Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Philippines Defense Forces Forum. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Plucky or rash, the Philippines is right to challenge China
Topic Started: May 31 2013, 11:45 AM (948 Views)
seWer Rat
Member Avatar
amateur sewer cleaner

It is a shame others have not been bold enough to test their maritime claims

Nine dashes, five judges, two contestants. It sounds like a reality television show. In fact, it is the rather obscure – but very important – beginning of a process to delineate fiercely disputed Asian maritime borders according to the rule of law, rather than the law of the jungle.

The nine dashes belong to China. They mark what Beijing says is its historical claim to most of the South China Sea, a vast waterway that borders several other Asian countries. The five judges have been chosen to sit on a tribunal that will determine the validity of that claim under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea.

The two contestants are the Philippines, which brought the case, and China, whose nine-dash line is being challenged. Strictly speaking, there is only one contestant, since Beijing, though a signatory of Unclos, has not deigned to recognise the process.

Asian countries, particularly the not inconsiderable number that have maritime disputes of their own with China, are watching the case with intense interest. Few, though, have dared say much in public for fear of offending Beijing. Whether you judge it plucky or rash, the Philippines has gone out on a limb.

Manila’s hope is to put its bilateral dispute with Beijing over the ownership of waters and islands close to the Philippine coast to international arbitration. There is an air of desperation about its gambit, which suggests it sees no possible progress through dialogue. Professor Jerome Cohen, an authority on Chinese and international law at New York University School of Law, says the Philippine “bombshell” has shocked Beijing with its audacity.

more
To avoid criticism, write nothing, say nothing, do nothing, BE NOTHING.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Goose
Member Avatar
Member
[ *  *  * ]
about time!!!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
patfreak
Recruit
[ * ]
How I wish I can read the article. It is subscription based kasi.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ganymede09
Member
[ *  *  * ]
@pat YOU CAN, just register for a FREE trial subscription... free read 8 articles/month IIRC
LET'S RAISE OUR MIDDLE FINGERs TO THE MIDDLE KINGDOM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Andres Boning
Member
[ *  *  * ]
Plucky or rash, the Philippines is right to challenge China

Posted Image

From the article:

Even if Unclos declares itself competent to judge the case, there are at least three things to bear in mind before we become too excited.


>First, contrary to what is often assumed, international law is not some Newtonian absolute. Rather, it is a set of common rules agreed by nations that emerged from a post-second world war order, and whose realities it reflects. International law is not the word of God.

>Second, there is very little “morality” when it comes to territorial disputes, no matter how loud countries shout about their inalienable rights. In most cases, it is the job of international law to decide who grabbed which territory first. Nation states with their fixed borders are a relatively new phenomenon. Today’s boundaries have more to do with armies and warships than righteousness.

>Third, the case for international law is undermined by the fact that the US, in whose image the postwar order has been created, often stands on the sidelines. Washington, for example, has never ratified Unclos. That makes it hard to insist that Beijing should abide by its decisions. To cite just one example of how Washington has thumbed its nose at international law when it is inconvenient: in 1986 the International Court of Justice ruled that the US had violated Nicaragua’s rights by mining its ports and funding the Contra rebels. Ronald Reagan, then American president, simply ignored the decision. Might is generally right.


Here's a much better link->>> http://johnib.wordpress.com/2013/05/30/plucky-or-rash-the-philippines-is-right-to-challenge-china/
Post lang kasi ng topic article, kung bakit yung may restrictions pa? :armyroleyes: :dunno:
Edited by Andres Boning, May 31 2013, 05:23 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
« Previous Topic · West Philippine Sea · Next Topic »
Add Reply