Burma-China alliance threatens ASEAN unity, Burma support China in South China Sea dispute Options

[Mid-Night_Sun]

Burma-China alliance threatens ASEAN unity
Burma is asking China to back its bid for chairmanship of partnership in 2014

By Jonathan Manthorpe, Vancouver Sun June 6, 2011


Burma has marked its unconvincing transition from military regime to civilian government by delivering a couple of slaps round the face to its nine long-suffering partners in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN).

The actions by the Burmese regime raise serious questions over whether ASEAN will be able to achieve its objective of creating a fully integrated community by 2015 with a high degree of economic unification and common policies on key regional and global issues.

Burma's maverick activities come at a time when ASEAN is not only facing another internal friction with the Thailand-Cambodia border conflict, but is under pressure from China, which appears to be pursuing a divide-and-conquer strategy to disrupt association unity.

Burma's general-turned-President Thein Sein managed the one-two punch while leading a large delegation of ministers and officials from the new regime to Beijing last week.

First he announced that his government fully backs China in its long-running dispute with ASEAN members Vietnam, Philippines, Brunei and Malaysia over the ownership of clusters of islands and reefs in the South China Sea.

This craven piece of sycophancy was not only a gross act of disloyalty to Thein Sein's fellow ASEAN members, it flies in the face of a 2002 agreement between the association and China on how to manage their dispute.

Then Thein Sein added a further insult by asking China's President Hu Jintao to assist Burma to get the 2014 chairmanship of ASEAN.

The implication is that Thein Sein wants Beijing to use its regional economic and political muscle to press ASEAN to guarantee Burma the host status that has only been pencilled in at the moment.

Thein Sein's unequivocal siding with China will undoubtedly reinforce the qualms and misgivings several ASEAN leaders have about whether Burma has the political maturity and administrative capacity to play the roll of association figurehead in 2014.

ASEAN faced down much international criticism in 1997 when it admitted Burma, which its regime calls Myanmar, in a purposeful piece of intimidation aimed at the country's many minority groups, suggesting they have a junior and servile status to the majority Burmans.

The military regime was under multiple sanctions and embargoes for its appalling human rights record, and political suppression symbolized by the detention of opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi.

But ASEAN leaders maintained the "constructive engagement" with the junta was the way forward.

It was not successful. Late last year elections were held in Burma on the basis of a new constitution that leaves all ultimate power in the hands of the military, which also has control of key ministries and an allocated block of seats in parliament.

Very many of the most senior positions, such as that of President Thein Sein, are held by military men who hung up their uniforms to join the "civilian" government.

Thein Sein took up office at the end of March.

Beijing has been lavishing attention on Burma in recent years to the extent that the country is often called an "economic colony" of China.

As well as investing heavily in Burma's abundant natural resources, China sees its southeast Asian neighbour as an important strategic partner in foiling what Beijing sees as efforts by the United States to contain China's growing regional influence.

China is in the process of building a pipeline from Burma's western coast in the Bay of Bengal to China's southwestern Yunnan province. This will allow China to import oil from the Middle East without tankers having to pass through the Malacca Strait choke point between Singapore and Indonesia.

Burma's expressions of loyalty to Beijing come as China is acting more aggressively toward other claimants to sovereignty over areas of the South China Sea than it has in years.

This coincides with evidence from ongoing exploration that there are much greater submarine oil and gas reserves than was previously suspected.

There was a serious incident early in March when the Philippine oil exploration ship, MV Veritas Voyager, was harassed by Chinese Navy patrol boats at Reed Bank off the coast of the Philippines.

Then, a week ago, Chinese patrol boats cut the sonar cable of an exploration ship, the Binh Minh 2, working for the state-owned Petro Vietnam company.

The encounter took place 120 nautical miles off the central Vietnamese coast and 600 kilometres south of China's Hainan island.

Beijing has sent curt warnings to both the Hanoi and Manila governments not to challenge China's maritime territorial claims, which are based on the view of imperial Chinese emperors hundreds of years ago that all surrounding countries were vassal states.

jmanthorpe@vancouversun.com
© Copyright © The Vancouver Sun

http://www.vancouversun.com/opinion/Burma+...8900/story.html

i know, not the most unbiased article. point is Burma.

even within ASEAN, there are countries that recognize Chinese claims. very interesting wouldnt you say? so far, i havent heard of one country other than the claimant themselves, that support their claims. except for China.

This post has been edited by Mid-Night_Sun: Jun 8 2011, 03:25 AM

[DOUBLEMINT]

Time to set up a burmese chat. 2

[Mid-Night_Sun]

its always more comforting to think that the bigger country is the bully and the rest of the world supports the under dog. its quite painful to realize that "the rest of the world" doesnt mean the same thing to the bigger country as it does to the under dog.

and all it takes is one smaller country to ruin this entire fantasy of little guys standing up to bullying and finally drag the attention back where it belongs. who has stronger claims.



course this might all be pointless as im pretty sure Vietnam and Phillipines ALREADY started taking the resources from the disputed territory. then of course they whine and cry about Chinese actions.

This post has been edited by Mid-Night_Sun: Jun 8 2011, 12:17 AM

[DOUBLEMINT]

its always more comforting to think that the bigger country is the bully and the rest of the world supports the under dog. its quite painful to realize that "the rest of the world" doesnt mean the same thing to the bigger country as it does to the under dog.

and all it takes is one smaller country to ruin this entire fantasy of little guys standing up to bullying and finally drag the attention back where it belongs. who has stronger claims.



course this might all be pointless as im pretty sure Vietnam and Phillipines ALREADY started taking the resources from the disputed territory. then of course they whine and cry about Chinese actions.

Vietnam National Oil and Gas Group (PetroVietnam-PVN) alone accouted for 20% of vietnam's GDP last year.

[XigonCongchua]

course this might all be pointless as im pretty sure Vietnam and Phillipines ALREADY started taking the resources from the disputed territory. then of course they whine and cry about Chinese actions.

It irks me how Chinese often use the pretext of dispute to justify their encroachments of other nations.

Spratly and Paracels are disputed territory, I agree.

But the recent incidents are not about Spratly or Paracels, they are about Chinese harassing ships and fishermen along the coast of South Central Vietnam.



How would you feel if Japan comes harassing your ships and your fishermen along the coast of Southern China? And then Japan can call it a "disputed area" to justify their actions.


Technically China can go to any part of South China Sea and harass ships of other countries, and then come back home and call it a "disputed" area to justify their actions.


I guess the entire South China Sea belong to China after all...that's probably why they name it South China Sea.


I know people of China feel their nation has been humiliated a lot in the past by the Westerners with the opium war and all, they feel like they're supposed to the richest, the most powerful nation in the world but the Westerners ruined it for them, so now they just want to act tough to prove their power and superiority to the world...when they want something and other small nations don't listen, their ego got hurt I guess, so they have to act tough to all...but really you don't need to this, you'll gain more respect from the world if you behave more reasonably.

[DOUBLEMINT]

It irks me how Chinese often use the pretext of dispute to justify their encroachments of other nations.

Spratly and Paracels are disputed territory, I agree.

But the recent incidents are not about Spratly or Paracels, they are about Chinese harassing ships and fishermen along the coast of South Central Vietnam.



How would you feel if Japan comes harassing your ships and your fishermen along the coast of Southern China? And then Japan can call it a "disputed area" to justify their actions.


Technically China can go to any part of South China Sea and harass ships of other countries, and then come back home and call it a "disputed" area to justify their actions.


I guess the entire South China Sea belong to China after all...that's probably why they name it South China Sea.


I know people of China feel their nation has been humiliated a lot in the past by the Westerners with the opium war and all, they feel like they're supposed to the richest, the most powerful nation in the world but the Westerners ruined it for them, so now they just want to act tough to prove their power and superiority to the world...when they want something and other small nations don't listen, their ego got hurt I guess, so they have to act tough to all...but really you don't need to this, you'll gain more respect from the world if you behave more reasonably.

What makes you think china's current claim isnt reasonable,xigon?I mean,with all the maps and stuff.

[Mid-Night_Sun]

It irks me how Chinese often use the pretext of dispute to justify their encroachments of other nations.

Spratly and Paracels are disputed territory, I agree.

But the recent incidents are not about Spratly or Paracels, they are about Chinese harassing ships and fishermen along the coast of South Central Vietnam.



How would you feel if Japan comes harassing your ships and your fishermen along the coast of Southern China? And then Japan can call it a "disputed area" to justify their actions.


Technically China can go to any part of South China Sea and harass ships of other countries, and then come back home and call it a "disputed" area to justify their actions.

you claim its not about spratly or paracel, but pretty much every article has connected this as such. every politician who commented on this, also bring up the spratly dispute. and of course the most important thing, is China does think it is connected to spratly.

[XigonCongchua]

What makes you think china's current claim isnt reasonable,xigon?I mean,with all the maps and stuff.

Well you tell me. Do you think claiming 80% of South China's sea without any regard to other countries is reasonable?

you claim its not about spratly or paracel, but pretty much every article has connected this as such. every politician who commented on this, also bring up the spratly dispute. and of course the most important thing, is China does think it is connected to spratly.

Because South China Sea has a long history of conflicts between China and other SEA nations, this is just one another of the many conflicts that took place.

But it's an unfortunate part right there because any blatant encroachment done by any nation on any other nation can be masqueraded as a "dispute".


Yea only what China thinks is important, right? China can just come down to the coast of Phú Yên, Đà Nẵng, Nha Trang, Saigon, Vũng Tàu...and harass the fishermen there because she thinks she's defending her territory, and that's all what matters, right?

[Mid-Night_Sun]

Well you tell me. Do you think claiming 80% of South China's sea without any regard to other countries is reasonable?


Because South China Sea has a long history of conflicts between China and other SEA nations, this is just one another of the many conflicts that took place.

But it's an unfortunate part right there because any blatant encroachment done by any nation on any other nation can be masqueraded as a "dispute".


Yea only what China thinks is important, right? China can just come down to the coast of Phú Yên, Đà Nẵng, Nha Trang, Saigon, Vũng Tàu...and harass the fishermen there because she thinks she's defending her territory, and that's all what matters, right?

wrong. they specifically referenced spratly dispute and almost EVERY TIME list the claimants China, Vietnam, Phillipines, Malaysia and so on. everything about this, is about spratly dispute. you are just desperately trying to pretend it isnt so you can make that ridiculous "China can claim anything is disputed then make an issue" thing.

for crying out loud, this very thread, ONCE AGAIN

"First he announced that his government fully backs China in its long-running dispute with ASEAN members Vietnam, Philippines, Brunei and Malaysia over the ownership of clusters of islands and reefs in the South China Sea."

why do you insist on denying what is right in your face?

oh right, so you can talk about viet fisherman while everyone else is talking about spratly DISPUTE.

This post has been edited by Mid-Night_Sun: Jun 8 2011, 01:23 AM

[Chan-Ho]

Wow, the rogue states of the world have China's back. What a relief. I'm sure North Korea supports it too. That definitely legitimizes China's claim to the entire South China Sea. /Sarcasm

This post has been edited by Chan-Ho: Jun 8 2011, 01:24 AM

[DOUBLEMINT]

Well you tell me. Do you think claiming 80% of South China's sea without any regard to other countries is reasonable?

Actually I do.We have the right to claim what belongs to us.Maps&facts dont lie.
Territory isnt something we can share,Xigon.

[XigonCongchua]

No, Midnight_Sun. You're the one who's desperately trying to defend the actions of your dearly motherland even when it's wrong.

Dragging Spratly and Paracels in makes it look like the area of the incident in in the same disputed area as Paracels and Spratly even when it's not.
I'm not talking about Paracels, I'm not talking about Spratly. I'm talking about this specific case.



If Vietnam does something wrong like that, I wouldn't bother to defend her.

[XigonCongchua]

Actually I do.We have the right to claim what belongs to us.Maps&facts dont lie.
Territory isnt something we can share,Xigon.

What makes you think 80% of South China Sea belong to China?

You completely disregard other nations in Southeast Asia, which actually have much more border with the sea than China does.

If that is how you think, then there's nothing I can say.

I'm not sure if majority of Chinese think like you do...not sure if this has anything to do with the mentality that China is the center of the universe that's been pervading Chinese for centuries.


--------------

Well since most Chinese AFers seem to think this way, I think it's pointless to talk here. I'll just leave this topic.

My last words here: I don't really care about oil and gas, I don't really care about Spratly or Paracel...What I care about is ordinary Vietnamese being able to make a living within their lawfully defined sea. I would not be upset if Chinese ships don't come near the coast of Vietnam once in awhile every year or so and harass the ships (usually fishing boats) there.

[Mid-Night_Sun]

No, Midnight_Sun. You're the one who's desperately trying to defend the actions of your dearly motherland even when it's wrong.

Dragging Spratly and Paracels in makes it look like the area of the incident in in the same disputed area as Paracels and Spratly even when it's not.
I'm not talking about Paracels, I'm not talking about Spratly. I'm talking about this specific case.



If Vietnam does something wrong like that, I wouldn't bother to defend her.

you keep trying to pretend it isnt about the spratly dispute but it is. you are talking about the cutting cable incident. this incident has been cited by pretty much every news agency as an example of Chinese aggression in this spratly dispute.

you can keep trying to deny it, but it is pointless.



BBC

Vietnam says the boats deliberately cut the survey ship's cables in Vietnamese waters. China denies the allegation. China, Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia, Brunei and Taiwan all claim territories in the South China Sea.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-13592508



CNN

The area rich in oil deposits is rife with territorial disputes with claims by China, the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei and Taiwan. It's considered to be one of Asia's more dangerous potential flashpoints. In his speech, Thanh recounted a May 26 incident when surveying cables of a Vietnamese oil exploration vessel were cut.
http://edition.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/asiapcf/....sea/index.html


i can easily find so many more. but i feel it is redundant. stop denying reality. you are about the only one who pretend this cut cable thing has nothing to do with spratly dispute. every single time spratly dispute is either directly mentioned, or implied by listing the SAME group of claimants. if its about China, later or before, you will find that cable cutting incident as an example.

this is in ADDITION to the fact China deems it as part of spratly dispute as well. which is even more important than all the foreign media who ALSO deems it as part of the spratly dispute.

This post has been edited by Mid-Night_Sun: Jun 8 2011, 01:53 AM

[DOUBLEMINT]

What makes you think 80% of South China Sea belong to China?

You completely disregard other nations in Southeast Asia, which actually have much more border with the sea than China does.

If that is how you think, then there's nothing I can say.

I'm not sure if majority of Chinese think like you do...not sure if this has anything to do with the mentality that China is the center of the universe that's been pervading Chinese for centuries.

Ancient maps, documents and international law make me think that.I dont know what other chinese think.
Shouldnt we be arguing facts,why do you have to get all emotional?

[XigonCongchua]

Ancient maps, documents and international law make me think that.I dont know what other chinese think.
Shouldnt we be arguing facts,why do you have to get all emotional?

Ok, since you insist

Here's a map of the Ming dynasty...Does this mean China lawfully own Northern and Central Vietnam now?


Also, the ancient maps you're talking about are often questionable by international community. Have you see the real maps yourself or do you just hear about them through the internet? Are they authentic?

Furthermore, just because something exists in a map made by a country, it doesn't mean it belongs to that country.


Before consider the points above, let's consider these first

Which ancient map shows that 80% of South China Sea politically belonged to China?

Which international law supports China's claim of 80% of South China Sea?

[Chan-Ho]

I agree Xigon. History is a stupid justification to territorial claims in today's modern world. There is nothing that can be "proven." The reality is every country as a right to stake a claim in adjacent UNINHABITED territory. The only time things get messy is when one country wants more than others. It's called greed. And from any unbiased perspective, China is being greedy here and it feels justified in doing so simply because its bigger and more powerful.

This post has been edited by Chan-Ho: Jun 8 2011, 02:08 AM

[XigonCongchua]

I agree Xigon. History is a stupid justification to territorial claims in today's modern world.

History can be valid in this matter if it shows a "continuous ownership" from a certain point in history to the modern day.

Example:
- Vietnam owns Phú Quốc island because she's been owning it since the 1800s. It's a continuous ownership up until the modern time. Now if Malaysia decides to take Phú Quốc from Vietnam by showing an ancient map in which Phú Quốc belonged to Malaysia, it doesn't work.

- Cambodia owned Southern Vietnam in the ancient time, but her ownership is "discontinuous". She no longer owned it in the 18th century and now she can't claim ownership of it based on history.

[InitialDJay]

Well you tell me. Do you think claiming 80% of South China's sea without any regard to other countries is reasonable?

i kept hearing people bring up these 9-dots line map (80% of sea as you said) as a starting point to argue china unreasonable claim. i'm going to clarify what china means by this 9-dots line from china perspective.

first, the 9-dots line was published around world war II and at the time, NO ONE protested the map and was universally agreed upon. this, of course, later complicated the matter when nations come together to agree on the UNCLOS stipulations. that's why countries like philippine, vietnam, and others use the legal definition of eez/continental self to justify and change their maritime boundary, and use the UNCLOS definition of maritime boundary to protest china's 9-dots line as unreasonable and illegal, which they did not in the past. HOWEVER, what they don't understand is that china never opposed neighboring states from operating and engaging fishing and naval activities WITHIN the 9-dots line. so what does this 9-dots line actually mean? it means that china is using the 9-dots line as delineating ownership of spratley and paracel island and its adjacent water ONLY by using past historical record and universally agreed at the time by these same claimant states. in general, the 9-dots line is not china maritime boundary, instead it is a reason to justify china on spratley and paracel island ownership, which are covered inside the 9-dots line map.

Because South China Sea has a long history of conflicts between China and other SEA nations, this is just one another of the many conflicts that took place.

But it's an unfortunate part right there because any blatant encroachment done by any nation on any other nation can be masqueraded as a "dispute".


Yea only what China thinks is important, right? China can just come down to the coast of Phú Yên, Đà Nẵng, Nha Trang, Saigon, Vũng Tàu...and harass the fishermen there because she thinks she's defending her territory, and that's all what matters, right?

you guys are arguing two separated cases lumping together by confused media reports. the incident where china cutted the cable of that "bing minh" boat was a SEPARATE incident from the philippine accusation cases, which WAS in a disputed spatley area. when china argued back, they are referring to that particular incident happened in spratley. the bing minh incident is a separated issue between vietnam/china, which i already said countless time that china was wrong and i apologize vietnamese for it.

This post has been edited by InitialDJay: Jun 8 2011, 02:15 AM

[XigonCongchua]

you guys are arguing two separated cases lumping together by confused media reports.

Ok. I apologize. I don't know about the situation in the Philippines. Media reports always lump everything together.