Spratly Islands - News and Discussions

[Micky_Mouse]

With all due to respect to all the Chinese members on the forum
From a high level view, I see very little difference between what China is doing today and from what Germany did in 1930s to Austria and Czech.
The Germans did it on basis of ethnicity and race, Chinese are doing it for resources
One just needs to look at the extent of Chinese claims to see this

 

[STURM]

With all due to respect to all the Chinese members on the forum. From a high level view, I see very little difference between what China is doing today and from what Germany did in 1930s to Austria and Czech.
The Germans did it on basis of ethnicity and race, Chinese are doing it for resources
One just needs to look at the extent of Chinese claims to see this

There is a profound difference with China's claims on the Spratleys and Germany's re-drawing of borders prior to WW2. The Germans did it for mainly economic reasons and for influence - to eastablish Germany as a great power to rival the British Empire, Russia and to gain access to the raw goods, energy resources and food supplies. The rubbish about racial purity wasn't the driving factor behind establishing Germany as a great continental power. Bear in mind that a lot of areas the Germans annexed contained ethnic Germans or where in borders that were artificially created after WW1 by the victors. Irrespective of whether it claims or gains the Spratleys or not, China is already a rising power.

It's always economics and power, whether it was the American meddling in South America or the Philippines in the late 19th century, Russian expansion into Central Asia and Siberia or the expansion of the British Empire.

 

[Sampanviking]

Why the obsession with China? Its not as if this is China vs the rest. Every country with a shared border in the East or South China Seas has disputes with virtually everybody else on this matter. This is why there is not and can not be a multilateral approach from the ASEAN members, as there is no multilateral position to approach from.

China is quite right that all disputants need to resolve each individual dispute bilaterally, as this is the only position that can realistically be discussed.

If this situation proves anything, it is that UNCLOS is a wholly unsatisfactory and inadequate set of measures with which to try and settle the disputes as all it has achieved is set every neighbour against every other neighbour.

China would be right to reject it and offer regional leadership with superior measures for a lasting solution.

 

[Schumacher]

Why the obsession with China? Its not as if this is China vs the rest. Every country with a shared border in the East or South China Seas has disputes with virtually everybody else on this matter. This is why there is not and can not be a multilateral approach from the ASEAN members, as there is no multilateral position to approach from.................

Why the obsession with China ? Of course it's obvious many who talk about the Spratly issue actually has an anti-China agenda being disguised as one concerned with Spratly per se, especially those from outside the region. They wouldn't care much even if war breaks out in the Spratly if it only involves the other claimants other than China.

 

[STURM]

China is quite right that all disputants need to resolve each individual dispute bilaterally, as this is the only position that can realistically be discussed.

Well, that's a matter for much debate. Whilst it true that the other claiments do not have a common stand as they themselves have overlapping claims, in dealing bilaterally with certain countries China can use its greater diplomatic and economic clout to advantage. Bilateral discussions may be to the advantage of China but not the other claiments. UNCLOS may not be perfect and the best platform but is there an alternative? In the event that the other 5 claimants settles their differences and agree to take a common stand in dealing with China - would China agree to it and would it help sole the disputes - I think not as China would then cry foul.

Why the obsession with China ?

Why the 'obsession'? I would substitute 'obsession' for 'concern' because China is one of the world's biggest militaries, is a rising superpower and will soon be the biggest economy. Plus the fact that China has been increasingy assertive over its claims and recent actions taken by Chinese vessels like cuting cables and confrontating vessels of other countries have made smaller, less powerful countries nervous.

Of course it's obvious many who talk about the Spratly issue actually has an anti-China agenda being disguised as one concerned with Spratly per se, especially those from outside the region.

There is a level of misunderstanding and uncertainty with regards to China and the Spratleys but I would doubt very much if there is any ''anti-China agenda being disguised'' as you claimed. I frequently discuss the Spratleys issue and I'm concerned but I'm not 'anti-China' ....

They wouldn't care much even if war breaks out in the Spratly if it only involves the other claimants other than China.

A clash between other claimants other than China, say between Vietnam and the Philippines, would be over very soon and would not have the risk of escalating into a major conflict leading to a disruption of vital sea lanes. With the exception of Taiwan and China, all the other claimants are ASEAN members.

 

[Sampanviking]

Well, that's a matter for much debate. Whilst it true that the other claiments do not have a common stand as they themselves have overlapping claims, in dealing bilaterally with certain countries China can use its greater diplomatic and economic clout to advantage. Bilateral discussions may be to the advantage of China but not the other claiments. UNCLOS may not be perfect and the best platform but is there an alternative? In the event that the other 5 claimants settles their differences and agree to take a common stand in dealing with China - would China agree to it and would it help sole the disputes - I think not as China would then cry foul.

Hi Sturm, well you open the areas that should be discussed very nicely.

Lets start be reiterating the point that their is no common position. This is an unavoidable reality and simply trying to pretend otherwise (for the purpose of diplomatic negotiation) is pointless, as trying to assume a multilateral position when there isn't one is simply a fiction.
This is I believe the Chinese complaint with the US Interjection, as it encourages the other participants to open negotiations from a position of fiction. Well obviously this is a recipe for disaster, misunderstanding and chaos. It means that one side is talking BS from the outset in a situation where the other knows it. If someone did it you, you would doubtless conclude that people were trying to take the "p" and react negatively. Its no different for International relations.

In this instance I am sure that the Chinese view the US position as one deliberately intended to promote regional division and mistrust and benefit little more than the Corporate Arms Manufacturers by translating dispute and mistrust into an arms race.

UNCLOS is a piece of legislation, like any other and should not be deemed as written in stone. It should be a liable to revision or replacement as any other piece of legislation. If you are charitable, you may say that it fails to satisfy the requirements of dispute resolution in the East Asian Seas, while if you were not charitable you could describe it as a primary driver of the dispute and an obstacle to resolution. In that sense the US insistence on its use, could easily appear malignant to the Chinese side.
UNCLOS may have a role to play in determining final border demarcations in a post dispute settlement phase, but otherwise it can be all too easily perceived as a system that draws Imperious straight lines across water, just as once the great powers drew them across land. In any sense, in Asia, UNCLOS is clearly unfit for purpose and should be withdrawn in favour of a system capable of building new protocols.

How would China react if the other 5 resolved their differences and were able to present themselves from a credible multilateral position? If the position was genuinely changed, then I have no doubt that China would change its policy. China however is as unwilling to be dragged into hypothetical's on such matters as is any other nation and to for any of to try and claim we could second guess, unrealistic.

 

[ManilaBoy]

There will be a simultaneous protest in 6 US cities by Filipino-Americans in front of the Chinese consular site on July 8th starting from 12 p.m. to 1 p.m. in response to the recent incidents in the disputed Spratlys area and the imminent arrival of a massive oil rig from China that is schedule to start drilling in July inside the Philippines 200 miles EEZ...

The Official Website of E-People Power*|*Home

 

[STURM]

Lets start be reiterating the point that their is no common position. This is an unavoidable reality and simply trying to pretend otherwise (for the purpose of diplomatic negotiation) is pointless, as trying to assume a multilateral position when there isn't one is simply a fiction.

And that is precisely why all the claimants were more than contend for the status quo to remain. Due to recent Chinese activity and the U.S. bringing up the matter at a recent summit, the Spratleys issue has now received global attention. What is for certain is that China will continue to resist all efforts by the U.S. to act as a mediator and that the other 5 claimants will be unable or will onwilling to reach a common ground on how to diplomaticly deal with China. Behind the scenes, Chinese diplomats will be very busy pushing their stand as China has different levels or relationships and economic ties with the 5 claimants. What remains to be seen is despite all the talk about claiming 90% of the areas is whether China will be willing to make some consessions in the future.

 

[wormhole]

China's budget is smaller than the US but their armed forces don't have to back up security commitments spanning the globe. One can also question how accurate the "official" figures are for defense spending. A big chunk of the US budget goes to payroll and other manpower-related expenses.. expect the Chinese to incur significantly smaller figures. No matter how you look at it, the forces they are putting in place are impressive and by their bullying actions and claims, they seem intent on making the area their private lake.

 

[Tronco (RES)]

a foreign platform was seen within the 100-150 EEZ of the Philippines from Palawan.

The Chinese is really getting cocky.

 

[ManilaBoy]

a foreign platform was seen within the 100-150 EEZ of the Philippines from Palawan.

The Chinese is really getting cocky.

Ex-Hamilton cutter now BRP Gregorio Del Pilar PF-15 passing under the S.F./Oakland Bay Bridge on her way out to the Pacific Ocean on July 18th for it's 3 weeks voyage home...NICE BIG FLAG!

(PhotoMCMSSR@flickr)

 

[ed famie]

a foreign platform was seen within the 100-150 EEZ of the Philippines from Palawan.

The Chinese is really getting cocky.

yes, it was reported on ABS-CBN.com news it was remove and dismantled by the Phil. Navy on , it was spotted in the air by air force recon plane.
as stated by the SONA of the President of the Phil. he will provide the needed equipment for the AFP specially the navy to protect its maritime terrotory

 

[ed famie]

ANY links to confirm this report? Ex-Hamilton cutter now BRP Gregorio Del Pilar PF-15 passing under the S.F./Oakland Bay Bridge on her way out to the Pacific Ocean on July 18th for it's 3 weeks voyage home...NICE BIG FLAG!

(PhotoMCMSSR@flickr)

I have no links my friend but it was reported in ABS-CBN.com the Departure of BRP Gregorio del PIlar for his 3 weeks voyage to the Phils.

 

[ManilaBoy]

a foreign platform was seen within the 100-150 EEZ of the Philippines from Palawan.

The Chinese is really getting cocky.

ANY links to confirm your statement? or just making a hype to make things worst...

 

[ManilaBoy]

I have no links my friend but it was reported in ABS-CBN.com the Departure of BRP Gregorio del PIlar for his 3 weeks voyage to the Phils.

You must have misunderstood me, I was quoting about the foreign platform that China has placed inside the 200 miles EEZ...

 

[rip]

There is something we have not discussed and that is why China is pushing this issue and other similar issues on the international stage. I know that there are arguments to be made about resources and security and some of them sound to be reasonable ones to the uneducated ear but the truth is there is a completely irrational reason driving China’s actions beyond the normal rational ones. One nether they or the west ever talk about because of its explosive nature. A reason that drives their actions in such a way that to others it makes China seem to them to be highly aggressive and even dangerous. This is not a China bashing forum and I have no intention of turning it into one. But I have a very good reason to bring up this added fact and that is because I do not know how it can be fixed.

Before I go any farther I want to make it clear that everybody starts out in life as a racist until they learn better, if they ever learn better. Everybody is a nationalist to some degree for if they are not we must assume an element of self-loathing is in involved. Everyone wants the best for their own people. In these respects China is just like everybody else. No different and no better or worse. But there one element in which they are different and it comes from history.

It is a fact that China suffered greatly from outsiders both western and even more from the Japanese. The reason why and how this historical fact came about and just how a great country that has traditionally been one of the foremost powers of the world fail so low is one I have often debated with my Chinese friends and acquaintances. It is not an issue that can be resolved on this forum but the lingering result of the history of the Chinese nations’ suffering, a great and long lasting suffering I might add, was for the Chinese people to surfer a blow to their image of themselves as being Chinese. A blow that they are still dealing with. When a person’s sacred identity is threatened the first and strongest response is that the one of anger, no matter who you are or where you are from.

Because of their last two hundred or so years of history the Chinese see the world around them as far more threatening place than the most of the rest of us see it. They believe that if they are not aggressive in their actions that the world will not respect them. And if the world does not respect them the world will once again abuse them.

They now believe that they are once again taking their rightful place in the world once more and the world better now respect them from now on. If this was any other time in world history than this one, they would be perfectly right on how the world works. The problem as I humbly see it, and many others will agree with me, is the ways of the past just no longer work anymore. If we, the entire world, do not adopt a different approach to world power, nationalism, our race centric ideas, and how to manage the future, advanced civilization and all that it means may fall everywhere due to our collative power to destroy.

The problem that I cannot solve is how do the Chinese people find and not just their government the people, the recognition that they feel they must need to once again feel secure to be Chinese but not in the old ways but in the new ways? When they are still thinking in the old ways.

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

There is something we have not discussed and that is why China is pushing this issue and other similar issues on the international stage. I know that there are arguments to be made about resources and security and some of them sound to be reasonable ones to the uneducated ear but the truth is there is a completely irrational reason driving China’s actions beyond the normal rational ones. One nether they or the west ever talk about because of its explosive nature. A reason that drives their actions in such a way that to others it makes China seem to them to be highly aggressive and even dangerous. This is not a China bashing forum and I have no intention of turning it into one. But I have a very good reason to bring up this added fact and that is because I do not know how it can be fixed.

The communist party faces an ongoing crisis of legitimacy caused by the adoption of quasi (bastardized) free market institutions and the rejection of communist ideology. For a party which not only came to power but justified one party rule on the back of the promise to act in the name of the proletariat (such as existed in China) and achieve a socialist state to reject all of the above in favor of liberalized trade and profit legitimacy is always going to be a serious issue.That's what Tiananmen was all about.

Before I go any farther I want to make it clear that everybody starts out in life as a racist until they learn better, if they ever learn better. Everybody is a nationalist to some degree for if they are not we must assume an element of self-loathing is in involved. Everyone wants the best for their own people. In these respects China is just like everybody else. No different and no better or worse. But there one element in which they are different and it comes from history.

Not every individual is a nationalist. Nationalism is an artificial phenomena. Racism is not a natural, racist ideology needs to be taught not the other way around. A child doesn't know the difference between a black friend and a white friend.

If you're trying to say that every national government acts in their own interest, well that gos without saying.

It is a fact that China suffered greatly from outsiders both western and even more from the Japanese. The reason why and how this historical fact came about and just how a great country that has traditionally been one of the foremost powers of the world fail so low is one I have often debated with my Chinese friends and acquaintances. It is not an issue that can be resolved on this forum but the lingering result of the history of the Chinese nations’ suffering, a great and long lasting suffering I might add, was for the Chinese people to surfer a blow to their image of themselves as being Chinese. A blow that they are still dealing with. When a person’s sacred identity is threatened the first and strongest response is that the one of anger, no matter who you are or where you are from.


Because of their last two hundred or so years of history the Chinese see the world around them as far more threatening place than the most of the rest of us see it. They believe that if they are not aggressive in their actions that the world will not respect them. And if the world does not respect them the world will once again abuse them.

They now believe that they are once again taking their rightful place in the world once more and the world better now respect them from now on. If this was any other time in world history than this one, they would be perfectly right on how the world works. The problem as I humbly see it, and many others will agree with me, is the ways of the past just no longer work anymore. If we, the entire world, do not adopt a different approach to world power, nationalism, our race centric ideas, and how to manage the future, advanced civilization and all that it means may fall everywhere due to our collative power to destroy.

This does somewhat explain Chinese nationalism, however all too often nationalistic expressions like that seen in contemporary China are a product of a politicized education system and media; i.e. a tool of the state. There are plenty of other nations in the far east who share a similar history of defeat and exploitation who do not display the same level of nationalism. Korea suffered far worse under the Japanese for far longer than most of China, yet South Korea is no where near as nationalistic as contemporary China. Again, IMO, it comes down to regime legitimacy. Plenty of other one party governments have turned to nationalism and foreign threats to legitimize their hold on power.

 

[NICO]

There is something we have not discussed and that is why China is pushing this issue and other similar issues on the international stage. I know that there are arguments to be made about resources and security and some of them sound to be reasonable ones to the uneducated ear but the truth is there is a completely irrational reason driving China’s actions beyond the normal rational ones. One nether they or the west ever talk about because of its explosive nature. A reason that drives their actions in such a way that to others it makes China seem to them to be highly aggressive and even dangerous. This is not a China bashing forum and I have no intention of turning it into one. But I have a very good reason to bring up this added fact and that is because I do not know how it can be fixed.

Before I go any farther I want to make it clear that everybody starts out in life as a racist until they learn better, if they ever learn better. Everybody is a nationalist to some degree for if they are not we must assume an element of self-loathing is in involved. Everyone wants the best for their own people. In these respects China is just like everybody else. No different and no better or worse. But there one element in which they are different and it comes from history.

It is a fact that China suffered greatly from outsiders both western and even more from the Japanese. The reason why and how this historical fact came about and just how a great country that has traditionally been one of the foremost powers of the world fail so low is one I have often debated with my Chinese friends and acquaintances. It is not an issue that can be resolved on this forum but the lingering result of the history of the Chinese nations’ suffering, a great and long lasting suffering I might add, was for the Chinese people to surfer a blow to their image of themselves as being Chinese. A blow that they are still dealing with. When a person’s sacred identity is threatened the first and strongest response is that the one of anger, no matter who you are or where you are from.

Because of their last two hundred or so years of history the Chinese see the world around them as far more threatening place than the most of the rest of us see it. They believe that if they are not aggressive in their actions that the world will not respect them. And if the world does not respect them the world will once again abuse them.

They now believe that they are once again taking their rightful place in the world once more and the world better now respect them from now on. If this was any other time in world history than this one, they would be perfectly right on how the world works. The problem as I humbly see it, and many others will agree with me, is the ways of the past just no longer work anymore. If we, the entire world, do not adopt a different approach to world power, nationalism, our race centric ideas, and how to manage the future, advanced civilization and all that it means may fall everywhere due to our collative power to destroy.

The problem that I cannot solve is how do the Chinese people find and not just their government the people, the recognition that they feel they must need to once again feel secure to be Chinese but not in the old ways but in the new ways? When they are still thinking in the old ways.

I disagree with some of your assertions but they are so far off topic that I don't think they work on this forum.

I do find interesting your notion, if I understood correctly and what you imply, that China is trying to regain its honor or "face" through aggressive actions around the world or taking what might appear as an aggressive position in SCS vis a vis other neighboring countries. I will have to think more about this, at first glance, actions in SCS would fit the bill for China.

It is an interesting take for sure, one that I agree with to some extant and have noticed when traveling to China and talking to Chinese friends, their internal/external history (and in particular it's violence) could/can explain some of their actions today.

 

[ed famie]

You must have misunderstood me, I was quoting about the foreign platform that China has placed inside the 200 miles EEZ...

i am sorry my friend i thought you are talking about the picture of the newly acquired Phil. Navy Ship Gregorio del Pilar, by the way that picture can be see at www. defense-studies.blog.com/Philippines with also some explanation, thank you

 

[Schumacher]

...................This does somewhat explain Chinese nationalism, however all too often nationalistic expressions like that seen in contemporary China are a product of a politicized education system and media; i.e. a tool of the state. There are plenty of other nations in the far east who share a similar history of defeat and exploitation who do not display the same level of nationalism. Korea suffered far worse under the Japanese for far longer than most of China, yet South Korea is no where near as nationalistic as contemporary China. Again, IMO, it comes down to regime legitimacy. Plenty of other one party governments have turned to nationalism and foreign threats to legitimize their hold on power.

Bush and Sarkozy just to name a few turn to wars and foreign threats in Middle East and Libya respectively to save their political careers. Although there's little difference between the political parties in those countries, I don't think they are single party states. At least the parties have different names.

Just how do you measure the degree of nationalism in China and SK with regard to Japan anyway ?
A simple search on the internet shows the latest SK-Japan tension.

AFP: S. Korea warns Japan against disputed island visit

"S. Korea warns Japan against disputed island visit

(AFP) – 1 day ago

SEOUL — South Korean President Lee Myung-Bak has warned Japanese lawmakers against visiting a site near islands claimed by both nations, saying their safety cannot be guaranteed, an official said Wednesday.

The neighbours are facing a renewed escalation in a decades-old territorial row over the Seoul-controlled Dokdo islands in the Sea of Japan (East Sea), which are known as Takeshima in Japan.

The latest row began when flag carrier Korean Air operated a test flight of its new A380 aircraft over Dokdo in June. Tokyo in response ordered public servants not to use Korean Air for a month..............................
South Korea, which was colonised by Japan from 1910-1945, has sought to strengthen its control over the islets after Japan in March authorised new school textbooks reasserting its claims to them........................"