Why is the US constantly sowing discord in South China Sea?

[mrswdk]

ITT: Andy doesn't know what the claims are but rubbishes them anyway.

[mrswdk]

Even leaving aside historical claims from the ancient Chinese dynasties, the Paracels and Spratlys were put under the control of the Japanese empire's Taiwan administration during the 20th century, and following the end of the Second World War and the return of Japanese colonies to their original sovereigns, everyone in the world recognized that the mainland and Taiwan, including the islands, were all now the sovereign territory of the Chinese nation.

[waauw]

Even leaving aside historical claims from the ancient Chinese dynasties, the Paracels and Spratlys were put under the control of the Japanese empire's Taiwan administration during the 20th century, and following the end of the Second World War and the return of Japanese colonies to their original sovereigns, everyone in the world recognized that the mainland and Taiwan, including the islands, were all now the sovereign territory of the Chinese nation.

By that same reasoning the Crimea is Ukrainian because it was placed under Ukrainian administration during the Soviet Union.

Your argument that everybody in the world acknowledged China's claim on the south-china sea islands is a plain lie. The Philippines never acknowledged it, the Americans supported Chiang Kai-Shek(not Mao) and french claims were passed to Vietnam.

[AndyDufresne]

ITT: Andy doesn't know what the claims are but rubbishes them anyway.

Dumping sand into the ocean is a surefire way to improve those claims!




--Andy

[mrswdk]

Even leaving aside historical claims from the ancient Chinese dynasties, the Paracels and Spratlys were put under the control of the Japanese empire's Taiwan administration during the 20th century, and following the end of the Second World War and the return of Japanese colonies to their original sovereigns, everyone in the world recognized that the mainland and Taiwan, including the islands, were all now the sovereign territory of the Chinese nation.

By that same reasoning the Crimea is Ukrainian because it was placed under Ukrainian administration during the Soviet Union.

Erm, what? Crimea was Ukranian and was universally acknowledge as such for exactly that reason.

Your argument that everybody in the world acknowledged China's claim on the south-china sea islands is a plain lie. The Philippines never acknowledged it, the Americans supported Chiang Kai-Shek(not Mao) and french claims were passed to Vietnam.

Chiang Kai-Shek also claimed the Spratleys and Paracels. Like I said, the islands were run as a part of Taiwan during Japan's colonial rule over the island and were left under the dominion of China once Japan gave Taiwan back to China.

[waauw]

Even leaving aside historical claims from the ancient Chinese dynasties, the Paracels and Spratlys were put under the control of the Japanese empire's Taiwan administration during the 20th century, and following the end of the Second World War and the return of Japanese colonies to their original sovereigns, everyone in the world recognized that the mainland and Taiwan, including the islands, were all now the sovereign territory of the Chinese nation.

By that same reasoning the Crimea is Ukrainian because it was placed under Ukrainian administration during the Soviet Union.

Erm, what? Crimea was Ukranian and was universally acknowledge as such for exactly that reason.

You do realize the Russians have disputed it ever since the fall of the Soviet Union. Because of american supremacy, they were however coerced to swallow their opinions.

Your argument that everybody in the world acknowledged China's claim on the south-china sea islands is a plain lie. The Philippines never acknowledged it, the Americans supported Chiang Kai-Shek(not Mao) and french claims were passed to Vietnam.

Chiang Kai-Shek also claimed the Spratleys and Paracels. Like I said, the islands were run as a part of Taiwan during Japan's colonial rule over the island and were left under the dominion of China once Japan gave Taiwan back to China.

You seem to be holding a double standard here. Those administrative zones were also supposed to report back to Tokyo as part of the Japanese empire, does that mean Taiwan and the south-china sea islands are actually japanese?

[mrswdk]

Even leaving aside historical claims from the ancient Chinese dynasties, the Paracels and Spratlys were put under the control of the Japanese empire's Taiwan administration during the 20th century, and following the end of the Second World War and the return of Japanese colonies to their original sovereigns, everyone in the world recognized that the mainland and Taiwan, including the islands, were all now the sovereign territory of the Chinese nation.

By that same reasoning the Crimea is Ukrainian because it was placed under Ukrainian administration during the Soviet Union.

Erm, what? Crimea was Ukranian and was universally acknowledge as such for exactly that reason.

You do realize the Russians have disputed it ever since the fall of the Soviet Union. Because of american supremacy, they were however coerced to swallow their opinions.

Whether or not the Russians disputed Ukraine's claim to Crimea is not really relevant is it? What is relevant is whether or not China has a claim to the Paracels and Spratleys. So on that note:

You seem to be holding a double standard here. Those administrative zones were also supposed to report back to Tokyo as part of the Japanese empire, does that mean Taiwan and the south-china sea islands are actually japanese?

No, I don't. After the war Taiwan and those islands chains were all taken away from Japan and reincorporated into China, as I said earlier in this thread.

[GoranZ]

Even leaving aside historical claims from the ancient Chinese dynasties, the Paracels and Spratlys were put under the control of the Japanese empire's Taiwan administration during the 20th century, and following the end of the Second World War and the return of Japanese colonies to their original sovereigns, everyone in the world recognized that the mainland and Taiwan, including the islands, were all now the sovereign territory of the Chinese nation.

By that same reasoning the Crimea is Ukrainian because it was placed under Ukrainian administration during the Soviet Union.

Erm, what? Crimea was Ukranian and was universally acknowledge as such for exactly that reason.

You are joking rite.

Your argument that everybody in the world acknowledged China's claim on the south-china sea islands is a plain lie. The Philippines never acknowledged it, the Americans supported Chiang Kai-Shek(not Mao) and french claims were passed to Vietnam.

Chiang Kai-Shek also claimed the Spratleys and Paracels. Like I said, the islands were run as a part of Taiwan during Japan's colonial rule over the island and were left under the dominion of China once Japan gave Taiwan back to China.

Spratly and Parcel Islands become interesting in the last 50 years due to the high sea traffic in the area, they were not very interesting for the Japanese. For the Parcels China and South Vietnam had little war in 1974, and united Vietnam never accepted Chinese occupation of the islands... Although Spratlies were occupied by Japanese in WW2 and administered from Taiwan, Taiwan was rewarded to China, but no decision was made for the Spratlies.

P.S. Those little islands might become a large battlefield one day but I doubt the Chinese can win that war alone.

[Bernie Sanders]

Philippines
Its Spratly claims have clearly defined coordinates, based both upon the proximity principle as well as on the explorations of a Philippine explorer in 1956. In 1971, the Philippines officially claimed eight islands that it refers to as the Kalayaan, partly on the basis of this exploration, arguing that the islands: 1) were not part of the Spratly Islands; and 2) had not belonged to anybody and were open to being claimed. In 1972, they were designated as part of Palawan Province, Kalayaan municipality. The total land area of these islands is 790,000 sq meters.

The Philippines
control the following
islands in the Spratlys:
Kota or Loaita Island
Lawak or Nansham Island
Likas or West York Island
Panata or Lamkian Cay
Pag-asa or Thitu Island
Parola or North East Cay
Patag or Flat Island
Rizal or Commodore Reef
Taiwan
Taiwan's claims are similar to those of China, and are based upon the same principles. As with China, Taiwan's claims are also not clearly defined.

Taiwan controls Itu Aba [Taiping Dao] Island, the largest single island among the Spratlys
Vietnam
Vietnamese claims are based on history and the continental shelf principle. Vietnam claims the entire Spratly Islands as an offshore district of the province of Khanh Hoa. Vietnamese claims also cover an extensive area of the South China Sea, although they are not clearly defined. The Vietnamese have followed the Chinese example of using archaeological evidence to bolster sovereignty claims. In the 1930's, France claimed the Spratly and Paracel Islands on behalf of its then-colony Vietnam.

Vietnam has occupied a number of the Spratly Islands. In addition, Vietnam claims the Paracel Islands, although they were seized by the Chinese in 1974.

In the Spratlys, Vietnam controls 21 islands, reefs, shoals, and cays:
Alison Reef
Amboyan Reef
Barque Canada Reef
Central London Reef
Cornwallis South Reef
Da Gri-san
Da Hi Gen
East London Reef
Great Discovery Reef
Ladd Reef
Landsdowne Reef
Namyit Island
Pearson Reef
Petley Reef
Sand Cay
Sin Cowe Island
South Reef
South West Cay
Spratly Island
Tennent Reef
West London Reef

[Bernie Sanders]

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ ... claims.htm

China will need to recognize these countries rights to these reefs and islands or tensions will rise. China can ill afford bad relations with it's neighbors.

Indonesia
Not a claimant to any of the Spratly Islands. However, Chinese and Taiwanese claims in the South China Sea extend into Indonesia's EEZ and continental shelf, including Indonesia's Natuna gas field.

Malaysia
Claims are based upon the continental shelf principle, and have clearly defined coordinates. Malaysia has occupied three islands that it considers to be within its continental shelf. Malaysia has tried to build up one atoll by bringing soil from the mainland and has built a hotel.

Malaysia controls the following islands in the Spratlys:
Ardasier Reef
(Terumbu Ubi)
Mariveles Reef
(Terumbu Mantanani)
Swallow Reef
(Terumbu Layang)
Philippines
Its Spratly claims have clearly defined coordinates, based both upon the proximity principle as well as on the explorations of a Philippine explorer in 1956. In 1971, the Philippines officially claimed eight islands that it refers to as the Kalayaan, partly on the basis of this exploration, arguing that the islands: 1) were not part of the Spratly Islands; and 2) had not belonged to anybody and were open to being claimed. In 1972, they were designated as part of Palawan Province, Kalayaan municipality. The total land area of these islands is 790,000 sq meters.

The Philippines
control the following
islands in the Spratlys:
Kota or Loaita Island
Lawak or Nansham Island
Likas or West York Island
Panata or Lamkian Cay
Pag-asa or Thitu Island
Parola or North East Cay
Patag or Flat Island
Rizal or Commodore Reef
Taiwan
Taiwan's claims are similar to those of China, and are based upon the same principles. As with China, Taiwan's claims are also not clearly defined.

Taiwan controls Itu Aba [Taiping Dao] Island, the largest single island among the Spratlys
Vietnam
Vietnamese claims are based on history and the continental shelf principle. Vietnam claims the entire Spratly Islands as an offshore district of the province of Khanh Hoa. Vietnamese claims also cover an extensive area of the South China Sea, although they are not clearly defined. The Vietnamese have followed the Chinese example of using archaeological evidence to bolster sovereignty claims. In the 1930's, France claimed the Spratly and Paracel Islands on behalf of its then-colony Vietnam.

Vietnam has occupied a number of the Spratly Islands. In addition, Vietnam claims the Paracel Islands, although they were seized by the Chinese in 1974.

In the Spratlys, Vietnam controls 21 islands, reefs, shoals, and cays:
Alison Reef
Amboyan Reef
Barque Canada Reef
Central London Reef
Cornwallis South Reef
Da Gri-san
Da Hi Gen
East London Reef
Great Discovery Reef
Ladd Reef
Landsdowne Reef
Namyit Island
Pearson Reef
Petley Reef
Sand Cay
Sin Cowe Island
South Reef
South West Cay
Spratly Island
Tennent Reef
West London Reef

[jimboston]

The chinese seek to claim all land that was theirs, when their empire was at their biggest.

Right before they were repeatedly attacked by the colonial powers and a lot of that territory was snatched from them. SE Asia, much like the Middle East, Africa or Indian subcontinent, is still marred by the borders imposed by Western imperialism. The current changes are just equilibrium slowly restoring itself.

So Italy should get to claim pretty much all f the Mediterranean, because that land was snatch by the Germans, and the Normans, and the Huns, etc?

I suppose the USA should just cease to exist, and reincorporate under Native American control?

[mrswdk]

False analogies, false analogies everywhere!

[jimboston]

False analogies, false analogies everywhere!

How so?

You are stating that China is just taking back territories that were stolen from it.

EVERY PIECE OF LAND ON THIS EARTH that is currently populated was stolen from previous inhabitants.
The ONLY QUESTION is how long ago that at took place.

England was stolen from Celtic people in classical times... maybe 300-400AD?

Canada and US were both stolen from Native American peoples between 1500-1800AD.

Parts of China were at various point independent countries... prior to consolidation by the Han Dynasty, and subsequently throughout Medieval Times.

If we want to end wars of territorial conquest we have to accept these facts, and then find peaceful ways of letting people self-identify and self-govern. If you think China's claim to these "historical" peaces of land are more valid because they were taken away more recently fine... but then you have to acknowledge if they have "stolen" other peoples' land, and you have to accept that at some point a country can't go back after some (agreed upon) period of time has elapsed.

[mrswdk]

You are stating that China is just taking back territories that were stolen from it.

No I'm not. I'm stating that the territories were colonized and then given back to China by the Japanese, in a move which everyone (by which I mean other nations) recognized.

So China is not taking anything from anyone. Those islands already belonged to China.

[jimboston]

You are stating that China is just taking back territories that were stolen from it.

No I'm not. I'm stating that the territories were colonized and then given back to China by the Japanese, in a move which everyone (by which I mean other nations) recognized.

So China is not taking anything from anyone. Those islands already belonged to China.

Some of those "islands" don't even exist.
They are being "built" as a way to grab additional territorial water.

You are changing your point.

[Bernie Sanders]

You are stating that China is just taking back territories that were stolen from it.

No I'm not. I'm stating that the territories were colonized and then given back to China by the Japanese, in a move which everyone (by which I mean other nations) recognized.

So China is not taking anything from anyone. Those islands already belonged to China.

Hmmm, does the United Nations recognize the islands, reefs and those man made islands as Chinese territory?

[mrswdk]

You are stating that China is just taking back territories that were stolen from it.

No I'm not. I'm stating that the territories were colonized and then given back to China by the Japanese, in a move which everyone (by which I mean other nations) recognized.

So China is not taking anything from anyone. Those islands already belonged to China.

Some of those "islands" don't even exist.
They are being "built" as a way to grab additional territorial water.

You are changing your point.

I have been quite clear that I am talking about the Spratleys and the Paracels. If you can't be bothered to read my posts properly then this is not going to work at all.

[GoranZ]

Poor Chinese, they are playing Game of Clones

[mrswdk]

Poor Asian countries, being used as pawns by America in their imperial war games.

Hopefully China will grow strong enough to rise up and liberate its neighbors from their American puppet masters!

[jimboston]

You are stating that China is just taking back territories that were stolen from it.

No I'm not. I'm stating that the territories were colonized and then given back to China by the Japanese, in a move which everyone (by which I mean other nations) recognized.

So China is not taking anything from anyone. Those islands already belonged to China.

There are disputed islands... and there are islands China is making.

How do these "belong to China"?

A piece of land that is disputed, and unoccupied, pretty much by definition doesn't belong to China.
If all the other countries "gave it back" then it wouldn't be disputed.

Building islands in (what is generally recognized as) International Water is not equivalent to "islands that already belong to China".

[jimboston]

Poor Asian countries, being used as pawns by America in their imperial war games.

Hopefully China will grow strong enough to rise up and liberate its neighbors from their American puppet masters!

LOL

Is that what the people of Japan and the Philippines want?

LOL

Better analogy.

China is the local bully of the South China Sea. He's demanding the lunch money (i.e. islands,
and territorial water filled with oil) from Japan and the Philippines.
USA is the "football hero" of the World, and think it's his job to protect the kids being bullied.

Of course "football hero" USA admittedly ignores the bullies on the other side of the railroad track.
(i.e. Africa) He rarely interferes there.

He can't ignore China though, cause China is doing this bullying right in front of USA's face... and
to kids USA has said he'd "protect".

USA is also afraid that if he doesn't somehow show China how not to be a bully, then China will
get stronger and get more prestige. USA doesn't like other people getting prestige, as he feels
this diminishes him.

So yeah... USA maybe should be less involved.
However, USA wouldn't even think about it if China wasn't being a bully.

A complicating factor is that USA knows Japan has it's own mental issues. Japan can snap.
Japan doesn't like being bullied... and Japan has a knife. Everyone knows China could kick
Japan's ass in the long run... but Japan will use his knife if he's cornered, and that would be
bad new for everyone. USA is afraid China is gonna push Japan too far.

[jimboston]

I have been quite clear that I am talking about the Spratleys and the Paracels. If you can't be bothered to read my posts properly then this is not going to work at all.

Your thread is entitled "Why is the US Constantly sowing discord in South China Sea?"
Your OP does not mention any specific islands of island chains.

You can't make such a wide blanket statement, then subsequently try to limit conversation to some subset of that topic.
The fact is that the geopolitics in the region are not limited to the ownership of these two island chains. There are other
factors; other parcels of land, disputes about what is "territorial vs. international" water, natural resource issues, and history.

Any conversation about the region must factor in all these issues.

Otherwise it's meaningless.

[Bernie Sanders]

I have been quite clear that I am talking about the Spratleys and the Paracels. If you can't be bothered to read my posts properly then this is not going to work at all.

Your thread is entitled "Why is the US Constantly sowing discord in South China Sea?"
Your OP does not mention any specific islands of island chains.

You can't make such a wide blanket statement, then subsequently try to limit conversation to some subset of that topic.
The fact is that the geopolitics in the region are not limited to the ownership of these two island chains. There are other
factors; other parcels of land, disputes about what is "territorial vs. international" water, natural resource issues, and history.

Any conversation about the region must factor in all these issues.

Otherwise it's meaningless.

What would you expect from someone who claims he lives in Great Britain [or is it England] and professes his love for a morally corrupt country like China?

[mrswdk]

You are stating that China is just taking back territories that were stolen from it.

No I'm not. I'm stating that the territories were colonized and then given back to China by the Japanese, in a move which everyone (by which I mean other nations) recognized.

So China is not taking anything from anyone. Those islands already belonged to China.

There are disputed islands... and there are islands China is making.

How do these "belong to China"?

A piece of land that is disputed, and unoccupied, pretty much by definition doesn't belong to China.
If all the other countries "gave it back" then it wouldn't be disputed.

Building islands in (what is generally recognized as) International Water is not equivalent to "islands that already belong to China".

I was talking about Paracels and Spratleys. Let's try to focus.

[mrswdk]

I have been quite clear that I am talking about the Spratleys and the Paracels. If you can't be bothered to read my posts properly then this is not going to work at all.

Your thread is entitled "Why is the US Constantly sowing discord in South China Sea?"
Your OP does not mention any specific islands of island chains.

You can't make such a wide blanket statement, then subsequently try to limit conversation to some subset of that topic.
The fact is that the geopolitics in the region are not limited to the ownership of these two island chains. There are other
factors; other parcels of land, disputes about what is "territorial vs. international" water, natural resource issues, and history.

Any conversation about the region must factor in all these issues.

Otherwise it's meaningless.

What would you expect from someone who claims she lives in Great Britain [or is it England ] the UK and professes her love for a morally corrupt country like China?

I don't 'claim' I live in the UK. I 'do' live in the UK, as you can see from my profile.