South China Sea Strategies for other nations (Not China)

[joshuatree]

In international law, the word "dispute" has a legal meaning and not an ordinary meaning as we understand it. Once a "dispute" is formally recognised, the whole legal status changes. I am not familiar with the two different issues mentioned and so I would just stop hereht.

Perhaps but that still doesn't change the observation that Japan has not filed any "dispute" against SK regarding Dokdo in ICJ nor any of the SCS claimants filing any "dispute" against other claimants in ICJ either.

I would also add that this is a thread on SCS and not ESC.

Agree and that is why my last reply steered the topic of ICJ back to the SCS even though I did not initiate the ECS discussion here earlier.

 

[Blackstone]

I am curious to understand how you arrive at such a position. Please elaborate.

China opted out of UNCLOS arbitration, clearly, openly, and up front. Knowing that, you refused to acknowledge China has equal rights to decline ICJ arbitration as Philippines has the right to sue.

 

[Blackstone]

Very compelling.. So in other words PRC is not going to court unless it is garanteed to win and not have other nations to follow suit in filing a complaint against PRC.
Very diplomatic. LoL

So? What's your point? Great powers seldom allow third parties to decide their fate, and I know of none in Brenton Woods history that embrace ICJ arbitration as usual policy. It's how things are in the real world.

 

[Equation]

Most nations prefer and adhere to International arbitrations and judgements. Examples: Cambodia & Thailand - "Preah Vihear Land around Temple"; Indonesia & Malaysia - "Sipadan & Ligitan Islands"; Singapore and Malaysia " Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh Light house & waters". These are only a few examples that were amiably solved by Southeast Asian nations; so why can't China so the same? The problem has always been that a major economic and military power tends to flex its muscles and disregard smaller countries who they can bully. That's what in the eyes of most countries in the Southeast Asian region feel, although a few are also scared to offend the Chinese because of economic reasons. Not following International rulings would invite criticisms world wide, and could end in serious conflicts.

It is NOT China's job to make some of those Southeast Asian nation to feel more adhere to their insecurity who uses that "bully" excuses to lay claims on disputed territories. That's the problem you can't cry wolf while at the same time started AND building outposts on disputed islands.

 

[Blackstone]

Most nations prefer and adhere to International arbitrations and judgements. Examples: Cambodia & Thailand - "Preah Vihear Land around Temple"; Indonesia & Malaysia - "Sipadan & Ligitan Islands"; Singapore and Malaysia " Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh Light house & waters". These are only a few examples that were amiably solved by Southeast Asian nations; so why can't China so the same? The problem has always been that a major economic and military power tends to flex its muscles and disregard smaller countries who they can bully. That's what in the eyes of most countries in the Southeast Asian region feel, although a few are also scared to offend the Chinese because of economic reasons. Not following International rulings would invite criticisms world wide, and could end in serious conflicts.

Advill, can you name one great power since ICJ's creation that commonly agrees to the court's adjudication? And if you can't name it, then why do you think it's just to treat China differently? By the way, I know of three great powers since Brenton Woods, US, Soviet Union, and China, none of them fit the bill.

 

[SamuraiBlue]

So? What's your point? Great powers seldom allow third parties to decide their fate, and I know of none in Brenton Woods history that embrace ICJ arbitration as usual policy. It's how things are in the real world.

Then why argue as if PRC has any legitmacy to their actions?
Just admit upfront that PRC is intimidating smaller neighboring nations for their own selfish interest.

 

[Blackstone]

Then why argue as if PRC has any legitmacy to their actions?
Just admit upfront that PRC is intimidating smaller neighboring nations for their own selfish interest.

I'm consistent in saying China takes advantage of its power to pursue its national interests. Like other nations, China rather go with peaceful and cooperative means, because that's easier, but should push comes to shove, China would use all of its power, including bribery, coercion, and intimidation to achieve its objectives. Can you name a great power that doesn't?

 

[advill]

In actual fact China can truly be a great and magnanimous power if it behaves like one. No need to follow past Colonial powers whether European or others who then considered Asian countries were places to intimidate and dominate. How peaceful the Asian region would be & progress made if China shows it is truly a great power respecting smaller countries concern and abiding to International law. It is still not too late, as President Xi appears to be a pragmatic leader.

 

[delft]

In actual fact China can truly be a great and magnanimous power if it behaves like one. No need to follow past Colonial powers whether European or others who then considered Asian countries were places to intimidate and dominate. How peaceful the Asian region would be & progress made if China shows it is truly a great power respecting smaller countries concern and abiding to International law. It is still not too late, as President Xi appears to be a pragmatic leader.

China was until a short while ago quite unable to intimidate and dominate. The Asian region wasn't very peaceful at that time. I remember a war fought just South of China lasting thirty years.

 

[Brumby]

you refused to acknowledge China has equal rights to decline ICJ arbitration as Philippines has the right to sue.

Please refresh my memory that I refused the acknowledgement.