a document issued in 2015 regarding the so-called freedom of navigation program, the U.S. government said the foremost target of the U.S. action is "excessive maritime claims that are defined by the U.S. side." The document reveals that Washington substitutes its own standard for international law and attempts to unilaterally impose its own idea upon other countries.

Moreover, the U.S. action itself to maintain so-called freedom of navigation under international law is a threat to the principles of international law.

The Law of the Sea Treaty stipulates that any resort to the threat or use of force against coastal sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence, or any resort to the threat or use of force that violates purposes and principles of the UN Charter, are all regarded as actions destabilizing the peace, order or security in coastal states.

Due to shared resolve of relevant parties to keep the sea peaceful, and in no smaller part thanks to China's restraint, the freedom of navigation in the South China Sea has never been a problem.

By repeatedly sending military ships on so-called "freedom of navigation" missions in the area, the United States is actually abusing the freedom of navigation and pursuing selfish gains at the cost of others.

It is strongly desired that Washington abandon its own standards to observe international laws and act as a responsible power, rather than stirring up trouble in the South China Sea and then making a false countercharge against others.

 

[jhungary]

The international-law Irony of U.S. Provocations in South China Sea
2016-01-31

In disregard to China's call not to disturb peace in the South China Sea, the United States has carried out another "freedom of navigation" mission there, with a U.S. Navy destroyer sailing within 12 nautical miles off Zhongjian Dao, part of China-owned Xisha Islands.

Washington has long claimed that the so-called freedom of navigation operations by the U.S. military aims to safeguard public access to waters and airspace as allowed by the international law.

However, citing seemingly lofty motives will not obscure the fact that the U.S. maneuvers in South China Sea threaten China's sovereignty and security interests, endanger regional peace and stability and constitute a grave violation of the international law.

As ironic as it is, Washington has always defended its arbitrary move by referring to international law, but it has so far not approved the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, which establishes legal order and regulations on international waters.

The calculation behind such a move is crystal clear: The United States is unwilling to be bound by an international treaty, which it claims as severely flawed, because the sole superpower has already controlled such maritime resources as oil and gas deposits through military power.

Another irony is that US asserts that it maintains freedom of navigation in the South China Sea on the legal basis of international law, but it applies standards unilaterally defined by itself.

In a document issued in 2015 regarding the so-called freedom of navigation program, the U.S. government said the foremost target of the U.S. action is "excessive maritime claims that are defined by the U.S. side." The document reveals that Washington substitutes its own standard for international law and attempts to unilaterally impose its own idea upon other countries.

Moreover, the U.S. action itself to maintain so-called freedom of navigation under international law is a threat to the principles of international law.

The Law of the Sea Treaty stipulates that any resort to the threat or use of force against coastal sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence, or any resort to the threat or use of force that violates purposes and principles of the UN Charter, are all regarded as actions destabilizing the peace, order or security in coastal states.

Due to shared resolve of relevant parties to keep the sea peaceful, and in no smaller part thanks to China's restraint, the freedom of navigation in the South China Sea has never been a problem.

By repeatedly sending military ships on so-called "freedom of navigation" missions in the area, the United States is actually abusing the freedom of navigation and pursuing selfish gains at the cost of others.

It is strongly desired that Washington abandon its own standards to observe international laws and act as a responsible power, rather than stirring up trouble in the South China Sea and then making a false countercharge against others.

BS article. Xinhua can now write as much as weight into arse-wipe, not even toilet paper grade article.

It's call for arms to any Chinese claim and that's "Disruption of Peace" LOL, maybe the write should have served with a thing called "Dictionary" and have it read a couple more time.

International Law is to maintain Freedom of Navigation, the US does not claim the sea as its own and it is the Chinese Fascist and Dictatorship regime that call for it's so called "9 dots lines" as a "Legitimate claim" which the world laugh it off as some sort of constipation that the Chinese leader have between meal.

While the US is exercising it's INTERNATIONAL RIGHT with freedom of navigation, Chinese government act like High School Cheerleader and chant it's motto with tutu-style costume trying to "Portrait" the US as bad guys, for what? Not recognise the Chinese story book claim of the South China Sea?

Again, like it or not, or call whatever the hell you want, it is not going to stop the US from traverse thru these sea lane at will, grow a pairs and maybe try to attack the US Naval ship and you will know what does it mean by "Freedom of Navigation". These type of report are no more than the Chinese Remake of "High School Musical" where a lot of wind and song but no substance at all.

Which kind of writer write these type of BS

 

[asia2000]

BS article. Xinhua can now write as much as weight into arse-wipe, not even toilet paper grade article.

It's call for arms to any Chinese claim and that's "Disruption of Peace" LOL, maybe the write should have served with a thing called "Dictionary" and have it read a couple more time.

International Law is to maintain Freedom of Navigation, the US does not claim the sea as its own and it is the Chinese Fascist and Dictatorship regime that call for it's so called "9 dots lines" as a "Legitimate claim" which the world laugh it off as some sort of constipation that the Chinese leader have between meal.

While the US is exercising it's INTERNATIONAL RIGHT with freedom of navigation, Chinese government act like High School Cheerleader and chant it's motto with tutu-style costume trying to "Portrait" the US as bad guys, for what? Not recognise the Chinese story book claim of the South China Sea?

Again, like it or not, or call whatever the hell you want, it is not going to stop the US from traverse thru these sea lane at will, grow a pairs and maybe try to attack the US Naval ship and you will know what does it mean by "Freedom of Navigation". These type of report are no more than the Chinese Remake of "High School Musical" where a lot of wind and song but no substance at all.

Which kind of writer write these type of BS

Ok, the reporter is trying to do his daily job here. Can you come up something better? Or are you suggesting the Chinese media should just shut up and not making any news?

 

[jhungary]

US fascist media.

The way the person writes, the person proves it really deserves the title some people gave it.

@waz , @Horus what kind of language that person employs? Do not let that kind of low quality, hate-filled posts defile your forum, sirs.

***

On topic:

The US strategy is wrong. So, no tactical moves will save the day for them.

Exactly what I said is low quality?

Was Chinese Government a Fascist Regime? - OF course it is, a fact that China wasn't even trying to hide. China is a Police State, hence a Fascist County.

Was Chinese Government a Dictatorship? - Of course it is, did China have something called election?

This article is indeed BS, and if it was printed on paper, I would not even use it after I went to do number 1 hence this article would not even deserved to be my arse wipe. The article is misleading, using wrong choice of words, and also biased.

Hate Filled? Well, if you count my hatred of Disney High School Musical then yeah, you are in the money. What else do I hate? Kim Kardashian maybe? You want to discuss that as well?

Facts remain, US were not the one claiming ownership of an ocean, you need to get this fact right, and Chinese Government is indeed dancing around in front of a TV camera like a High School Musical production with song and praise on how they militarize their island, again, if you have anything to counter my point, or the FACT I chose to speak of, do so. Otherwise take my post as a man and shut it..

What US have to be saved for? They are transverse within your so called territories and nothing happened, if anything left to be save, it is the red face of the Chinese Government for lack of action. Not a single kind of action can save the face for the Chinese government on becoming a rhetoric of its own propaganda, which they choose not to defend. Hence this is what we called "Empty Word"

Don't like my reply? You can put it up your behind. You think this article is gold, and I think this article is BS, so what exactly is of low quality here? My reply is low quality because I don't agree with you?

Ok, the reporter is trying to do his daily job here. Can you come up something better? Or are you suggesting the Chinese media should just shut up and not making any news?

Well, I don't know where you came from, but here in the west, you have your right to pump any article, and I have the right to pan it, I said what I think is not true on this article. So I am gonna ask you the same question, if I did not agree with said Article, should I simply shut up?

 

[asia2000]

This article is indeed BS, and if it was printed on paper, I would not even use it after I went to do number 1 hence this article would not even deserved to be my arse wipe. The article is misleading, using wrong choice of words, and also biased.

So, may I ask, what paper is deserved and you are currently using for wiping your ***?

Well, I don't know where you came from, but here in the west, you have your right to pump any article, and I have the right to pan it, I said what I think is not true on this article. So I am gonna ask you the same question, if I did not agree with said Article, should I simply shut up?

Have I ever said you need to shut up?

 

[jhungary]

So, what paper is deserved and you are currently using for wiping your ***?

First this is not an actual action, I do think nobody is stupid enough to wipe their arse after taking a dump with a newspaper, it chive your arse because of the quality of the paper.

Second of all, I did not pan the whole newspaper, I pan this particular article, and this article written by Xinhua staff writer is full of BS, Bias, misinterpretation, and false information. I can get a 1000 sheet toilet paper for $1.29 in a supermarket and I probably need around 10 sheet after doing number 1. Hence 1.29 cents for it, and I would not pay 1.29 cents for this article and that's what it mean it don't deserve my money for it, or time, or braincell, or whatever you call you lost after reading such a BS article?

Have I ever said you need to shut up?

No, but did I ask the writer to shut up either? If he is okay with it, he can pump out BS after BS and as long as someone willing to buy them , what's to me to ask him to stop writing at all? I simply say his (or her?) article is BS, that's merely how I express my understanding after reading said article, but did I ask the writer to shut up? Or now I can't even disagree with something I think is BS?

As I said, if you think why or the reason I think this article is BS is wrong, you are more than welcome to discuss it with me, otherwise I have my right, as much as the writer have his/her right to write this article, to pan this article.

 

[asia2000]

First this is not an actual action, I do think nobody is stupid enough to wipe their arse after taking a dump with a newspaper, it chive your arse because of the quality of the paper.

Second of all, I did not pan the whole newspaper, I pan this particular article, and this article written by Xinhua staff writer is full of BS, Bias, misinterpretation, and false information. I can get a 1000 sheet toilet paper for $1.29 in a supermarket and I probably need around 10 sheet after doing number 1. Hence 1.29 cents for it, and I would not pay 1.29 cents for this article and that's what it mean it don't deserve my money for it.

No, but did I ask the writer to shut up either? If he is okay with it, he can pump out BS after BS and as long as someone willing to buy them , what's to me to ask him to stop writing at all? I simply say his (or her?) article is BS, that's merely I express my understanding after reading said article, but did I ask the writer to shut up?

Ok, I got you. But, your strong reaction to the Xinhua news does not make your argument any stronger. If you can remove all those BS words, it may become more readable.

 

[jhungary]

Ok, I got you. But, your strong reaction to the Xinhua news does not make your argument any stronger. If you can remove all those BS words, it may become more readable.

Yet I still did not hear any challenge to my actual point on the Xinhua article.

Again, you can see whatever, that does not mean I should see the same thing, and you can call this article as gold, as truth and the whole truth and as truth as possible, I can see this as a bunch of Bulls and Garbage.

As I said, you are welcome to challenge my point, but you should stop asking me not to express my thought in my own way.

 

[Kiss_of_the_Dragon]

We Chinese should issue more articles like this to assert our vision whether westerner like it or not.

 

[jhungary]

We Chinese should issue more articles like this to assert our vision whether westerner like it or not.

Of course you should, if that is your way to win hearts and minds

 

[Kiss_of_the_Dragon]

Of course you should, if that is your way to win hearts and minds

We Chinese should stand up for ourself and confidently assert our believe...this call the awakening.

 

[gambit]

Crappy article...

As ironic as it is, Washington has always defended its arbitrary move by referring to international law, but it has so far not approved the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, which establishes legal order and regulations on international waters.

Source: https://defence.pk/threads/the-inte...ions-in-south-china-sea.420183/#ixzz3yqXHbYGK

...Designed to fool domestic Chinese audience than to illuminate the sensitive subject.

There is no irony. Is the article saying that those rights and freedoms DID NOT exist until UNCLOS came along ?

Here is the first example of man's MANY attempts to formalize our relationships to each other with respect to territories that borders the seas: The Cannon Shot Rule.

http://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803095546425

The rule by which a state has territorial sovereignty of that coastal sea within three miles of land. Its name derives from the fact that in the 17th century this limit roughly corresponded to the outer range of coastal artillery weapons and therefore reflected the principle terrae dominum finitur, ubi finitur armorium vis (the dominion of the land ends where the range of weapons ends). The rule is now not widely recognized: many nations have established a 6- or 12-mile coastal limit. See also territorial waters.

Essentially, if you are outside a country's coastal cannon shot range, you are free to do as you wish.

What the US is doing is exercising, and enforcing by virtue of military might, centuries old customary laws regarding freedom of navigation on the seas. Not just US, but EVERY seafaring countries on Earth do not need UNCLOS in order to exercise those same freedom of navigation. Why the US did not approved UNCLOS is a different discussion.

 

[Zsari]

BS article. Xinhua can now write as much as weight into arse-wipe, not even toilet paper grade article.

It's call for arms to any Chinese claim and that's "Disruption of Peace" LOL, maybe the write should have served with a thing called "Dictionary" and have it read a couple more time.

International Law is to maintain Freedom of Navigation, the US does not claim the sea as its own and it is the Chinese Fascist and Dictatorship regime that call for it's so called "9 dots lines" as a "Legitimate claim" which the world laugh it off as some sort of constipation that the Chinese leader have between meal.

While the US is exercising it's INTERNATIONAL RIGHT with freedom of navigation, Chinese government act like High School Cheerleader and chant it's motto with tutu-style costume trying to "Portrait" the US as bad guys, for what? Not recognise the Chinese story book claim of the South China Sea?

Again, like it or not, or call whatever the hell you want, it is not going to stop the US from traverse thru these sea lane at will, grow a pairs and maybe try to attack the US Naval ship and you will know what does it mean by "Freedom of Navigation". These type of report are no more than the Chinese Remake of "High School Musical" where a lot of wind and song but no substance at all.

Which kind of writer write these type of BS

One cannot exercise freedom of navigation within other's territorial water, which Washington does not dispute. The right to innocent passage is a suspend-able one, only exception being through straits which the South China Sea is not. According to UNCLOS, foreign ships exercising the right of innocent passage through the territorial sea shall comply with the laws and regulations of the coastal state. Furthermore, in regards to warship there are relevant articles.

Article 30: If any warship does not comply with the laws and regulations of the coastal State concerning passage through the territorial sea and disregards any request for compliance therewith which is made to it, the coastal State may require it to leave the territorial sea immediately.

Article 31: The flag State shall bear international responsibility for any loss or damage to the coastal State resulting from the non-compliance by a warship or other government ship operated for non-commercial purposes with the laws and regulations of the coastal State concerning passage through the territorial sea or with the provisions of this Convention or other rules of international law.

This is basically another Iranian capture of US navy crews waiting to happen all over again.

 

[XenoEnsi-14]

This is basically another Iranian capture of US navy crews waiting to happen all over again.

Cry all you want but until you actually do something about it, Noooobodyyy Caaaares.

Until then we will continue fishing and counting Artificial Islands.

@Chinese-Dragon want to be a SCS Tourist Guide.

 

[Zsari]

Cry all you want but until you actually do something about it, Noooobodyyy Caaaares.

Until then we will continue fishing and counting Artificial Islands.

@Chinese-Dragon want to be a SCS Tourist Guide.

Like its already been said, this is just another Iranian incident waiting to happen. Your gleefulness in disregarding international law is rather interesting, I guess that's the mentality some has when breaking the law, not getting caught. BTW, Triton island is not an artificial island or a low tide elevation reef.