ok, who does?

there's china, the philippines, and vietnam.

NQSH says that it should be vietnam because they've been claiming it for a hundred years.

the philippines is there because it falls on its territory. (i think we already sent people to live on that island)

the size of the islands is miniscule but it has potential for producing fuel.

so?

EDIT:
says i:


NQSH:


halohalo:


NQSH:


halohalo:


NQSH:


halohalo:

i go for halohalo's reasoning.. that's a fact. vietnam's claim cannot be simply justified by that coz if that is the case, the Sultan of Sulu can claim Sabah from Malaysia because it was given to the Sultanate hundreds of years ago too...

i think the Philippines Government is too STUPID to handle her own international disputes, look at sabah and spartly islands, the philippines have strong and legitimate claims to both and yet who is persuing it?

not stupid but lacks the international influence and backing.. because of wat? poor economy, no military might and is a nation not regionally THAT important compared to Singapore, Brunei, etc

Right it is still being disputed by several countries like China, Vietnam, Philippines, Taiwan, Malaysia, Brunei.

at least the philippines has more right.. hehe

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/low/asia-pacific/3714627.stm

"Vietnam re-builds Spratly airport"

"It is a small airport that was used by South Vietnamese forces during the Vietnam War and was captured in 1975," said Duong Xuan Hoi, of Vietnam's tourist ministry.

The fact that we have an airport on one of the spratly island, by South Vietnam a long time ago shows that it is Vietnam territory or else we wouldn't have had that airport.

The fact that this airport was AFTER the U.N was established and international laws have already been set by the U.N shows that the island was already occupied by Vietnamese troops and used by Vietnam and is considered Vietnamese territory.

This airport didn't magically appear out of nowhere. Funny how when South Vietnam had an airport on the island, no one disputed that South Vietnam had no right to be using those islands. But after people suggested their might be oil all these countries now say that the islands belong to them. LOL

http://www.asiafinest.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=4511
Says I :
the South China Sea basically consists of 東沙群島 Pratas Islands, 西沙群島 Paracel Islands, 中沙群島 ( i forgot its english name) and 南沙群島 Spartly Islands.
According to ROC's South Sea ( South China Sea) policy and CCP Ministry of Diplomacy, China's sovereignty over the entire South Sea is undebatable. We can trace all the way back to 2nd century b.c. ( Han Dynasty). Chinese already discovered Paracel and Spartly. By 7th century A.D ( Tang dyansty), Chinese had already been living on these two groups of Islands, and Spartly was already a part of Guangdong province. In Yuan dynasty, Paracel was named 千里長沙 Qian Li Chang Sha, Spartly was named 萬里石塘 Wan Li Shi Tang. And by Ming and Qing dynasty, the South China Sea islands were all under the jursidction of Chinese government. ( you may refer to 瓊州府誌 or 萬州誌, published in Ming dynasty).
Besides, there are also historical records both from China and foreign countries. Such as Zheng He's 鄭和航海圖 ( Navigation Map of Zheng He), Qing dynasty's 四海總圖 ( General Map of 4 seas), 皇清各直省分圖 ( Map of Imperial Qing's provinces) and 大清一統天下圖 ( Map of Great Qing Unification). plus foreign sources such as J.Johnson of USA, the appendix map in his book 東方航行者 ( I don't know the english name either). and British Navy's China Sea Pilot. In both sources, they all refer South China Sea as "China Sea". very obvious.
After WW2, According to the Cairo Conference, Japanese returned the islands of South Sea to the government of Republic of China. In 1947, the government drew out a U-type boundaries of South China Sea, which covers from 109°30'E to 117°50'E and 3°40'N to 21°58'N.
=============================
Major players :
- legit ownders : China ( ROC and PRC )
- illegal occupants/claimants : Vietnam, Philippines, Malaysia
- someone who's trying to mess up : U.S.A

China's Claims :
(As stated above.)

Vietnam's Claims :
Vietnam also uses the archaepological "evidences", claiming the entire archipelago. It's been said that in 1815 the emperor of Annam, Gia Long, sent an expedition force and occupied the islands, which they referred as Truong Sa. In 1933, French annexed the Spratly islands, therefore Vietnam inherited the islands from the French. In 1973, Spratly islands were declared to be part of the Phuoc Tuy province. Later then it claimed the entire archipelago as a dictrict of Khanh Hoa province.

Malaysia's Claims :
Malaysia current has control of three islands but it claims the whole chain. Based on Law of the Sea Convention, the Spratlys are a part of its continental shelf, therefore Malaysia should be the rightful owner.

Philippines' Claims :
Philippines claimed the Spratlys with the excuse that in 1956, they sent an expedition and occupied some of the islands. A Manila lawyer, Tomas Clomas, named them Kalayaan, which means freedomland. In 1968, Filipino troops were sent to Kalayaan. Since then informal claims had been put forth by the government. In 1978, Filipino government officially declared the Spratly Islands were part of Palawan province " by virtue of their presence on the continental margin of the archipelago", and claimed that the islands were no man's land and free to be claimed.

USA's Claims:
Anything anti-China is good. In 1976, U.S.A stated that China invaded and captured the Paracel Islands from Vietnam, while Paracel Islands were originally under the jursidiction of China. And Americans also described the event as following " Disputes have been propelled by an aggressive China, eager to meet growing energy demands that outstript its supply capacity. Moreover, China's historical interpretation of its sovereignty rights ignores current international law."

Conclusion/Counter-proofs :
- first, what does it say in Law of Sea Convention? It doesn't not state that any islands on the same continental shelf shall belong to the same country. If by that reason, then Philippines should be long to Malaysia or vice versa. And there's no rights granted in the law that any country can extend its territories over to other countries just because they're on the same continental shelf. Law of Sea Convention also causes many problems such as the territorial waters of countries are overlapped ( conflicting), which is also a cause of the South Sea dispute. Moreover, USA has already violated it by flying spy planes over China's territorial waters, but the USA government apparently has not faced any type of formal charge. Therefore, the Law of Sea Convention proves to be inadequate, it must be revised. Meanwhile, this internation "law" has no real values to be regarded.
- Cuurent status : PRC holds 6 islands, ROC holds Tai Ping Island ( Itu Aba island, the largest island in Spratly), Vietnam illegally occupies 17 islands , philippines 9, malaysia 3.
- According to Cairo Conference and Potsdam, Japan had to return all its illegal posssessions back to China , including Manzhou and Taiwan. The Spratlys at the time was a part of Japanese Taiwan colony. Therefore , of course, Spratly Islands were also returned to China along with Taiwan.
- From USA media, it's been claiming that Malaysia and Philippines' claims are all well-coordinated and defined. While China ( both ROC and PRC) has no clear definition of their claims. But in fact, early in 1946 and 1947, the Chinese government had already drawn out the correct longtitudes and latitudes of our territories. Not even mentioning our sovereignty in previous dynasties.
- It's funny how USA keeps saying "aggressive China", while ROC government in Taiwan also uses almost an exactly the same claims as the PRC. No one ever called it "aggressive Taiwan".

Vietnam has ancient evidence showing they were on the islands first, and there is an airport on the island used by South Vietnam during the Vietnam War that shows it was occupied by Vietnam after the U.N was established.

Also Vietnam has the most troops on the Spratly Islands and has the most islands as well, so also by rule of majority, Vietnam wins.

The point is Vietnam claimed it for 150 years and no country raised their voice. When oil is suspected of being present there, all the countries in the region start claiming it as their own.

Tell me, how is it possible to illegally occupy land when the land in question has no legitimate owner, and who makes up the rules about proper ownership of disputed lands? If Vietnam illegally occupies 17 islands then what about the other countries? How are they legally occupying disputed land?

If I remember correctly, Vietnam, China and Taiwan claim the entire group of islands while Brunei, the Philippines and Malaysia claim parts of the Spratleys. History has shown that land ownership falls to the strongest nations, past claims mean nothing since even today's borders are not static. Nations have been conquering and dividing other nations and states for centuries, if it were not for certain countries that wish to maintain the status quo, the world today might look very different from our current map of the world. Besides, did all the said countries not recently agree to not going to war over the Spartleys? I wouldn't want Asian countries to be fighting each other over oil.

And I suppose he thinks that Chinese occupation of these islands are "legal".

First Paracel , now Spratly.

fu-king Paracels which is undisputely ours, but when the South was busy fighting the North, the Chinese sneak in with 11 warships and launch an attack on the Paracels with only 4 warships and the South couldn't reinforce them because they were busy fighting the North. If it wasn't for the North, Vietnam's superior American Warships would have taken out the PLA warships.

That's the sneaky tactics of the shrewd imperialists from the north. And they think we're illegally occupying their islands. If their same argument goes the other way, Mongolia should have the right to China, or Japan legally owns half of China.

I concur.

One major flaw in this stupid argument. Prior to the imperialist Japanese's invasion, Spratlys rightfully belongs to Vietnam, thus after their defeat it must be returned to Vietnam, not Taiwan. You seem to bring up anything that could back up your claim despite how dumb the argument is.

Lets stay on topic and not turn another seemingly legitimate thread into a flame war.

I'm just pissed about the Paracels. It's Vietnam's territory and China knows it and invaded because there was a rumour that there was oil(and if the reports are right, lots of oil has been discovered as well).

Vietnam still claims the Paracel islands, it should be given back to Vietnam, imperialist China.

China has disputes with Vietnam,Soviet Union,Japan, and SEA countries.

What is the next claim that China is gonna make China thinks belongs to her? Portugal? Yeah watch China claim Portugal is legitimately Chinese territory next.

If China keeps behaving like this, it will find that most of not all of her neighbours will turn against her. Might does not make it right.

I'm not very familiar with the conflict over the Paracel Islands. However, if what you several of you have said is true, and Vietnam can defend it, then yes, Vietnam should be able to claim it for herself, but if not....

Dammit why did South Vietnam not concentrate her forces on the Paracel islands instead of North Vietnam. They were gonna lose against North Vietnam anyway. South Vietnam has U.S Warships and U.S warplanes. They could have used their remaining energy on defending the Paracel Islands instead. Dammit. But they didn't send reinforcements and thus it was 11 Chinese warships vs. 4 Vietnamese warships.

My mother told me Vietnam still occupies some of the Paracels, but I don't know if this is true. Can someone please verify it for me? Thanks in advance.

Vietnam lost two ships in the battle over the Paracels right?

Everytime I think about this just makes my blood boils, along with the new treaties regarding land and sea demarcation. It's the Chinese's fault as well as our leaders' fault as well. Those SOB sold our land our ancestors fought and died over to preserve our sovereignty and integrity.

No the paracels is occupied by China. There are only small garrissons due to the fact that the islands are very tiny.

http://members.tripod.com/~doanket/hoangsa/hsrinh.html

Here's a story from one of the navy soldiers who fought to defend the Paracels from China.

To Blank Book: I have no idea how many ships Vietnam lost in defending the Paracels Islands.

http://cat.middlebury.edu/southchinasea/scs-intro-t5.html

yey for halohalo.. the kalayaan islands (8 of them) are not part of Spratly islands therefore RP is not supposed to be involved in the claims, however, China claims these islands too. isn't that too much? anyway, the Kalayaan Group of Islands fall under the EEZ of RP.

it's really sad that people show how materialistic they are, would kill over, start a major war in seasia for a few sand bars just cuz it has oil man.

Damn i wish all this spratly issue be resolve soon and peacefully. Noone wants to have a war because of those little island rocks.

Byron I'm sorry to hear that you lost a relative in the spratly conflict but you need to get the facts right.

After WW2 Paracel islands was occupied by ROC. They only occupied one island(the biggest) but it was understood that all islands belonged to China(ROC/PRC).

In 1974 the South Vietnamese and the north Vietnamese had a cease fire.
The south Vietnamese then claimed that the islands belong to them which infuriated Chiang Kai-shek but fortunately PRC states that the paracel and spratly belongs to 'China'. and PRC will not allow south Vietnamese to illegally occupy them.

To back up the statement PLAN sent a small flotilla of 2 sub hunters and a 2 mine sweepers totalling no more than 2000 tons.

To the PLAN flotilla's surprise the South vietnamese had already landed troops on some islands and also had a flotilla of warships standing by, 4 warships including a destroyer totalling more then 4000 tons.

The warships floated around then both sides backed of as night fell.
Next morning South Viet navy seeing PRC sent only 4 small boats with no reinforcements started to be more aggressive and open fire first.

The battle ended in victory to the PLAN as south Vietnam navy retreated.

PRC then kicked the vietnamese soldiers off the islands and reinforced its warships.

Because there was a typhoon at the time PRC had to supply the warships with submarines.

So please get the info right it was not 11 vs 4 it was 4 vs 4 and only later did the other ships arrive.

True but, before it belonged to the ROC after WW2, it belonged to French Indo-China.

They were then occupied by Japan and then GIVEN to China by Japan briefly.

http://www.encyclopedia.com/html/p/paraceli1.asp



Fact is they were part of Vietnam for a very long time until the Japanese came. How would you like it, if Japan who occupied Manchuria decided to give it to the Russians or the Koreans after WW2?

Do you think Russia or Korea rightfully should keep it since it was given to them for a brief time after WW2? This is just a fictional story made up by me to illustrate my point.



You got proof of this? I already posted a Western article in this forum about China launching the sneak attack with 11 ships.

Look I don't hate Chinese and want to be peaceful to them but you got to admit, it wasn't exactly "clean" to launch an sneak attack without declaring war first when we were busy having our civil war. China should have at least declared war(which they should have done according to international law) instead of launching a sneak attack so we can at least prepare our defences.

I mean how would you like it if during China's civil war, another country came and took advantage of that situation and took some of China's land without even declaring war and just launching a sneak attack to do it? I mean Japan did it in WW2 when China had their civil war, so why be like them?

Again I don't want to be hostile to any Chinese, I'm just trying to illustrate my point here.

here is another:

byron has a long hair
he brush it and brush his straight black hair
one day his hair is gone and he is bald
he brush to much and to hard
is byron is a famous politican who control the fate of rocks in the ocean
or is he just a bald man?

Sadly, If historical facts are to be based, China had all the legal rights to claim these island. They have known the islands for thousands of years.


If economic zones were to be based. Philippines had to be included as it it is nearest country to these islands.

china is lying! :genius:

No, They have a historical accounts written in their annals of history.

so, they can make claims to own the entire philippine archipelago since they known about it even before the creation of the philippine nation

Spratley belongs to ASEAN.....! he..he..
It located deep in Southeast Asia for God sake.

Any ASEAN countries ruling it will do....
Vietnam, Philippines, Brunei, or Malaysia.
However I think Vietnam and Philippines had strong claims.

Yes, i'd prefer a SEA nation than CHINA ruling Spratlys,no offense to the Chinese, but we dun wanna have superpowers in ASEANs doorstep and possibly making a naval base at the Spratlys. Really, China has been a bully lately, they send their stupid leaky warships to everywhere they want, Spratlys, South Korea and Japan (the leaking nuclear sub China sent was chased like a dog out of Japan's water). SEA should stop bickering and make a joint venture claim on the Spratlys, we all need the political will to show China who rules South East Asia!!!!

Malaysia is actually indirectly threatened by the continual presence of Chinese warships off its coast that we're placing 3 three attack submarines in Sabah to keep a watch on Malaysia's territory. Too bad the Philippines are so impoverished to have any capable warships to keep check on the Chinese warships and Vietnam could not spare any capable warship to the Spratlys coz they are so busy with the Chinese on the north.

Bear in mind that military buid up in SEA is partly motivated by China's military presence in Myanmar and their constant approach unto SEA territories.

if big bad china wants to go to war over the spratley's which rightfully belongs to vietnam, then so be it.

heh don't be sad cuz you can't do jack $hit.

let's welcome the americans again to Clark Air Base & Subic Marine & Navy base in exchange for patroling our waters..

with the deadlock thats taking place..no one is making any money off of these oils...we should just combine islands claimed by all SEA country and put it under the command of ASEAN..that way china cant just bully ASEAN into giving them the islands and we can drill that sucker for oil.

I think i rather have the United States do policing in South China Sea if SEA nations are overpowered by PRC. Better than trigger happy Chinese warships going around.Not to mention chinese obsolete nuclear subs that might explode anytime if they hang around too long.

2

When did Malaysia even have a submarine?

i heard they bought 3 submarines from China 2 yrs ago ............lol, ....iono

let's turn the Badjaos and offshore living tribes into Special Ops Navy Seals and burn those warships....... hehe

^no, Let's send our Terrorists & Rebel Groups to the islands(NPA, MILF, Abu Sayyaf, etc) & perform a sucide attack on the enemy..lol

I think the RP owns the Spratley Islands.

But it does not really matter what I think. What counts most is the fact that China - a very powerful nation compared to the Philippines - can grab any island she wants. They can even grab the whole Tibet if they want - without dissent. If we speak in theory: what if China grabs Palawan Island - the biggest island that is closer to the South China sea. What can the lame duck Philippine government do? Declare war against China?