Vietnam acknowledged Chinese sovereignty over South China Sea in 1958

[happycanuck]

Couldn’t believe you keep bring shames to your motherland … that your education system can only produce mentally handicapped people like you is a tragedy of Vietnam!


You parallel Washington with Spratly, thinking that Washington is a part of USA and China wants to occupy USA, just as North Vietnam thought Spratly was a part of South Vietnam and North Vietnam wanted to occupy South Vietnam.

Do you see the fallacy of your inane logic here, caused by your rotten and crippling education system?

FOOL!

This thread was started for and against the 1958 letter given by North Vietnam PM and not PM of whole of Vietnam combined. Any official letter given by one half of the Vietnam has no legal binding on the other half of the country when they are divided into two separate entities or countries.

I would wellcome input by any legal professional scholar who is expert in the disputes related to territories between two nations.

I know some of you get carried away because your point of view is not being accepted by the citizens of other nation that does not give anyone any right to use abussive personal attacks towards other fellow human beings. Please refrain from degrading comments towards others.
Show respect to earn one and accept others for who they are.

Peace and respect will bring us closer as human beings. So let us all focus on the Topic of discussion.

Best regards.

 

[gambit]

This thread was started for and against the 1958 letter given by North Vietnam PM and not PM of whole of Vietnam combined. Any official letter given by one half of the Vietnam has no legal binding on the other half of the country when they are divided into two separate entities or countries.

I would wellcome input by any legal professional scholar who is expert in the disputes related to territories between two nations.

I know some of you get carried away because your point of view is not being accepted by the citizens of other nation that does not give anyone any right to use abussive personal attacks towards other fellow human beings. Please refrain from degrading comments towards others.
Show respect to earn one and accept others for who they are.

Peace and respect will bring us closer as human beings. So let us all focus on the Topic of discussion.

Best regards.

No need for any input from any legal expert. Common sense will do and common sense tells us that the Phạm Văn Đồng 1958 letter to China was not even qualified as a legal document, let alone a treaty between nation-states. This is what the Chinese boys have been avoiding all this time.

 

[happycanuck]

North Vietnam did not have the sovereignty，so south Vietnam must have the sovereignty?
What is the logic？
the fact is no other coutry recognized Vietnam has sovereignty over these two island Whether any party in Vietnam

When two countries have dispute then third country party have right to admit One party‘s declaration, in order to support one party.


I have always said that you recognize our statement I never said that you have sovereignty, but also did not say these two islands is that you gave us, in fact, the Vietnamese do not have sovereignty over these two islands no matter any side , so you can no give us these island。
Has always been our stuff, do not need you give, you just admit the fact.
Not self-contradictory. All you own fantasies out.

I think this is your full time profession to make contradictory statements. South Vietnam had the sovereignty when it was passed on to them by France. Details can be read in books published by several authors in Europe.

The title of this thread should be NorthVietnam Acknowledges Chiniese sovereignty over the two islands and not Vietnam acknowledged Chiniese sovereignty over SCS. SCS is not the property of China. If this interpretation is taken as a acceptable in the International arena than this will lead to nightmare scene. Just imagine countries with the ocean fronts making allsorts of claims. Just the way China wants to make. I think some commonsense has to prevail and International Courts should be asked to resolve the dispute.

If as you said North Vietnam letter recognises your statement. Why of all the countries in the world you need North Vietnam to recognise your statement? Than Vietnam can also derecognise the Chiniese statement. Would you accept that act from Vietnam as a single nations representing North and South Vietnam. Would you accept this act for the sake of peace in your part of the world. There is International Court to solve the disputes of this magnitude between the nations.

 

[gambit]

North Vietnam did not have the sovereignty，so south Vietnam must have the sovereignty?
What is the logic？
the fact is no other coutry recognized Vietnam has sovereignty over these two island Whether any party in Vietnam

When two countries have dispute then third country party have right to admit One party‘s declaration, in order to support one party.

Yes...South Viet Nam was given authority and custodial rights over the islands. The proof is in the 1954 Geneva Accords that outlined the temporary partition of the country until the Vietnamese internal conflict is settled...

Geneva Accords

(b) Any territory controlled by one party which is transferred to the other party by the regrouping plan shall continue to be administered by the former party until such date as all the troops who are to be transferred have completely left that territory so as to free the zone assigned to the party in question. From then on, such territory shall be regarded as transferred to the other party, who shall assume responsibility for it.

Let us examine in details...

Any territory controlled by one party which is transferred to the other party by the regrouping plan...

The 'regrouping plan' is the partition plan. What this mean is that any territory that is under the control of party A and if said territory is being affected by the partition plan, aka 'transferred to the other party', which should be party B...

...shall continue to be administered by the former party...

...Then party A shall continue to administer said territory...

...until such date as all the troops who are to be transferred have completely left that territory so as to free the zone assigned to the party in question.

...Until party B arrived to relieve party A of that administrative responsibility.

From then on, such territory shall be regarded as transferred to the other party, who shall assume responsibility for it.

At that point in time, each party will be responsible for the territories that are affected by the partition plan.

Even though the islands were not occupied by North Vietnamese troops, the spirit of the agreement which clearly had the intention of promoting peace between warring sides by assigning them territories places authority and custodial rights of the islands to South Viet Nam. The issue of sovereignty is not part of this because everyone at that time acknowledged that sovereignty belonged to Viet Nam. Not North Viet Nam. Not South Viet Nam. But simply Viet Nam.

Sovereignty is one thing, authority and custodial rights are other issues. France, as a colonial power over Indochina, never claimed sovereignty of the islands but did claimed authority, which mean any decision regarding the islands must passed through France. Custodial rights means maintenance and occupation so France could have assigned either Vietnamese or French forces to occupy and maintain the islands, in other words, exercise 'presence of State'. Opportunistic fishermen do not have that power of 'presence of State' no matter how long they may be in the islands. They were not empowered by any State to speak on the State's behalf. They could be legally ejected at any time the same way a squatter could be ejected from an empty house.

So under the 1954 partition plan designed to promote peace, sovereignty was never the question but authority and custodial rights were. Article 14 gave authority and custodial rights of the islands to South Viet Nam. China never objected. Phạm Văn Đồng's 1958 letter to China never conceded the islands to China. Not even custodial rights, let alone sovereignty.

If China want sovereignty of the islands, it will have to be under diplomatic agreement but never by military compulsion and if military compulsion has Chinese troops as 'presence of State' on the islands, that would mean theft. China would have authority and custodial rights and responsibilities but never sovereignty.

 

[Gayorgy]

I think this is your full time profession to make contradictory statements. South Vietnam had the sovereignty when it was passed on to them by France. Details can be read in books published by several authors in Europe.

The title of this thread should be NorthVietnam Acknowledges Chiniese sovereignty over the two islands and not Vietnam acknowledged Chiniese sovereignty over SCS. SCS is not the property of China. If this interpretation is taken as a acceptable in the International arena than this will lead to nightmare scene. Just imagine countries with the ocean fronts making allsorts of claims. Just the way China wants to make. I think some commonsense has to prevail and International Courts should be asked to resolve the dispute.

If as you said North Vietnam letter recognises your statement. Why of all the countries in the world you need North Vietnam to recognise your statement? Than Vietnam can also derecognise the Chiniese statement. Would you accept that act from Vietnam as a single nations representing North and South Vietnam. Would you accept this act for the sake of peace in your part of the world. There is International Court to solve the disputes of this magnitude between the nations.

In case you haven't noticed the North were the victorious party during the Vietnam war, and are in control of the country to this day, so whatever they signed counts.

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

In case you haven't noticed the North were the victorious party during the Vietnam war, and are in control of the country to this day, so whatever they signed counts.

Not quite.

It has not been ratified by the United Vietnam.

 

[akittya]

Yes...South Viet Nam was given authority and custodial rights over the islands. The proof is in the 1954 Geneva Accords that outlined the temporary partition of the country until the Vietnamese internal conflict is settled...

Geneva Accords


Let us examine in details...


The 'regrouping plan' is the partition plan. What this mean is that any territory that is under the control of party A and if said territory is being affected by the partition plan, aka 'transferred to the other party', which should be party B...


...Then party A shall continue to administer said territory...


...Until party B arrived to relieve party A of that administrative responsibility.


At that point in time, each party will be responsible for the territories that are affected by the partition plan.

Even though the islands were not occupied by North Vietnamese troops, the spirit of the agreement which clearly had the intention of promoting peace between warring sides by assigning them territories places authority and custodial rights of the islands to South Viet Nam. The issue of sovereignty is not part of this because everyone at that time acknowledged that sovereignty belonged to Viet Nam. Not North Viet Nam. Not South Viet Nam. But simply Viet Nam.

Sovereignty is one thing, authority and custodial rights are other issues. France, as a colonial power over Indochina, never claimed sovereignty of the islands but did claimed authority, which mean any decision regarding the islands must passed through France. Custodial rights means maintenance and occupation so France could have assigned either Vietnamese or French forces to occupy and maintain the islands, in other words, exercise 'presence of State'. Opportunistic fishermen do not have that power of 'presence of State' no matter how long they may be in the islands. They were not empowered by any State to speak on the State's behalf. They could be legally ejected at any time the same way a squatter could be ejected from an empty house.

So under the 1954 partition plan designed to promote peace, sovereignty was never the question but authority and custodial rights were. Article 14 gave authority and custodial rights of the islands to South Viet Nam. China never objected. Phạm Văn Đồng's 1958 letter to China never conceded the islands to China. Not even custodial rights, let alone sovereignty.

If China want sovereignty of the islands, it will have to be under diplomatic agreement but never by military compulsion and if military compulsion has Chinese troops as 'presence of State' on the islands, that would mean theft. China would have authority and custodial rights and responsibilities but never sovereignty.

You ignore this point

The Final Declarations of the Geneva Conference July 21, 1954

6. The Conference recognizes that the essential purpose of the Agreement relating to Viet-nam is to settle military questions with a view to ending hostilities and that the military demarcation line is provisional and should not in any way be interpreted as constituting a political or territorial boundary. The Conference expresses its conviction that the execution of the provisions set out in the present Declaration and in the Agreement on the cessation of hostilities creates the necessary basis for the achievement in the near future of a political settlement in Viet-Nam.

Geneva Conference no mean acknowledged that these two islands belonged to Viet Nam. because relating to Viet-nam is to settle military questions ,military demarcation line is provisional and should not in any way be interpreted as constituting a political or territorial boundary,

note: is in any way

. of couse cant't not interpreted Territorial disputes betwwem south Vietnam and china

so the fact still is no one recognize Vietnamthe sovereignty over these two islands,.your proof Can not support your argument

and North Vietnam recognize china sovereignty over these two islands,mean for Territorial disputes betwwem south Vietnam and china , North Vietnam Recognize the South Vietnamese declaration is unreasonable，so support china claim.

 

[akittya]

If as you said North Vietnam letter recognises your statement. Why of all the countries in the world you need North Vietnam to recognise your statement? Than Vietnam can also derecognise the Chiniese statement. Would you accept that act from Vietnam as a single nations representing North and South Vietnam. Would you accept this act for the sake of peace in your part of the world. There is International Court to solve the disputes of this magnitude between the nations.

i alredy say many times ,our claim these islands not base on your note and statement ,for Territorial disputes betwwem south Vietnam and china , if North Vietnam think china is more reasonable, South Vietnam is unreasonable,why North Vietnam cant recognises china's claim?, North Vietnam supported our claim Continued 20 years mean North Vietnam is clear that China is should own these two islands.

why now North Vietnam change idea ,The most reasonable explanation is that the discovery of oil in south china sea.To achieve the target of couse they need make some fake Evidence,and they do well in this area.

 

[NiceGuy]

Geneva Conference no mean acknowledged that these two islands belonged to Viet Nam. because relating to Viet-nam is to settle military questions ,military demarcation line is provisional and should not in any way be interpreted as constituting a political or territorial boundary

We don't need Geneva Conference acknowledged these two islands belonged to Viet Nam, coz we send troops to protect those islands from 1836.

In 1836, Emperor Minh Mạng received a report from his Ministry of Construction that recommended a comprehensive survey of all the East Sea islands because of their "great strategic importance to our maritime borders.[21][30]" The King ordered Phạm Hữu Nhật, a royal navy commander, to erect a wooden stele on the islands. The post was engraved with the following inscription: The 17th of the reign of Minh Mạng by the royal ordinance commander of the navy Phạm Hữu Nhật came here to Hoàng Sa for reconnaissance to make topographical measurements and leave this stele as record thereof, CHina had no oppose, so, it's clearly belong to VN.
??c m?c b?n tri?u Nguy?n kh?ng ??nh ch? quy?n Hoàng Sa - Bee - Khoa h?c & ??i s?ng Online

 

[gambit]

You ignore this point

The Final Declarations of the Geneva Conference July 21, 1954

6. The Conference recognizes that the essential purpose of the Agreement relating to Viet-nam is to settle military questions with a view to ending hostilities and that the military demarcation line is provisional and should not in any way be interpreted as constituting a political or territorial boundary. The Conference expresses its conviction that the execution of the provisions set out in the present Declaration and in the Agreement on the cessation of hostilities creates the necessary basis for the achievement in the near future of a political settlement in Viet-Nam.

And you misinterpreted it. Grossly misinterpreted. That paragraph mean that in no way does the conference recognizes there were two countries called 'North Viet Nam' and 'South Viet Nam'. It simply mean that for the time being, the conference recognizes that there is a temporary partition of A country called Viet Nam.

so the fact still is no one recognize Vietnamthe sovereignty over these two islands,

Of course not. They recognize that sovereignty belongs to Viet Nam.

.your proof Can not support your argument

Neither can you prove that sovereignty belonged to North Viet Nam, which is necessary if China is to prove that North Viet Nam concede the islands. To put it to your simple mind: If I cannot prove that sovereignty belonged to South Viet Nam to keep, then neither have you Chinese boys proved that sovereignty belonged to North Viet Nam to give.

and North Vietnam recognize china sovereignty over these two islands,mean for Territorial disputes betwwem south Vietnam and china , North Vietnam Recognize the South Vietnamese declaration is unreasonable，so support china claim.

Wrong...That Phạm Văn Đồng 1958 letter said nothing to the kind.

So much for 'high Chinese IQ'.

 

[NiceGuy]

"The flag of Vietnam, also known as the 'red flag with yellow star', was adopted as the flag of the Vietminh (Communist army) in 1941. It was adopted by the Democratic Republic of Vietnam (the future North Vietnam) in 1945, and by the Socialist Republic of Vietnam (united Vietnam) on July 2, 1976, following the end of the Vietnam War"

Unified Vietnam have Paracel from Viet Cong, not because North Vietnam vanquish South Vietnam

Anyway, your "flag" argument is stupid and meaningless

Bro, they had alittle diffrent.

North VN flag

Socialist republic of VN.

Diffrent shape of Star

 

[akittya]

And you misinterpreted it. Grossly misinterpreted. That paragraph mean that in no way does the conference recognizes there were two countries called 'North Viet Nam' and 'South Viet Nam'. It simply mean that for the time being, the conference recognizes that there is a temporary partition of A country called Viet Nam..

6. The Conference recognizes that the essential purpose of the Agreement relating to Viet-nam is to settle military questions with a view to ending hostilities and that the military demarcation line is provisional and should not in any way be interpreted as constituting a political or territorial boundary. The Conference expresses its conviction that the execution of the provisions set out in the present Declaration and in the Agreement on the cessation of hostilities creates the necessary basis for the achievement in the near future of a political settlement in Viet-Nam.

i think you are Look for a way interpreted as constituting a political or territorial boundary ，This is clearly prohibited

Neither can you prove that sovereignty belonged to North Viet Nam, which is necessary if China is to prove that North Viet Nam concede the islands. To put it to your simple mind: If I cannot prove that sovereignty belonged to South Viet Nam to keep, then neither have you Chinese boys proved that sovereignty belonged to North Viet Nam to give.

I have the same view with you, northern Vietnam does not have sovereignty over these islands, so it need not prove.

Wrong...That Phạm Văn Đồng 1958 letter said nothing to the kind.

white and black 。You recognize China's declared, while China's statement clearly shows that China's territory, including these two islands,。
BTW,is recognize not need you give ,your not own these island.as i recognize Hanoi is belong Vietnam,it not mean i give Hanoi to Vietnam.


a simple 1 +1 = 2, if you have to be understood as two people get married, then gave birth a children, So you come to the results is 1 + 1 = 3, I have nothing to say.

 

[gambit]

i think you are Look for a way interpreted as constituting a political or territorial boundary ，This is clearly prohibited

If anyone who is looking for creative interpretation, it is YOU.

I have the same view with you, northern Vietnam does not have sovereignty over these islands, so it need not prove.

Then North Viet Nam cannot them give away.

white and black 。You recognize China's declared, while China's statement clearly shows that China's territory, including these two islands,。
BTW,is recognize not need you give ,your not own these island.as i recognize Hanoi is belong Vietnam,it not mean i give Hanoi to Vietnam.


a simple 1 +1 = 2, if you have to be understood as two people get married, then gave birth a children, So you come to the results is 1 + 1 = 3, I have nothing to say.

China can make any claim she wants. The issue is proving it said claim is valid, which she failed. And so did you.

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

People forget that without people working for North Vietnam within the South Vietnam govt and military, it would not have been possible for North Vietnam to win.

Therefore, to say that North Vietnam alone is responsible for Vietnam is ridiculous.

Statements of North Vietnam is not the voice of United Vietnam!

If it were, then there would have been no demonstration against the Chinese aggressive actions and intent in the South China sea.

 

[akittya]

China can make any claim she wants. The issue is proving it said claim is valid, which she failed. And so did you.

of course we can claim we want, the key is Whether Reasonable.and other countries whether agree our is reasonable and admit it.
for this claim every Governments can express their views.
if you think we are Reasonable than you can select admit our claim,
if you think we are unReasonable you can select object we clalim,
if you not clear whether we are Reasonable then you can select silence.

North Vietnam think we are Reasonable so chose to recognize our claim.

Otherwise，we think Vietnamese Government 1979 declared is unReasonable , so we oppose such a declared.