Doesn't matter. It belongs to whomever takes it by force. Won't be Japan.
This is a discussion on UN approves of Japan's EEZ claim around Okinotorishima within the Strategic Defense forums, part of the China Defense & Military category; UN approves Japan's claim on wider seas http://www.energy-daily.com/reports/...islet_999.html imo, japan is atually doing this for the encirclement of China. i ...
UN approves Japan's claim on wider seas
imo, japan is atually doing this for the encirclement of China. i wonder how the UN atually lend its support to such a claim when Under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, an island is "a naturally formed area of land, surrounded by water, which is above water at high tide". It states that "rocks which cannot sustain human habitation or economic life of their own shall have no exclusive economic zone.
Last edited by eldarlmari; 04-29-2012 at 04:42 AM.
Doesn't matter. It belongs to whomever takes it by force. Won't be Japan.
Guys, that has been one verdict in a legal battle. If someone starts to take such things by force you have to calculate that Japan can have a lot more military and weapons if they decide to resolve things with guns and bombs.
On 22 April 2004, Chinese diplomats stated during bilateral talks with Japan that they regarded Okinotorishima as rocks, not an islet, and—while acknowledging Japan's territorial rights to Okinotorishima itself—did not acknowledge Japan's claim to an exclusive economic zone (EEZ) stemming from Okinotorishima.
In other words, Japan can claim the rock all it wants, but China will be drilling for oil and gas in its supposed EEZ.
Here's your silly rock.
If you're going to tell me that this nonsense generates its own EEZ, then we better start rewriting the rules so that the width, length, and maximum altitude of the landmass are central factors for calculating the size of the EEZ.
Japan claims an EEZ over 400,000 square km (154,500 square miles) around Okinotorishima. The People's Republic of China disputes this claim, saying the area only consists of rocks and not islands. The PRC has not made a territorial claim of its own regarding Okinotorishima, but foreign policy analysts note that it wants to "investigate the surrounding seabed for submarine operations in case of military conflict involving the Republic of China (Taiwan)."
Last edited by gjy2105; 04-29-2012 at 10:44 AM.
"rocks which cannot sustain human habitation or economic life of their own shall have no exclusive economic zone."
Could we perhaps see the reasoning of the UN? I strongly suspect that the Japanese were able to prove the point that this object in the water can sustain human habitation and economic life, although the degree might be very limited.
If China starts resource exploitation good neighbourly feelings can become nil with a strengthened US-Japan-South Korea tie.
They're already all plotting to contain China anyways. Also, factoid for you. China has already been exploiting the resources under disputed waters for years. If they haven't done anything in retaliation to a weaker China in the past, they're not about to start trying to do it to a stronger one.
Last edited by gjy2105; 04-29-2012 at 11:54 AM.
perhaps china can 'grow' an island like japan too right next to okinotorishma and dispute japan's ridiculous claim for EEZ over those rocks.
anyway, IMO, real motives of both parties are clear:
1)Japan wants to keep China in check(EEZ claim for resources exploitation are only secondary-in other words- a cover)
2)China doesnt care who owns those rocks- she just wants that patch of ocean kept open for her unhindered entry into the Pacific and also because of the fact that it's halfway between American Guam and Taiwan
Last edited by eldarlmari; 04-29-2012 at 11:59 AM.
Sun, Apr 29, 2012
The Yomiuri Shimbun/Asia News Network
The United Nations' Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf has approved the addition of about 310,000 square kilometers to Japan's continental shelf, according to the government.
Yeah, "according to the government."... don't you guys find it word playing here?
From the #1 post's first source, it's like a done deal; from the second source, it's up to wristing. I would call it a waste of time if we follow the "done deal" source and act as if there is anything legal here.
Besides, in the name of UN, there were a lot of things being "said", almost none getting enforced - not untill the permanent members of the security council are uniformily devoted.
I don't see what you guys are actually getting antsy about. The article stated that Japan wasn't able to claim the waters around the disputed islands, as its definition as a rock/island was unclear. They were only able to claim the waters out to the islands. UNCLOS is quite clear on the ability of countries to claim the rights to its continental shelf, in this case I guess it's the continental shelf connected to undisputed Japanese territory. The definition of the continental shelf have to do with the shape and topography of the seabed.
These questions have nothing to do with politics, nor who seizes what. It's simply a matter of law and technicality. These matters are settled by the ICJ and the UN bureaucracy, who in turn rely on legal documentation that all parties around those waters have agreed on. The Security Council have nothing to do with it.
Tokyo's bid to upgrade the status of a Okinotori Atoll into an island, and claim an outer continental shelf with an exclusive economic zone, was formally dismissed by UNited Nation Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf
Thread Title is misleading and should be changed. Anyone?
China welcomes UN decision over Japanese "island" claims - People's Daily Online
08:10, May 17, 2012 BEIJING, May 16 (Xinhua) -- China on Wednesday welcomed a decision by a United Nations (UN) commission not to adopt Japanese claims over the geopolitical classification of Okinotori Atoll, an outcropping in the Philippine Sea.
"Japan's claim of its outer continental shelf based on Okinotori Atoll was not acknowledged by the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf," said Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei in response to a question at a regular press conference, quoting information released by the UN agency.
"Japan's allegation that Okinotori Atoll has been adopted by the commission as an 'island' is absolutely baseless," said the spokesman.
Japanese media, quoting government officials in the country, reported on April 28 that the UN Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf agreed with Japan that the sea basin north of Okinotori Atoll is part of its continental shelf, and thus said Okinotori was recognized as an "island" and could be used as a territorial "base point."
However, Hong denied Japan's rights to the outcropping, citing the commission to explain, "As mentioned by the Japanese side, the commission recognized the Shikoku Basin Region north of Okinotori Atoll as part of Japan's outer continental shelf. But in fact the recognition was based on other parts of Japan's land territory, not related to Okinotori Atoll."
Hong said Japan's request submitted to the commission involved some 740,000 square km but only 310,000 square km was recognized by the body.
"The areas claimed by Japan as part of its outer continental shelf but not accepted by the commission include the 250,000-square-km southern Kyushu-Palau ridge based on Okinotori Atoll," added the spokesman.
Okinotori Atoll, some 1,700 km south of Tokyo, is only about 10 square meters above sea level at high tide.
According to Article 121 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, rocks that cannot sustain human habitation or an economic life of their own shall have no exclusive economic zone (EEZ) or continental shelf status.
An EEZ is an area of sea over which a state has exclusive rights of exploration.
China and South Korea have opposed Japan's illegal attempt to claim areas based on Okinotori Atoll as part of its continental shelf, as Okinotori is a group of rocks and not classifiable as an "island."
"Many countries have also expressed their objection against Japan's illegal claims relating to Okinotori Atoll," noted the spokesman.
According to Hong, the commission's decision concerning Okinotori Atoll is "fair and reasonable" and in line with international law.
"[The commission] has safeguarded the common interests of the whole international community and China welcomes the decision," he added.
Last edited by Dolcevita; 05-17-2012 at 11:43 PM.
I crunched some numbers in regards to the fleet size comparison between China and Japan. It surprised how powerful the "Self Defense Force" was. They are even bigger than the USN presence in the Western Pacific.
At this stage, since both China and Japan don't have super-large service combatants, the most powerful vessels are the destroyers. (Helicopters don't count, they are only good for ASW, service ships can easily knock them down).
Japan currently has 23 destroyer class ships that are above 6000 tons (full load), with 3 more currently being built. On the other hand, China only has 18 in service with more on the way. Although China is catching up quickly in terms of numbers, but the tonnage of the new 052C's are still really small compared to the Atagos and Kongos. The highest prediction of 052C's tonnage is about 7500 tons, but Kongo is 9500 and Atago 10000+, probably close to 11000 tons.
China should really launch its new generation of ships.
To be fair Japan's long range anti-ship offensive missile capabilities are very modest, and despite their size (destroyers) these ships pack relatively few weapons systems and missiles considering how much more they should be able to carry.
It literally is a defensive fleet geared for providing AEGIS screening for US ships, and is entirely reliant on US logistics chains to operate.
Without the US fleet it is extremely unbalanced and deficient in offensive capabilities.
Last edited by Igor; 05-27-2012 at 10:54 AM.
Seems like the constant exaggeration of 'the China threat' has had an effect even on the informed members of this forum as to China's military capabilities, one wonders how much the average person might be affected.
China's military power has seen dramatic improvement compared to its completely obsolete self which lasted through the early 2000s. It is now capable of competently defending the country, by this I mean it can pose sufficient risk of unacceptable costs to potential attackers, NOT that China will definitely win a war in which it is attacked.
In terms of overall military capabilities especially in offensive operations, China is very weak relative to other industrializing and industrialized countries (such as those of South Korea, Japan, India, Western Europe, Russia, Israel, South Africa... etc.). China's military prowess is even lesser if you measure it on a per capita basis and compare it to that of other countries.
The military capability China possesses right now is the bare minimum to deter anyone from attacking it, including being ganged up on. The Chinese military has a long ways to go before being capable of something like the PLAN going toe-to-toe with the JMSDF and having a chance of winning.
"China is very weak relative to other industrializing and industrialized countries (such as those of South Korea, Japan, India, Western Europe, Russia, Israel, South Africa... etc.)"
Judging from what you have said, I would say that you are a fan boy (most likely Japanese) trying to troll this forum. There is no point arguing with you.