Think before u speak

Statesboro, GA

#1048 Jun 15, 2013
chip chao wrote:
spam spam, all the filipino post are lie and spam
monkey are expert in telling lie...
China own spratly
Oh yeah than if they are lying then how many percent stuff that Chinese said are the truth????? Lemme guess .01% or less ? If u call other monkeys, can we call u chimpanzees. Give people some of your MANNER or maybe RESPECT Kk?
Think before u speak

Statesboro, GA

#1049 Jun 15, 2013
AAA wrote:
<quoted text>
If that is true and effective, why did Philippines invaded Sabah ? No, China is not god, but it does have historical records to justify ownership.
For real? OMG !!! PROVE it than. Then u might ask why does China take over Tibet and other of its neighboring countries too. China has taken over Tibet and maintains a large military presence in the region, suspending all basic human rights of the Tibetan people. Hong Kong has special administrative status in China; it is an autonomous city with an elected council that generally respects the rights of people living there. Taiwan is an independent territory altogether; officially known as the Republic of China (ROC), it was kicked out of the UN in 1971 because the international community supported a united China. Now they want Taiwan's sovereignty to be respected. It's pretty hypocritical, isn't it? But Taiwan is free and democratic, and that's more than anyone can say about the People's Republic of China. Ur mouth said that china isn't god ,but the deep meaning in the way you express thought tell everything ( no offense)
AAA

London, UK

#1050 Jun 15, 2013
Think before u speak wrote:
<quoted text>
For real? OMG !!! PROVE it than. Then u might ask why does China take over Tibet and other of its neighboring countries too. China has taken over Tibet and maintains a large military presence in the region, suspending all basic human rights of the Tibetan people. Hong Kong has special administrative status in China; it is an autonomous city with an elected council that generally respects the rights of people living there. Taiwan is an independent territory altogether; officially known as the Republic of China (ROC), it was kicked out of the UN in 1971 because the international community supported a united China. Now they want Taiwan's sovereignty to be respected. It's pretty hypocritical, isn't it? But Taiwan is free and democratic, and that's more than anyone can say about the People's Republic of China. Ur mouth said that china isn't god ,but the deep meaning in the way you express thought tell everything ( no offense)
Tell everything about what, I don't understand what you are saying.

From what you have written, you don't seem to know the history regarding Tibet, Taiwan and Hong Kong.

Tibet has been part of China since Qing Dynasty, before that could be a tributary/vassal state of China. In those days, being a tributary state was common as China was a huge empire. However that alone does not mean Tibet should be part of China, for example Korea was a tributary state, but it is independent state now. It was during Qing dynasty when a Qing governor was stationed in Tibet, and also during Republic of China under Nationalist government. During this time Tibet pretty much has full autonomy, in fact the Chinese helped Tibet to repel invaders like British/Indians and also Russians. It was until the Chinese Nationalist government or KMT retreated that the Chinese liberation army under communist party (CCP) entered Tibet in 1950s. CCP's approach to Tibet is more hardline, probably due to its own insecurity and also external factors like foreign attempts to destabilize and capture Tibet. Yes, we may not like it, but that does not take away the fact that Tibet is part of China. Besides from what I have seen, China is serious in improving Tibet and has put in huge investment. Whether that will improve thing remains to be seen.

Taiwan is different, the Nationalist government or KMT retreated there after losing the civil war and has so far managed to defend itself. In fact, speaking of Spratly, before WWII it was Chinese's and was again ceded to KMT after WWII under the Cairo and Potsdam declaration. A general from the nationalist army took the effort to put sovereignty stone markers on the islands/reefs in Spratly after 1948. Taiwan civilian and military have been stationed in Taiping Island in Spratly since then, making them the longest residents in Spratly. For more than 50 years, no country in the region complain about the Chinese/Taiwanese ownership of Spratly, and the Chinese did ensure South China Sea is free for ship navigation. It was until the cuckoo Philippines decided to remove the chinese sovereignty market that trigger the current dispute.

Hong Kong is also different. Chinese promised Hong Kong one country two system after the handover in 1997 from British. Till now, it has kept its promise and ensures Hong Kong continuous properosity. Other than a few demonstrations every years, Hong Kong has done very well, so well that even American whistleblower Edward Snowden decided to take cover there, a testimonial to Hong Kong's civil liberty.

With regard to Spratly, you have to look at the case in isolation. I can't see any merit/logic in you bringing in all the unrelated problems with China into the debate. It makes your reasoning sounds stupid, well you are a Pinoy I supposed.
Think before u speak

Statesboro, GA

#1051 Jun 15, 2013
AAA wrote:
<quoted text>
Tell everything about what, I don't understand what you are saying.
From what you have written, you don't seem to know the history regarding Tibet, Taiwan and Hong Kong.
Tibet has been part of China since Qing Dynasty, before that could be a tributary/vassal state of China. In those days, being a tributary state was common as China was a huge empire. However that alone does not mean Tibet should be part of China, for example Korea was a tributary state, but it is independent state now. It was during Qing dynasty when a Qing governor was stationed in Tibet, and also during Republic of China under Nationalist government. During this time Tibet pretty much has full autonomy, in fact the Chinese helped Tibet to repel invaders like British/Indians and also Russians. It was until the Chinese Nationalist government or KMT retreated that the Chinese liberation army under communist party (CCP) entered Tibet in 1950s. CCP's approach to Tibet is more hardline, probably due to its own insecurity and also external factors like foreign attempts to destabilize and capture Tibet. Yes, we may not like it, but that does not take away the fact that Tibet is part of China. Besides from what I have seen, China is serious in improving Tibet and has put in huge investment. Whether that will improve thing remains to be seen.
Taiwan is different, the Nationalist government or KMT retreated there after losing the civil war and has so far managed to defend itself. In fact, speaking of Spratly, before WWII it was Chinese's and was again ceded to KMT after WWII under the Cairo and Potsdam declaration. A general from the nationalist army took the effort to put sovereignty stone markers on the islands/reefs in Spratly after 1948. Taiwan civilian and military have been stationed in Taiping Island in Spratly since then, making them the longest residents in Spratly. For more than 50 years, no country in the region complain about the Chinese/Taiwanese ownership of Spratly, and the Chinese did ensure South China Sea is free for ship navigation. It was until the cuckoo Philippines decided to remove the chinese sovereignty market that trigger the current dispute.
Hong Kong is also different. Chinese promised Hong Kong one country two system after the handover in 1997 from British. Till now, it has kept its promise and ensures Hong Kong continuous properosity. Other than a few demonstrations every years, Hong Kong has done very well, so well that even American whistleblower Edward Snowden decided to take cover there, a testimonial to Hong Kong's civil liberty.
With regard to Spratly, you have to look at the case in isolation. I can't see any merit/logic in you bringing in all the unrelated problems with China into the debate. It makes your reasoning sounds stupid, well you are a Pinoy I supposed.
U know it is very funny when u said Philippine invade other country, but I can't talk about china invaded other countries and bully them ? Where is the fairness ? Plus u r not one people of one of the countries that got bully by China, i dont think u understand how these people feel Ok ?
AAA

London, UK

#1052 Jun 15, 2013
Think before u speak wrote:
<quoted text>
U know it is very funny when u said Philippine invade other country, but I can't talk about china invaded other countries and bully them ? Where is the fairness ? Plus u r not one people of one of the countries that got bully by China, i dont think u understand how these people feel Ok ?
Excuse me, so which country are you referring to? You can be more specific, maybe I can offer a bit of historical perspective
Johnny

Canada

#1053 Jun 16, 2013
AAA wrote:
<quoted text>
If that is true and effective, why did Philippines invaded Sabah ? No, China is not god, but it does have historical records to justify ownership.
Pinoys have the habit of making up lies as they go.
Johnny

Canada

#1054 Jun 16, 2013
Don't forget the Philippines is the aggressor in many cases - attacking Sabah, killing of Taiwan fisherman within Taiwan's EEZ...

“China, follow Internat'l Law!”

Since: Jun 12

United States of America

#1055 Jun 16, 2013
AAA wrote:
<quoted text>
Please exclude Singapore, Cambodia, Laos, also Thailand, Malaysia and Brunei all want peaceful resolution. Confrontational Philippines can go ahead, we will encourage it taking the case to UNCLOS, but we will just watch. We don't want Philippines to take the whole spratly, that will be too greedy.
China’s refusal to JOIN the PHILIPPINES in the Permanent Court of Arbitration or to the United Nations International Court of Justice (ICJ) or to the United Nation’s International Tribunal on the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) by itself is a tacit admission that it cannot prove its so called historical claim before a proper neutral court.

China is scared of the COURT because her 9 dash claim is ILLEGAL.

“China, follow Internat'l Law!”

Since: Jun 12

United States of America

#1056 Jun 16, 2013
AAA wrote:
<quoted text>
Disagree. Vietnams and Philippines claims are no better, still the whole of Spratly, just with less water. The objective is to ensure safe navigation of one of the world's shipping lane, and only Chinese has the resources and discipline to enforce that. Giving it to Vietnam or Philippines will be no end to conflicts, and piracy in the region. Besides what are you going to say to Malaysia and Brunei if Philippines have it all?
The Philippines don't claim the whole spratlys. The philippines claim is based on UNCLOS, an International Law.

“China, follow Internat'l Law!”

Since: Jun 12

United States of America

#1057 Jun 16, 2013
Johnny wrote:
<quoted text>Pinoys have the habit of making up lies as they go.
Really? Read this...

Various Chinese scholars criticize “9-dashed line”

Various Chinese scholars with certain knowledge of international law have confirmed that there exist no legal documents to verify the existence of this illegal dotted line.

Scholar, famous commentator of the online Phoenix newspaper (Hongkong, China) Xue Litai warned that China will face various difficulties and challenges from international community if it claims sovereignty over the “9-dashed” line. This scholar pointed out some incorrect points of the “cow-tongue” line.

Firstly, China itself has drawn the 11-dotted line on the map without demarcation at sea with neighbouring countries and the dashed line has received no international recognition.

Secondly, to date, China has failed to make clear that the “cow-tongue” line is the national dashed border line or traditional demarcation line at sea. Beijing has given no definition and clear longitude and latitude relating to the geological location but just drawn the dotted line on their map. That is not convincing at all.

Thirdly, if Beijing stresses that the previous 11-dotted line was the national border line that could not be violated, why after the new China was born, Beijing itself removed two dots on the map in the Tonkin Gulf. Does China consider the fixing of national border line a joke?

No reliable legal evidence

Other Chinese scholars said that the “cow-tongue” line is only the unilateral claim of China with no firm legal foundation. These scholars also have disagreed with what China has interpreted the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea 1982 (UNCLOS 1982). This vague interpretation on the jurisdiction without mentioning geological elements of the coastal line or basic line is completely unconvincing.

Li Linghua, a researcher at China’s National Oceanographic Data and Information Centre, the author of more than 90 articles on maritime issues and the law of the sea, which were posted on different Chinese newspapers, frankly criticized wrong viewpoint on the issue relating to the South China Sea and rejected the “cow-tongue” line at the seminar “The South China disputes, national sovereignty and international regulations” jointly organized by Tian Ze Economic Research Institute and online newspaper Sina.com on July 14th. Li Linghua stressed that “We-China had drawn the 9-dashed line with no specific longitude and latitude and legal basis”.

In his writing,“About 200-mile border map on the South China Sea drawn under UNCLOS” released on July 3rd, he made public a map demarcating 200-mile exclusive economic zone, concerned by nations bordering the South China Sea, clearly features that areas that China has been claiming its sovereignty over basing on the “9-dashed line” are within the 200-mile exclusive economic zone of other countries. That article also rejected the establishment of what is called “Sansha” city by China.

Professor Zhang Shuguang from the University of Sichuan emphasized that the “cow-tongue” line claimed by China without any basis and international recognition is worthless.“Chinese interests need to be recognized by others. Without that recognition China has no right”.

“China, follow Internat'l Law!”

Since: Jun 12

United States of America

#1058 Jun 16, 2013
Johnny wrote:
Don't forget the Philippines is the aggressor in many cases - attacking Sabah, killing of Taiwan fisherman within Taiwan's EEZ...
You are wrong. The Philippine-Malaysia and Philippine-Taiwan Relations are back to Normal.

China wants to invade Japan, Taiwan, India, Malaysia, Philippines, Brunei, Vietnam, and Indonesia Territories and EEZ.

China is ASIAN'S most hated country!

“China, follow Internat'l Law!”

Since: Jun 12

United States of America

#1059 Jun 16, 2013
AAA wrote:
<quoted text>
Typical one peso pinoy.. Pathetic.
(Reuters)- The United Nations is planning to consider later this year the scientific validity of a claim by China that a group of disputed islands in the East China Sea are part of its territory, although Japan says the world body should not be involved.

Tensions over the uninhabited islands - located near rich fishing grounds and potentially huge oil-and-gas reserves - flared after Japan's government purchased them from a private Japanese owner in September, sparking violent anti-Japanese protests across China and a military standoff.

Taiwan also claims the islands, known as the Diaoyu islands in China, the Senkaku islands in Japan and Tiaoyutai in Taiwan.

In a submission to the U.N. Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf, China claims that the continental shelf in the East China Sea is a natural prolongation of China's land territory and that it includes the disputed islands.

Under the U.N. convention, a country can extend its 200-nautical-mile economic zone if it can prove that the continental shelf is a natural extension of its land mass. The U.N. commission assesses the scientific validity of claims, but any disputes have to be resolved between states, not by the commission.

China said the "Diaoyu Dao upfold zone" - the islands - is located between the East China Sea shelf basin and the Okinawa Trough. "The Okinawa Trough is the natural termination of the continental shelf of (the East China Sea)," it said.

---

China invoked UNCLOS vs Japan but CHINA ignores the Philippines UNCLOS claim against China.

China invokes UNCLOS in claiming sovereignty over the Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands.

Are the CHINESE CRAZY?????? They say

1. Diaoyu/Senkaku - UNCLOS can be used
2. Scarborough/Spraltys - UNCLOS is ILLEGGAL

The Chinese government is contradicting itself.

China’s move to use Unclos in its dispute with Japan should bolster the Philippines’ position to settle its own territorial conflict with China with the international body.

CHINA MUST BE CRAZY!

“China, follow Internat'l Law!”

Since: Jun 12

United States of America

#1060 Jun 16, 2013
Think before u speak wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh yeah than if they are lying
International Law EXPERTS blast China's Fantasy 9 dash claim:

1. Tom Ginsburg, chair of international law at the University of Chicago, said the Philippines’ claim to the Spratlys has merit under international law.
“My understanding of the Law of the Sea basis of the claim is that the Philippines’ claim is actually very strong on the merits according to the substance of international law,” Ginsburg told reporters on the sidelines of the same forum.

China’s recent move to bring all its claimed South China Sea areas under the ambit of the recently established “Sansha City” was “an internal recognition that the nine-dash line on its own was not enough to make a viable claim,” Ginsburg said.
“If you do have a populated territory, then the maritime baselines can be calculated from that place. Extending populated areas in the South China Sea is an effective strategy from the law of the sea,” he added.

----------

2. Top arbitration lawyer Yas Banifatemi, of the Paris-based Shearman & Streling said China’s historical basis for its huge territorial claims is a throw-back in time that could no longer be used and cited under modern-day laws, where the international community subscribes to and uphold.
Asked if China’s historical basis for its claims would hold water, Banifatemi replied:“No, I don’t think so. It was something that was done in certain circumstances and certain people in different context and history and economic context and that’s over. They have to take international law as it exists and to achieve something that is compatible with the principles of international law that exists today.”
China, Banifatemi said,“should abide by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (Unclos) definitely because China is covered by the provisions of the convention.”
Benifatemi was referring to the 1982 treaty that bestows coastal states, like the Philippines, the right to manage, develop and exploit resources in areas covered by its exclusive economic zone (EEZ).
It is signed by the Philippines, China and 162 other states.

--------

3. Singapore’s former senior minister and law
expert Professor S. Jayakumar has described the
map as “puzzling and disturbing” because it has
no basis under UNCLOS and can be “interpreted
as being a claim on all the maritime areas within
the nine dotted lines.” Such an interpretation
undermines some norms of international law and
endangers the right to freedom of navigation.

__________

4. Robert Beckman, director of the Centre for International Law under the National University of Singapore, said China should promote its interests in accordance with international law. He explained that if an international tribunal delivers a verdict in a Philippine lawsuit against China, both parties’ claims will be made clear under UNCLOS, laying a foundation for a negotiation process, which many see as a long-term, viable solution to legal disputes regarding the East Sea.

__________
5.The 1982 UN Convention on Law of the Sea recognizes the common heritage of the world’s oceans with a set of laws organizing exclusive zones for nations 200 nautical miles from their respective coasts. Waters beyond are open for use by all in ways that contribute to peace and friendly relations. By declaring sovereignty over the South China Sea, China rejects the convention, argues Carlyle A. Thayer, with the University of New South Wales at the Australian Defence Force Academy.

__________

6. Dr. Termsak Chalermpalanupap, Assistant Director for Program Coordination and External Relations of the ASEAN Secretariat, said:“I don’t think that the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) recognizes history as the basis to make sovereignty claims.”

----------

See China's claim is INVALID according to International Law Experts!

“China, follow Internat'l Law!”

Since: Jun 12

United States of America

#1061 Jun 16, 2013
Think before u speak wrote:
<quoted text>
For real? OMG !!! PROVE it than. Then u might ask why does China take over Tibet and other of its neighboring countries too. China has taken over Tibet and maintains a large military presence in the region, suspending all basic human rights of the Tibetan people. Hong Kong has special administrative status in China; it is an autonomous city with an elected council that generally respects the rights of people living there. Taiwan is an independent territory altogether; officially known as the Republic of China (ROC), it was kicked out of the UN in 1971 because the international community supported a united China. Now they want Taiwan's sovereignty to be respected. It's pretty hypocritical, isn't it? But Taiwan is free and democratic, and that's more than anyone can say about the People's Republic of China. Ur mouth said that china isn't god ,but the deep meaning in the way you express thought tell everything ( no offense)
7. Speaking to The Straits Times on condition of anonymity, a legal expert said that Manila's submission might even compel China - which has largely been leery of settling territorial disputes in international fora - to change its mind.

Beijing would be wise to seek expert counsel before it decides whether to participate or even challenge the tribunal's jurisdiction, he said. "Beijing's initial reaction is likely that it would not participate. But if they seek expert advice, they will find it is a more complex decision than they first thought," the expert said.

Even if China doesn't participate, a decision by the tribunal in Manila's favour would put it on higher legal and moral ground, says Professor Carl Thayer at the University of New South Wales.

Dr Ian Storey, a senior fellow at the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, said that China is facing a lose-lose situation.

"If it ignores the submission, then it will leave itself open to criticism that it does not adhere to international legal norms. If it decides to argue its case before the tribunal, it will have a very difficult task of justifying the legality of the nine-dash line and its claims to 'historic rights' within the limits of that line - and it might lose," he said.

An Asean diplomat who requested not to be named agreed.

"If they don't fight the tribunal's jurisdiction, it might embolden other claimants in the South China Sea dispute. If they do fight and win, they could lose in the court of international opinion," the diplomat said.

“China, follow Internat'l Law!”

Since: Jun 12

United States of America

#1062 Jun 16, 2013
Think before u speak wrote:
<quoted text>
U know it is very funny when u said Philippine invade other country, but I can't talk about china invaded other countries and bully them ? Where is the fairness ? Plus u r not one people of one of the countries that got bully by China, i dont think u understand how these people feel Ok ?
China rejects International Court Arbitration because her claims are not in accordance with International Laws.

----------

BEIJING (AP)— China said Tuesday it has rejected the Philippines' attempt to seek international arbitration over conflicting claims to territory in the South China Sea.

Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei said that China's ambassador to Manila, Ma Keqing, had returned Manila's formal notification of the move to a Philippine Department of Foreign Affairs official. Hong said the proposal was historically and legally incorrect and contained unacceptable accusations against China.

The Philippines informed China last month of its plans to take the countries' conflicting claims to a tribunal operating under the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. It wants the panel to declare Beijing's moves in the potentially oil-rich waters unlawful.

The Philippines' foreign affairs department said in a statement Tuesday that China's rejection will not interfere with the arbitration process that the Philippines has started.

"The Philippines remains committed to arbitration, which is a friendly, peaceful and durable form of dispute settlement that should be welcomed by all," the statement said.
AAA

London, UK

#1063 Jun 16, 2013
Austronesian Guy wrote:
<quoted text>
China’s refusal to JOIN the PHILIPPINES in the Permanent Court of Arbitration or to the United Nations International Court of Justice (ICJ) or to the United Nation’s International Tribunal on the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) by itself is a tacit admission that it cannot prove its so called historical claim before a proper neutral court.
China is scared of the COURT because her 9 dash claim is ILLEGAL.
Philippines is like a wilful child, like to cry bully and play tantrum when it cannot get its toy. China is the only one ignoring Philippines.
AAA

London, UK

#1064 Jun 16, 2013
Austronesian Guy wrote:
<quoted text>
The Philippines don't claim the whole spratlys. The philippines claim is based on UNCLOS, an International Law.
That is almost the whole Spratly, dude. Pure greed, no historical record, so wants everything via UNCLOS.
It is Amazing

Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

#1065 Jun 16, 2013
Austronesian Guy wrote:
I have successfully DEFEATED the the CHINESE including the paid WU MAOS.
Very very CLEAR
1. No International Law Supports China's claim
2. International Experts/Lawyers/Professors say CHINA's 9 dash claim has no LEGAL MERITS.
3. Chinese SCHOLARS admitted China's 9 dash claim in BOGUS.
4. No Country Supports China's 9 dash claim.
5. SCS Claimants ACCEPTS UNCLOS.
-------
Dear WU MAOS, you are all boring.
Can you bring me any WU MAO or any CHINESE who has brains to debate with?
again you are all boring.
I've been humiliating you ever since.
C'mon, BRING ME ANY WU MAO CHINESE WHO HAS BRAINS!
lmao zedong!
LOL. Everyone of us find your SELF-PROCLAMATION of VICTORY as FUNNY, STRANGE and CHILDISH!

It is as though every time I snapped my finger, the Pinoy macabre will start doing their dance - Victory Dance. Hahahaha

As always the PINOY have declared themselves as the prosecutor, the witness and the Judge.

1. Did any International Law experts declared that SCARBOROUGH SHOAL belongs to Philippines? Who and when?

2. Let not CONFUSE the people here with your silly notion on legality of the 9 dash Map released by China about Chinese jurisdiction with "Huangyan Island" or all other China individual claim.

3. Wile some of China's own scholars opined in their debate that China may have difficulty proving the ownership of every islands in the 1947 orginal 11-dash map presented by KMT ruled China. Tell me what is WRONG with that? It simply SHOW how democratic China is in such debate.

4. Did they disagreed on says China claim on Huangyan Island? CERTAINLY NO! And since you AGREED with their view, why are you disputing the ownership of Huangyan by China. Present only negative views to distort facts to suit your argument. That is SNEAKY!

5. That is what we mean by PROPAGANDA and you are obviously a PAID WORKER!

6. Since I am not a Chinese National, you can called me a Pro-China fan.

7. This unlike you, one that is filled with BLIND NATIONALISM that will include agreeing to lie in order to ordain the ACT of THIEVERY of Philippines.

8. Using the name Austronesian, I preferred ARSEHOLENESIAN which is more proper suggested to us, you are a RACIST!

9. As I says before let hope Philippines is right because without a BILATERAL RELATIONSHIP, Philippines might as well kissed those land they intend to steal or claim. Sayanora!

10. SO in conclusion for all your 1 peso per post comment, go and claim all your from your Ministry of Propaganda beforethey run out of money. You need it to feed your family. Hahahaha
It is Amazing

Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

#1066 Jun 16, 2013
Austronesian Guy wrote:
<quoted text>
China’s refusal to JOIN the PHILIPPINES in the Permanent Court of Arbitration or to the United Nations International Court of Justice (ICJ) or to the United Nation’s International Tribunal on the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) by itself is a tacit admission that it cannot prove its so called historical claim before a proper neutral court.
China is scared of the COURT because her 9 dash claim is ILLEGAL.
Which is make you so please. That is because you blindly read and paste from the Philippines Ministry of Propaganda.

As allowed by Article 298 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), China has declared that it does not accept compulsory dispute settlement procedures for specific categories of disputes. Therefore, the tribunal has NO JURISDICTION to resolve disputes relating to the delimitation of the territorial sea, exclusive economic zone (EEZ) or continental shelf. As such, it is possible that the tribunal will not have the authority to accept many of the thirteen points in the Philippines’ notification.

China is NOT alone in ASIA in rejecting this as Australia and South Korea have also applied Article 298 in their disputes with others. And they are all in compliance with International Law.

Despite my REPLY, ARSEHOLENESIAN will repeat the above 1000X. SPAMMING as part of his PROPAGANDA effort in here.
It is Amazing

Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

#1067 Jun 16, 2013
Austronesian Guy wrote:
<quoted text>
Really? Read this...
Various Chinese scholars criticize “9-dashed line”
Various Chinese scholars with certain knowledge of international law have confirmed that t
Well it is TRUE the original 11 dash plan by KMT ruled China may be vague and hard to prove in international law but as a 63 year document to prove that China did exercise their jurisdiction on the disputed island, it is a GEM!

However China can also organised a LAW DEBAT in says Beijing to question the LEGALITY of the 2009 Philippines "Baseline Bill" which is equally ILLEGAL in International Law.

Although Philippines Philippines has listed thirteen points on which it asked the tribunal to rule, she also knew her chances in the TRIBUNAL to rule in her favor is WEAK and so to save FACE she deviated and try to pitch for a POLITICAL VICTORY instead by attacking the 1947 9 dash line.

As China own scholars in debating, pointed out that trying to prove every islands in the 9 dash Map is a colossal task and is difficult to prove.
NOTHING NEW in there. We all knew it and that is ASEAN stance as well.

But as a document to prove China jurisdiction in the region, it is completely LEGAL.

But does all these EXPENSIVE exercise in bring the case to a TRIBUNAL that has not clout beside declare the sovereignty of the 9 dash map as not valid, bring an ownership verdict for Huangyan Island for Philippines, DEFINITELY NOT!

Given that the tribunal does not have the jurisdiction to resolve disputes relating to the delimitation of the EEZ, which may extend up to 200 nautical miles from some of the larger features of the Spratlys, it will not have the authority to accept these points unless

it IS TO RULE that NONE of the Spratlys can generate an EEZ.

Then PHILIPPINES LOSE!

Will Philippines accept a negative verdict by her choice tribunal?

IMO definitely NOT!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

China Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Hong Kong PARALYZED by anti-CCP Protests! 4 min DEMOCRACY for CHINA 40
Hong Kong Youth Create Pride in all Chinese! 10 min DEMOCRACY for CHINA 5
The Great Walmart of China 18 min why so sad be happy 12
china and russia are waiting for america to com... 21 min why so sad be happy 14
China is Hong Kong’s future – not its enemy 34 min why so sad be happy 1
Reports: China body-searched 10,000 pigeons 56 min Tim Osman 3
Free Tibet! Taiwan Independence! Democracy Now! 1 hr DEMOCRACY for CHINA 59

China People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE