China's SCS Strategy Thread

[kroko]

Re: East China Sea Air Defense ID Zone

If the wrong law is being used then by your statement it implies that there is a right law which is the basis of China's position. Please enlighten as to what that might be.

I dont think there is any law that is the basis of china´s position. China is claiming those islands on the basis of what they perceive as past historical evidence of their ownership of those islands. In fact, they even refused philipines request to decide their dispute in the international court of the law of the sea.

 

[SampanViking]

The name of the game is of course "pressure".
The object of the game is not merely to take possession of a few bits of rock, but to influence deep and substantive change to the political thinking of the other nations you are playing against.
In this instance, the aim of the PRC is use its full spectrum of pressure to cause change to the Status Quo political elites of the opposing countries, resulting in the installation of new Pro Beijing establishments, amenable to China's Regional Security concerns. The prize for those countries that realign could very well include the rocks in question.

Conversely (and you may think perversely) is that victory for China in enforcing possession of disputed marine features is actually a failure, as it means that it has failed to engineer the desired realignment. Unless of course it manages to do both, although that would to me seem a little ungracious.

 

[solarz]

Re: East China Sea Air Defense ID Zone

A basic principle of logical reasoning is that the conclusion is drawn from the premise. I fail to see the legal nexus between eating a cake and copyright infringement. At least get your reasoning right if you want to talk logic. Secondly, your statement is a logical fallacy of equivocation as Jeff pointed out.

And I fail to see the legal nexus between territorial claims and UNCLOS. The only thing United Nations say about territorial disputes is that one should not use force, so what is your point about there being a "right" law on the basis of China's position?

Do you need a law to allow you to eat cakes? If an action is not covered in a legal framework, does that mean other people are justified in applying irrelevant laws to accuse you of wrongdoing?

 

[solarz]

Re: East China Sea Air Defense ID Zone

I do not think I would logically compare the PRC's claims to the many Islands in the South China Sea encompassed by the 9-dash as similar to "eating cake," either. That too is not good logic, particularly when there are others claiming that the cake in this case that you are eating is theirs. LOL!

Like I said in the previous post, Jeff, if someone has a problem with me eating a cake, it would make no sense for them to use the copyright laws to accuse me of wrongdoing. Likewise, as UNCLOS has no bearing on territorial disputes, it makes no sense for anyone to bring up UNCLOS on the issue of China's territorial claims *IN* (not "of"!) the South China Sea!

 

[kroko]

US officials are once again putting pressure on china regarding SCS. US admiral says that US will help philipines in case of conflit with china, but strangely, he doesnt specify what kind of help that would be.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

to which china condemns his remarks.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[Blackstone]

US officials are once again putting pressure on china regarding SCS. US admiral says that US will help philipines in case of conflit with china, but strangely, he doesnt specify what kind of help that would be.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

to which china condemns his remarks.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Just more kabuki dances between the eagle and the dragon.

 

[Jeff Head]

Re: East China Sea Air Defense ID Zone

Like I said in the previous post, Jeff, if someone has a problem with me eating a cake, it would make no sense for them to use the copyright laws to accuse me of wrongdoing. Likewise, as UNCLOS has no bearing on territorial disputes, it makes no sense for anyone to bring up UNCLOS on the issue of China's territorial claims *IN* (not "of"!) the South China Sea!

I am not arguing your point about the applicability of UNCLOS.

I simply pointed out that a better example could have been used to make that point. On your side of the arguement, comparing China's claims to those islands to "eating cake," is probably not the best, or most logical example to use.

That's all.

In the example, there are other parties who believe the various pieces of the cake being eaten by the PRC are theirs.

 

[solarz]

Re: East China Sea Air Defense ID Zone

I am not arguing your point about the applicability of UNCLOS.

I simply pointed out that a better example could have been used to make that point. On your side of the arguement, comparing China's claims to those islands to "eating cake," is probably not the best, or most logical example to use.

That's all.

In the example, there are other parties who believe the various pieces of the cake being eaten by the PRC are theirs.

That's right, and that's called "territorial disputes". The United Nations says nothing about that other than don't use force.

There's nothing wrong with territorial disputes, practically every nation has them. However, there is something wrong and dishonest about portraying China's territorial disputes by drawing a false image of China's position.

 

[Jeff Head]

Re: East China Sea Air Defense ID Zone

That's right, and that's called "territorial disputes". The United Nations says nothing about that other than don't use force.

There's nothing wrong with territorial disputes, practically every nation has them. However, there is something wrong and dishonest about portraying China's territorial disputes by drawing a false image of China's position.

I certainly have not drawn a false image of China's claims, so the last sentence does not apply to me.

China is claiming those islands within the 9 dash. Others may indicate that this claim is upon the entirety of the SCS within the 9 dash...but that is not what China says.

However, depending on how China views 1st, the size and extent of its own territorial waters surrounding those islands, and then, 2nd, how China views and intends to enforce the EEZ surrounding all of those islands, then the amount of territory being "controlled" by China as a result of the 9 Dash could go up astronimically and be of significant concern to others.

And this does not address the "disputes" of the islands themselves, which you refered to in your post. Several nations claim those islands. China drawing a 9 Dash doe snot make the Islands theirs...it just plainly indiccates what China's claim and intentions are with respect to those islands. Which in turns gives rise to fear and anxiety in the other nations that claim the respective islands.

Anyhow, as I mentioned, my only point was to indicate that comparing China's 9 Dash to "eating cake," is a comparison that tends to warrant the worst fears of others in this regard.

That is all.

 

[solarz]

Re: East China Sea Air Defense ID Zone

I certainly have not drawn a false image of China's claims, so the last sentence does not apply to me.

Never said you have, Jeff. If I am referring to anyone, it would be to the likes of Kerry, who is still calling on China to "clarify" its position, when that position has been crystal clear for 60 years, or the likes of Aquino, who is constantly repeating the falsehood that China is claiming open seas as its territory.

China is claiming those islands within the 9 dash. Others may indicate that this claim is upon the entirety of the SCS within the 9 dash...but that is not what China says.

However, depending on how China views 1st, the size and extent of its own territorial waters surrounding those islands, and then, 2nd, how China views and intends to enforce the EEZ surrounding all of those islands, then the amount of territory being "controlled" by China as a result of the 9 Dash could go up astronimically and be of significant concern to others.

And this does not address the "disputes" of the islands themselves, which you refered to in your post. Several nations claim those islands. China drawing a 9 Dash doe snot make the Islands theirs...it just plainly indiccates what China's claim and intentions are with respect to those islands. Which in turns gives rise to fear and anxiety in the other nations that claim the respective islands.

Anyhow, as I mentioned, my only point was to indicate that comparing China's 9 Dash to "eating cake," is a comparison that tends to warrant the worst fears of others in this regard.

That is all.

I don't see why the EEZ and territorial waters based around the islands in the SCS would be different from the EEZ and territorial waters around any other piece of sovereign land.

As for fear and anxiety, I would ask this question: there are 7 claimants in the SCS dispute. How many of them are experiencing "fear and anxiety"? For example, why is the Philippines anxious while Malaysia, by all accounts, is not? I would submit that it is not China's actions that are causing fear and anxiety in the region.