A Chinese journalist wisely answered the questions about dispute of South China Sea

Discussion in 'China' started by linda, Jan 6, 2016.

  1. linda

    linda Regular Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2011
    Messages:
    45
    Likes Received:
    2

    There are lot of debates about dispute of South China Sea, but this Chinese journalist wisely answered the questions about it.
    But please take a look of the first comment below , it has given the legitimacy of Chinese claim of those islands based on the history ,they are very convincing evidences,.
     
  2.  
  3. linda

    linda Regular Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2011
    Messages:
    45
    Likes Received:
    2
    chiupo lini 4 months ago (edited)
    There appears to be a lot of misconception in the web about China's claim over the South China Sea. The one most often seen is that China is too far away to claim it. This is a gut reaction to which I once shared when this topic first heated up in recent years. However as I discussed this topic on the web with others, I carried out research, and this changed my mind as the historical facts are revealed. There are many ways a person may come to own a property. One way is he inherited it from his parents, and his parents from his grandparents. Similar principle applies to nations. China is an old country and it was invaded but has never been colonized by western powers. However Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia, Brunei and Indonesia did, and they only gained independence after WWII. Their nationhood are therefore defined by their colonial masters. In that sense what territorial rights each of these once colonized countries have, or inherited, must be traced to that claimed by their previous colonial masters. As the claims of Brunei and Indonesia are insignificant, I shall concentrate only on the main contenders, i.e. Vietnam, the Philippines and, to certain extent, Malaysia, and contrast that with the historical claim of China. Below is a summary of the facts of China's claims to the South China Sea I collated through my research, some of which are from old records written in Chinese before the dispute even arose. Most of them may however be found in the internet if you care to do some research. While I do not claim they are the full facts, they are at least much richer in contents than some of the arguments presented in the internet or the so called “forums”. If you think you are open minded, try to read them. Whether you agree with China's stance of not, it does show that the South China Sea issue is not a recent invention by China but "it may be that some of the claims are legitimate", a phrase used by the US President Obama on 1st June 2015 in a meeting with the young South East Asian leaders. Chinese fishermen were using the South China Sea as fishing ground and inhibited those islands during fishing season on regular basis since at least the Sung dynasty more than 1,000 years ago and these were recorded facts. Up to now many of the larger islands in the South China Sea still has remains of old Chinese temples built by the fishermen to beg for good fortune. There is also a book called Kan Lo Chi (更路誌) which until the introduction of the GPS was used by Chinese fishermen for navigating the SCS, and which recorded all the atolls, sand bars and reefs based on records compiled by hundreds of generations of Chinese fishermen. This shows how common Chinese fishermen used the South China Sea as its traditional fishing ground. That of course is not decisive as fishermen of other lands also fished in the SCS although probably not as extensively as the Chinese. However by the time of the Ming dynasty in the 15th century (i.e. preceding the invasion of the Philippines by Spain) all the surrounding lands in the South China Sea were either not developed, or were vassal states of China (such as Vietnam, Siam and Malacca). Naval control of China over the South China Sea also started in this period. At one time the Ming Emperor Young Le even appointed a governor called Ko Cha-lao in 1405 to rule Luzon during Admiral Zheng He’s epic sea voyages although his governance was short-lived after the death of Yong Le emperor and the Ming Court became disinterested in the land. Some of the islands in the South China Sea still have territorial stone plagues left by the navy of the Ming dynasty. Ironically such control was precipitated by the rampant Chinese pirates at the time which, in cooperation with Japanese pirates, infested the South China Sea and the coast of China which in turn brought the Ming navy in to control that region. In 1844, 1867 and 1889 the British sent expedition forces to survey South China Sea. Germany did the same in 1883. They were met with strong protests from the Qing Government. In the late 19th Century, France and China entered into the Sino-French war over Indo-China. The result was China agreed to cede Vietnam (then still a vassal state of China) to France which then became its protectorate. In 1887 under the Sino-French Treaty the border of China and Vietnam was ascertained by the joint border commission which did not include the Paracel and Spratly Islands into Vietnamese territory. Soon after the Sino-French Treaty, the French colonial government in Vietnam sough to lay claim to Paracel Islands on the basis of the historical presence of Vietnamese fishermen on those islands. To counter the demand, in May 1909 a fleet of 3 fully armed warships led by the Qing Admiral of Guangdong province, Li Zhun "李准" , made an official survey of all the islands and atolls of Paracel Islands and other islands in the South China Sea and compiled a report to the Qing court with 8 proposals of further exploit the resources of the islands. His proposal was approved. Before implementation, however, the Qing court collapsed in 1911. However after 1911 the Republic of China placed continued to administer the Paracel and Spratly Islands by granting licenses to exploit guano and other resources. After the expedition of Li Zhun and the publication of the survey records setting out the islands in the South China Sea as Chinese territories, the then French prime minister Aristide Briand stated on 21 May 1921 that the Chinese sovereignty over Paracel Islands were impossible to dispute: see the book entitled "Security Flashpoints: Oil, Islands, Sea Access and Military Confrontation" edited by Myron Nordquist and John Moore from the University of Virginia, Center for Oceans Law and Policy. In the dawn of WWII, due to the threat of Japan to the British and French colonies in Indo-China, the French landed a force on Xisha (Paracel) and Nansha (Spratly) in 1931 and later in 1933 to prevent the Japanese from using them as outposts against Vietnam. The Chinese government protested and reserved its rights on both occasions but was otherwise powerless to take action due to the civil war and the Japanese invasion at the time. But in 1939 Japan threw out the French and annexed the two island groups as their colonies and renamed them Shinnam Gunto (New Southern Islands) and incorporated them under the Taiwan administration (which was then ruled by Japan). When France protested, Japan said that as they were in war with China they could annex China's territories, Note that in 1939 the Philippines was still a colony of the US. And Malaysia was under British rule. Japan did not go to war with the US and Britain until December 1941. If the islands the Japanese occupied were part of the territories of the Philippines or Malaysia (or Brunei), the US and Britain would surely have declared war against Japan as early as 1939. But they did not even raise a word of protest. This throw the “inheritance” theory of the Philippines and Malaysia out of the window. After Japan's defeat and unconditional surrender in 1945, Japan had to give up all the islands it stole from China 'by violence and greed' under the Potsdam Declaration, which formed part of the Japanese Instrument of Surrender signed in September 1945. In October and November 1946 the Nationalist Government of China repossessed the South China Sea islands (with the help of the US navy), and reiterated its sovereignty over the islands.(including the islands now the Philippines claimed to be theirs), France tried to take Woody island (the largest island in Paracel Islands) from China but failed, and never has it raised any claim again. After a comprehensive survey in 1947 the Republic of China (RoC) then renamed the islands and published in Feb. 1948 an official map called "The Southern China Sea Island Location Map" with the 11 dotted lines around the South China Sea as China's territorial water. There was no protest from any nation. Also in 1947 the Collier's World Atlas and Gazetteer included a map made by Rand McNally entitled "Popular Map of China, French Indochina, Siam and Korea". That map clearly marked Paracel Islands (the one now claimed by Vietnam as its territory) as Chinese territory (with the word China in parenthesis over the islands), and all other islands in the Spratly Islands group (some now claimed by the Philippines) with Chinese names. And none was marked as belonged to the Philippines. Bear in mind that this US map was made in 1947 which was intended to reflect the post WWII territories of the region, it would be very odd indeed if the Rand McNally would have ignored any claim to those Islands if they were “traditionally” part of the Philippines territory, which just got independent from the US the year before under the Treaty of Manila 1946. Rand McNally was a well-established map maker in the US. While its map is not conclusive, it does accurately reflected how the world saw the South China Sea in the immediate post WWII era. In 1948 the People's Republic of China (PRC) took over the government of China and forced the RoC government to flee to Taiwan. In 1951 when the San Francisco conference was held, neither the PRC nor the RoC was invited to attend as there was a dispute as to which government represented China. At the time the then Chinese Premier and Foreign Minister Zhou Enlai made a declaration warning against the participants of the San Francisco Convention that China reaffirmed its sovereignty over the islands in the South China Sea whatever be the outcome of the Convection. Vietnam (then still under French administration) did make a claim in the Convention based on previous occupation by France. But at the end the San Francisco Treaty only included the Japanese renunciation of its claims over the islands without stating to whom they belonged, hence implicitly rejected French Vietnam’s claim. In 1953 the PRC entered into friendly negotiation with Vietnam (the part administered by Viet Ming under Ho Chi Ming who was fighting the French colonial power) and ceded to it part of the sea in Gulf of Tonkin including an island now called Bach Long Vi (with the few Chinese fishermen living on that island told they would became Vietnamese). In the same year the PRC also amended the original 11 dotted lines to 9 by deleting the lines over the Gulf of Token to reflect that friendly arrangement. After the Battle of Dien Bien Phu and the defeat of the French colonial by the Viet Minh, in the Geneva Convention of 1954 Vietnam was formally divided into North Vietnam and South Vietnam. On 4 Sept, 1958, China declared that the breadth of its territorial sea shall be 12nm, and this applied to all of its territories. The declaration included a map which clearly depicted sea borders and sea territories including Paracel and Spratly Islands. North Vietnam published the declaration on the front page of the official Nhan Dan newspaper on 6 Sept. Then on 14 September 1958, North Vietnam’s Prime Minister Pham Van Dong wrote a diplomatic note to Premier Zhou Enlai which stated that: "We would like to inform you so that you may be clear that the Government of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam has noted and support the September 4, 1958 declaration by the People’s Republic of China regarding territorial waters of China. The government of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam respects this decision and will direct the proper government agencies to respect absolutely the 12 nautical mile territorial waters of China in all dealings with the People’s Republic of China on the sea. We would like to send our sincere regards." This diplomatic note was published on the official Nhan Dan newspaper on 22 Sep 1958. The Philippines, which became independent in 1946, also did not object to China's 11 dotted line declaration published in 1948 nor the subsequent 4 Sept 1958 declaration. That is little wonder since the territorial limits (including its territorial sea) of the Philippines are in fact defined in Article III of the Treaty of Paris 1898 when the Spanish sold the Philippines and its other overseas possession to the US for US$20,000,000. That is the same territory when the US ratified the Treaty of Manila in 1946 when the Philippines gained its independence. Anyone who cares to read Article III will find that the territory sea boundary lines do not include any of the islands/atolls in the South China Sea claimed by China. Two other treaties before the Philippines became independent, namely the Cession Treaty 1900 (which dealt with the territories of Cagayan, Sulu and Sibutu) and the Boundaries Treaty of 1930 (which delimited the boundary between the State of North Borneo and the Philippines) did not affect the Paracel or Spratly Islands claimed by China at all. In 1971 President Marcos of the Philippines announced a claim over 53 islands in part of the Spratly Island group and named them the Kalayaan Island Group purportedly on the basis of terra nullius (prior to that the group of islands were declared by a Filipino freak called Tomas Cloma to be his own independent country). RoC immediately sent a diplomatic note of protest on 12 July 1971 to Manila, which protest was seconded by PRC even though the two were still in hostility. At the same time South Vietnam also issued a protest based on its own claim: See the book: Contest for the South China Sea by Marwyn Samuels published in 1982. President Marcos forcefully purchased the "Free Territory of Freedomland" (i.e. Kalayaan islands), from Tomas Cloma for one peso (after imprisoning him for several months) in 1974. Then on 11 June 1978 Marcos issued a presidential decree no. 1596 and annexed the Kalayaan Island Group as a municipality under Palawan province and sent human settlement on the largest island there. In the international context, the legal basis Marco's decree was not recognized by China or Vietnam and the islands remain in dispute. In 1974, China and South Vietnam broke into military conflict over Paracel Islands. It ended with a decisive victory for China. After South Vietnam was annexed by North Vietnam in 1975, however, Vietnam and China fell out as the former was trying to extend its influence over all of Indo-China, sided sought help from Russia, which was then in serious border dispute with China. In 1979 a war broke out between Vietnam and China. Since then Vietnam went back on its position and annexed some islands in the South China Sea. In 1988 a mini sea war broke out between China and Vietnam over the Spratly Islands ending with a decisive victory for China. Yet today Vietnam has obtained the benefit of over 1 billion bbls of oil produced from the sea it occupied. China has not even built any oil well in the area occupied by China so as not to escalate tension. Malaysia annexed 6 features in 1979, twenty-two years after its independence from the British who never handed them any such island/atolls in the South China Sea. The islands, reefs and atolls it now occupies is now increased to 14. Brunei only claim the Louisa reef, which is also contested by Malaysia and China. Hence it can clearly be seen that the claims by Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia and Brunei are all of recent origins. After WWII and before the 1970s, no one disputed China's claims to the islands in the South China Sea. And before WWII, only the French and Japanese did but they have since raised no claim. UNCLOS is the law which many claimed China should be subject. However anyone who actually reads its provisions will find that it is the sea law which seeks to settle certain issues over open sea resources. It does not determine sovereignty issues, in particular what is the “baseline” against which the sea territory and EEZ were measured. In any event when China rectified the UNCLOS in 1996, it expressly declared that its accession was subject to its sovereignty over the islands in the South China Sea as well as Diaoyu Islands. Such declarations are not unique as many member nations also made their own declarations. The UNCLOS was hence studded with more exceptions than rules. In 2006 China further declared under Article 298 of UNCLOS that the jurisdiction of the tribunal set up under the UNCLOS was excluded from any dispute with China. That is not something exceptional as a long list of countries also wholly or partially excluded the jurisdiction of the international tribunal e.g. Australia, Canada, Denmark, Ecuador etc. However it seems that the UNCLOS is now being used by some nations to justify extending rights into territories which did not belong to them before by the concept of Exclusive Economic Zone created in UNCLOS. What they forgot was EEZ did not extend sovereignty, but to regulate right based on their original sovereignties, which the UNCLOS provides no answer. So an instrument of peace has now been distorted and used as a justification for aggression. Since the turn of the century China had extended invitation to enter talks among parties in dispute over the South China Sea. But with the interference with the US, any talk between the disputed parties are not possible. Yet ironically the US has not even ratified the UNCLOS because its provisions are against the US interest over its “extended continental shelf” claim which translates to hundreds of billions of dollars in royalties over oil exploration off Alaska. Hence when the US calls for China to settle the dispute of the South China Sea in accordance with International Law (which many in the web support), it is not clear which international law the US is talking about - UNCLOS (which does not apply to determine sovereignty issues and which US does not itself ratify) or some US home-made international law based on the "customary law of the sea" made by the colonial powers, to which China never subscribed. In the absence of any applicable law, the issue can only be resolved by force or by bilateral talk. China and Malaysia prefer the latter. Vietnam seems to favour the former as it has been engaged continuously in island building in SCS for decades. The Philippines? I am not quite sure as it insists any talks must involve its US military protector or based on the UNCLOS law which does not even apply.
     
  4. linda

    linda Regular Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2011
    Messages:
    45
    Likes Received:
    2

    Here is his talking in the another debate. This guy is smart!
     
  5. Oblaks

    Oblaks Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2012
    Messages:
    372
    Likes Received:
    123
    Freaking lies from another Chini troll
     
  6. Oblaks

    Oblaks Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2012
    Messages:
    372
    Likes Received:
    123
    Anybody who has studied China's position vs the other claimants will know that China has the most unreasonable claim. Anybody who follows this issue will recognize that This so called SCS expert just parrots what the ccp has released through their propagandas. Anybody whomunderstands China's position on the ScS will know that China is selective on which part of history it will use just to back up its claim. Anybody who has knowledge of how China media works will know that on the contrary, this guy has no mind of his own.
     
    Last edited: Jan 6, 2016
  7. Oblaks

    Oblaks Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2012
    Messages:
    372
    Likes Received:
    123
    The truth about China's Lies are on this article complete with citations
    http://www.asiasentinel.com/politics/fact-fiction-south-china-sea/3/

    If you feel lazy to read it then here are the facs:
    • before WW2 the CCP had very little knowledge of where the spratlys were and were not interested in these islets and atols axcept for some fisher folks who compete with the locals (austtronesians) in fishing. That is why they drew the ambiguous 9 dashed lie to encompass the whole ocean.
    • During ww2 the japs were the first ones to use the islands and used them as submarine bases. When Japan surrendered, they made no mention at the potsdam declaration of surrendering the spratlys islands to anybody. That was because nobody really owned them
    • The chinese did not name the islands and atols, they used the names given by western explorers and translated them to chinese. Which means their knowledge of the scs geography was very poor
    • China drew a map of the 9-dashed lie during the 1940s but announced it to the world only when it signed UNCLOS in 1982. Which means that the chinese are late comers
    • nobody in China can explain the basis of the 9 dahsed lie. until now, China thrives on the ambiguity of that claim.
     
  8. dhananjay1

    dhananjay1 Regular Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2013
    Messages:
    972
    Likes Received:
    912
    Location:
    india
    This 'claim based on history' is a hilarious concept. If a king, in a far off land, for some reason sent a gift to the chinese emperor, the chinese would claim sovereignty over his territory based on history. :laugh:
     
    Navneet Kundu and Indx TechStyle like this.
  9. Indx TechStyle

    Indx TechStyle Perfaarmance Naarmal Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2015
    Messages:
    6,958
    Likes Received:
    7,494
    Location:
    21°N 78°E / 21°N 78°E
    Well bro, this is Indian Defense Forum so less here.
    If you want real cheeni trolls, you must visit pakistani defence forums where pakis keep licking their feet at abnormal extent. Chinkys in paki forums think China a country with alien technology with an intergalactic starfleet.
    :hehe:
     
    Anupu likes this.
  10. linda

    linda Regular Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2011
    Messages:
    45
    Likes Received:
    2

    Archaeologists Discover 7 Stone Figure Statues from Sunken Ship Site in South China Sea-Those are Chinese ancient ship ( Min dynasty 600 years ago) sank in South China Sea
     
  11. linda

    linda Regular Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2011
    Messages:
    45
    Likes Received:
    2
    http://www.kaogu.cn/en/News/New_discoveries/2013/1026/43034.html
    New cultural relics discovered under South China Sea
    From:CNTV Writer: Date:2012-08-14


    Chinese archaeologists have discovered 12 new sites containing ancient relics under the waters around Xisha Islands in South China Sea. However, most of the sites have been robbed and left severely damaged.

    The survey team discovered the sites around 400 kilometers out to sea. So far, the archaeologists have already collected various cultural relics from the depths, including porcelain, pottery, glazeware and even boat decks.

    The newly discovered relics are believed to have come from ships that sank over the course of a one thousand year period ranging from the late Tang Dynasty to the Qing Dynasty.

    The discovery team say they will continue to safeguard the relics from damage and theft. China is planning to step up efforts to safeguard its coastline, from the Bohai Sea in the North, to seas around the Xisha and Nansha Islands in the South.
     
  12. linda

    linda Regular Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2011
    Messages:
    45
    Likes Received:
    2
    Philippine archaeologists discover ancient shipwreck in disputed islands
    JIM GOMEZ , Associated Press
    Jun. 10, 1997 2:21 PM ET
    http://www.apnewsarchive.com/1997/P...d-islands/id-d1b6036a42948abcc27b68e88e66a9d3

    MANILA, PHILIPPINES MANILA, Philippines (AP) _ Philippine archaeologists have discovered granite stones from a tomb, cannons and other artifacts in an ancient shipwreck in the South China Sea's disputed Spratly Islands.

    In addition, nearly 5,000 Chinese and Thai porcelains have been recovered from a separate 15th century Chinese junk discovered off the western Philippine province of Palawan.

    Archaeologists described both as important finds.

    Eusebio Dizon, chief of the National Museum's underwater archaeology department, said Tuesday that Filipino archaeologists and French divers, acting on a tip from fishermen, discovered a shipwreck on a coral reef about six miles off Pag-asa Island in the Spratlys.

    A recovery team retrieved around 1,000 granite stones from a tomb, cannons and iron musket balls from the still unidentified wooden ship, found at a depth of 30 feet.

    Some of the stones were engraved with what appeared to be Hindu markings and drawings of dancing women, according to a museum official who spoke on condition of anonymity. One stone was engraved with the numbers 1754, but it was unclear whether that referred to the date.

    The stones may have been stolen from a tomb in Asia to be smuggled into Europe, Dizon said.

    Pag-asa is the biggest of eight islands occupied by Philippine troops in the Spratlys, a chain of islands, atolls and reefs claimed by the Philippines, China and four other countries.

    In the other find, museum officials said they have recovered nearly 5,000 prized porcelain plates, jars and bowls from a Chinese junk that sank four miles off Calauit Island at the northern tip of Palawan.

    The artifacts were from the late Ming period during the 15th and 16th centuries.

    Archaeologists are still trying to determine when the Chinese junk sank, but it is believed to be older than the Spanish galleons that plied the busy Manila-Acapulco trade route run by Spain in the 16th century.

    Filipino archaeologists were led to the wreckage, lying on a shoal at a depth of 160 feet, by the coast guard, which found fishermen looting the site early this year.
     
  13. Scarface

    Scarface Regular Member

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2015
    Messages:
    412
    Likes Received:
    219
    Location:
    Mumbai
    I couldn't bother reading after the article implied that China inherited SCS.
     
  14. linda

    linda Regular Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2011
    Messages:
    45
    Likes Received:
    2
    t ancient Vietnamese look like :
    [​IMG]
    HanoiCan you read that Chinese Characters in this ancient Vietnamese painting?oops, forgot, nowadays Vietnamese can't read their forefather's characters , they can only read that strange spelling letters that invented by their French former master,how could we expect you could remember your real history , the history you learned in your school is scrabbled fake history based on your political need!
    Look at this ancient painting , this is what ancient Vietnamese costume look like, they were all basically Chinese han costume! pity! you all forget who are you and where you were come from!

    [​IMG] this is your king(one of Chinese vessel state king), don't call emperor, there is no such Vietnamese emperor exist, in east Asia, there is only one emperor that is Chinese emperor who could has right to appoint king under him. understand those difference? go to learn some history first before come out to make your claim.
    want to see more real old photos?
    1915 Vietnamese local officials in Hanoi

    [​IMG] [​IMG]
    see the background Chinese characters? can you understand what that means?
    See real ancient Chinese painting:[​IMG] [​IMG]
    Tang dynasty painting (618–904) Polo
    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Jan 7, 2016
  15. linda

    linda Regular Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2011
    Messages:
    45
    Likes Received:
    2



    Along the River During the Qingming Festival
    (simplified Chinese: 清明上河图; traditional Chinese: 清明上河圖; pinyin: Qīngmíng Shànghé Tú) is a painting by the Song dynasty artist Zhang Zeduan (1085–1145). It captures the daily life of people and the landscape of the capital, Bianjing, today's Kaifeng, from the Northern Song period.[1] The theme is often said to celebrate the festive spirit and worldly commotion at the Qingming Festival, rather than the holiday's ceremonial aspects, such as tomb sweeping and prayers. Successive scenes reveal the lifestyle of all levels of the society from rich to poor as well as different economic activities in rural areas and the city, and offer glimpses of period clothing and architecture.[2] The painting is considered to be the most renowned work among all Chinese paintings,[3][4][5] and it has been called "China's Mona Lisa."[6]

    As an artistic creation, the piece has been revered and court artists of subsequent dynasties made re-interpretive versions, each following the overall composition and the theme of the original but differing in details and technique.[7] Over the centuries, the Qingming scroll was collected and kept among numerous private owners, before it eventually returned to public ownership. The painting was a particular favorite of Puyi, the Last Emperor, who took the Song dynasty original with him when he left Beijing. It was re-purchased in 1945 and kept at the Palace Museum in the Forbidden City. The Song dynasty original and the Qing version, in the Beijing and Taipei Palace Museums respectively, are regarded as national treasures and are exhibited only for brief periods every few years.[8]
     
  16. linda

    linda Regular Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2011
    Messages:
    45
    Likes Received:
    2
    [​IMG]
    The world’s oldest map--made in 1418 Chinese Ming Dynasty map
     
  17. linda

    linda Regular Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2011
    Messages:
    45
    Likes Received:
    2
    Ancient Chinese Treasure Fleet: CHINA DISCOVERED THE WORLD (AMAZING HISTORY DOCUMENTARY)
     
  18. Oblaks

    Oblaks Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2012
    Messages:
    372
    Likes Received:
    123
    Philippine ancestors have been Sailing and fishing in the SCS long before the Chinis came!!!

    Massive Philippine balangay 'mother boat' unearthed in Butuan
    - See more at: http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/stor...boat-unearthed-in-butuan#sthash.rOcbYuOY.dpuf
     
  19. Oblaks

    Oblaks Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2012
    Messages:
    372
    Likes Received:
    123

    No can you please put forward and announce to the world that China is now Claiming Vietnam
     
  20. linda

    linda Regular Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2011
    Messages:
    45
    Likes Received:
    2
    Don't worry about that. Vietnam had been a part of China during the past 2000 years, of course it was no problem to share the south China sea together with you before.But since Vietnam has separated from China now, it doesn't mean all of islands of China in this region now belongs to Vietnam , right? Vietnamese now is acting too aggressive and greedy , they occupied most of islands in south China Sea by all means ,then sold those region to western oil companies and earned trillions of dollars from it. Yet China has not drilled any oil wells in South China Sea so far, It is not because China has no ability to do it but China doesn't want to increase the tension and prefer to keep the peace around this region .

    http://thediplomat.com/2015/06/who-is-the-biggest-aggressor-in-the-south-china-sea/
     
    Last edited: Jan 7, 2016
  21. linda

    linda Regular Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2011
    Messages:
    45
    Likes Received:
    2
    Don't worry about that. Vietnam had been a part of China during the past 2000 years, of course it was no problem to share the south China sea together with you before.But since Vietnam has separated from China now, it doesn't mean the all of islands of China in this region now belongs to Vietnam , right? Vietnamese now is acting too aggressive and greedy , they occupied most of islands in south China Sea by all means then sold those region to western oil company and earned trillions of dollars from it. Yet China has not drilled any oil wells in South China Sea so far, It is not because China has no ability to do it but China doesn't want to increase the tension and prefer to keep the peace around this region .

    http://thediplomat.com/2015/06/who-is-the-biggest-aggressor-in-the-south-china-sea/
     
    Last edited: Jan 7, 2016

Share This Page