Author Topic: China rejects Philippines’ sovereignty over Spratly Islands  (Read 1531 times)

Lorenzo

  • SUPREME COURT
  • THE LEGEND
  • *****
  • Posts: 54226
  • Be the change you want to see in the world...
    • View Profile
MANILA, Philippines (April 14, 2011) – The Chinese government cannot accept the claims of the Philippines on its sovereignty over some islands in South China Sea, a high ranking official of China said today.

This after the Philippine government filed a protest before the United Nation, claiming control over parts of Nansha Islands, parts of the Kalayaan Group of Islands.

In a regular briefing in Beijing today, spokesman of China’s foreign ministry Hong Lei said: “China has indisputable sovereignty over the South China Sea islands and adjacent waters.”

“China owns sovereignty and jurisdiction over the related sea area, seabed and subsoil,” Hong pointed out.

“The sovereignty of China over the South China Sea and related rights and jurisdiction are well-grounded from both historical and legal perspectives,” Hong added.

Early last month, the China insists sovereignty on the area where a Filipino ship, searching for oil near the disputed Spratly Islands, were allegedly harassed by Chinese patrol boats.

In a statement, Ethan Sun, China’s spokesman and deputy chief of Political Section here, said his nation has sovereignty over the area where the reported harassment happened.

“What I want to point out is that, ever since ancient times, China has indisputable sovereignty over Nansha Islands and their adjacent waters,” he cited.
He assured that China is sticking to the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea, and committed to maintaining peace and stability in the area.

“The Chinese side maintains that the related disputes should be resolved through peaceful negotiations,” he added.

The statement came after the Philippine government sought explanation of the incident, where two Chinese patrol boats allegedly harassed a Philippine boat near the disputed islands.

The March 4 incident prompted the United States to call on the Philippine and Chinese governments to exercise restraint over the incident.

U.S. Ambassador Harry Thomas Jr. said the two countries must exercise “restraint” in resolving the issue.

Linkback: https://tubagbohol.mikeligalig.com/index.php?topic=40282.0
www.trip.com - Hassle-free planning of your next trip

unionbank online loan application low interest, credit card, easy and fast approval

chicogon

  • >
  • SUPREME COURT
  • GURU
  • *****
  • Posts: 12292
    • View Profile
    • The Mark of Priestly Bliss
Re: China rejects Philippines’ sovereignty over Spratly Islands
« Reply #1 on: April 21, 2011, 02:28:53 AM »
Per history una jud nuon ang mga Chinese ug lawig-lawig sa dagat, coming to the Philippines to do barter & trades vs. Pinoy going to China

Linkback: https://tubagbohol.mikeligalig.com/index.php?topic=40282.0
Wine does not make you FAT... it makes you LEAN.

(LEAN gainst tables, chairs, floors, walls and ugly people.)

> Join World's Fastest Cloud Hosting Server

Lorenzo

  • SUPREME COURT
  • THE LEGEND
  • *****
  • Posts: 54226
  • Be the change you want to see in the world...
    • View Profile
Re: China rejects Philippines’ sovereignty over Spratly Islands
« Reply #2 on: April 21, 2011, 03:40:41 AM »
The chinese claim of these islands are new and are driven because of China's desperate need to raw natural resources. Prior to recent findings that the Spratly Islands having some untold billion units of natural gas, there was no interest in the region.



Linkback: https://tubagbohol.mikeligalig.com/index.php?topic=40282.0
www.trip.com - Hassle-free planning of your next trip

unionbank online loan application low interest, credit card, easy and fast approval

Lorenzo

  • SUPREME COURT
  • THE LEGEND
  • *****
  • Posts: 54226
  • Be the change you want to see in the world...
    • View Profile
Per history una jud nuon ang mga Chinese ug lawig-lawig sa dagat, coming to the Philippines to do barter & trades vs. Pinoy going to China

Historically speaking, they do have the paper. Even as early as the Han Dynasty, the Chinese were already fishing in these waters. However, so were the Malay Filipinos.

The Chinese, through their historical preservation of old writings and maps, lay claim. The Filipinos, who may have fished these waters at the same time, do not have the old / preserved writings. Filipinos were not as developed in terms of historical preservation as were the Chinese. Then again, one has to take into consideration that the Spaniards condemned the use of baybayin and ordered the burning of old Filipino documents.

So whatever historical text we may have had to give legitimacy to the Filipino claim perished during the era of Pax Hispanica some 3-4 centuries ago.

Linkback: https://tubagbohol.mikeligalig.com/index.php?topic=40282.0
www.trip.com - Hassle-free planning of your next trip

Lorenzo

  • SUPREME COURT
  • THE LEGEND
  • *****
  • Posts: 54226
  • Be the change you want to see in the world...
    • View Profile
Per history una jud nuon ang mga Chinese ug lawig-lawig sa dagat, coming to the Philippines to do barter & trades vs. Pinoy going to China

If we were to consider the anthropological aspects, the Malays are older than the Han Chinese.

Thousands of years before the Han Chinese settled the heart of what is now present-day China, the Malay people already colonized much of the Malay Archipelago.

The Malay people are part of the proto-Mongol groups, meaning the Malays were the original/ first waves of Mongoloids to colonize most of the Asian Continent.



Linkback: https://tubagbohol.mikeligalig.com/index.php?topic=40282.0
www.trip.com - Hassle-free planning of your next trip

Lorenzo

  • SUPREME COURT
  • THE LEGEND
  • *****
  • Posts: 54226
  • Be the change you want to see in the world...
    • View Profile
Per history una jud nuon ang mga Chinese ug lawig-lawig sa dagat, coming to the Philippines to do barter & trades vs. Pinoy going to China

The original inhabitants of the Philippines were not Malays, but were the Aeta (they have the same dna haploid grouping as the aborigines of papau new guinea). Starting as early as 20,000 years ago, the first Malays migrated and colonized the Philippines. Malays came in waves upon waves , traveling in bankas and established their dong shan culture in much of the Philippine Islands, and thereby displacing the aetas, either killing them or forcing them to the mountains.

The Malays had an early mastery of the sea, which was necessary for their traveling from present day Java, Borneo into the then-virgin islands of the Philippines.

Thousands of years before the first Han Chinese settled into what is now the Yangzhe River Basin and established their first civilization, the Malays already occupied and established themselves in the Philippines.

So, for the Chinese to claim historical rights, in my opinion, is refutable. Malays are, genetically and anthropologically speaking, more ancient and predate the Han Chinese by 10 millenia. We are a far older race than the Han Chinese.




Linkback: https://tubagbohol.mikeligalig.com/index.php?topic=40282.0
www.trip.com - Hassle-free planning of your next trip

islander

  • SUPREME COURT
  • THE LEGEND
  • *****
  • Posts: 46867
  • If you're from Pluto, you're welcome.
    • View Profile
    • Book Your Travel Tickets
if we must base claims on territories only on history (which we may know is written by the victors and by a nation's own historical perspective) and not on the current world order (like the UNCLOS I, II, III and the specific EEZ of 200 nautical miles from the baseline of a country, which did not exist in any country's ancient history), then the philippines would not stand a chance in its claim of part of the spratlys. 

ancient history is just that, history.  it is a people's past story that informs its identity.  but it need not be the basis for decisions amid current realities.  otherwise, what are most of the current americans doing in north america when that land once belonged to the native american indians?  and we don't even have to talk of sabah here, or gibraltar or the falklands.

rhetoric aside, it looks like the chinese are beginning to roar in confidence with its newly perceived economic might and rising role as a world power.  whew!  what would keep them from claiming the whole philippines, using the UNCLOS  200 nautical miles EEZ, once they do get to legitimize their claim of the whole spratly archipelago?  oh, they swallowed tibet using ancient historical claims too.         

Linkback: https://tubagbohol.mikeligalig.com/index.php?topic=40282.0
Republic Act 8485 (Animal Welfare Act of 1998, Philippines), as amended and strengthened by House  Bill 6893 of 2013--- violation means a maximum of P250,000 fine with a corresponding three-year jail term and a minimum of P30,000 fine and six months imprisonment

Book your travel tickets anywhere in the world, go to www.12go.co

unionbank online loan application low interest, credit card, easy and fast approval

Lorenzo

  • SUPREME COURT
  • THE LEGEND
  • *****
  • Posts: 54226
  • Be the change you want to see in the world...
    • View Profile
if we must base claims on territories only on history (which we may know is written by the victors and by a nation's own historical perspective) and not on the current world order (like the UNCLOS I, II, III and the specific EEZ of 200 nautical miles from the baseline of a country, which did not exist in any country's ancient history), then the philippines would not stand a chance in its claim of part of the spratlys. 

ancient history is just that, history.  it is a people's past story that informs its identity.  but it need not be the basis for decisions amid current realities.  otherwise, what are most of the current americans doing in north america when that land once belonged to the native american indians?  and we don't even have to talk of sabah here, or gibraltar or the falklands.

rhetoric aside, it looks like the chinese are beginning to roar in confidence with its newly perceived economic might and rising role as a world power.  whew!  what would keep them from claiming the whole philippines, using the UNCLOS  200 nautical miles EEZ, once they do get to legitimize their claim of the whole spratly archipelago?  oh, they swallowed tibet using ancient historical claims too.         

lol. right.

on the latter part, the Chinese regime conquored Tibet because it was "historically" part of China. However, if anyone reads about chinese history or takes a course on chinese history, one realizes that tibet was only part of China during the QING Dynasty.

The QING were not ethnic Han Chinese. The Qing were Manchu people who took over the Ming Dynasty , an ethnic Han Dynasty. The QING then assimilated into the Chinese culture; however, prior to QING usurpation of power from the relegated MING DYNASTY, Tibet was never part of China.

What they are doing right now is an example of modern day EMPIRE BUILDING.



Linkback: https://tubagbohol.mikeligalig.com/index.php?topic=40282.0
www.trip.com - Hassle-free planning of your next trip

unionbank online loan application low interest, credit card, easy and fast approval

Tags: