Filipino maritime expert digs up proof of Manila’s century-long jurisdiction over Scarborough Shoal
Exclusive by Raïssa Robles
A Filipino maritime law expert has dug up a 1916 Philippine Supreme Court decision which shows Manila – not China – has had actual legal and maritime jurisdiction over Scarborough Shoal for at least a century.
In contrast, China imposed its legal jurisdiction over Scarborough Shoal only this week by creating a law-making body to enact laws over Sansha City, which now includes Scarborough Shoal or Huangyan Island. China started imposing its maritime jurisdiction over Huangyan this year when it asserted the rights of its fishermen to fish in and around Huangyan.
Dr. Jay Batongbacal, a University of the Philippines law professor, told me that the lawsuit decided by the Philippines’ top court in 1916 – led by Filipino Chief Justice Cayetano Arellano – “is clear evidence that we were exercising jurisdiction over the shoal and incidents on it during the American colonial period” in the Philippines.”
“This case is proof we are the ones responsible when it comes to shipwrecks on Scarborough,” he said.
Implications to US’ treaty obligations to the Philippines
Dr Batongbacal also presented additional proofs which, to my mind, have far reaching implications. His proofs show that the United States amended the 1898 Treaty of Paris with Spain by negotiating and signing the 1900 Treaty of Washington in order to buy up the “outlying islands” of the Philippines which were not expressly included in the Treaty of Paris. Scarborough Shoal was one of those “outlying islands”.
Dr. Batongbacal did not categorically say it but I personally believe this means the US then considered Scarborough Shoal as part of its Philippine possession. Therefore, when the Philippines and the US signed the Mutual Defense Treaty in 1951, Scarborough Shoal was considered part of the “island territories” that either side had to defend in case of an “armed attack”, but in accordance with each nation’s constitutional processes. This is stated in Article IV of the MDT.
Article V of the MDT then defines what would prompt one side into coming to the aid of the other. It states:
For purposes of ARTICLE IV, an armed attack on either of the Parties is deemed to include an armed attack on the metropolitan territory of either of the Parties, or on the island territories under its jurisdiction in the Pacific Ocean, its armed forces, public vessels or aircraft in the Pacific.
Hmmm. Did I just read this right? The MDT even includes “an armed attack on…its (the Philippines or US) armed forces, public vessels or aircraft in the Pacific.” I’ll leave this section to the envoys of both sides to clarify this.
The Mutual Defense Treaty can be accessed here.
This piece will be about the findings of UP College of Law professor Jay Batongbacal, who was among those who helped the country firm up its claim on Benham Rise in the East Philippine Sea.
Dr. Batongbacal is the first academic I have heard who has squarely challenged China‘s historical claims over Scarborough Shoal. He holds a Master of Marine Management degree and a doctorate in the Science of Law from Dalhousie University, Canada.
China’s ancient claim to Scarborough Shoal (Huangyan Island)
China dates its claim over Scarborough and Spratlys (which it calls Nansha Islands) as far back as 1279 during the Yuan dynasty, when it said Chinese astronomer Guo Shoujing surveyed the South China Sea and reportedly used Scarborough shoal as the surveying point. [Interestingly, however, he never gave Scarborough a Chinese name, whereas other islands were later given Chinese names such as Ma-i or Ma-yi – an island group which included Mindoro – and Liu-sung for Luzon.]
Still, who can quarrel with China’s seemingly detailed proof that points to a scientist as the source?
Well, Prof. Batongbacal just did in a public lecture entitled “The Philippine Security Interests in Panatag Shoal” which he delivered Tuesday last week at the UP College of Law auditorium. [The Philippine government now refers to Scarborough as Panatag.]
Prof. Batongbacal pointed out the historical context of China’s 1279 claim:
At that time, China was part of the great Mongol empire. Going by the implied logic, Huangyan Island should rightfully belong to Mongolia.
He also noted that China has to this day not produced for public scrutiny the 1279 map on which it bases it historical claim. During his public lecture last Tuesday, Dr. Batongbacal showed a copy of a map dating back to the Yuan Dynasty and noted that: “This Yuan dynasty map cannot even properly place Luzon and Mindanao islands.”
Filipino academic refutes China’s jurisdiction claim over Scarborough
I find it interesting to see that there is a gap of 656 years between China’s 1279 record and its more recent mentions of Scarborough in official records.
It is only in 1935 when Chinese official records state that the shoal – which it mentions by its popular western name “Scarborough Shoal” – was part of its “Zhongsha Islands”. It is only in 1947 that China baptized the shoal with its first Chinese name – Minzhu Jiao or Democracy Reef.
Recently, the Chinese Embassy in Manila released the following arguments why Scarborough Shoal does NOT belong to the Philippines. Chinese Embassy spokesman Hua Zhang said:
The Philippine territory is set by a series of international treaties, including the Treaty of Paris(1898), The Treaty of Washington(1900) and the Treaty with Great Britain (1930), none of which ever referred to Huangyan Island or included this island into its territory. Until 1997, the Philippine side has never disputed China’s jurisdiction of and development on Huangyan Island.
No one contradicted this, that is, until Prof. Batongbacal said in his lecture last week that “Bajo de Masinloc is considered as having been ceded to the United States by Spain” through the Treaty of Washington in the 1900.
I learned in school about the Treaty of Paris in 1898 which sold the Philippine Islands and our ancestors, together with the islands and natives of Cuba, Puerto Rico and Guam for the sum of US$20 million. (Why, if you just consider this amount without converting it to today’s prices, many of our lawmakers have the money to buy up the same assets.)
In any case, I don’t recall studying about the Treaty of Washington of 1900. It was my first time to see its wording when Prof. Batongbacal flashed it on a giant screen.
Remember, the Chinese Embassy said the Treaty of Washington is one of the proofs showing Scarborough Shoal is not within Philippine territory. But what the actual words of the treaty say contradict the Chinese Embassy’s statement. The very title of the treaty says it all – Treaty between Spain and the United State for Cession of Outlying Islands of the Philippines.
“Outlying Islands” mean outside the area delineated by the Treaty of Paris in 1898, Prof. Batongbacal said.
The Treaty of Washington has only one section and it says:
Spain relinquishes to the United States all title and claim of title; which she may have had at the time of the conclusion of the Treaty of Peace of Paris, to any and all islands belonging to the Philippine Archipelago, lying outside the lines described in Article III of that Treaty and particularly to the islands of Cagayan Sulu and Sibutu and their dependencies, and agrees that all such islands shall be comprehended in the cession of the Archipelago as fully as if they had been expressly included within those lines. [Underlining mine.]
For this, the US paid Spain an additional US$100,000.
Scarborough Shoal is not mentioned by name here, Chinese officials are bound to say.
Prof. Batongbacal has this answer:
Bajo de Masinloc (the name given to Scarborough Shoal by Spanish and European maps) is in the first official American map of the Philippine Islands issued in 1900 by the US Bureau of Coast and Geodetic Surveys.
He noted that this map had been criticized for including the islands of Borneo and the southern tip of Taiwan (then named Formosa). “But notice the very clear difference in the coloring” of Borneo and Taiwan to that of the Philippine islands, he said. What he meant was that the map maker merely included the two other islands as reference points.
As further proof that Scarborough Shoal was among those islands ceded by Spain to the US under the Treaty of Washington in 1900, Dr. Batongbacal unearthed a court ruling around that period and said,
At that time of the signing (of the Treaty of Washington), Bajo de Masinloc was always under the direct control of the the Philippine (colonial) government primarily for purposes of safety of navigation.
Those who say that occupation is the best proof of ownership have not seen how tiny that shoal is. A defense analyst who has physically seen it told me in a separate interview that the rocky outcrop at low tide could probably accommodate up to 20 people packed tightly, standing up. In other words, it’s not livable unless you build a structure on stilts on it. No one has ever lived there.
Before the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Seas (UNCLOS) was drawn up in the 1970s, the only reason why Scarborough Shoal was well known was because it was a navigational hazard. In fact it got its internationally known name – Scarborough Shoal – from a British tea trade ship with that name that was wrecked there in the late 1700s.
Scarborough Shoal entered Philippine jurisprudence in 1916 when the Philippine Supreme Court decided a case involving a shipwreck there. The shipwreck predates China’s 1935 claim.
I asked Dr. Batongbacal if it was correct to conclude that if China claimed jurisdiction over Scarborough Shoal for over six centuries, it should have had some sort of agency in the 1900s that would have been in charge of rescuing shipwrecked survivors and of keeping count of the shipwrecks there.
Dr. Batongbacal replied to me:
China would have had one agency responsible for whatever happens there, including shipwrecks. This case is proof we are the ones responsible when it comes to shipwrecks on Scarborough.
And the fact that a lawsuit involving a foreign vessel was brought before and decided by a Philippine court led by a Philippine judge shows that foreigners recognized that the Philippines had legal jurisdiction over incidents on Scarborough Shoal for nearly a century.
Isn’t this argument for claiming Philippine jurisdiction far stronger than making Scarborough Shoal a reference point for a survey map of the South China Sea drawn in 1279 that probably looks like the map below? Prof. Batongbacal said this is a copy of a Yuan dynasty map.
For those who want to read all about the shipwreck, below is a summary of the case. And a link to the actual SC decision.
The shipwreck
Example of a shipwreck
On May 7, 1913, the Swedish steamship Nippon, laden with copra (dried coconut meat), camphor and curios, sailed from Manila to Singapore. The weather turned bad. The next day Nippon “went aground on Scarborough Reef about 4:30 in the afternoon of May 8, 1913,” the SC decision issued in 1916 noted.
The crew waited a day to see if the rising tide would free the vessel. When it did not, its chief officer Weston, with nine men, rowed the two remaining boats back in the general direction of Luzon island. [What now takes a mere five hours by fast boat took Weston’s crew three days to reach Santa Cruz, Zambales.]
In Santa Cruz, Weston send this telegram to Manila to a Mr. Helm, the Director of the Bureau of Navigation:
SANTA CRUZ, ZAMBALES,
May 12, 1913.
DIRECTOR OF BUREAU OF NAVIGATION, Manila
Nippon stranded on Scarborough Reef, wants immediate assistance for saving crew – boats gone. 12.15 p. m.
(Sgd.) WESTON.An hour later, according to the Supreme Court, “the Government of the Philippine Islands ordered the Coast Guard cutter Mindoro with life-saving appliances to the scene of the wreck of the Nippon.”
The bureau also asked the steamship Manchuria, then about to sail from Manila to Hong Kong, to pass by Scarborough Reef. Manchuria arrived first at the wreck and the captain of the wrecked ship, Eggert, decided that he and the remaining crew would board Manchuria. Just then the Philippine coast guard cutter Mindoro arrived and offered to take the men and their baggage back to Manila. Still, Captain Eggert told Coast Guard Captain Anderson he preferred to go to Hong Kong to contact “my owners’ agents” and arrange for salvage operations with “the Tykoo dockyard people (and) the Hongkong dockyard people.” But Captain Eggert asked the coast guard captain to bring the rest of their baggage back to Manila.
Coast Guard Captain Anderson testified before a lower Philippine court that he sailed to the shipwreck a second time on May 14 and reached there on May 15:
I examined Nippon more fully and I believe that if the cargo is taken out the ship can be saved after the holes are patched up, if this is done before the heavy weather sets in.
It is unclear from court records whether it was Captain Anderson who contacted the salvage operator or the other way around. In any case, the SC decision states that the salvage operator, Erlanger & Galinger, “chartered” the Coast Guard Cutter Mindoro’s second return to S. S. Nippon. Under international maritime law at that time, salvage operators were free to go to any abandoned shipwreck, offload any cargo on board, tow the ship back to port if possible, and sell off the salvaged goods.
The court decision noted that:
The plaintiffs [Erlanger & Galinger] took possession of the Nippon on or about May 17, 1913, and continued in possession until about the 1st of July, when the last of the cargo was shipped to Manila…The Nippon was floated and towed to Olongapo, where temporary repairs were made, and then brought to Manila.
Meanwhile, as soon as Captain Eggert arrived in Hong Kong on May 14, he sent the following cablegram to the ship owner:
Nippon wrecked during typhoon eight May Scarborough Shoal latitude 15 longitude 118 probably total wreck bottom seriously damaged ship full of water chief officer and nine men took to boat for rescue landed twelfth Luzon mailsteamer Manchuria saved captain and remaining crew morning thirteenth. Arrived Hongkong tonight. Wreck on edge of reef, will probably slip off and sink by first gale captain arranging to visit wreck and attempt salvage.who arrived there
His cablegram showed his pessimism at recovering the ship.
However, later, when Nippon’s ship owner learned that a “salvor” had actually managed to recover the ship and the goods in it, the owner refused to pay the salvor the recovery costs. It was the salvor – Erlanger & Galinger – that brought the lawsuit against the cargo insurers and the ship owner after it felt it did not get enough compensation for its “perilous” service. The Supreme Court led by SC Chief Justice Arrellano decided in the salvor’s favor.
In the course of the trial, two expert witnesses were presented by the plaintiff. One of them named Captain Robinson was asked whether he “would have gone to Hong Kong and used Hongkong men and material and made Hongkong your base on operations” if he had been the salvor.
Robinson replied:
Certainly not. I would have made Manila my base, which I always have done.
A second expert witness – a stevedore named Lebreton – also testified that:
…he would have gotten some of his materials from Hongkong but that he would have freighted the salved cargo to Manila. All other things being equal, the fact that Hongkong is forty sailing hours from Scarborough Reef while Manila is less than twenty-four sailing hours would make Manila by far the more logical base.
Here’s the link to the actual SC decision that shows the Philippines’ jurisdictional claim on Scarborough over that of China.
Here’s the link where you can download a copy of the Treaty of Washington. Just click on Reference No. 32
Mel says
wyl5326 says
It is very obvious that Cambodia realized the mistake of their own envoy and probably wanted to end the problem quickly to recall him and avoid more damage ! Let it be and what we should be prepared was the other shoe that may be dropped later if it decides not to send a replacement soon and hinders whatever tenuous relations we have with them ! Talking too much is sometimes only going to invite more problems and maybe better to zipped up for now !
[email protected] says
The US should not bend and accommodate Red China in its bullying policy. Hitler was accommodated by Western Powers which eventually led to WW2.
Xinhua Beijing, August 4 (reporter Bai Jie)
Foreign Ministry spokesman Qin Gang on the 4th of China’s solemn stance clear statement on the U.S. State Department issued the so-called South China Sea issue.
Qin Gang said, August 3rd, the U.S. State Department issued a so-called statement on the South China Sea issue, ignore the facts and confuse right and wrong, has issued a serious error signal, the efforts to maintain peace and stability in the South China Sea and the Asia Pacific region will not help the parties concerned. The Chinese side expresses its strong dissatisfaction and resolute opposition.
Qin Gang said that China has indisputable sovereignty over the South China Sea islands and their adjacent waters, the historical facts in this regard is clear. Moreover, in 1959 on the establishment under the Guangdong Province, west, south, sand Islands Office, the administrative jurisdiction of the Xisha, sand and the reefs of Nansha Islands and its waters. The establishment of three Shashi is necessary to adjust the existing jurisdiction of the local administration institutions is a matter within China’s sovereignty.
He said, should be noted that more than 20 years, the joint efforts of China and relevant countries in the region, to maintain peace and stability in the South China Sea, the freedom of navigation and the normal trade are fully protected. In 2002, China and ASEAN countries signed the “Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea”. The Declaration clearly stipulates that directly related to the sovereignty of countries through friendly consultations and negotiations to resolve their territorial and jurisdictional disputes by peaceful means, and promise not to dispute would complicate or escalate action. Worrying yes, individual countries do not respect the non-compliance with the “Declaration”, a provocative manner again and again three to damage the principles and spirit of the Declaration, but also to discuss the South China Sea Code of Conduct “manufacturing difficult. Therefore, China is open-minded, while the South China Sea Code of Conduct “with ASEAN countries to discuss and advocate the parties to strictly abide by the Declaration, and that to discuss the guidelines to create the necessary conditions and atmosphere.
Qin Gang said that the U.S. side on China’s normal, reasonable move groundless accusations can not but question the intent of the U.S. Why are some countries in the South China Sea to draw a large number of oil and gas blocks, the introduction of the reefs and waters of China’s program to turn a blind eye to the existing domestic legislation, and why some countries have dispatched warships to threaten Chinese fishermen on the controversial Chinese reefs unreasonable claim of sovereignty to avoid discussing it, but then the Chinese response to these provocative acts of reasonable and appropriate response to proposed groundless accusations? Why in the countries concerned to strengthen dialogue and communication efforts to resolve contradictions, to calm the situation on the occasion unexpected voice, fiddle with the non-? This selective blindness and sound contrary to their claims dispute “does not hold position”, “does not get involved” attitude is not conducive to unity and cooperation and peace and stability of the countries in the region.
He said the current global economic downturn and turmoil in some countries in the region, the Asia-Pacific is relatively stable and the most dynamic regions, is also an important support world economic recovery. The United States should follow the trend of the times, respect the countries in the region to seek peace, stability, and promoting the development of a universal aspiration and the consensus, respect China’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, and do more things conducive to the Asia-Pacific stability and prosperity, rather than vice versa.
Qin Gang said China dialogue relations with ASEAN over 20 years, the largest FTA among developing countries to jointly respond to the challenges of the Asian financial crisis, the international financial crisis and major natural disasters, and comprehensively promote cooperation in various fields. China attaches importance to friendly relations and cooperation with ASEAN and support the ASEAN integration process and to support ASEAN’s leading role in East Asian cooperation, ready to work with ASEAN to work together to eliminate interference, and to further promote the bilateral strategic partnership forward.
Beijing, Xinhua, August 5 (Ming Wu) U.S. State Department recently issued a so-called statement on the South China Sea issue, ignore the facts and confuse right and wrong, make irresponsible remarks on the matter within the scope of China’s sovereignty and interference in China’s internal affairs, sent to the outside world serious error signal, which is not conducive to regional peace and stability in the South China Sea and the Asia-Pacific.
As we all know, China has indisputable sovereignty over the South China Sea islands and their adjacent waters. As early as 1959, China set up under the Guangdong Province, west, south, sand Islands Office, the administrative jurisdiction of the Xisha, sand and the reefs of Nansha Islands and its waters.
Today, the establishment of level three Shashi these three Islands of the islands and waters of the administrative system to adjust and improve. People familiar with the situation of China all know, set up in the prefecture-level city garrison is standard practice in China, set up three sand garrison is no exception. Set up offices in China in its own territory on the right and proper, the United States are not eligible to pick nose horizontal to vertical hypercritical.
Since Sansha established as a city, the U.S. government and some politicians on this series of improper comments, and grossly interfered in China’s internal affairs. These moves is the same strain with the United States to return to the Asia-Pacific strategy.
Originally, the South China Sea is very calm. As early as 2002, China and South China Sea countries signed the “Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea sovereignty over the South China Sea islands and reefs of differences in accordance with established track directly related to the sovereignty of countries through bilateral friendly consultations, the peaceful settlement of. However, the U.S. announced a high profile return to Asia-Pacific since its repeatedly demonstrated “interest” involved in the South China Sea issue, and suddenly this calm sea of simmering, high wind and waves.
From two years ago, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s remarks on the South China Sea since the United States in recent years in this region dense introduced a series of tendentious initiatives. This year, the U.S. military claims will shift its strategic focus to the Asia-Pacific region, the warships number from 2020, the U.S. Navy will be deployed in the Pacific accounted for 50% of the total number to 60%.
Today, the United States in the South China Sea issue again to the outside world a serious error signal, ulterior motive.
On the surface, the South China Sea islands dispute adopt a “holding position” does not get involved “attitude; from practice selective favoritism and connivance of some countries, a serious violation of China’s territorial sovereignty. The United States in the South China Sea issue on the spoiler, and also an attempt to drive a wedge between the South China Sea some neighboring countries and China relations. Obviously, this is not conducive to resolve the problem, is not conducive to unity and cooperation and peace and stability of the countries in the region.
Historical experience shows that when the territory or territorial disputes between states, the intervention of foreign forces often have a negative impact to the countries concerned. Historically, the western powers to provoke other countries into discord and strife, planted the seeds of regional tensions, and then in order to “arbitrator”, the identity of the “balance” to intervene to seek to maximize their own interests. Today, people in the United States who saw a similar trick.
United States and China are the world’s first and second-largest economy, China-US relations is not a zero-sum game. Especially in the global economic downturn and turmoil in some countries, the Asia-Pacific is both relatively stable and the most dynamic regions, is an important pillar of the world economic recovery. The United States has the responsibility to take active steps to maintain stability and prosperity in the Asia-Pacific region, not to create tension in the region. Therefore, we advise Washington not to recurrence of the error signal in the South China Sea issue, completely to abandon the attempt to take advantage of the chaos, so that the return to the South China Sea a sea of peace, a sea of friendship, cooperation, sea.
Mel says
[email protected] says
The following are pronouncements from Chinese media. A reading of Chinese intent clearly shows a resemblance to Hitler’s policies when it was flexing its muscles, i.e., do not interfere because we are merely exercising our rights. As history tells us, the Western Powers accommodated Hitler which emboldened Nazi Germany to invade and swallow Poland. And the rest is history.
WE MUST COOPERATE WITH THE US IN ITS ATTEMPT TO HELP THE PHILIPPINES STEM THE CHINESE RED MENACE IN THE SOUTH CHINA SEA!
Xinhua Beijing, August 4 (reporter Bai Jie)
Foreign Ministry spokesman Qin Gang on the 4th of China’s solemn stance clear statement on the U.S. State Department issued the so-called South China Sea issue.
Qin Gang said, August 3rd, the U.S. State Department issued a so-called statement on the South China Sea issue, ignore the facts and confuse right and wrong, has issued a serious error signal, the efforts to maintain peace and stability in the South China Sea and the Asia Pacific region will not help the parties concerned. The Chinese side expresses its strong dissatisfaction and resolute opposition.
Qin Gang said that China has indisputable sovereignty over the South China Sea islands and their adjacent waters, the historical facts in this regard is clear. Moreover, in 1959 on the establishment under the Guangdong Province, west, south, sand Islands Office, the administrative jurisdiction of the Xisha, sand and the reefs of Nansha Islands and its waters. The establishment of three Shashi is necessary to adjust the existing jurisdiction of the local administration institutions is a matter within China’s sovereignty.
He said, should be noted that more than 20 years, the joint efforts of China and relevant countries in the region, to maintain peace and stability in the South China Sea, the freedom of navigation and the normal trade are fully protected. In 2002, China and ASEAN countries signed the “Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea”. The Declaration clearly stipulates that directly related to the sovereignty of countries through friendly consultations and negotiations to resolve their territorial and jurisdictional disputes by peaceful means, and promise not to dispute would complicate or escalate action. Worrying yes, individual countries do not respect the non-compliance with the “Declaration”, a provocative manner again and again three to damage the principles and spirit of the Declaration, but also to discuss the South China Sea Code of Conduct “manufacturing difficult. Therefore, China is open-minded, while the South China Sea Code of Conduct “with ASEAN countries to discuss and advocate the parties to strictly abide by the Declaration, and that to discuss the guidelines to create the necessary conditions and atmosphere.
Qin Gang said that the U.S. side on China’s normal, reasonable move groundless accusations can not but question the intent of the U.S. Why are some countries in the South China Sea to draw a large number of oil and gas blocks, the introduction of the reefs and waters of China’s program to turn a blind eye to the existing domestic legislation, and why some countries have dispatched warships to threaten Chinese fishermen on the controversial Chinese reefs unreasonable claim of sovereignty to avoid discussing it, but then the Chinese response to these provocative acts of reasonable and appropriate response to proposed groundless accusations? Why in the countries concerned to strengthen dialogue and communication efforts to resolve contradictions, to calm the situation on the occasion unexpected voice, fiddle with the non-? This selective blindness and sound contrary to their claims dispute “does not hold position”, “does not get involved” attitude is not conducive to unity and cooperation and peace and stability of the countries in the region.
He said the current global economic downturn and turmoil in some countries in the region, the Asia-Pacific is relatively stable and the most dynamic regions, is also an important support world economic recovery. The United States should follow the trend of the times, respect the countries in the region to seek peace, stability, and promoting the development of a universal aspiration and the consensus, respect China’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, and do more things conducive to the Asia-Pacific stability and prosperity, rather than vice versa.
Qin Gang said China dialogue relations with ASEAN over 20 years, the largest FTA among developing countries to jointly respond to the challenges of the Asian financial crisis, the international financial crisis and major natural disasters, and comprehensively promote cooperation in various fields. China attaches importance to friendly relations and cooperation with ASEAN and support the ASEAN integration process and to support ASEAN’s leading role in East Asian cooperation, ready to work with ASEAN to work together to eliminate interference, and to further promote the bilateral strategic partnership forward.
Beijing, Xinhua, August 5 (Ming Wu) U.S. State Department recently issued a so-called statement on the South China Sea issue, ignore the facts and confuse right and wrong, make irresponsible remarks on the matter within the scope of China’s sovereignty and interference in China’s internal affairs, sent to the outside world serious error signal, which is not conducive to regional peace and stability in the South China Sea and the Asia-Pacific.
As we all know, China has indisputable sovereignty over the South China Sea islands and their adjacent waters. As early as 1959, China set up under the Guangdong Province, west, south, sand Islands Office, the administrative jurisdiction of the Xisha, sand and the reefs of Nansha Islands and its waters.
Today, the establishment of level three Shashi these three Islands of the islands and waters of the administrative system to adjust and improve. People familiar with the situation of China all know, set up in the prefecture-level city garrison is standard practice in China, set up three sand garrison is no exception. Set up offices in China in its own territory on the right and proper, the United States are not eligible to pick nose horizontal to vertical hypercritical.
Since Sansha established as a city, the U.S. government and some politicians on this series of improper comments, and grossly interfered in China’s internal affairs. These moves is the same strain with the United States to return to the Asia-Pacific strategy.
Originally, the South China Sea is very calm. As early as 2002, China and South China Sea countries signed the “Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea sovereignty over the South China Sea islands and reefs of differences in accordance with established track directly related to the sovereignty of countries through bilateral friendly consultations, the peaceful settlement of. However, the U.S. announced a high profile return to Asia-Pacific since its repeatedly demonstrated “interest” involved in the South China Sea issue, and suddenly this calm sea of simmering, high wind and waves.
From two years ago, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s remarks on the South China Sea since the United States in recent years in this region dense introduced a series of tendentious initiatives. This year, the U.S. military claims will shift its strategic focus to the Asia-Pacific region, the warships number from 2020, the U.S. Navy will be deployed in the Pacific accounted for 50% of the total number to 60%.
Today, the United States in the South China Sea issue again to the outside world a serious error signal, ulterior motive.
On the surface, the South China Sea islands dispute adopt a “holding position” does not get involved “attitude; from practice selective favoritism and connivance of some countries, a serious violation of China’s territorial sovereignty. The United States in the South China Sea issue on the spoiler, and also an attempt to drive a wedge between the South China Sea some neighboring countries and China relations. Obviously, this is not conducive to resolve the problem, is not conducive to unity and cooperation and peace and stability of the countries in the region.
Historical experience shows that when the territory or territorial disputes between states, the intervention of foreign forces often have a negative impact to the countries concerned. Historically, the western powers to provoke other countries into discord and strife, planted the seeds of regional tensions, and then in order to “arbitrator”, the identity of the “balance” to intervene to seek to maximize their own interests. Today, people in the United States who saw a similar trick.
United States and China are the world’s first and second-largest economy, China-US relations is not a zero-sum game. Especially in the global economic downturn and turmoil in some countries, the Asia-Pacific is both relatively stable and the most dynamic regions, is an important pillar of the world economic recovery. The United States has the responsibility to take active steps to maintain stability and prosperity in the Asia-Pacific region, not to create tension in the region. Therefore, we advise Washington not to recurrence of the error signal in the South China Sea issue, completely to abandon the attempt to take advantage of the chaos, so that the return to the South China Sea a sea of peace, a sea of friendship, cooperation, sea.
[email protected] says
Just another Chinese lie
China voices support for ASEAN’s community building
China will continue to support the community building of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), a Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman said Monday.
Commenting on the recent ASEAN foreign ministers’ meetings in Cambodia, Hong Lei said the meetings have yielded positive results, which show these countries’ willingness to strengthen regional cooperation and achieve common development.
Although a joint statement was not produced, ASEAN members have reached profound agreement on accelerating their community building, said Hong.
The spokesman also said China will comprehensively promote pragmatic cooperation with the ASEAN in various fields to benefit each other.
[source:China.org.cn]
[email protected] says
And another lie
http://www.ebeijing.gov.cn/BeijingInformation/BeijingNewsUpdate/t1233318.htm
[email protected] says
And another lie
U.S. intervention not conducive to Asia-Pacific stability
Hillary Clinton’s whirlwind tour of China’s neighbors as part of the U.S. pivot to Asia strategy has made waves again in the South China Sea. The “strategic pressure” is not conducive to Asia’s development or U.S. long-term interests.
The U.S. secretary of state’s Asia trip, which took her to Afghanistan, Japan, Mongolia, Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia, was nothing but an apparent “diplomatic encirclement.”
Though wary of overtly irking China, Clinton further meddled in the South China Sea issue by repeatedly highlighting America’s interests there and openly supporting individual ASEAN members’ scheme to complicate the maritime dispute.
Clinton also extended her hand to the East China Sea, clearly recognizing during the visit to Japan that the Diaoyu Islands fell within the scope of the 1960 Japan-U.S. security treaty, though Washington does not take a position on the ultimate sovereignty of the islets.
Many facts have proved that major changes have taken place in regard to the South China Sea since Washington made a military and economic “pivot” toward Asia, a strategy many interpret as a bid to counteract China’s influence in the region.
In the past decades, there has been mainly a lull in the South China Sea issue, as China and other claimant states sought solutions based on bilateral friendly negotiations.
However, at the ASEAN foreign ministers’ meeting two years ago, Clinton announced Washington had a “national interest” in the South China Sea and would return to Asia. Since then, tensions have been simmering below the surface.
In particular, China’s maritime territorial sovereignty has been severely infringed this year, with the Philippines laying claims to Huangyan Island, Japan’s farce in attempting to buy the Diaoyu Islands and Vietnam’s enactment of a law asserting sovereignty over the Xisha Islands and Nansha Islands.
The United States claims it does not take a position on the one hand and intensively takes one-sided actions on the other.
Since the dispute over Huangyan Island between Beijing and Manila flared up in April, Washington not only held joint military drills with the Filipinos, but also sold two Hamilton-class warships to them.
Last month, U.S. Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta announced a shift of deployment of the U.S. Navy from its current 50-50 split between the Pacific and the Atlantic to 60-40 by 2020.
As the Chinese saying goes, “the tree craves calm but the wind keeps blowing.” Though China always exercises restraint and insists on diplomatic solutions to the disputes, some countries keep challenging China, which certainly has something to do with U.S. re-engagement in the region.
President Barack Obama’s strategy to focus U.S. foreign policy more intensely on the Asia-Pacific after a decade of wars in Iraq and Afghanistan is welcome, as long as it is beneficial to the peace, stability and prosperity of the region. However, what the strategic shift has brought in the past two years is evidently contrary to regional stability.
Washington must understand that returning to Asia by way of militarily flexing its muscle, and diplomatically intervening in bilateral disputes is wrong and short-sighted. It is wrong because it is favoring confrontation instead of cooperation, which does not contribute to Asia’s development and also goes against U.S. long-term interests.
Americans should do more to promote regional and win-win cooperation rather than mess up peace and development in the Asia-Pacific region.
[source:China.org.cn]
[email protected] says
Another lie
China delegates stress peace at ASEAN meeting
China does not want the efforts and progress of maintaining peace and safety in the South China Sea to be disturbed, a Foreign Ministry spokesman said in Beijing on Tuesday, amid the ongoing 19th ASEAN Regional Forum and related meetings during which the issue was put on the table.
“China has always supported the building of the ASEAN community … We hope the foreign ministers’ meeting at the ASEAN Regional Forum can produce positive outcomes,” Liu said at a daily news briefing.
Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi, who is in Cambodia to attend the meeting, met Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen on Tuesday.
Yang thanked Cambodia for its support for China on issues related to China’s core interests and said safeguarding peace and promoting development are the top concerns of all countries in the region.
Senior officials from 18 members of the East Asia Summit gathered at the Peace Palace on Tuesday to discuss cooperation mechanisms and exchange views on various issues, according to a press release from Cambodia’s Foreign Ministry.
It was attended by senior officials from the 10-nation Association of Southeast Asian Nations – Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam – and its eight dialogue partners, including China, the United States and India.
Senior officials from China and Southeast Asian countries met in Phnom Penh earlier on Sunday. At the meeting, attended by Deputy Foreign Minister Fu Ying, the participants from China and the ASEAN nations underlined their commitment to the continued implementation of a declaration over the South China Sea reached in 2002.
They agreed to carry out “the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea” in a comprehensive and effective manner with the purpose of upholding peace and stability.
The Chinese and ASEAN officials also held informal discussions on how to jointly formulate a code of conduct in the South China Sea.
China is willing to discuss the code of conduct with the ASEAN countries when conditions mature. “But I want to stress that it is not aimed at resolving disputes, but aimed at building mutual trust and deepening cooperation,” Liu said earlier.
Luo Yongkun, an expert on Southeast Asian studies at China Institutes of Contemporary International Relations in Beijing, said discussing the South China Sea issue at the ASEAN meetings is not appropriate.
“It is an issue between China and some ASEAN countries rather than between China and ASEAN. It will only make the issue even more complicated if more unaffected countries get involved,” he said on Tuesday.
“In fact, there are many more important topics than the South China Sea dispute for ASEAN. To build an ASEAN community by 2015 is the prime task for all ASEAN members,” he said.
“In other words, development should be on top of the agenda at the moment.”
[source:china daily]
[email protected] says
Another lie
http://www.ebeijing.gov.cn/BeijingInformation/BeijingNewsUpdate/t1230948.htm
bright says
Can we get bright minds in dealing with this issue? We need academics in this.
Cesar Evangelista says
“You can be sure of succeeding in your attacks if you only attack places which are undefended.”
This is the philosophy Communist China is now employing on its aggression against the Philippines. It is one of Sun Tsu’s principles in the Art of War. Of course Communist leaders, who never forget their past history, especially those where they learned them the hard way, have long prepared and laid the foundations for these current events by weakening the will of Filipinos.
For instance, how do you explain the proliferation of Chinese shabu laboratories right in the heart of the Philippines? The Chinese learned that tactic during the opium wars except that at that time they were the recipients of such malevolent tactic. We all know that the opium wars eventually bled the Chinese economy and eventually led to the collapse of the Manchu dynasty.
Expect the Chinese to exercise their aggression on undefended parts of our territory where our ineffective navy or coast guard could hardly reach or at those parts which could be easily overwhelmed. That is what they are doing even as I write this reaction.
Back at their home in China, their media had been bombarding their people with all the justifications for their blatant bullying tactics even boldly declaring that the whole South China Sea belongs to China. That may be a preposterous claim but then again, a lie repeated a million times will be believed as TRUTH!
Also, the Chinese “intervention” during the recent ASEAN meeting where no common protocol against China was adopted only goes to show another tactic – divide and rule – a policy the British know only too well.
But despite our “weak” position, the Philippines will still prevail. 1) The Chinese are committing the same mistakes that Hitler’s propagandists had committed – LYING TO THEIR OWN PEOPLE. 2) The bully almost always unites the weak against it and that is exactly what we must hope for, not only amongst us Filipinos but also amongst all Southeast Asian countries and those smaller states that shares its borders with China. International outrage at Chinese aggression will eventually topple Communist China. Just like in EDSA during which we toppled a dictatorship, we can replicate the feat by causing the downfall of Communist China. 3) The Filipinos will rethink that aside from hoping for Uncle Sam’s help, we must first and foremost strengthen our will and resources to protect our sovereignty and our dignity as a Filipino race. 4) If we shun Chinese-made goods, it will force Filipinos to be more and more resourceful and more and more creative which in the end, with or without Chinese bullying, will inevitably improve our economic integrity. The list of benefits goes on and on but we must take the first step!
wyl5326 says
Your narration of facts is indisputable and the best way to counter them was to exposed their bully tactics to shame them. China has a long history and hates bullies too, so we can turn them around by exposing them as behaving like bullies too. We just have to rely on facts to do so without armed provocations that could led to retaliations.
[email protected] says
This is how Chinese media reports lies to its people –
Philippines urged to make efforts to ease tensions
China urged on Tuesday the Philippines to make more helpful efforts to ease tensions over Huangyan Island and promote bilateral ties between the two nations.
“We are all clear about the Huangyan Island incident,” Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei said in response to a question on Philippine President Benigno Aquino’s latest remarks on the incident, adding that the United Nations Convention of the Law of the Sea does not serve as evidence to judge to whom Huangyan Island belongs, and cannot change the fact that the island is an inherent part of China.
China claims a Philippine warship harassed 12 Chinese fishing vessels on April 10 that had sailed near Huangyan Island to seek shelter from bad weather, triggering a months-long standoff near the island.
“While the Chinese side is firm with the stance of safeguarding our territorial sovereignty, we have always been committed to resolving the issue through bilateral consultations,” Hong said.
In his annual “state of the nation” address to parliament on Monday, Aquino asked the Chinese side to respect the Philippines'”rights” as he talked about the Huangyan Island incident.
Hong said tensions over Huangyan Island had generally eased recently.
“We hope that the Philippine side will make more efforts that are helpful to ease tensions over Huangyan Island and to advance the healthy development of the bilateral ties between the two nations,” he added.
[source:china daily]
duquemarino says
@CPMers
We have won the east (Benham Rise), we can win the west (Spratly and Scarborough Shoal).
“Benham Rise: How the shelf was won”
http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/-depth/07/28/12/benham-rise-how-shelf-was-won
leona says
I did not read the whole of this article yet…but just to remind everybody…if China does not even want to or recognize any UN Body to interfere or mediate the issue, why would China honor or recognize a 1916 decision of our SC? We claim also that China’s theory or argument is not only old but non-existent. It can claim that a 1916 old decision is just as old as anything we say they claim.
raissa says
True.
But if enough countries believe the Philippines’ legal and rational arguments and say so, then pressure on China increases.
leona says
Yes, the right enough pressure should prompt China to stop their mischiefs. Only, that even Asean countries appears lukewarm to believe even Philippines’ cause, legal and rational arguments, etc. Maybe Philippines should also apply pressure to these Asean countries one way or the other for that.
duquemarino says
@CPMers
Naiiyak ako sa nasaad sa article na ito “Facing up to China with sheer guts”
http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/236827/facing-up-to-china-with-sheer-guts
“If a surface-to-air missile were fired from a Chinese frigate, it would have easily taken out a blue-colored surveillance plane of the Philippine Navy that flew over the Hasa-Hasa Reef in the morning of July 14.”
“The war room of Wescom under Lt. Gen. Juancho Sabban is just big enough to assemble the command’s top brass around an oversized oval table. There are no electronic contraptions more advanced than an overhead projector to suggest any sophisticated monitoring over the vast West Philippine Sea.”
“Is the Philippines getting support from the United States in terms of live satellite feeds showing China’s movements? Wescom is mum…….”
This is the only thing that buoys up my spirit, “But Kalayaan Mayor Bito-onon, a devout Adventist follower, laughs off scenarios of a Chinese invasion or aggression. “It’s just because of my religious conviction. It’s not in the scriptures that China will prevail here,” he mused.”
leona says
The whole country of Pilipinos just have to keep their SPIRIT on this matter. We don’t have much other than that. China is of course AFRAID of Pilipino SPIRIT, the reason why haven’t really gone to a final conquestatory action over the Islands.
We have about 90 MILLION HUMAN SPIRITS, more or less, while China has only about 3 MILLION…members of their party leadership. I am sure the rest of the Chinese population is not well aware of the mischiefs of their leaders…so it does not appear conclusive that that is also the stand of the Chinese population.
PILIPINO SPIRIT!
duquemarino says
@CPMers
Ito ang nakakalungkot at nakaka-alarma.
Palawan town ‘furious’ over Chinese boats
http://www.rappler.com/nation/9280-palawan-town-furious-over-chinese-boats
Inch by inch the Chinese are nearing our shorelines. Now they are trying to distract us from the Scarborough issue and instead are now doing their wanton destruction of the corals and other marine resources disguised as “…..part of a Chinese government fishing expedition, with several frigates and armed Chinese fisheries vessels backing them up.”
Before we know it, habang nakafocus naman ang atensyon sa Pag-asa Island anong malay natin kung unti-unti nagtatayo na ng istruktura sa Scarborough Shoal.
Remember Mischief Reef dubbed as China’s “creeping” invasion. That was in 1995 during the term of President Fidel V. Ramos.
Remember Subi Reef, now “…..the Chinese were speeding up development at the Subi Reef, an islet closest to the main Philippine-occupied island of Pag-asa.”
leona says
Put a 1 minute barrage over those REEFS! That’s the initial solution to drive them out!
The sound of that barrage will be heard throughout the world!
Make our SOUNDS OF DEFIANCE heard! China’s response even if louder will be condemned!
Make ASEAN hear our sounds then as they seem to be deft and quiet, a sign of indecisiveness!
Those REEFS are ours. We cannot be wrong but only right. If weakness is shown, we are not even willing to take the risk to do anything worth taking. How then can we proceed to assert any further in our claims anywhere if not in those REEFS first of all!
Not to show some courage results in being taken over little by little, bit by bit, piece by piece, then the whole of everything when it a bit late to take any action to recover the whole thing…the big piece!
Sarah says
Sharing the following article…. this shows just how weak China’s claim is. http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/global-filipino/world/07/26/12/qing-dynasty-map-shows-no-china-claim-spratlys
raissa says
Thanks, Sarah.
Janine says
Naisip q lang po, d po kaya natatakot ang China for the upcoming AEC in 2015 kaya po they want to have full control of the sea? South East Asian Nations economic boom I think will have a great impact on their economy.
wyl5326 says
If RP is host for 2015 AEC, perhaps China may just send a low level representative to attend and avoid exposing their leadership to an embarrassing position. China is an old country who’ve mastered the Art of War as well as Art of subtle diplomacy !
Janine says
China is not part of ASEAN nor one of the back ups for AEC… I can’t stand their idiotic reasoning (sorry for the word), illogical!!!
Geo says
Right or Wrong only counts in peaceful times, if we go to war, nothing matters because war doesnot determine who is right or who is wrong, whoever is left will be the one to say the looser party aint right.
wyl5326 says
China does not have history of colonialism even when it has an ancient civilization. it aspires only to trade with other countries. Since it was more advance than all countries it knows then, they are considered as backwards and classified them all as ignorant Barbarians. That explains why they never have historical claims on territories it now claims ! So their claims are only based on hindsight !
wyl5326 says
We can always try to limit dispute to government level as bringing it to ethnic level would not be good for our country.