Thread: China 'building runway in disputed South China Sea island'

Yes.

But China cannot claim those islands on any of those grounds.

Originally Posted by Latindancer

Yes. But China cannot claim those islands on any of those grounds.

"Yes", to what?

"any of those grounds", what grounds?

Originally Posted by OhOh

There are many countries alleging sovereignty on far away distant lands. Won as the spoils of some battle centuries ago or even just proclaiming, "as there are no Christians here we claim all in the name of our own Christian God".

Yes, the above statement is true. But China is not making its claim on the grounds of the islands being the spoil of a battle long ago, or proclaiming religious rights.

They're just being their pushy, hyperbolic, hypocritical selves.

China plays down Steve Bannon's predictions of war with US

The Chinese foreign minister has taken a swipe at Steve Bannon, Donald Trump’s chief strategist, for predicting China and the US will eventually go to war.

He said any “sober-minded politician” would understand that both sides would lose from such a conflict.

China’s foreign minister, Wang Yi, met the Australian foreign minister, Julie Bishop, in Canberra on Tuesday to discuss trade and security arrangements. In a press conference afterwards, he was asked if he was concerned about a possible war between China and the US, given the Trump administration has signalled it wants to take a stronger and more aggressive stance towards Beijing, and Bannon last year predicted the two nations would go to war over the South China Sea.

It emerged last week that Bannon, during a radio show hosted on the far-right website Breitbart in March 2016, predicted the US would go to war in the South China Sea “in five to 10 years”.

“There’s no doubt about that,” he said. “They’re taking their sandbars and making basically stationary aircraft carriers and putting missiles on those. They come here to the United States in front of our face – and you understand how important face is – and say it’s an ancient territorial sea.”

Wang dismissed concerns of war on Tuesday, saying “irrational statements” had often been made about China-US relations in the last four decades. “But such statements aside, the China-US relationship has defied all kinds of difficulties and has been moving forward continuously,” he said.
Donald Trump's first 100 days as president – daily updates
Read more

“Any sober-minded politician, they clearly recognise that there cannot be conflict between China and the United States because both will lose, and both sides cannot afford that.”

He said what mattered were the comments from the Trump administration, not the comments that members of the administration may have made in the past.

Rex Tillerson, during his confirmation hearing in January to become US secretary of state, said China should be barred from the artificial islands it had built in the South China Sea.

“We’re going to have to send China a clear signal that, first, the island-building stops and, second, your access to those islands also is not going to be allowed,” he said. “They are taking territory or control or declaring control of territories that are not rightfully China’s.”

His comments encouraged the former Australian prime minister Paul Keating to issue a public statement castigating Tillerson for warmongering.

“Tillerson’s claim that China’s control of access to the waters would be a threat to ‘the entire global economy’ is simply ludicrous,” Keating said. “No country would be more badly affected than China if it moved to impede navigation.”

Tillerson was confirmed as secretary of state last week.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...ith-us-wang-yi

The fun thing about this new US administration is you literally don't know what they might be capable of which has got the sneaky chinks backtracking in their previously bellicose rhetoric over the South China Sea.

Originally Posted by OhOh

You don't believe China's "historic" rights are based on some long ago battle victory where the surrender documents mention transfers of ownership of conquered lands and an annual levy to be paid by the inserted "Prince" left running the place?

No !
And why now?
Have the Chinese recovered from some type of Alzheimer disease ?
Will there be anymore historic memory Déjà vus ?


P.S.
do you actually believe the crap you write sometime ?

Originally Posted by HermantheGerman

And why now? Have the Chinese recovered from some type of Alzheimer disease

Some might call it that.

However China has for some time , post WWII, been acknowledged as the sovereign owner of pieces of Asia. Has it been powerful enough to do anything about it, who knows. Now though something has awakened and others have decayed. Is it the time, who knows.

It is some other, far away country, which has taken it upon itself to try and continue promoting it's declining empire. They are the ones who "pivoted" which means a turn in another direction. Unfortunately in their latest attempt at bullying an illegal court to judge in it's favor, what was the worlds reaction.

The all yawned and smiled at the emperor with no clothes tantrum. The empire has lost it's right to govern, it has shown it behavior to the world and the world finds it distasteful.

Morally, financially and military, all the wheels are coming off the cart. It's so obvious when countries are actually telling them so publicly, no more.

IMHO

Originally Posted by Looper

which has got the sneaky chinks backtracking in their previously bellicose rhetoric over the South China Sea.

In your dreams bro. Ameristani "speakers" are daily walking back from the verbal red lines they are shouting to the world.

The Chinese, as they didn't utter any threats, they have no need. Just politely visiting a dying empires vassal and signing a few agreements. You know everyday political things.

gids!

Originally Posted by OhOh

Originally Posted by Looper

The English channel is a narrow strait between 2 countries.

The distances between the partially submerged reefs and more numerous small scattered, islands are what.

I suggest you ask a captain on a super tanker which area is the more dangerous. The well regulated English Channel with it's lights and radar controlled management, or the unlit, uncontrolled risk infected SCS.

Originally Posted by Looper

The south China sea territorial claim is thousands of miles from China

Originally Posted by Latindancer

Furthermore, the Spratleys are way, way down South from China

How far would you agree that a country has to be from one of it's islands or territories prior to it losing its claim 50km, 1000km, ......

There are many countries alleging sovereignty on far away distant lands. Won as the spoils of some battle centuries ago or even just proclaiming, "as there are no Christians here we claim all in the name of our own Christian God".

Or are you being just a tad racist?

There are specific and well-defined rules about this, and China's assertions have been rejected in accordance with those rules. Trying to bring in "other stuff" into it, adds nothing to their case.

Originally Posted by OhOh

Originally Posted by Latindancer

Yes. But China cannot claim those islands on any of those grounds.

"Yes", to what?

"any of those grounds", what grounds?

The way you go on about this you seem like the product of if I raped Jeff and he only had half an abortion.

Originally Posted by CaptainNemo

There are specific and well-defined rules about this, and China's assertions have been rejected in accordance with those rules.

I am aware of the ruling at it's arguments.

They are not leagally able to arrive at a legal verdict. Check out the courts own rules, let alone anyboby elses.

There are 400 posts here there will be a link somewhere. The jonnycome latelys have to do their own research.

Chinese development in Indian Ocean raising concern of possible militarisation among major players

Japan, India, Australia and the United States are closely monitoring China's infrastructure development on the Indian Ocean rim amid increasing concern about the potential for militarisation in the sea lanes which carry much of the world's oil.

One former American intelligence chief is warning the only way to avoid that is to make confrontation unpalatable for China.

With an eye to China's current island reclamation activity in the South China Sea, Japan, which is almost wholly dependent on imported oil, is particularly nervous.

"Yes, China is a kind of threat to us in the South China Sea. Will this Indian Ocean be the same, or different?" asked Nobuo Tanaka, a former Japanese bureaucrat and head of the International Energy Agency.
Before and after: South China Sea

See how China is converting reefs to military facilities by building artificial islands in the South China Sea.

More than 80 per cent of the world's seaborne oil trade passes through three Indian Ocean choke points — the Strait of Hormuz, Strait of Malacca and Bab el-Mandab.

"This area, the Indian Ocean, is so important for us now because it connects our energy sources in the Middle East to Asia and to Japan," Mr Tanaka said at an Indian Ocean security conference in New Delhi this week.

The chair of the Sasakawa Peace Foundation think tank said Japan was worried about a Chinese road, rail and pipeline project from China through central Asia and Pakistan, which culminates at a deep-water port close to Karachi, strategically located near the entrance to the Persian gulf.

"China is trying to develop so-called 'one belt, one road' strategy and they're extending their power projecting their power to this area also," he said.
Shared concern

"The fear is this could become increasingly militarised," said Dhruva Jaishankar, a foreign policy fellow at the Brookings Institute in India.

"The Indian Ocean is already seeing a level of competition that I think we would not have anticipated 10 years ago, we've seen investments by China, Japan, the United States, Singapore, India all across the Indian ocean littoral from Iran to Djibouti, east Africa to South-East Asia.

"I think the Indian Ocean will become a principal focus of security competition in the coming decade or two."

What will the United States do?

The biggest uncertainty is US President Donald Trump.
US President Donald Trump pauses as he talks to journalists.
Photo: Predicting US President Donald Trump's moves is not always easy. (Reuters: Carlos Barria)

White House spokesman Sean Spicer has already signalled President Trump's intention to "defend international territories from being taken over by one country", in reference to potential confrontation in the South China Sea.

The question among policy wonks is whether he will adopt a similar stance in the Indian Ocean.

"I would also urge those of you who are watching the United States to look a little bit below the surface and not to be captured by social media — from whatever source," retired US Admiral and former Director of America's National Intelligence agencies, Dennis Blair, joked at the New Delhi conference.

"Enjoy the spectacle," Admiral Blair said, in reference to President Trump's penchant for conducting foreign policy via Twitter.
Make it 'very high risk' for China

But in support of President Trump's promised military build-up, Admiral Blair also said the only way to deter Chinese aggression was for other countries to ensure that China knew it would lose any confrontation.

"What's really important, I believe, is for India, Japan and the United States to modernise and strengthen our own maritime, air and, where necessary, ground capabilities to improve that military balance in our favour, and therefore make it very high risk for China to undertake military aggression."
Australia's balancing act

Australia's foreign policy establishment is similarly awaiting direction from Washington.

Within Australia's Department of Foreign Affairs, there is also continued debate on the merits of reviving formal four-way security cooperation between Australia, Japan, India and the United States.

Supporters argue it would send an important message about the democracies' shared desire to protect the status quo.
Malcolm Turnbull in China
Photo: Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull and Chinese Premier Li Keqiang in Beijing last year. (Reuters: Jason Lee)

Opponents fear it would be seen as provocative by China.

Former Labor Foreign Minister Stephen Smith withdrew Australia from the Japanese-led initiative in 2007, a move widely seen as a win for Chinese diplomacy.

Professor Rory Medcalf, from the Australian National University's National Security College, said since then, much of the work as continued 'by stealth' under three-way arrangements between Australia, Japan and the US, and the US, Japan and India.

"The four countries are of course being careful about Chinese reactions, but at the same time, none of us wants to allow China to veto the dialogues we have with each other," he said.

Professor Medcalf argues Australia's interests are best served by working with regional powers to urge Chinese restraint, and to keep America engaged.

"Countries like Japan, Australia and India will get together with one voice, to say, on the one hand to China, 'be more stabilising' in the way its using its growing power," Professor Medcalf said.

"But also to send a message to the United States, that we want a forthright and engaged and balanced American presence in the region."

Chinese development in Indian Ocean raising concern of possible militarisation among major players - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

Time to smoke these slinky mofos

^
Have you heard of the biggest and prominent Chinese concentration camp the world as ever seen ?

^No. Please elucidate.

South China Sea: US carrier group begins 'routine' patrols

US aircraft carrier the USS Carl Vinson has started what it calls "routine operations" in the South China Sea, with a fleet of supporting warships.



The deployment comes days after China's foreign ministry warned Washington against challenging Beijing's sovereignty in the region.

China claims several contested shoals, islets and reefs in the area.

It has been constructing artificial islands with airstrips in the South China Sea for a number of years.
Image copyright Reuters
Image caption China has built islands on reefs and, says a think tank, is building military facilities on some

Flying close to Beijing's new islands
Why is the South China Sea contentious?
Images 'show weapons built on islands'

The aircraft carrier was last in the South China Sea two years ago, for exercises with Malaysia's navy and air force and has made 16 voyages to the region in its 35 years of US navy service.

Shortly after US President Donald Trump took office on 20 January, his administration vowed to prevent China from taking territory in the South China Sea.

On Wednesday, Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Geng Shuang said: "We urge the US not to take any actions that challenge China's sovereignty and security."

Trump breaks ice with Chinese leader

South China Sea: US carrier group begins 'routine' patrols - BBC News

Originally Posted by OhOh

Originally Posted by CaptainNemo

There are specific and well-defined rules about this, and China's assertions have been rejected in accordance with those rules.

I am aware of the ruling at it's arguments.

Clearly, you're not.

Originally Posted by OhOh

They are not leagally able to arrive at a legal verdict. Check out the courts own rules, let alone anyboby elses.

Yes they are. Given your poor English I am sceptical that you have either fully read or fully understood any of them; I also doubt you have any legal qualifications.

Originally Posted by OhOh

There are 400 posts here there will be a link somewhere. The jonnycome latelys have to do their own research.

1. You can't spell or structure a sentence properly: "at it's arguments", "leagally", "courts", "anyboby elses", "jonnycome latelys", etc...
2. I work at sea.
3. I am a full member of a professional marine institution.
4. I've passed an official marine law exam and came top of my cohort with 90%.
5. I've been on this thread a while: https://teakdoor.com/world-news/15309...ml#post3210877 (China 'building runway in disputed South China Sea island').
6. I have studied Chinese in China, and passed exams on it (I've also studied Japanese through the medium of Chinese in China, so I can read their shite too).

Frankly, it's quite weird for a westerner to be quite so frothily agitated about arguing the case for Chinese imperialism like this. Why are you doing it? Why do you care? Why are you so obsessively and relentlessly posting pro-PRC drivel here?

Originally Posted by OhOh

Looking at the helpful BBC map one wonders where those high seas are though.It would have to pass through Chinese or Philippine exclusive economic zone/territorial waters.

FFS!

EEZ is not "Territorial Waters", and if you actually ever read UNCLOS you would be familiar with the definition of territorial waters and one of the basic rules about the right of innocent passage.

UNCLOS, Part II, Section2, Article 3: Breadth of the territorial sea

Every State has the right to establish the breadth of its territorial sea up to a limit not exceeding 12 nautical miles

UNCLOS, Part II, Section 3, Article 17: Innocent Passage

Subject to this Convention, ships of all States, whether coastal or land-locked, enjoy the right of innocent passage through the territorial sea.

UNITED NATIONS CONVENTION ON THE LAW OF THE SEA

UNCLOS, Part V: EEZ, Article 55:Specific legal regime of the exclusive economic zone

The exclusive economic zone is an area beyond and adjacent to the territorial sea

PREAMBLE TO THE UNITED NATIONS CONVENTION ON THE LAW OF THE SEA

UNCLOS, Part V: EEZ, Article 57: Breadth of the exclusive economic zone

The exclusive economic zone shall not extend beyond 200 nautical miles

The 9-dash line is about as factual as "Atlantis", "The Bermuda Triangle", and "Here be dragons"... it has no legal standing, and never has.

The Paracels should be owned jointly by Vietnam and China, and the Spratlys by the Philippines and Malaysia.

And Scarborough Shoal exclusively by the Philippines.

I would give Vietnam and Brunei some of the Spratlys too.
Or just keep the ones outside to 200 mile limit British - after all, we named them
I wouldn't give China any of them at all: the Paracels are Vietnamese.

Who owns The Pacific?

...specifically, the Asian rim region.

Originally Posted by thaimeme

the Asian rim region.

Well, if anyone would know about Asian rims....