Just a warning. Keep politics out of the thread or I'll start pruning!
China's terrirotial loses and claims + Importance.
- Thread starter legoboy
- Start date
- Status
Did the Dutch "hand back" Indonesia? No, they fought from 1946 to 1949, because this large, "rich", colony should pay for the rebuilding of the Netherlands after WWII. Just a few weeks ago a Dutch court rejected the contention of the Dutch government that it should not be forced to pay compensation to the survivors of a large war crime, the killing of 471 unarmed male inhabitants of a Javanese village in 1949, because said war crime was committed too long ago. Very few of the war crimes committed in that war ( euphemistically called police action ) against the Indonesians have been prosecuted.
( @ siegecrossbow: as a Dutchman I'm surely allowed to express my disgust? )
( @ siegecrossbow: as a Dutchman I'm surely allowed to express my disgust? )
Engineer
Major
Apples with oranges like how China did not conduct genocide of the indigenous population via tactics like biological warfare and the extermination of food sources that the indigenous people are dependent on, whereas the West did.
So the colonization of Australia and America is justified in your view because of The White Man's Burden - that the West "brought" the indigenous populations out of neolithic age. Okay.
People like him are the ones to always go on about how only the west is truly 'civilized' and everybody else are uncivilized barbarians that deserve military 'shock and awe' because "we said so"...
bladerunner
Banned Idiot
double post
bladerunner
Banned Idiot
Last edited:
solarz
Brigadier
Okay, so we now know you have no clue whatsoever why Tibet is a part of China. I think that's not surprising to most forumites.
What is a little more surprising is the fact that you have no clue what colonialism means. Here's a hint: a country that's mostly ruled by European descendants doesn't not really count as "handed back" to the original inhabitants.
bladerunner
Banned Idiot
Last edited:
Engineer
Major
ROFL! Descendents of colonists in Australia, Canada, and New Zealand being given self rule after the indigenous population nearly goes extinct are not examples of handing back territories. India and Pakistan fought for their independence. Samoa fought for its independence as well, but in anycase those islands in the middle of no where in the Pacific are given self rule precisely because they are in the middle of no where and have nothing to offer in terms of landmass. But I digress that if the concept of EEZ exists back then these islands would never have given independence.
China's suzereinty over Tibet, if that's the word you want to use, is no different than the suzereinty that Canada has over its 9 provinces; or that New Zealand has over its 16 regions; or that US's has over its 50 states.
And ever since Qing Dynasty reincorporate Tibet into China, Tibet has not have any de jure indepdence which could qualfiy it as an occupied territory like the former colonies that you have mentioned. This is especially so since the modern concept of nation-state hasn't take hold in China when Tibet was invaded by the Qing Dynasty. The claim that Tibet is/was independent is nothing more than a disguised attempt at annexing territories from China.
Rising China
Junior Member
Why was China willing to settle for so much less? Why not go for 50/50? Do you have any ideas?
Tajikistan ratifies border agreement with China
Tajikistan's lower house of parliament ratified an agreement Wednesday that was signed with China in 2002 for resolving a century-old border dispute, Reuters reported.
Under the agreement, China gains control over an area of 1,000 square kilometers, about 3.5 percent of the disputed 28,500-square-kilometer land that had been under discussion.
Tajikistan took control of the land after independence in 1991 but China had never accepted the ruling, according to China News Service.
The two nations signed the border treaty in 1999, and added an amendment to it three years later, thus establishing a joint committee for demarcation, the agency said.
During a visit to Beijing in May 2002, Tajik President Emomalii Rahmon agreed with the amendment that allows China to take over 1,000 square kilometers of the disputed land.
The two sides then carried out two demarcation works in 2006 and 2008, building 101 border stones.
Hong Lei, a spokesman of China's Foreign Ministry, said Thursday the deal thoroughly resolved "a historical boundary issue," the AP reported.
The dispute was resolved "according to universally recognized norms of international law through equal consultations," Hong said, without advancing more details.
Tajik Foreign Minister Khamrokhon Zarifi hailed the ratification of the agreement as "a great victory for Tajik diplomacy," Reuters reported.
"This is an important political event and will promote further expansion of Tajikistan's ties with China," the Times of India quoted Zarifi as saying.
However, some Tajik officials voiced opposition to the agreement, saying it contradicted the country's constitution that states the territory of Tajikistan is inseparable and inviolable, the Times of India reported.
Sun Wenbin, a press officer of the Chinese embassy in Dushanbe, told the Global Times that the disputed land is in the sparsely populated Pamir Mountains.
"We don't know how many people are living in the area and how they will be resettled," he said.
As the Global Times went to press, the Tajik embassy in Beijing had not commented on the issue.
Xing Guangcheng, an expert with the Research Center for Chinese Borderland History and Geography of Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, told the Global Times that the settlement of the dispute provided a good example for resolving other border issues.
"It is significant because China and Tajikistan reached consensus after peaceful dialogue, showing that compromise is vital in solving border disputes," he said.
Due to historical reasons, China has border issues with a number of its neighbors.
Beijing and Moscow completed the demarcation of their 4,300-kilometer border in 2008, after co-revealing border markers that split the Heixiazi Island (known as the Bolshoi Ussuriysky Island in Russia).
In February 2009, China and Vietnam inaugurated two border stones, the last of 2,000 such markers built during their eight-year land demarcation efforts, the Xinhua News Agency reported.
Beijing and New Delhi concluded their 14th round of border talks in November with a joint pledge to "seek a fair and reasonable solution acceptable to both sides," Xinhua reported.
Li Wei, director of the Institute of Security and Strategic Studies at the China Institutes of Contemporary International Relations, told the Global Times that the Sino-Tajik resolution will have a positive impact on other territorial disputes.
"Historical experience has proved that the settlement of territorial disputes by force brings nothing but hatred and worsened discord," he said.
Liu Linlin and Song Shengxia contributed to this story
By Yu Miao, Global Times
- Status