China's SCS Strategy Thread

[taxiya]

The "China leaving UNCLOS" is a pure fabrication by Japan without any shred of credibility. I wouldn't extend thought on it at all, it is a trap, distraction and twist to turn people's focus from the dispute to portraiting of so called China disrespect law. Any discussion of any possible action towards that direction will be a "proof" that Japan is waiting for. That is how a lie becomes "truth". It is a common practice by the school bullies. They provoke and attack others, but immediately stop just before teacher arrives leaving the innocent appearing to be the attacker.

The only party wrong is PCA overstepping in the legal protocol. The target of legal attack from China should be PCA and the Philippine, not to be distracted by other "cheerleaders, drummers". China should chase PCA to the very end even leaving Philippine aside.

 

[Blackstone]

The "China leaving UNCLOS" is a pure fabrication by Japan without any shred of credibility. I wouldn't touch it at all, it is a trap, distraction and twist to turn people's focus from the dispute to portraiting of so called China disrespect law.

The only party wrong is PCA overstepping in the legal protocol. The target of legal attack from China should be PCA and the Philippine, not to be distracted by other "cheerleaders, drummers".

Even if China actually quit UNCLOS over "unjust ruling," so what? What of it?

Some nations large and small would rant and rave, one, two, or five might even impose symbolic "sanctions." But, nothing substantial would result, at least nothing that would actually seriously harm western economies. China could shrug off criticisms from the usual suspects, and whatever short to mid-term reputation hit it takes would be conveniently tabled if OBOR goes forward and provide some economic security in the gloomy global economy.

China wins in the long-run, if it continues to tighten its grip in the SCS and systematically squeeze the snot out of everyone else there. That's the reality.

 

[taxiya]

Even if China actually quit UNCLOS over "unjust ruling," so what? What of it?

Some nations large and small would rant and rave, one, two, or five might even impose symbolic "sanctions." But, nothing substantial would result, at least nothing that would actually seriously harm western economies. China could shrug off criticisms from the usual suspects, and whatever short to mid-term reputation hit it takes would be conveniently tabled if OBOR goes forward and provide some economic security in the gloomy global economy.

China wins in the long-run, if it continues to tighten its grip in the SCS and systematically squeeze the snot out of everyone else there. Everyone else knows it too.

China's aim is higher than just economical gains, but also the future international order (institutions). China does not need to care and can and should just shrug off criticisms from the usual suspects, BUT not a institution that China is part of (UNCLOS).

I repeat, it is not UNCLOS' fault in this dispute, but it is the abuse of PCA, China shouldn't and wouldn't beat UNCLOS for PCA's fault, it is simply unfair.

This is what Ms. Hua (spokeswoman)'s word "China is defending UNCLOS' authority". This is really long-run, and most importantly broad vision.

 

[taxiya]

an addition to my post #2753,

The parties who would benefit and wish China to quit UNCLOS are the ones who fabricate and actively propping up this lie, the usual suspects.

Although not always right, but very often right, one should act opposite to the enemies' "expectation".

A man does not need to act like a bully to show his strength.

 

[shen]

I think this is a fair and accurate summary of the competing views within China over the SCS issue. The realists are dominant at this time, while the moderates and hardliners debate loudly on Chinese talk shows

oops, quote function not working? this is in rely to AndrewS's post.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[Brumby]

The "China leaving UNCLOS" is a pure fabrication by Japan without any shred of credibility. I wouldn't extend thought on it at all, it is a trap, distraction and twist to turn people's focus from the dispute to portraiting of so called China disrespect law. Any discussion of any possible action towards that direction will be a "proof" that Japan is waiting for. That is how a lie becomes "truth". It is a common practice by the school bullies. They provoke and attack others, but immediately stop just before teacher arrives leaving the innocent appearing to be the attacker.

The reason why this particular discussion is even happening on this forum is because someone posted that article on this thread. Rather than attacking Japan for fabrication, why don't you ask the poster the motive for sharing the article in the first place?

https://www.sinodefenceforum.com/chinas-scs-strategy-thread.t3118/page-274

The only party wrong is PCA overstepping in the legal protocol.

Your statement that the PCA is overstepping its legal protocol is pure fabrication. The PCA is empowered to make the determination by UNCLOS and it has. There are no ifs or buts. You can say that it has made error of judgement but overstepping its powers is pure spin.

 

[taxiya]

The reason why this particular discussion is even happening on this forum is because someone posted that article on this thread. Rather than attacking Japan for fabrication, why don't you ask the poster the motive for sharing the article in the first place?

https://www.sinodefenceforum.com/chinas-scs-strategy-thread.t3118/page-274


Your statement that the PCA is overstepping its legal protocol is pure fabrication. The PCA is empowered to make the determination by UNCLOS and it has. There are no ifs or buts. You can say that it has made error of judgement but overstepping its powers is pure spin.

About the PCA overstepping, both You and I have been involved in long debates and presented our opinions without being able to convince each other. This post of yours is just another recycle of your previous argument. Recycling my argument won't get us anywhere. So just leave it.

Regarding that post which brought up this ongoing discussion,

Why should I just question the poster's motivation? I remember you have posted some news link without a single word of comment. Have I chased you for a motivation? I didn't and therefor wouldn't do this time either.

But I can not let the content of that linked report go without questioning. And why it is more important to chase the poster than attacking the fabrication? A fabrication is a lie, a poster is a messenger. You know the saying "don't kill the messenger"?

 

[Blackstone]

I repeat, it is not UNCLOS' fault in this dispute, but it is the abuse of PCA, China shouldn't and wouldn't beat UNCLOS for PCA's fault, it is simply unfair.

Except current standoffs in the SCS trace their origin to various nations filing claims, as required by UNCLOS. PCA came in later.

 

[SamuraiBlue]

I repeat, it is not UNCLOS' fault in this dispute, but it is the abuse of PCA, China shouldn't and wouldn't beat UNCLOS for PCA's fault, it is simply unfair.

This is what Ms. Hua (spokeswoman)'s word "China is defending UNCLOS' authority". This is really long-run, and most importantly broad vision.

This doesn't really make any sense, UNCLOS is an international law. Nations interpret them in their own way and when separate nation's interpretations conflict against one another in an actual situation then it is disputed at court in which the court provides ruling of which interpretation is closer to the law.
That is what is happening, PCA is ruling which interpretation of law comes closer. In which case arguing against PCA's finding is basically saying, "I don't care what the court says since I only follow my own rules."
This is not defending UNCLOS's authority, it abusing it taking the law into one's own hands.

 

[solarz]

This doesn't really make any sense, UNCLOS is an international law. Nations interpret them in their own way and when separate nation's interpretations conflict against one another in an actual situation then it is disputed at court in which the court provides ruling of which interpretation is closer to the law.
That is what is happening, PCA is ruling which interpretation of law comes closer. In which case arguing against PCA's finding is basically saying, "I don't care what the court says since I only follow my own rules."
This is not defending UNCLOS's authority, it abusing it taking the law into one's own hands.

No, international laws are not like national laws, where you have courts and law enforcement. International laws are treaties, where nations come to an agreement and set that agreement down on paper. China never agreed to any 3rd party dispute resolution concerning matters of sovereignty, therefore the PCA has no authority what so ever on taking this case in the first place. By the very agreement set out in the UNCLOS, the PCA has abused the process and overstepped its bounds.