What's new

South China Sea Forum

It's not all negative thing USA get involved SCS issues directly.
At least the USA action can beat the ridiculous trolls China bully those poor little neighbors. lol.
 
Yes, that's my point. Most of the media points to the keyword of "artificial island" as the basis for legality of US patrol, which is completely false. It is Chinese ownership of the island that US disputes, not the construction.

Navigation is defined as passage of ship. Is conducting military mission considered navigation? China obviously disagrees.

The Brits created a series of artificial "islands" between it and the English Channel to break up Nazi Attack Squadrons in WW2. They are outside the British Territorial waters, and hence the Germans had to negotiate with the Prince of Sea-land when another foolish pirate radio operator wanted to become the prince and take over his competitor hired some german mercenaries, to take it, who didnt expect a fight got captured.

Principality of Sealand - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If the Destroyer was just sailing through then yes it does have the right to do so. Even an Electronic Warfare ship can navigate.

Under international law a warship can transit through a nation’s territorial waters “so long as it is not prejudicial to the peace, good order or security of the coastal state,”

Here's a report of Chinese ships passing:
Chinese Navy Ships Came Within 12 Nautical Miles of U.S. Coast - WSJ

Any ship can enter territorial waters, it's sailors can walk around naked to show the natives their crown jewels. It can't enter if it's going to carry out a military strike. Even in Special Operations, the operator has to show their nationality flag on their shoulders.
 
The fact China did very little with Diaoyu island exposed its weakness. In fact Chinese government arrested partriotic Chinese for staging anti Jap protests in Diaoyu island :crazy:.

Be very careful who these "patriotic Chinese" are, the same HK group that protests against the Chinese government. Do not be provoked into actions by third party that are funding these people.
 
And that was exactly what I was talking about. Now the US have given a false sense of security to Vn and Jp due to a nonchalant first response from PLAN.
@TaiShang @Martian2


The fact China did very little with Diaoyu island exposed its weakness. In fact Chinese government arrested partriotic Chinese for staging anti Jap protests in Diaoyu island :crazy:
Sometimes you cannot wait for full modernization because when trouble comes to you, you can't just deflect it and hope to modernize until 2025.

Its corruption.

Didn't a chinese general named Fan Long Worm say merely days ago that china would not resort to force even if the US went into 12 nm? That is basically opening a green light telling US to go and China promises to stay put. :angry:

I can't believe that one could be that stupid, except some curry munching friends in PDF of course. China' s anti-corruption bureau should investigate this Fan. He must have deposited all his countless silvers with Chase Manhattan in New York.
 
I don't think this is China's position, that it is "first claimant." Rather, China's position is that these areas are China's and that other claims don't exist. This makes resolving the issue impossible - which, in my opinion, is what the CCP wants right now.

You are mistaking China for Japan. That is exactly the Japanese position on the Diaoyu island dispute, whereas China has always maintained that territorial dispute in the South China Sea should be resolved bilaterally.
 
The battle of rhetoric between the US and China continues to escalate over the disputed South China Sea, with state-linked newspapers claiming Beijing is "not frightened to fight a war in the region".

The threat in an editorial of the Global Times comes after the US said it did sail a Navy ship near to China's artificial islands in the Spratly archipelago - and that it will do it again.

But just what is it that has led the two nations, who are otherwise working to forge closer ties, to such a diplomatic impasse?

Located at a maritime crossroads between Malaysia, Vietnam, the Philippines and China, the Spratly Islands are sliced through by a confusion of different claims to sovereign territory.

Areas of open sea in the archipelago have been aggressively dredged by the Chinese Government, however, and in barely two years more than 2,000 acres of new land has been created.

The activity has proved highly controversial because China is accused of creating new land to extend its sea borders. As if to sure up its claims, the Communist state has piled military bases, docks and even a runway on the new islands.

Why is the US involved?

The US has said it does not have a position on the land reclamation projects that have incited such anger from China's neighbours.

But the US defence secretary, Ash Carter, implied that the mission to sail the USS Lassen missile destroyer within 12 nautical miles of the Subi Reef was an expression of the right to freedom of navigation.

He told a congressional hearing: "We will fly, sail and operate wherever international law permits." Mr Carter has previously demanded an "immediate and lasting halt" to the reclamation projects in the area.

The Philippines, which has conducted its own land-building efforts on a smaller scale, welcomed the US sail-by as a way of helping maintain "a balance of power" in the region.

How has China reacted?

China says it tracked and then warned the USS Lassen as it sailed by the Subi Reef, which only lay above sea level at low tide before Chinese military installations appeared there around 2012.

It has since summoned the American ambassador, Max Bacaus, in protest. China's foreign ministry said on its website that ministers told Mr Bacaus the US had acted in a "provocative" manner which threatened China's sovereignty and security.

Chinese newspapers linked to the Communist party expressed outrage in more colourful terms. According to the Guardian, a Global Times editorial suggested Beijing "should deal with Washington tactfully and prepare for the worst".

"This can convince the White House that China, despite its unwillingness, is not frightened to fight a war with the US in the region, and is determined to safeguard its national interests and dignity."

China's main military newspaper, the People's Liberation Army Daily, reportedly made examples of the US's chaotic interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan.

It said: "Cast-iron facts show that time and again the United States recklessly uses force and starts wars, stirring things up where once there was stability, causing the bitterest of harm to those countries directly involved."

What are the long-term implications?

Top Comment
Chinese are in great trouble....USA challenging China at it's door step will pave way for many more countries joining against China.Valid Sach
China has reacted defiantly, saying it will continue to develop its island-building projects and add new buildings, harbours, helipads and runways on them.

But, according to the Associated Press, other countries in the region have greeted the intervention and could use it as encouragement to stand up to China's assertiveness.

Further afield, regional powers including Singapore and Indonesia are wary of being caught up in the increasingly bitter dispute - and all sides are calling for negotiations on a long-term solution to head off the possibility of conflict.

BS article. Nobody is cheering these kind of distruptive engagement that could harm trade and causes unnecessary anxiety to the already fragile world economy. Talking about island expansion, Malaysia, Philippine, Vietnam has long engage these activities with no one make a fuss until now by US pinpointing at China only. Then they will come out with the stupid reasoning China is pick becos the expansion of island is much bigger than others. WHo the hell are to judge who is bigger and who's not.

The article is right. China shall engage a strong stance against US provocation. The response will come soon. Be prepare for blood to shed.
 
The Brits created a series of artificial "islands" between it and the English Channel to break up Nazi Attack Squadrons in WW2. They are outside the British Territorial waters, and hence the Germans had to negotiate with the Prince of Sea-land when another foolish pirate radio operator wanted to become the prince and take over his competitor hired some german mercenaries, to take it, who didnt expect a fight got captured.

Principality of Sealand - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If the Destroyer was just sailing through then yes it does have the right to do so. Even an Electronic Warfare ship can navigate.



Here's a report of Chinese ships passing:
Chinese Navy Ships Came Within 12 Nautical Miles of U.S. Coast - WSJ

Any ship can enter territorial waters, it's sailors can walk around naked to show the natives their crown jewels. It can't enter if it's going to carry out a military strike. Even in Special Operations, the operator has to show their nationality flag on their shoulders.

We are talking about two different topic. I was responding to Jhungary regarding to China's dispute with the US over its conducting of espionage mission and military drill in China's EEZ. You are talking about innocent passage which is well defined.
 
We are talking about two different topic. I was responding to Jhungary regarding to China's dispute with the US over its conducting of espionage mission and military drill in China's EEZ. You are talking about innocent passage which is well defined.

They both go hand in hand. China is no right to claim Territorial Waters if the territory isn't recognized.

So the passage of the Destroyer isn't a concern. Regardless. It can sail up within the 12 miles of China's coast also without hindrance from the Chinese, unless its planning on attacking.
 
Interesting development. Although this whole affair would have been agreed upon by both US and Chinese authorities in private.

China to US(like kids): aj mari tabbiyat kharab thee. kal ana to main maron ga tumhain:china:
Achchi tactic hai. Koi Chinese samjhenge bhi nahin. :lol:
 
They both go hand in hand. China is no right to claim Territorial Waters if the territory isn't recognized.

So the passage of the Destroyer isn't a concern. Regardless. It can sail up within the 12 miles of China's coast also without hindrance from the Chinese, unless its planning on attacking.

There are specific protocol to innocent passage that I don't think US excursion in the SCS would qualify, ie no radar and helicopter in conducting surveillance etc.

Article 19
Meaning of innocent passage

1. Passage is innocent so long as it is not prejudicial to the peace, good order or security of the coastal State. Such passage shall take place in conformity with this Convention and with other rules of international law.
2. Passage of a foreign ship shall be considered to be prejudicial to the peace, good order or security of the coastal State if in the territorial sea it engages in any of the following activities:

  1. any threat or use of force against the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of the coastal State, or in any other manner in violation of the principles of international law embodied in the Charter of the United Nations;
  2. any exercise or practice with weapons of any kind;
  3. any act aimed at collecting information to the prejudice of the defence or security of the coastal State;
  4. any act of propaganda aimed at affecting the defence or security of the coastal State;
  5. the launching, landing or taking on board of any aircraft;
  6. the launching, landing or taking on board of any military device;
  7. the loading or unloading of any commodity, currency or person contrary to the customs, fiscal, immigration or sanitary laws and regulations of the coastal State;
  8. any act of wilful and serious pollution contrary to this Convention;
  9. any fishing activities;
  10. the carrying out of research or survey activities;
  11. any act aimed at interfering with any systems of communication or any other facilities or installations of the coastal State;
  12. any other activity not having a direct bearing on passage.
Article 21
Laws and regulations of the coastal State relating to innocent passage

1. The coastal State may adopt laws and regulations, in conformity with the provisions of this Convention and other rules of international law, relating to innocent passage through the territorial sea, in respect of all or any of the following:
  1. the safety of navigation and the regulation of maritime traffic;
  2. the protection of navigational aids and facilities and other facilities or installations;
  3. the protection of cables and pipelines;
  4. the conservation of the living resources of the sea;
  5. the prevention of infringement of the fisheries laws and regulations of the coastal State;
  6. the preservation of the environment of the coastal State and the prevention, reduction and control of pollution thereof;
  7. marine scientific research and hydrographic surveys;
  8. the prevention of infringement of the customs, fiscal, immigration or sanitary laws and regulations of the coastal State.
2. Such laws and regulations shall not apply to the design, construction, manning or equipment of foreign ships unless they are giving effect to generally accepted international rules or standards.
3. The coastal State shall give due publicity to all such laws and regulations.
4. Foreign ships exercising the right of innocent passage through the territorial sea shall comply with all such laws and regulations and all generally accepted international regulations relating to the prevention of collisions at sea.
 
Last edited:
You are mistaking China for Japan. That is exactly the Japanese position on the Diaoyu island dispute, whereas China has always maintained that territorial dispute in the South China Sea should be resolved bilaterally.
My understanding is that bilateral talks always start with China explaining the area is Chinese, period, and any other status can't be discussed by China's diplomats. If I'm wrong I'd gladly learn better - please provide links or quote sources, thanks.
 
Its corruption.

Didn't a chinese general named Fan Long Worm say merely days ago that china would not resort to force even if the US went into 12 nm? That is basically opening a green light telling US to go and China promises to stay put. :angry:

I can't believe that one could be that stupid, except some curry munching friends in PDF of course. China' s anti-corruption bureau should investigate this Fan. He must have deposited all his countless silvers with Chase Manhattan in New York.

Either he said that or it was misquoted in English news. I cannot read the Chinese newspaper so other who know this can say if it's mistranslated or he actually said this. If he did say it I am not surprised because if it's a Chinese strategy of keeping a low profile and continue modernization, it's starting to wane.

@cnleio @Martian2 what did the Chinese general say from Chinese sources?
 
My understanding is that bilateral talks always start with China explaining the area is Chinese, period, and any other status can't be discussed by China's diplomats. If I'm wrong I'd gladly learn better - please provide links or quote sources, thanks.

Any bilateral talk will start with reaffirming one's claim from both side, without which you will have no basis to negotiate anything. And realistically speaking, China would want to hold off or delay any negotiation until it is able to resolve its internal dispute with ROC first.
 
Last edited:
Any bilateral talk will start with reaffirming one's claim from both side, without which you will have no basis to negotiate anything.
We're not talking reaffirmation but stuffing cotton in the ears.

...And realistically speaking, China would want to hold off or delay any negotiation until it is able to resolve its internal dispute with ROC first.
That's the first time I've ever heard that excuse and I don't see how it applies, it doesn't affect China's external boundaries and claims at all, does it?
 

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom