South China Sea Strategies for other nations (Not China)

Brumby

Major
continuation ......
After the birth of the Republic of the Philippines in 1946, Bajo de Masinloc continued to be subject to its power, which actually grew in intensity. In 1961, the Philippine Coast and Geodetic Survey sent a hydrographic and topographic survey team to the shoal, led by Lieutenant Commander Antonio P. Ventura. They spent four days mapping and sounding the shoal to produce a detailed chart of Bajo de Masinloc and its environs. A hut with a tide and current station was also installed on the biggest rock.

Two years after, in 1963, the local press reported on the rescue of the crew of the French vessel Arsineo, which was shipwrecked on the shoal. A commercial vessel and a US Navy vessel brought the crew to Manila. This was only one of many shipwrecks on the shoal throughout its entire history. The Philippine Coast and Geodetic Survey was responsible for marking those shipwrecks on the nautical charts, and earlier versions of Chart 4200 (containing the complete map of the archipelago) clearly indicated both shipwrecks and navigational lights on the shoal.

The year 1963 also saw a major example of the exercise of absolute sovereignty, when the Philippine Navy discovered a smuggler’s base on the shoal. The smuggler’s base was used as a pick-up/drop-off point for blue seal cigarettes and other contraband. An actual photograph of the facility was published in the newspapers. The Philippine Navy sent ships to bombard the wharf twice in the same month. No other government action can express sovereignty so completely and convincingly than this enforced destruction of these illegal facilities.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Figure . An actual picture from the local newspapers, of the smuggler’s roost found and destroyed by the Philippine Navy on Scarborough Shoal in October 1963. (Source: Ayala Museum)

Perhaps to discourage the re-establishment of the smuggler’s base, and to maintain a naval presence around the shoal, the Philippines allowed the establishment of a US Naval Operating Area covering a 20 mile radius around the shoal. This turned Scarborough Shoal into a target and bombing range for the Philippine and US Navy. The whole world was notified of this fact through the Coast Pilot Guides regularly issued by the Philippine Coast and Geodetic Survey.

Absolute sovereignty continued to be exercised well into the 1970s and 1980s, as shown by “Notice to Mariners” issued by the Philippine Coast and Geodetic Survey and the Philippine Navy, warning all ships of live fire exercises, including a missile firing exercise by the US Navy operating out of Subic Bay, in the early 1980s.
 

Brumby

Major
continuation ....
All these exercises of sovereignty were uninterrupted and conducted peacefully and openly, without protest from any country including China, all throughout this time, until as late as 1995, and even in the summer of 1997 when the Coast and Geodetic Survey Division of NAMRIA conducted a GPS survey of the shoal as part of its effort to identify points to be used to create the archipelagic baseline system under UNCLOS.

It therefore becomes clear that contrary to China’s insistence, it was China, not the Philippines, which only began asserting a claim to Bajo de Masinloc/Scarborough Shoal in the 1990s when it issued a permit to amateur radio operators to establish and operate an amateur radio station thereon. The incident was immediately protested by the Philippines at the time, and the radio station removed. This is the event which initiates the Philippines-China dispute over Bajo de Masinloc, flaring up again in 2002 and then culminating in China’s blockade of the shoal in 2012. It was only in the 1990s when China actually and clearly claimed the shoal, and it was only in 2012 that it actually asserted and exercised (albeit illegally) any form of jurisdiction thereon.
 

Brumby

Major
Something to ponder. After 500 years of colonial rule, Spain did not even administer some of the the territories they ceded.
Not something to ponder but rather present the facts in support of your case i.e. China. In law, when a dispute arises, a claimant must rely on the strength of his own claim and not the weakness of the other’s.
 

confusion

Junior Member
Registered Member
Another smart move by Indonesia:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Indonesia will use data from miniature satellites around the globe to pinpoint the location of illegal fishing vessels trawling its vast waters, under an agreement announced on Wednesday (April 27) with a Silicon Valley tech firm.

The deal upgrades Jakarta's arsenal against illegal fishing by allowing it to more accurately monitor its remote territory, including in the South China Sea where Indonesian and Chinese vessels clashed last month.

A memorandum of understanding has been signed between Fisheries Minister Susi Pudjiastuti and Spire Global, the satellite-powered data company confirmed. Spire runs a fleet of "nanosatellites" that can detect and track ships as they pass through Indonesian waters.

Ships on the high seas are required by international law to carry a transponder that "pings" information via radio frequency about their identity and location to other vessels in order to avoid collisions.

Spire's miniature satellites - each no bigger than a wine bottle - collect this publicly available information to quickly and accurately construct a global map of shipping movements, and transmit this data to authorities on the ground.

Indonesia can then respond to any "red flags" - like a vessel switching off its transponder - that might suggest a suspicious ship is passing through their territory, Spire's business development executive Mark Dembitz told AFP.

"This provides them an additional arrow in the quiver to fight the good fight," said Mr Dembitz. "They are looking to use as much technology as they possibly can to solve their illegal fishing problem."

It will also give Indonesia a technological edge to closely monitor its vast exclusive economic zone (EEZ) around the remote Natuna Islands in the South China Sea, the scene of a tense standoff between Jakarta and Beijing last month.

Indonesia was towing a Chinese vessel it claimed was trawling without a permit near the fish-rich Natunas when Chinese coastguards appeared and rammed the captured boat.

Indonesia does not have overlapping territorial claims with Beijing in the hotly disputed waters, but it does object to a segmented line China uses to define its claims since this overlaps Indonesia's EEZ north of the Natunas.

Indonesia, a vast archipelago of 17,000 islands, has taken a tough stance on illegal fishing, impounding around 200 foreign vessels caught trawling without permits.

Many of those vessels have later been blown up in spectacular public displays that have stoked tensions with Indonesia's neighbours and trading partners.

Jakarta remains unapologetic and has vowed to defend its maritime borders from the illicit trade it claims costs billions every year in lost revenue.
 

confusion

Junior Member
Registered Member
Congress wants to pass a bill to “to put a little steel in their spine,” of the Obama administration when it comes to dealing with China in the SCS:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Dismayed at China’s tactics in the South China Sea, U.S. senators from both parties on Wednesday demanded the White House show more resolve with Beijing and ratchet up U.S. naval patrols near disputed islands in the strategic waterway.

With President Barack Obama due to travel to Vietnam next month, four senators introduced
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
that calls for bolstering security assistance to allies in Southeast Asia and expanding U.S. military operations meant to uphold the right of freedom of navigation in the South China Sea.

“For too long as China continues its aggressive and expansive policies, the United States has played the role of observer, or perhaps protestor, but not yet actor,” Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) said in a statement announcing the bill.

Over the past two years, China has aggressively moved to
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
its territorial claims in the South China Sea, a hugely important waterway rich in resources and a highway for trillions of dollars in trade. Chinese tactics have included coercion of other states, such as
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
and the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, as well as the installation of advanced military hardware on disputed reefs and atolls hundreds of miles from the Chinese coast.

The Obama administration has consistently called for China to respect international law and forswear coercion, but to little avail. Last fall, Chinese president Xi Jinping
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
in a visit to Washington to halt so-called “militarization” of the region, but instead has only ramped up the dispatch of advanced radars, air defense systems, and even military aircraft to islands claimed by neighboring states.

The broader U.S.-China relationship, which requires cooperation on issues ranging from the global economy to North Korea, makes it hard for Washington to push back too hard on Beijing’s moves in the region — but that tread-softly approach is wearing thin with lawmakers.

At a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing Wednesday featuring Deputy Secretary of State Antony Blinken, some lawmakers blasted the administration’s policies on the South China Sea as weak and lackluster.

The Republican chairman of the committee, Sen. Bob Corker of Tennessee, said that “freedom of navigation operations that happen once a quarter are viewed as nothing but symbolic” and that the U.S. Navy should be carrying out the patrols every week or every month.

For years, the United States has routinely sailed through areas it considers part of international waters to assert the principle of freedom of navigation. But the patrols have taken on heightened importance and political weight in the contested South China Sea, where tensions have mounted due to Beijing’s elaborate island-building campaign and its expansionist territorial claims.

The U.S. military has conducted two freedom of navigation patrols near artificial islands or features claimed by China
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
October 2015. Pentagon officials say the military has been ready to carry out operations more frequently within 12 nautical miles of man-made islands, but the White House so far has chosen to take a more cautious approach.

The proposed legislation is aimed in part at influencing the Obama administration’s policies before the president’s scheduled visit to the region next month, congressional aides said, amid concern among some lawmakers that the United States needs to do more to check China’s assertive moves in the South China Sea.

The bill “encourages them to take a more robust, forward leaning position” and is meant “to put a little steel in their spine,” a Senate staffer, who spoke on condition of anonymity, told Foreign Policy.

The proposed legislation is also designed to send a signal to China about how lawmakers view its aggressive tactics and, as a bipartisan bill, to reassure allies and partners alarmed at some of the more bombastic, isolationist
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
in the U.S. presidential campaign.

The proposed legislation, the Asia-Pacific Maritime Security Initiative
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, would require the administration to report to Congress on plans for freedom of navigation operations as well as China’s activities in the disputed waters. The bill also would elevate the status of the Philippines under rules for U.S. security assistance, allowing the country to receive more sophisticated military hardware.

Over the past two years, Beijing has built up a network of
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
islands on disputed reefs and atolls through a massive dredging effort, with runways and deep harbors that can accommodate military aircraft and naval warships.

Sen. Ben Cardin, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said the bill was a response to China’s repeated defiance of the rule of law and militarization of the South China Sea.

The senators issued their appeal for a stronger stance as an international court in The Hague weighs a complaint filed by the Philippines that accuses China of violating the laws of the sea with its far-reaching claims in the South China Sea.

With a landmark ruling pending with the Permanent Court of Arbitration,now is the time for the United States and our regional and global partners to take clear and concrete measures to support a rules-based order for the Asia-Pacific Region,” Cardin said in a statement.

Three Democrats and Republican Sen. Cory Gardner of Colorado sponsored the proposed legislation.
 
Not something to ponder but rather present the facts in support of your case i.e. China. In law, when a dispute arises, a claimant must rely on the strength of his own claim and not the weakness of the other’s.

My case is Spain never ceded Scarborough to the US as you claimed as fact, You have yet to provide facts to support your case and avoid changing the topic.
 

confusion

Junior Member
Registered Member
Not something to ponder but rather present the facts in support of your case i.e. China. In law, when a dispute arises, a claimant must rely on the strength of his own claim and not the weakness of the other’s.
Yeah sure, Australia is just a shining example of international law compliance.

Australia criticizes China on international law, and then turns around and bullies refugees and East Timor in violation of international law.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

'Canberra may encourage Beijing to embrace the rule of law, but what China hears is hypocrisy'
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

27 April 2016

If Australia wants China to respect rules-based regional and global orders the country needs to learn to do so itself, Ramesh Thakur writes.

Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull’s recent official visit to China featured a packed schedule of meetings and speeches in Shanghai and Beijing including a combined total of four hours with President Xi Jinping and Premier Li Keqiang. Public comments and media reports mostly highlighted the exciting opportunities, with only muted references to challenges and potential points of friction.

The story of Australia’s constantly recalibrating bilateral relationship with China is liberally sprinkled with clichés and bumper sticker slogans: strategic dialogue, engage and hedge, fear and greed. The
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
(ChAFTA), in effect from 20 December 2015, is intended to drive, deepen and broaden the bilateral economic engagement.

In parallel, Australia has been consolidating and deepening alliance ties with the US and actively exploring expanded defence ties with Japan, India and Vietnam. US ambassador John Berry correctly points to the ‘
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
’ with regard to the Australia–US security alliance. For the past decade Australia’s policy is best described as regionally oriented but US-anchored in strategic, and China-anchored in economic moorings.

Turnbull’s visit met the expectations of the business community that believes the PM understands China, gets its importance and approaches relations from the vantage point of a former private sector entrepreneur. His appreciation of China’s strategic weight in the readjusting polycentric regional and global geopolitical order is certainly more nuanced than the infamously
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
former Prime Minister Tony Abbott. Turnbull brings a cerebral approach to analysis and understanding and a civil and circumspect use of language in diplomatic discourse. His closest circle of foreign policy advisers is unusually Sinocentric.

Australian governments of both persuasions focus on economics as the main game but keep their eye firmly on the prize of long-term strategic interests. Turnbull’s gentle advice to Beijing is to ensure, by word and deeds, that its rise does not perturb the tranquillity, harmony and security of the region based on a continuing role for the US as the security anchor of Asia-Pacific. Eschewing the language of human rights that Beijing finds threatening and provocative, Turnbull deploys the softer language of the rule of law. This is reflected most strikingly in the 2016
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, which is notably assertive in mapping China’s territorial claims and the militarisation of its disputed islets in the South China Sea.

Turnbull has cautioned Beijing not to push the envelope on the maritime territorial disputes, observing that restraint is very much in China’s self-interest, and encouraging China to settle all outstanding disputes through the mechanisms provided by the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
(UNCLOS), not through unilateral acts that others perceive as threatening. In other words, Turnbull is no more willing to accommodate China’s geopolitical ambitions in the region than any of his predecessors.

Unfortunately, when Canberra counsels Beijing to eschew coercion and embrace the rule of law, what the Chinese hear is not virtue speaking truth to power, but hypocrisy. The rule of law requires laws to be publicly promulgated, uniformly applied and independently adjudicated. The defence white paper uses the phrase ‘rules-based global order’ 48 times and contains another three references to a ‘rules-based regional order’. It is difficult to believe that Australian leaders and officials are ignorant of the fact that every time they mention it as a catchphrase for guiding international behaviour, their Chinese interlocutors will be reminded of Australia’s participation in the illegal aggression against Iraq in 2003. Then there is the sharp break between Australia’s obligations under the 1951 UN refugee convention and its treatment of asylum seekers.

Australian analysts seem mostly blind to the structural similarities between the Chinese mindset of tributary relationships with smaller neighbours and our own neocolonial mindset of deference by the peripheral state to the imperial power, both of which ride roughshod over the rule of law. The relationship with East Timor might well be described in bumper sticker language as ‘bribe, bully and spy’. Under the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
signed in Dili on 20 May 2002 that came into effect on 2 April 2003, and the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
signed in Sydney on 12 January 2006 and in effect since 23 February 2007, the two countries share oil and gas revenues in a joint development area.

Dili believes the vast majority of oil and gas reserves in the Timor Sea, worth an estimated US$40 billion, lie in its territory as per the UNCLOS norms for determining sea borders. On this basis, Dili claims it has lost some US$5 billion in royalties and tax revenue since independence, enough to fund its entire budget for three years. Dili wants to begin fresh, good faith negotiations on a new border and submit the dispute to binding international determination if the talks fail.

Canberra rejects Dili’s claim and independent dispute resolution offer. Moreover, in March 2002 (just before East Timor’s independence), Australia withdrew from the maritime boundary jurisdiction of the
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
. This eliminated Dili’s option of resolving the territorial dispute through international adjudication – hardly the action of a nation committed to promoting the rule of law in international affairs.

Australia then
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
in East Timor’s cabinet room in 2004. When Dili launched legal proceedings against Canberra to recover foregone revenues and renegotiate a less unequal treaty, the Canberra offices of its lawyer,
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, were raided by police in 2013 and thousands of documents seized by Australia’s security intelligence service.

As the great Scottish poet Robbie Burns lamented, if only we had the gift ‘to see ourselves as others see us.’ If we want China to respect rules-based regional and global orders we had better learn fast to do so ourselves: no country has a God-given or self-proclaimed right to be the sole judge of both its own and everyone else’s compliance with rules, norms, and laws. As was true also of the nuclear deal with India, when others in a relationship perceive Australia’s actions as norm-violating rather than norm-reinforcing, the simultaneous pursuit of normative and transactional relations is mutually undermining. One has to be prioritised and the other quietly dropped.
 

Brumby

Major
My case is Spain never ceded Scarborough to the US as you claimed as fact, You have yet to provide facts to support your case and avoid changing the topic.
You asked for facts and I provided them in the article. If you don't agree with the facts you are at liberty to offer your rebuttal. You did not but instead repeat the same lines. In sovereignty disputes both law and facts need to complement each other to support the case. Whether Spain actually ceded that specific territory is not just a question of law but also of fact and the historical facts as offered by the article actually demonstrates actual administration and affirms that it included the Scarborough. In contrast you haven't offered anything to support China's case other than obfuscate.

That Spain began exercising jurisdiction at this time is very important. The end of the century saw the transfer of the Philippines to the United States through two treaties of cession. While the Treaty of Paris of 1898 described the Philippine Islands as being comprised of all the islands within an irregular polygon, Spain also had sovereignty and jurisdiction over islands and places outside of the lines of that polygon. These islands and places were clarified to have also been transferred to the United States under the terms of the Treaty of Washington of 1900.

Thus, the American colonial government continued periodically to exercise jurisdiction over the shoal, particularly through rescue and salvaging of ships in distress. One very well-documented event took place in 1913, when the S.S. Nippon, a Swedish steamer carrying a valuable cargo of copra, was wrecked on the shoal by a typhoon as the ship proceeded from Manila to Hong Kong. The shipwreck demonstrated the exercise of a whole gamut of maritime jurisdictions: the ship’s crew were rescued, the incident was officially investigated by Philippine maritime authorities, the ship subjected to salvage law in the Philippines, and an official scientific study was conducted on the effects of the sea on the ship’s cargo.
 

Brumby

Major
Yeah sure, Australia is just a shining example of international law compliance.

Australia criticizes China on international law, and then turns around and bullies refugees and East Timor in violation of international law.
You guys keep on re-directing the issue without offering anything that can be of substance to defend China's case. Is China's case so pathetically absent of facts and law that the only recourse is to re-direct?
 

confusion

Junior Member
Registered Member
You guys keep on re-directing the issue without offering anything that can be of substance to defend China's case. Is China's case so pathetically absent of facts and law that the only recourse is to re-direct?
If countries like the US, UK, Japan and Australia are only willing to follow international law when it suits their purposes, why should China be expected to act differently? Why is China being held to a higher standard when it comes to international law compliance?
 
Top