China and the sea in South East Asia

ASEAN EEZ Vs China's claims over South China Sea

ASEAN EEZ Vs China’s claims over South China Sea

The diplomatic row in the region which brewed and never been resolved, is actually escalating. In the utter stubborn self-preservation belief by China that the nation has rights over the South China Sea since the largest communist nation rejected a multilateral approach to resolve the multiple claims problem within the massive body of water commonly shared between Malaysia, Thailand, Indonesia, Brunei, Cambodia, Vietnam and the Philippines,.

Wall Street Journal story on the recently concluded ASEAN Defense Minister Meeting in Brunei.

China Rejects Multilateral Intervention in South China Sea Disputes

But Beijing Agrees to Work With Southeast Asian Bloc Over Maritime Code of Conduct


BANDAR SERI BEGAWAN, Brunei—China’s defense minister issued a blunt rebuke to Southeast Asian counterparts on Thursday, saying Beijing rejected any multilateral approach to resolving competing territorial claims in the South China Sea.

Defense minister Gen. Chang Wanquan said disputes over the South China Sea shouldn’t harm China’s relations with the Association of Southeast Asian Nations because the 10-member regional bloc doesn’t have a direct role in the disagreements.

“These disputes should be resolved by the countries directly concerned,” Gen. Chang said. “We oppose any attempt to internationalize or complicate the disputes.”

The South China Sea is claimed almost in its entirety by China, which has run up against competing claims by several other countries.

The Chinese position isn’t new but was delivered at a joint news conference after a meeting with the U.S. defense secretary and defense chiefs from Asean and other Asian nations. The remarks were read by Gen. Chang and his translator in answer to a question posed by the Chinese state news agency.

U.S. officials said the statement wasn’t surprising and noted China nonetheless has agreed to negotiate with Asean over a common maritime code of conduct for the region.

Still, the remarks by Gen. Chang made plain the very different visions the U.S. and China have for Asean. While the U.S. hasn’t taken a position on how territorial disputes get resolved, it has favored an Asean role in finding a common approach to settling conflicts over the South China Sea.

The declaration from the assembled defense ministers issued Thursday contained few surprises. But U.S. defense officials said they were encouraged by the organization’s support for practical measures to avoid conflicts between vessels plying the South China Sea. The meeting’s participants endorsed a proposal for more joint exercises to help avoid confrontations between naval vessels in disputed waters.

Brunei’s Energy Minister Mohammad Yasmin, who hosted the meeting, said the group agreed to work on establishing mechanisms to “reduce miscalculation and undesirable incidents at sea.” The presence of substantial reserves of oil and gas under the South China Sea has also helped heighten tension in the area.

U.S. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel outlined proposals to improve military cooperation and joint exercises in Southeast Asia. “Exercising together builds trust and understanding, and reduces the risk of conflict when disputes arise,” Mr. Hagel told the gathering, according to a copy of his prepared remarks.

Mr. Hagel outlined proposals to improve military exercises and operations, urging the Asian nations, working with the U.S., to develop standardized procedures for humanitarian and disaster relief operations, which could improve communications, command and control during a crisis. He also pushed for more multilateral counterterrorism operations as well as improved information sharing. He offered to share military medical technology the U.S. has developed during the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts.

The U.S. has tried to focus its work in Southeast Asia on countering terrorists and pirates, as well as building its partners’ abilities to respond to humanitarian crises.

Mr. Hagel added cybercriminals to the list Thursday, singling out North Korea for putting the Asian-Pacific region in peril. “Pirates and terrorists, proliferators, diseases, natural disasters, and cybercriminals aren’t contained by national borders, and they will jeopardize all of our futures if we fail to act together.”

Separately, the Philippines said Beijing has asked President Benigno Aquino III to cancel a trip to China to attend a trade exposition starting Sept. 2 in Guangxi province. “The president has decided not to proceed to [the expo], taking into consideration China’s request for the president to visit China at a more conducive time,” said Philippines Foreign Affairs spokesman Raul Hernandez.

When contacted, the Chinese government did not address the Philippines’s request but said that it hopes China and the Philippines can “can march forward together, tackle problems and clear up disturbances, while making efforts to recover the sound and stable development of Sino-Philippine relations.” The Philippines is locked in a territorial dispute with China over the South China Sea and has turned to the United Nations to settle the issue.


This is rather odd since China signed the  Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea (DOC) on 4 November 2002, which is the term of reference that ASEAN nations and China respect the ” principles of the Charter of the United Nations, the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, the Treaty of Amity and Cooperation in Southeast Asia, the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence, and other universally recognized principles of international law which shall serve as the basic norms governing state-to-state relations”


The Governments of the Member States of ASEAN and the Government of the People’s Republic of China,

REAFFIRMING their determination to consolidate and develop the friendship and cooperation existing between their people and governments with the view to promoting a 21st century-oriented partnership of good neighbourliness and mutual trust;

COGNIZANT of the need to promote a peaceful, friendly and harmonious environment in the South China Sea between ASEAN and China for the enhancement of peace, stability, economic growth and prosperity in the region;

COMMITTED to enhancing the principles and objectives of the 1997 Joint Statement of the Meeting of the Heads of State/Government of the Member States of ASEAN and President of the People’s Republic of China;

DESIRING to enhance favourable conditions for a peaceful and durable solution of differences and disputes among countries concerned;

HEREBY DECLARE the following:

1. The Parties reaffirm their commitment to the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations, the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, the Treaty of Amity and Cooperation in Southeast Asia, the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence, and other universally recognized principles of international law which shall serve as the basic norms governing state-to-state relations;

2. The Parties are committed to exploring ways for building trust and confidence in accordance with the above-mentioned principles and on the basis of equality and mutual respect;

3. The Parties reaffirm their respect for and commitment to the freedom of navigation in and overflight above the South China Sea as provided for by the universally recognized principles of international law, including the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea;

4. The Parties concerned undertake to resolve their territorial and jurisdictional disputes by peaceful means, without resorting to the threat or use of force, through friendly consultations and negotiations by sovereign states directly concerned, in accordance with universally recognized principles of international law, including the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea;

5. The Parties undertake to exercise self-restraint in the conduct of activities that would complicate or escalate disputes and affect peace and stability including, among others, refraining from action of inhabiting on the presently uninhabited islands, reefs, shoals, cays, and other features and to handle their differences in a constructive manner.

Pending the peaceful settlement of territorial and jurisdictional disputes, the Parties concerned undertake to intensify efforts to seek ways, in the spirit of cooperation and understanding, to build trust and confidence between and among them, including:

  • a. holding dialogues and exchange of views as appropriate between their defense and military officials;
  • b. ensuring just and humane treatment of all persons who are either in danger or in distress;
  • c. notifying, on a voluntary basis, other Parties concerned of any impending joint/combined military exercise; and
  • d. exchanging, on a voluntary basis, relevant information.

6. Pending a comprehensive and durable settlement of the disputes, the Parties concerned may explore or undertake cooperative activities. These may include the following:

  • a. marine environmental protection;
  • b. marine scientific research;
  • c. safety of navigation and communication at sea;
  • d. search and rescue operation; and
  • e. combating transnational crime, including but not limited to trafficking in illicit drugs, piracy and armed robbery at sea, and illegal traffic in arms.

The modalities, scope and locations, in respect of bilateral and multilateral cooperation should be agreed upon by the Parties concerned prior to their actual implementation.

7. The Parties concerned stand ready to continue their consultations and dialogues concerning relevant issues, through modalities to be agreed by them, including regular consultations on the observance of this Declaration, for the purpose of promoting good neighbourliness and transparency, establishing harmony, mutual understanding and cooperation, and facilitating peaceful resolution of disputes among them;

8. The Parties undertake to respect the provisions of this Declaration and take actions consistent therewith;

9. The Parties encourage other countries to respect the principles contained in this Declaration;

10. The Parties concerned reaffirm that the adoption of a code of conduct in the South China Sea would further promote peace and stability in the region and agree to work, on the basis of consensus, towards the eventual attainment of this objective.

Done on the Fourth Day of November in the Year Two Thousand and Two in Phnom Penh, the Kingdom of Cambodia.

Signatories to the DOC

Signatories to the DOC


The DOC is s significant document since China and Vietnam went to war over Paracel Islands on 19 January 1974.

Despite signing the DOC, China’s attitude and actions over the South China Sea is far from what has been stated and agreed upon as the basis for resolving issues. More over, there are international maritime laws to govern the free and safe passage of vessels in the international waters in the South China Sea.

Last year, Chinese Navy incurred into the Scarborough Shoal, a disputed island which many believe that belongs to the Philippines because of the proximity and accepted international maritime claims practices.

As such, in the interest of protecting the busiest commercial waterway United States has committed to move majority of the warships of their Seventh Fleet into the region. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta announced this during last year’s annual Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore.

Earlier this year Chinese Navy flotilla ‘visited and conducted naval exercise’ at James Shoal, 45 nautical miles off the coast of Miri. Included in the flotilla is Chinese Navy brand new 210m amphibious ship Jinggangshan. That is far too close for comfort for China to be ‘flexing their muscle’, especially to Malaysia a country where both mutually respect each other as ‘close friends’ and major trading partners.

The recent WSJ report about China has been acused for preparing to build structures on the disputed Scarborough Shoal. The multiple claims issue between China and the Philippines mounted into deeper and more intense pressure as the latter wanted to bring the matter to the United Nations for arbitration. That irked China to a point where President Ninoy Aquino III is no longer welcome in to the communist super-power in the region.

Philippines Accuses China of Activity on Disputed Shoal

Defense Chief Claims ‘Prelude to Construction’ Is Attempt to Violate Its Territory


MANILA—The Philippines said China appeared to be preparing to build structures on the disputed Scarborough Shoal, accusing China of attempting to violate the Philippines’ claim to the territory.

Philippine Defense Secretary Voltaire Gazmin told a budget hearing in the House of Representatives that “concrete blocks were sighted inside the shoal,” which he called “a prelude to construction.” He showed three pictures, including one depicting about 30 concrete blocks scattered around the shoal located less than 200 kilometers, or 120 miles, from the northern Philippine province of Zambales.

The South China Sea is claimed almost in its entirety by China, which has run up against competing claims by several other countries. The Philippines claim several islands in the Spratlys group of islands and other shoals in the South China Sea within the 200-kilometer exclusive economic zone. Deeper concerns regarding territorial disputes in the South China Sea remain unresolved. The sea is thought to hold vast oil and gas reserves, and includes some of the world’s busiest shipping lanes. Other South China Sea claimants include Malaysia, Vietnam, Brunei and Taiwan.

Philippine officials are worried that China’s latest purported action on the Scarborough Shoal will lead to the construction of permanent structures, as had happened in Mischief Reef in the past.

The report of the concrete slabs comes a day after U.S. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel completed a four-nation Southeast Asian trip that ended in Manila. Mr. Hagel was pushing for increased rotational U.S. military presence in the Philippines as part of increasing its military focus on the Asian-Pacific region. It has similar security arrangements with Australia and Singapore.

Manila is hopeful that such an arrangement with the U.S. will help deter China from pursuing its claims in the South China Sea. Last year, the Philippines and China had a standoff at the Scarborough Shoal that soured diplomatic relations between the two countries.

Mr. Gazmin told lawmakers that the Philippine Navy plane that took the photos on Aug. 31 had also spotted three Chinese coast guard ships near the shoal.

He said the photographs have been forwarded to the Department of Foreign Affairs, the agency that would prepare any diplomatic protests against China.

Foreign Affairs spokesman Raul Hernandez said the agency is still “awaiting further confirmation” before taking further action. He said that jointly with the country’s Defense Department, “we are committed to look at ways to appropriately address this issue.”

Hua Zhang, spokesman for the Chinese Embassy in Manila, said he hadn’t heard of the existence of the concrete structure. China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesman Hong Lei also said he had no knowledge of the concrete slabs. “I have no information on that,” he told a news briefing in Beijing on Tuesday.

The Philippines has brought its territorial dispute with China before a United Nations tribunal for arbitration.

Last week, Philippine President Benigno Aquino III canceled a trip to China to attend the China-Association of Southeast Asian Nations Trade Expo, scheduled for this week, after the Chinese government requested that the Philippine leader postpone his trip to a more appropriate time.


According to military experts, “It is common for small naval forces units amongst ASEAN nations to chase Chinese naval ships out of the disputed area and it is part of the ‘game’ “.

On the other hand, China has been reported to be committed on the Joint Working Group on the implementation of DOC and would be  holding meetings with ASEAN nations at official level soon.

Xinhua story yesterday:

China, ASEAN South China Sea meetings scheduled | 2013-09-10 17:35:53 | Editor: Fu Peng
BEIJING, Sept. 10 (Xinhua) — China and the Association of Southeast Asia Nations (ASEAN) will hold meetings on implementing the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea (DOC) this weekend, China’s Foreign Ministry announced here Tuesday.Ministry spokesman Hong Lei specified at a regular press conference that the gatherings would be the sixth Senior Officials’ Meeting and the ninth Joint Working Group on the implementation of the DOC.

China and the ASEAN finished drafting the DOC in 2002, outlining the most important principles in the management of disputes on the South China Sea.Hong said that participants in the weekend’s meetings will have in-depth exchanges of views on full and effective implementation of the DOC and enhance maritime cooperationChina and the ASEAN achieved consensus recently to push for consultations to develop a more detailed Code of Conduct in the South China Sea (COC).

In a June meeting in Brunei, Chinese and ASEAN foreign ministers reiterated “the need to steadily move toward the conclusion of a COC on the basis of consensus.”Hong added that the new meetings will also involve “official consultations on the COC within the framework of the implementation of the DOC.”Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi said he is confident that both China and its ASEAN neighbors will be able to safeguard peace and stability in the South China Sea after the meetings.


Malaysia’s Exclusive Economic Zone has been defined as the continental shelves within 200 nautical miles from our coast. It is in accordance to the United Nations Convention Law of the Sea 1982.

Malaysian Exclusive Economic Zone as per the Malaysia Act 1984 and under jusrisdiction of the MMEA

Malaysian Exclusive Economic Zone as per the Malaysia Act 1984 and under jusrisdiction of the MMEA

Amongst the ASEAN nations, many are bullish that the multiple claims issue could be resolved from series of diplomatic consultations and negotiations. A workable solution in the form such as joint development area (JDA) is likely. Especially for Malaysia, where there are working models for JDA with Thailand and Vietnam.

However, China is very persistent and insistent in their claims.

China would not want to be seen as the ‘neighbourhood bully’ and prepared to arm twist her regional neighbours into submission on a resolve which is favouring China rather than ‘win win’, in the true spirit of mutual respect and friendship.

Published in: on September 12, 2013 at 04:00  Comments (36)  

The URI to TrackBack this entry is:

RSS feed for comments on this post.

36 CommentsLeave a comment

  1. Oh dear! How to keep passport dry next time I go for a swim on the beach at Sabah or Sarawak?

  2. Do you all believe what China says? I’m afraid I don’t. Their history tells me not to. Calling themselves a very ancient culture when there are professors who have uncovered the evidence that a lot of what is written in the archives were re-written by Imperial Palace officials at the relevant times to suit certain objectives.

    The burning of books occurred not just during Emperor Chin Shih Huangdi’s time over 2,000 years ago (where even a few professors were burnt), but also during communist leader Mao Zedong’s time in the 1960s. That’s just 5 decades ago.

    Calling themselves “the Middle Kingdom”, claiming that they were the only ones civilized, all others around them – even as far away as the West – were barbarians. Only in the latter half of the 20th century did professors told them being wrong, including History Professor Wang Gung Wu, formerly of Universiti Malaya, now in Singapore.

    Then Mao Zedong and the so-called Cultural Revolution tookplace for years where, with the attendant failed economic policies causing starvation, food shortage fights and killings, and demonstrating factional student fights, causing a total of some 30, yes 30, million Chinese dead in mainland China.

    And we have Lee Kuan Yew and the likes of Lee Kuan Yew, the cakap tak serupa bikin DAP Lim Kit Siang, Lim Guan Eng etc.

    Nope, I don’t trust them. Let’s do the necessary to protect ourselves via our foreign policy etc.

  3. Tahniah BD for posting a very resourceful article. I am impressed with the maps, too. Mind telling the source of the maps?

    P.S : Will post my comments later. Thanks.

    • Thank you.

      The first one is from BBC. The second is from MMEA.

      We need to share these things, so that more Malaysians understand the current regional diplomatic issues and probable military threats building up.

      • Yes, Malaysians should be aware of the disputes over the SCS as it directly concerns Malaysia’s security and interests.

        And thanks for the info on the sources of the maps.

  4. The first Map shows China’s famous nine dotted lines which is tongue-shaped to depict its claims over almost the entire South China Sea.

    • Obviously China hv very little respect to others and even international laws and conventions.

      Let me quote information available about the ‘Nine Dash Line’:

      According to Philippine President Benigno Aquino III, “China’s 9-dash line territorial claim over the entire South China Sea is against international laws, particularly the United National Convention of the Laws of the Sea (UNCLOS)”.[5] Vietnam also rejected the 9-dotted line claim, citing that it is baseless and against the UNCLOS.[6] In 2010, at a regional conference in Hanoi, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced that “The United States has a national interest in freedom of navigation, open access to Asia’s maritime commons, and respect for international law in the South China Sea”.[7] The United States has also called for unfettered access to the area that China claims as its own, and accused Beijing of adopting an increasingly aggressive stance on the high seas.[7]

      While China has never used the 9-dotted line as an inviolable border to its sovereignty,[citation needed] this strategy together with the fact that China’s authority has never officially explained the meaning of the 9-dotted line have led many researchers to try to derive the exact meanings of the 9-dotted line map in the Chinese strategy in the South China Sea. Some scholars believe that this line cannot be considered as a maritime boundary line because it violates international law which states that a national boundary line must be a stable and defined one. The 9-dotted line is not stable because it has been reduced from 11 to 9 dashes in the Gulf of Tonkin as endorsed by Zhou Enlai without any reasons given. It is also not a defined line because it does not have any specific geographic coordinates and does not tell how it can be connected if it was a continuous line.[8] In October 2008, the website WikiLeaks published a cable from the U.S. Embassy in Beijing reporting that Yin Wenqiang, a senior Chinese government maritime law expert, had “admitted” he was unaware of the historical basis for the nine dashes.[9]

      According to the Kyodo News, in March 2010 PRC officials told US officials that they consider the South China Sea a “core interest” on par with Taiwan, Tibet and Xinjiang,[10] but subsequently backed away from that assertion[11][12][13] In July 2010 the Communist Party-controlled Global Times stated that “China will never waive its right to protect its core interest with military means”[14] and a Ministry of Defense spokesman said that “China has indisputable sovereignty of the South Sea and China has sufficient historical and legal backing” to underpin its claims.[15]
      At the Conference on Maritime Study organized by the US-based Center for Strategic and International Study (CSIS) in June 2011, Dr. Su Hao from the China Foreign Affairs University in Beijing delivered a speech on China’s sovereignty and policy in the South China Sea using history as the main argument. However, Dr. Termsak Chalermpalanupap, Assistant Director for Program Coordination and External Relations of the ASEAN Secretariat, said: “I don’t think that the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) recognizes history as the basis to make sovereignty claims.” This view that history is not the basis for sovereignty claim over waters is agreed by Prof. Peter Dutton from the US Naval War College who commented that, “The jurisdiction over waters does not have connection to history. It must observe the UNCLOS.” He did not agree with the explanation of China of the meaning of the 9-dotted line related to history. Dr. Dutton further stressed that using history to explain sovereignty erodes the rules of the UNCLOS.[16] It is understood that China ratified the UNCLOS in 1996.[17]

      Maritime researcher Carlyle Thayer, Emeritus Professor of Politics of the University of New South Wales, said that Chinese scholars using historical heritage to explain its claim of sovereignty shows the lack of legal foundation under the international law for the claim.[18] Caitlyn Antrim, Executive Director, Rule of Law Committee for the Oceans of the USA, commented that “The U-shaped line has no ground under the international law because [the] historical basis is very weak”. She added “I don’t understand what China claims for in that U-shaped line. If they claim sovereignty over islands inside that line, the question is whether they are able to prove their sovereignty over these islands. If China claimed sovereignty over these islands 500 years ago and then they did not perform their sovereignty, their claim of sovereignty becomes very weak. For uninhabited islands, they can only claim territorial seas, not exclusive economic zones (EEZ) from the islands”

      No wonder the commie-living DAP Chinese Chauvinists are getting more bolder and brutal!

      • Since China is not a State Party to the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea 1982, it thus feels it is not bound by that Convention and has use historical argument as the basis of its claims. But as already mentioned by scholars and experts, such basis are flimsy since China never physically control SCS since time immemorial. It is also why China refuse to acknowledge UNCLOS’s 12nm territorial waters limits and the 200nm continental shelf/EEZ limits. It is also why China refuse to engage in multilateral negotiations preferring to divide and rule and deal with other claimants on a bilateral basis. The issue will be tough to resolve i.e if it could be resolved at all. It will likely remain as a stalemate for sometime. The claimant states like Malaysia, Brunei, Vietnam and the Philippines will stand their grounds and will develop the living and non living resources of their continental shelf/EEZ making conflicts with China even more intense. The only diplomatic avenue left will be the ARF through DOC and to establish a Code of Conduct over SCS dispute.

  5. This thing called 12 mile limit of territorial waters and 200 mile limit of right to food and other resources – can some one explain the 200 mile one where it overlaps, who decides rights in such an event, the role of UN etc.

    Bloody hell China is a Permanent member of the Security Council among US, Russia, UK, and France. The others, I understand – major players and victors of World War II. But China? How come they got in as a member. By population size? India has a billion population, too. Too long to tke googling and to read lengthy stuff, but any short explanations would be appreciated.

    Obama yesterday said US doesn’t want to be Policemen of the world viz Syria, after loss of many US lives in Iraq, Afghanistan etc. But I’m counting on their policy of “containment of China” in our region. I, too, don’t trust the Chinese.

    • The US is enmeshed in it’s own problems.

      I don’t think that the US public and Congress have the stomach for facing down China in Asia.

      What does that leave? Japan? India? Australia?

      Abu made snide comments about LKY, and by extension, Singapore, but it’s the city-state that is the US’s closest non-treaty ally in Asia.

      So I suspect that the region’s governments and defence forces must be secretly grateful to that city-state for openly hosting elements of the US armed forces.

      Now, isn’t that ironic?

      It just goes to show that geo-political realities trumps political posturing. Every time.

      • No, the city-state’s closest non-treaty ally is Israel, with Zionist Jews as advisers in Singapore. That, too, was to rub Malaysia and Indonesia which are predominantly Muslim. That is what good neigbourliness is all about in the Little Kingdom called Red Dot by former Indonesian President Habibie.

        It is doubtful that the US considers Singapore as its closest ally – Obama visited Burma, Thailand etc not too long ago, talking about finding the “pivot” in its relations with countries in this region. But then we know the posturing done by Lee Kuan Yew.

      • And the posturing done by you.

        I know I can’t expect from you any response to my request for explanations on the 200 mile zone, but to get your kind of posturing instead requires me to respond, shall we say, in a “snide manner”?

      • What difference does it make treaty or non-treaty ally? In the event of a conflict, both will get walloped by the enemy.

        And the Philippines has been rushing to get the former US Subic Naval Base and Clarke Air Force Base rehabilitated to cater to US ships and fighter planes after the Chinese muscle flexing on the island they have been claiming for a long time.

        Singapore is US closest ally?

      • Gooberman’s opinion may not be correct. Other people’s opinions on the US public and Congress having the stomach to face China in Asia are as good as his.

        And don’t underestimate Japan. They were reduced practically to ashes in 1945. Yet in 20 years they had re-built their country such that in no time they reached a developed nation status. Many books have been written pointing to that. Now they have the infrastructure to turn into a military Super Power in quick time, except that they don’t, because they volunteered to the victorious post-war US administrator General Douglas MacArthur to have a war-renouncing constitution.

        They have all the heavy machineries, those for making precision instruments as well, now producing all sorts from vehicles, to nuclear plants for peaceful use, to telecommunications satellites – they have the capacity to produce sophisticated fighter jets, aircraft carriers, rockets and missiles.

        It’s a matter of getting the green light from or understanding with the US. Of course China will object to it vehemently, but some activities may be done secretly. They have been having secret highly lethal biological weapons since the 1960s. The Japanese are a homogeneous and highly disciplined people, absolutely loyal to their Emperor, as proven by the kamikaze suicide pilots in the last war, and harakiri is a tradition among their samurai warriors since ancient times.

        Japan can take on China in reasonably early time from the time they start preparing themselves. Remember, the Chinese Ambassador to the US only 1-2 weeks ago told CNN that they are not a Super Power, only a developing country like many others. Military experts have said that it’ll take 10-20 years for China to become a Super Power like US and Russia.

    • Haba, the 12nm limit of territorial waters and the 200nm of continental shelf and the Exclusive Economic Zone are provisions under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea 1982. Each coastal state can claim 12 nm of territorial waters and 200nm of continental shelf and EEZ . The determinations of such limits will have to follow specific provisions concerning how such limits are to be drawn. Should the limits overlap with the territorial waters and con shelf/ EEZ limits those countries should negotiate to find a solution. They can also go to third party such as ICJ, Itlos or Tribunals for adjudication.

      • * should the limits of the territorial waters and con shelf/EEZ overlap with those of its neighbours’, then those countries should negotiate to find a solution..*

      • Thanks bro.

        So, likely to go back to UN and the 5 Permanent Members of which China is one. Not a bright prospect for any disputes in the South China Sea where China appears to be claiming all, or nearly all.

        ICJ is dicey. Some African states have withdrawn recognition of ICJ (Nigeria the latest?) in the belief they are bias. So, back to the “containment of China” thing?

        I dunno. The world is a happy place to be in if your country has the powers of the US, and my friend quoted William Shakespeare to me that if a small county like Malaysia gets bonked by China –

        “When beggars die, there are no comets seen
        The Heavens themselves blaze forth the death of princes.”

        Maybe not. Singapore, the bloke up there would probably say, would be shouting and jumping with joy, seeing comets and all. Good-neighbour policy bringing Zionist Jews, eh?

    • Sorry, Haba – my reply was to Abu’s post. I tagged it to your post. Again, my apologies.

      Note that I wrote “non-treaty ally”. As contrasted with “treaty allies” of the US (Japan, South Korea, Thailand, Australia).

      Which other non-treaty ally of the US in Asia has elements of the US Air Force and Navy regularly rotating through it’s bases? Not India, not the Philippines, not Indonesia and definitely not Malaysia!

      • You are bluffing and bull shitting. How can you meant that comment as a reply to Abu when you wrote

        “Abu made snide comments about LKY ..”

        You would have said “You” instead of “Abu” if you had intended it as a reply to Abu.

        Now, who can believe what you say, who cares about your opinions when you resort to bluffing and bull shitting?

        What’s with you anyway? Always trying to glorify LKY and Singapore. At the expense of Malaysian leaders and Malaysia. Are you a Singaporean? Come, come now, be honest this time.

      • Haba

        Which part of my English confuses you?

        Read what Abu wrote in his post: “And we have Lee Kuan Yew……”

        Now, I don’t how you define “snide”, but what has LKY got to do with China’s posture in the South China Sea?

        If anything, it was LKY who first, among South East Asian leaders, articulated the need for the US to stay engaged in the region – politically, militarily, diplomatically and economically.

        Show me where Dr Mahathir or Suharto clearly and unequivocally voiced such a stand.

        Indeed, I remember that Dr M was quite partial to taking pot shots at the US.

        But now that the successors of Imperial China are on the expansionist trail, it’s time to relook at where Malaysia’s interests lie.

        Btw, if there is so much doubt about Singapore’s foreign and defence policies, why do Malaysian defence big wigs keep showing up at the annual Shangri-la Dialogue in the city-state?

        Surely, it can’t just be the shopping, can it, seeing the relative positions of the Ringgit and the Sing Dollar?

        And that, my friend, was another “snide” remark…….

      • We do have a problem of communication – you and I – don’t we?

        My issue was not whether Abu made a snide remark or not. It was about you saying your reply was meant for Abu’s post but you “tagged it” to my post. I disputed that you meant it for Abu’s post.

        But the more important point in that comment of mine was to know why you have always been trying to glorify LKY and Singapore, at the expense of Malaysian leaders and Malaysia.

        I asked you whether you are a Singaporean. That was a perfectly valid question, wasn’t it? No harm if you are, only that I would then understand why you put out the views you did, though I would then seriously wonder why you often come into this blog, as if we here hit at Singapore all or most of the time.

        Yet you have not answered those. I wonder why.

      • No, your English doesn’t confuse me, as others here, like postgrad, have better English than yours. Even your intent does not confuse me – it is often simply suspect. Especially when you don’t respond specifically to the points raised.

        Malaysian defence big wigs keep showing up at the annual Shangri-la Dialogue in Singapore is indicative of doubt about Singapore’s foreign and defence policies? What logic school do you go by? Is it not logical that they attend the dialogue because they have doubts? To find out more. Or simply out of good neighbourly attitude, despite the good neighbour Singapore possibly having the “friendly” Zionist Israeli Military advisers milling around at such a dialogue.

        Yes, your snide remarks about the shopping re the Ringgit vis-a-vis the Sing Dollar situation. Sometimes caustic remarks, too. That’s why I, too, have not been saintly in my remarks to you, including the 21:57 one. But mine was one of cause and effect – you caused it, the effect was the tone of my reaction.

        And I don’t have any love lost with Lee Kuan Yew and Singapore. I’m honest about it. Would you? About being Singaporean or not? And why you often glorify LKY and Spore at the expense of Malaysian leaders and Malaysia? And cut the crap about freedom to submit comments and such if you are thinking along that line.

    • China’s stubbornness over ‘Nine Dash Line’ and their arrogance to flex millitary might even deep within the EEZ borders recognised under the UNCLOS, simply just opened the opportunity for the Americans to come back to the region and re-positioned themselves with their military might.

  6. The dollar is dying and the Obama team is scrambling support and resources from all over the world.

  7. This only affirm the characteristics about Chinese, regardless of their nationality and state of domicile; they are greedy, selfcentred, strategic-minded, no qualms about using force and being brutal and uncouth and brash.

    All that talk about Chinese respect their traditions, heritage, history, honour their words and non-invassive is pure bollocks and wishful thinking.

    Chinese only understand one language; force. Not even money!

    Otherwise they would hv gone for the JDA and get cracking in extracting hydron carbon, even from deep water wells in so many undiscovered fields of South China Sea.

    It’s a blatant wake up call! Whether Malaysians like it and ready or not, the pressing need to strengthen military relationship with the US, Australia, Singapore, Vietnam, India, Japan and Russia, in sundry et al, no longer an option to be put on the back burner.

    And it has to be done fast.

    This is because is no way Malaysia can make her military might formidable, enough to create a defense mechanism against China, in so little time.

    I emphatise Najib the Felinist for having to deal with this right smack on his forehead. But he got to literrally pull up socks now.

    The push already come to shove!

  8. […] is at the dismay of all the nations bordering the South China Sea is the attitude and ‘expansionary vision’ of China, which is also demonstrating their readiness to grossly disrespecting the United Nation Convention […]

  9. […] reflective of China’s attitude towards the rights of the regional neighbours and United Nations Convention o…where she is a […]

  10. […] disregard for United Nation’s Convention of the Law of the Seas (UNCLOS) and ASEAN’s Document of Conduct (DOC) signed in 2002. They rudely demonstrated their ‘Projection of Power’ and continous presence in areas […]

  11. […] also demonstrated their blatant disregard to respect the United Nations Convention Law of the Seas (UNCLOS) and the Document of Conduct which she […]

  12. […] tell the tale about how Chinese Foreign Ministry officials warn ASEAN nations involved in the multiple claims over various over lapping areas in the South China Sea to not raise words like “Multilateral solution” or “Arbitration”.  The […]

  13. […] Whether they claim to be a civilisation of 5,000 years, the Chinese have proven to be be selfish, coarse, rude and disrespectful of other people’s rights and decorum. They have also demonstrated steadfastness to ignore, dishonour and disrespect international laws and documents that they signed. […]

  14. […] China’s gross disrespect of nation’s around the region with the imaginary and unsubstantiated claims of the ‘Nine Dash Line’, which is […]

  15. […] China is aloud about its arrogant attitude as the neighbourhood bully, with regards to the recent steps taken by the Philippines to resolve at international arbitration on the controversy arisen by the world’s largest communist state’s imaginary and unsubstantiated claims of the’Nine-Dash-Line’. […]

  16. […] It is also an oil rich area, which falls under China’s imaginary and unsubstantiated claims of the ‘Nine-Dash-Line’ within the So…. […]

  17. […] should back off from its aggressive maneuvers in South China Sea and stick to commitment of the Document of Conduct (DOC)  signed with ASEAN in November 2002, which agreed to resolve issues which include multiple claims on disputed territories via […]

  18. […] which signed the United Nations Convention Law of the Seas (UNCLOS) and the Document of Conduct (DOC) with ASEAN nations in November 2002 where it has been outlined that issues pertaining multiple claims and disputed territories should […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: