South China Sea Forum
- Thread starter SinoChallenger
- Start date
....yet this same clown constantly advocating for a war with Vietnam LOL
Fukuoka
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2014
- Messages
- 3,035
- Reaction score
- -8
- Country
- Location
xunzi
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2013
- Messages
- 4,735
- Reaction score
- -2
- Country
- Location
He claimed that Manila cannot arrest the fishermen under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea and the ASEAN Declaration on Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea.
"Even in the disputed waters you have no right to arrest people," said Luo, who is currently vice-president of a Beijing-based think-tank consisting of retired military officers.
--------
If this is true, we need to react quickly and decisively against Phillipines provocative step.
"Even in the disputed waters you have no right to arrest people," said Luo, who is currently vice-president of a Beijing-based think-tank consisting of retired military officers.
--------
If this is true, we need to react quickly and decisively against Phillipines provocative step.
Viet
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2012
- Messages
- 29,950
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
you don´t get it, as usual.
ASEAN acts on consensus. so even if 1 member rejects the proposal to sharply critize China, the other 9 states can´t force the proposal to become public.
I assume, in the summit, there are 3 different opinions:
Vietnam, Singapore, Philippines, Malaysia, Indonesia, Laos and Brunei: anti-China
Burma and Cambodia: neutral
Thailand: pro-China
so the 10 member bloc agreed to soften the tone as consensus.
Viet
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2012
- Messages
- 29,950
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
you are not only a clown but a liar.China has given vn hundreds of billions aids, well, since you tell me China demand you to pay back. Give me the official figures how much you have paid back to China till today???
Risked fighting US: your fxxked government did not dare to tell you that.
Simply from: China–United States relations - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The PRC's involvement in the Vietnam War began in 1949, when mainland China was reunified under communist rule. The Communist Party of China provided material and technical support to the Vietnamese communists. In the summer of 1962, Mao Zedong agreed to supply Hanoi with 90,000 rifles and guns free of charge. After the launch of the American "Rolling Thunder" mission, China sent anti-aircraft units and engineering battalions to North Vietnam to repair the damage caused by American bombing, rebuild roads and railroads, and perform other engineering work, freeing North Vietnamese army units for combat in the South. Between 1965 and 1970, over 320,000 Chinese soldiers fought the Americans alongside the North Vietnamese Army, reaching a peak in 1967, when 170,000 troops served in combat. China lost 1,446 troops in the Vietnam War. The US lost 58,159 in combat against the NVA, Vietcong, and their allied forces, including the Chinese.
I do not even know how many Chinese soldiers have donated their lives during vn's struggle against french and then the u.s. However, if they could come back to life and know what vn has done to China, all of them will regret what they have done since they have given up their lives to these bunch of ingrateful bastards. In reality, tons of aids were sent to northern vn, way beyond some guessing figures U.S. intelligence could gather.
Without China, vn would have already invaded northern vn long ago.
China Contributed Substantially to Vietnam War Victory, Claims Scholar | Wilson Center
http://www.chinacenter.net/docs/Garver_parameters.pdf
Some u.s. generals then called China threat to send ground troops bluffing. However, at the end of the day, U.S. dare not to invade northern vn and did not send any ground troops into northern vn for invasion at all.
Acient China in Northern Yangtze river???
This is China's Qin map: The Qin Dynasty Map - Ancient China Maps - China Highlights
This is China's Han map:
http://www.mitchellteachers.org/Wor...lum/Images/handynasty/maphandynasty_large.jpg
Qin United China and Han inherited it. For your information, even Han empire started before BC 200. You dumb axx did not know that??? That was more than 2300 years ago.
Northern Yangtze river???
For vn, its earlier ruler was even Chinese, a Qin general named Zhao Tuo: Zhao Tuo - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
congrat
Beidou2020
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2013
- Messages
- 7,857
- Reaction score
- -48
- Country
- Location
Major General Luo Yuan is one of my favourites. He is a true Chinese patriot.
Rahul9090
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2014
- Messages
- 966
- Reaction score
- -1
- Country
- Location
India has signaled support for Vietnam in its latest flare-up with China over their competing territorial claims in the South China Sea.
On May 7 Hanoi charged that Chinese vessels had recently rammed several of its ships in an oil-rich zone claimed by both countries. Almost a week later the situation remains extremely tense, with both countries deploying large numbers of ships in the waters off the Paracel Islands.
India’s support is cautiously-worded. Nevertheless, it is inflammatory under conditions where Washington has been encouraging its East Asian allies, including Japan, the Philippines, and Vietnam, to press their claims against Beijing as part of its strategy to isolate and militarily encircle China.
Hanoi, for its part, is seeking to curry favor with New Delhi so as to further draw India into its dispute with China.
The latest flare up of tensions between Hanoi and Beijing began when the Chinese National Offshore Oil Corporation started setting up a $1 billion oil drilling rig near the Paracel Islands. The islands are claimed by both countries, but occupied by China.
While Vietnam has accused Chinese ships of ramming its vessels and using water cannon to drive them off, China has counter-charged that its vessels were rammed more than 171 times by armed Vietnamese vessels between May 3 and 7.
Two days after Hanoi made a very public protest about the events in the waters off the Paracel Islands, an Indian External Affairs Ministry spokesperson voiced New Delhi’s “concern” over “recent developments in the South China Sea.”
In what clearly were vetted remarks, the spokesperson told a media briefing that India “maintains that freedom of navigation in the South China Sea should not be impeded”, and is urging “cooperation” so as to ensure “security of sea-lanes and strengthening of maritime security.” Calling the “maintenance of peace, stability, growth and prosperity in the region” vital for “the international community,” the Indian spokesperson urged the dispute be resolved “through peaceful measures in accordance with universally recognized principles of international law.”
The Indian diplomat’s statement avoided mention of either China or Vietnam. However, its references to “freedom of navigation,” “security of sea lanes,” interests of “international community” and “international law” echo the US’s hypocritical stance on the disputes China has with its East Asian neighbours. While feigning neutrality and support for international law, Washington has been encouraging China’s neighbours to rake up their territorial disputes in the South China and East China Seas, and then paint Beijing as the aggressor.
With the maritime territorial disputes serving as a convenient pretext, Washington has recently dramatically increased its military cooperation with Japan and the Philippines—longstanding allies—and it is aggressively courting Vietnam. Last week, the Obama administration sent to the US Senate the proposed text of a nuclear cooperation agreement with Hanoi.
India, through the state-owned oil company ONGC Videsh (OVL), is already collaborating with Vietnam in parts of the South China Sea that China claims as its own and doing so over Beijing’s express objections.
In 2006, Hanoi awarded OVL oil-exploration rights to two blocks in disputed territory and while one was later abandoned as unviable, OVL signed a new oil exploration agreement with Vietnam last November.
China’s moves to initiate oil drilling off the disputed Paracel Islands come just days after Hanoi offered OVL two more oil exploration blocks.
India’s navy, which now routinely carries out joint exercises with the Pentagon, has recently become active in the South China Sea. In December 2012, India’s then chief of the navy, Admiral D.K. Joshi, publicly proclaimed that India’s navy was preparing for possible action in the South China Sea. “Are we preparing for it,” he asked. “The short answer is yes.”
In the wake of the latest flare up with China, Hanoi is intensifying its efforts to enmesh India in the conflict.
In a round table meeting in Melbourne sponsored by the Diplomatic Academy of Vietnam (DAV) on May 9, DAV President, Ambassador Dang Dinh Quy, denounced “Chinese assertiveness,” accused the Chinese navy of “acting without provocation,” and charged that it was doing so on orders of “the Chinese leadership at the highest level.”
Notwithstanding the US’s provocative anti-China stance, Quy went on to complain that the Obama administration has shown insufficient “clarity” on Vietnam’s dispute with China, then added, “That is why we want India should rise quickly. We have great expectations from India.”
Responding to Quy’s remark, Amitabh Mattoo, the inaugural director of the Australia-India Institute and a stalwart of India’s national-security establishment, lashed out against China.
“Chinese assertiveness,” declared Mattoo, “is bordering on aggressiveness.” He termed Beijing’s behavior “short sighted and counter-productive.”
Mattoo has served as foreign policy advisor to both Congress Party and BJP-led Indian governments. He was a member of India's National Security Council's Advisory Board under Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee and a member of the task force on Global Strategic Developments struck by the current Indian Prime Minister, Manmohan Singh.
Mattoo is far from alone in calling for India, which has a longstanding territorial dispute with China and is competing with it for oil and other resources, to take a more aggressive stand against China and do so in concert with Washington.
In an article titled “Chinese expansionism continues unabated” published in the May 7 issue of theTimes of India, S.D. Pradhan complained that the “Chinese policy of aggrandizement in its neighbouring areas” is “raising the serious risk of a conflict in the South China Sea.” He contended that China’s “aggressive behaviour towards Vietnam” was part of a “grand strategy” directed against Japan and India and advocated India “join hands” with the “US, Japan, ASEAN, Russia, [and] Australia … in pressurising China to give up its aggressive policies in the neighbouring countries.”
“They should be prepared,” Pradhan said, “to impose consequences on China when it violates international laws and norms,” although he refrained from spelling out what “penalties” he envisaged.
Even more than Mattoo, Pradhan is a voice of India’s national security establishment. The positions he has previously held include chairman of the Joint Intelligence Committee, deputy national security adviser, and chairman of the Task Force on Intelligence Mechanism, which reviewed the functioning and interaction of India’s various intelligence agencies.
India has formed a “global strategic partnership” with the US and otherwise tilted its foreign policy toward Washington since the beginning of the century. Nonetheless, large sections of India’s corporate elite and military-intelligence establishment have criticized the outgoing Congress Party-led government for not aligning more closely with Washington as a purported “insurance policy” against China. The reality is US imperialism is determined to make India the third pillar of its Indo-Pacific anti-China strategy, alongside Japan and Australia, through a combination of threats and inducements.
India signals support for Vietnam in South China Sea dispute - World Socialist Web Site
On May 7 Hanoi charged that Chinese vessels had recently rammed several of its ships in an oil-rich zone claimed by both countries. Almost a week later the situation remains extremely tense, with both countries deploying large numbers of ships in the waters off the Paracel Islands.
India’s support is cautiously-worded. Nevertheless, it is inflammatory under conditions where Washington has been encouraging its East Asian allies, including Japan, the Philippines, and Vietnam, to press their claims against Beijing as part of its strategy to isolate and militarily encircle China.
Hanoi, for its part, is seeking to curry favor with New Delhi so as to further draw India into its dispute with China.
The latest flare up of tensions between Hanoi and Beijing began when the Chinese National Offshore Oil Corporation started setting up a $1 billion oil drilling rig near the Paracel Islands. The islands are claimed by both countries, but occupied by China.
While Vietnam has accused Chinese ships of ramming its vessels and using water cannon to drive them off, China has counter-charged that its vessels were rammed more than 171 times by armed Vietnamese vessels between May 3 and 7.
Two days after Hanoi made a very public protest about the events in the waters off the Paracel Islands, an Indian External Affairs Ministry spokesperson voiced New Delhi’s “concern” over “recent developments in the South China Sea.”
In what clearly were vetted remarks, the spokesperson told a media briefing that India “maintains that freedom of navigation in the South China Sea should not be impeded”, and is urging “cooperation” so as to ensure “security of sea-lanes and strengthening of maritime security.” Calling the “maintenance of peace, stability, growth and prosperity in the region” vital for “the international community,” the Indian spokesperson urged the dispute be resolved “through peaceful measures in accordance with universally recognized principles of international law.”
The Indian diplomat’s statement avoided mention of either China or Vietnam. However, its references to “freedom of navigation,” “security of sea lanes,” interests of “international community” and “international law” echo the US’s hypocritical stance on the disputes China has with its East Asian neighbours. While feigning neutrality and support for international law, Washington has been encouraging China’s neighbours to rake up their territorial disputes in the South China and East China Seas, and then paint Beijing as the aggressor.
With the maritime territorial disputes serving as a convenient pretext, Washington has recently dramatically increased its military cooperation with Japan and the Philippines—longstanding allies—and it is aggressively courting Vietnam. Last week, the Obama administration sent to the US Senate the proposed text of a nuclear cooperation agreement with Hanoi.
India, through the state-owned oil company ONGC Videsh (OVL), is already collaborating with Vietnam in parts of the South China Sea that China claims as its own and doing so over Beijing’s express objections.
In 2006, Hanoi awarded OVL oil-exploration rights to two blocks in disputed territory and while one was later abandoned as unviable, OVL signed a new oil exploration agreement with Vietnam last November.
China’s moves to initiate oil drilling off the disputed Paracel Islands come just days after Hanoi offered OVL two more oil exploration blocks.
India’s navy, which now routinely carries out joint exercises with the Pentagon, has recently become active in the South China Sea. In December 2012, India’s then chief of the navy, Admiral D.K. Joshi, publicly proclaimed that India’s navy was preparing for possible action in the South China Sea. “Are we preparing for it,” he asked. “The short answer is yes.”
In the wake of the latest flare up with China, Hanoi is intensifying its efforts to enmesh India in the conflict.
In a round table meeting in Melbourne sponsored by the Diplomatic Academy of Vietnam (DAV) on May 9, DAV President, Ambassador Dang Dinh Quy, denounced “Chinese assertiveness,” accused the Chinese navy of “acting without provocation,” and charged that it was doing so on orders of “the Chinese leadership at the highest level.”
Notwithstanding the US’s provocative anti-China stance, Quy went on to complain that the Obama administration has shown insufficient “clarity” on Vietnam’s dispute with China, then added, “That is why we want India should rise quickly. We have great expectations from India.”
Responding to Quy’s remark, Amitabh Mattoo, the inaugural director of the Australia-India Institute and a stalwart of India’s national-security establishment, lashed out against China.
“Chinese assertiveness,” declared Mattoo, “is bordering on aggressiveness.” He termed Beijing’s behavior “short sighted and counter-productive.”
Mattoo has served as foreign policy advisor to both Congress Party and BJP-led Indian governments. He was a member of India's National Security Council's Advisory Board under Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee and a member of the task force on Global Strategic Developments struck by the current Indian Prime Minister, Manmohan Singh.
Mattoo is far from alone in calling for India, which has a longstanding territorial dispute with China and is competing with it for oil and other resources, to take a more aggressive stand against China and do so in concert with Washington.
In an article titled “Chinese expansionism continues unabated” published in the May 7 issue of theTimes of India, S.D. Pradhan complained that the “Chinese policy of aggrandizement in its neighbouring areas” is “raising the serious risk of a conflict in the South China Sea.” He contended that China’s “aggressive behaviour towards Vietnam” was part of a “grand strategy” directed against Japan and India and advocated India “join hands” with the “US, Japan, ASEAN, Russia, [and] Australia … in pressurising China to give up its aggressive policies in the neighbouring countries.”
“They should be prepared,” Pradhan said, “to impose consequences on China when it violates international laws and norms,” although he refrained from spelling out what “penalties” he envisaged.
Even more than Mattoo, Pradhan is a voice of India’s national security establishment. The positions he has previously held include chairman of the Joint Intelligence Committee, deputy national security adviser, and chairman of the Task Force on Intelligence Mechanism, which reviewed the functioning and interaction of India’s various intelligence agencies.
India has formed a “global strategic partnership” with the US and otherwise tilted its foreign policy toward Washington since the beginning of the century. Nonetheless, large sections of India’s corporate elite and military-intelligence establishment have criticized the outgoing Congress Party-led government for not aligning more closely with Washington as a purported “insurance policy” against China. The reality is US imperialism is determined to make India the third pillar of its Indo-Pacific anti-China strategy, alongside Japan and Australia, through a combination of threats and inducements.
India signals support for Vietnam in South China Sea dispute - World Socialist Web Site
GR!FF!N
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2012
- Messages
- 8,706
- Reaction score
- -4
- Country
- Location
China issued (veiled) warning no-SCS75321897
South China Sea ‘not a concern,’ China tells India - The Hindu
South China Sea ‘not a concern,’ China tells India - The Hindu
GR!FF!N
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2012
- Messages
- 8,706
- Reaction score
- -4
- Country
- Location
"Retired" and "Senile" are the words goes hand in hand. 
I LMAOed after reading this line...
UNCLOS and DOC probably doesn't even applicable for crazy demands like "9 dotted line".
read this...(on Vietnam)
The location of the rig is controversial because while Vietnam insists that it is in disputed waters, China claims it is not. If Vietnam is correct, which all the evidence suggests it is, then China's unilateral action is in violation of both the letter and spirit of its international commitments, including the UN Convention on the Law of the Seas (UNCLOS) and the Declaration of Conduct for Parties in the South China Sea.
China 'determined' to change status quo in South China Sea | Asia | DW.DE | 08.05.2014
also read why UNCLOS says China's claim is invalid.
The UNCLOS states three different types of maritime features that allow for the waters surrounding a country to be claimed as part of its territory.
The first are “Islands” defined as “a naturally formed area of land, surrounded by water and above water at high tide,” Jardeleza said.
Islands, such as Luzon, entitles the country that owns it to a 12 nautical mile (approximately 22 kilometers) territorial sea from the coastline with which it has full sovereignty. A country can exclude foreign entities from its territorial sea.
The island is also entitled to a 200 nm (approximately 370 km) exclusive economic zone (EEZ), which gives the country the sole right to exploit the resources within it such as fish and also mineral and oil reserves, if any.
The second are “rocks or reefs” that are mostly below water but have rocky protrusions above water during high tide. The important point under UNCLOS states that a maritime feature is a rock if “it cannot sustain human habitation or economic life on its own,” Jardeleza said.
Such mostly submerged features are entitled to only a 12 nm territorial sea and no EEZ. Examples of such are Bajo de Masinloc, also known as Panatag shoal or Scarborough shoal, which lies 120 nm off the coast of Zambales province.
The shoal is a submerged coral reef with a rocky protrusion that is three meters above the water during high tide. It cannot be classified as an island because it cannot sustain economic activity or humans on its own, Jardeleza said.
The third type of maritime features called “low tide elevation” are submerged rocks and reefs that are not visible above water. This type of maritime feature is not entitled to any territorial sea or EEZ.
UNCLOS explained: Why China’s claims in South China Sea are invalid | Inquirer Global Nation
about UNCLOS and DOC,shouldn't China become a party of the arbitration claim Philippines lodged in International court of Arbitration if they have so much confidence on its stance??why so much effort is needed to bypass that??fight the case and emerge as victorious just like India did against Pakistan countless times and against BD-Myanmar which is still to be decided.
I LMAOed after reading this line...
UNCLOS and DOC probably doesn't even applicable for crazy demands like "9 dotted line".
read this...(on Vietnam)
The location of the rig is controversial because while Vietnam insists that it is in disputed waters, China claims it is not. If Vietnam is correct, which all the evidence suggests it is, then China's unilateral action is in violation of both the letter and spirit of its international commitments, including the UN Convention on the Law of the Seas (UNCLOS) and the Declaration of Conduct for Parties in the South China Sea.
China 'determined' to change status quo in South China Sea | Asia | DW.DE | 08.05.2014
also read why UNCLOS says China's claim is invalid.
The UNCLOS states three different types of maritime features that allow for the waters surrounding a country to be claimed as part of its territory.
The first are “Islands” defined as “a naturally formed area of land, surrounded by water and above water at high tide,” Jardeleza said.
Islands, such as Luzon, entitles the country that owns it to a 12 nautical mile (approximately 22 kilometers) territorial sea from the coastline with which it has full sovereignty. A country can exclude foreign entities from its territorial sea.
The island is also entitled to a 200 nm (approximately 370 km) exclusive economic zone (EEZ), which gives the country the sole right to exploit the resources within it such as fish and also mineral and oil reserves, if any.
The second are “rocks or reefs” that are mostly below water but have rocky protrusions above water during high tide. The important point under UNCLOS states that a maritime feature is a rock if “it cannot sustain human habitation or economic life on its own,” Jardeleza said.
Such mostly submerged features are entitled to only a 12 nm territorial sea and no EEZ. Examples of such are Bajo de Masinloc, also known as Panatag shoal or Scarborough shoal, which lies 120 nm off the coast of Zambales province.
The shoal is a submerged coral reef with a rocky protrusion that is three meters above the water during high tide. It cannot be classified as an island because it cannot sustain economic activity or humans on its own, Jardeleza said.
The third type of maritime features called “low tide elevation” are submerged rocks and reefs that are not visible above water. This type of maritime feature is not entitled to any territorial sea or EEZ.
UNCLOS explained: Why China’s claims in South China Sea are invalid | Inquirer Global Nation
about UNCLOS and DOC,shouldn't China become a party of the arbitration claim Philippines lodged in International court of Arbitration if they have so much confidence on its stance??why so much effort is needed to bypass that??fight the case and emerge as victorious just like India did against Pakistan countless times and against BD-Myanmar which is still to be decided.
Similar threads
