VietWill - Defending Vietnamese lives and borders in the South China Sea

Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has.

- Margaret Mead

Most Discussed

Latest Updates

Recently Discussed

If they can do it, why can't we?

By Tony Le
25 May 2008

Malaysia and Singapore took their dispute over sovereignty over islands in overlapping waters to the U.N International Court of Justice and a decision was rendered last Friday (Read the news story posted below for the result of the ruling). Apparently, both countries have accepted the decision even though Singapore came out the more favored side. Reflecting upon what has taken place in this case, my thought immediately turns to the Paracel Islands being disputed between Vietnam and China. If Singapore and Malaysia can settle their case in ICJ, then why not Vietnam and China?

The Vietnamese government needs to take more aggressive action to propose that this case be settled in an international court of law in which China will not be able to use its upper hand to push people around as it would in bilateral negotiations. Vietnam's arguments with respect to sovereignty over the Paracel Islands are extremely well-founded and much more consistent than China's cut and paste evidence. If one reads literature from China, one even comes across a ridiculous idea like since Vietnam was a vassal state of China in the past, then Vietnam couldn't possibly have sovereignty over any islands because anything that Vietnam claimed would also belong to China.

China has always been against third party arbitration as a method of resolving the conflict because it knows has a lot to lose if it ever went to court. However, if some actions are not taken sooner, the hand of time will eventually make all wrongs become right, all violations become forgotten, and all peculiarities become ordinary. I hate to imagine what would happen in 30-50 yeas if the status quo continues.

_________________________________________________________
Malaysian PM calls for calm after court ruling on island

Associated Press
24 May 2008

KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia -- Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi has urged Malaysians to remain calm over an international court ruling awarding sovereignty of a disputed island to neighbor Singapore, news reports said Saturday.

"Any discussion to be held or action to be taken with Singapore must be done in a peaceful manner and with understanding from both sides," Abdullah was quoted as saying by The Star daily.

Aides traveling with Abdullah could not immediately be contacted.

The International Court of Justice on Friday gave Singapore ownership of a two-acre (0.8 hectare) island off the southern tip of peninsula Malaysia that houses a strategic lighthouse.

The island, at the eastern entrance to the Singapore Strait, is listed on most maps as Pedra Branca but is known by Malaysia as Pulau Batu Puteh. It lies about 40 miles (65 kilometers) from Singapore, but only seven miles (10 kilometers) off the Malaysian coast.

The two former British colonies were united in 1963, but split amid bitter political discord two years later. Their usually cordial ties occasionally still turn testy.

Abdullah said he plans to meet with the sultan of Malaysia's southernmost Johor state to explain the outcome, The Star reported. "There will be people who will be emotional, especially in Johor," Abdullah reportedly said.

In its ruling, the UN court gave Malaysia ownership of a smaller, uninhabited rock cluster. Sovereignty over a third tiny island, in overlapping territorial waters, should be decided by the two countries themselves, the court said.

The dispute erupted after Malaysia published a map in 1979 referring to the lighthouse island as its territory for the first time in modern history. The two countries agreed in 2003 to submit the case to the UN court.

The court ruled in favor of Singapore's argument that it had exercised sovereign powers over the rock since the lighthouse opened in 1851, with no protest from Malaysia until 30 years ago. Singapore operates the lighthouse.

Singapore wins world court battle over island

23 May 2008

THE HAGUE, Netherlands (AP) — The International Court of Justice has awarded to Singapore the disputed island of Pedra Branca.

The island is a granite rock that hosts a strategic lighthouse in the Singapore Straits whose sovereignty is disputed by Malaysia.

Malaysia knows the island as Pulau Batu Puteh. It claims the island historically belongs to the sultanate of Johor, now a Malaysian state.

The court of 16 judges agrees that the former British colony of Singapore has been acting as the sovereign power on the island since the British built the lighthouse in 1851.

The court says two even smaller disputed islands belong to Malaysia.

The U.N. court's decision Friday ends a dispute that began when Malaysia challenged Singapore's control in 1979.

Comments

Add New

RSS

mao	\|05-26-2008 21:26:59

Two factors against viet claim.
First Paracel island doesn't sit in the vietnamese continental shelf. Second factor is China has adminstered the island most recently for more than 30 yrs and still does.

Reply | Quote

Tony	\|05-27-2008 06:57:42

Mao,

What you are saying can hardly be considered factors against Vietnam's claims at all.

1)China itself does not claim the Paracel Islands based on the continental shelf principle. So it does not matter whether the Paracels lies on the Vietnamese Continental shelf or not. Remember that the Paracel Islands are approximately equidistant from Vietnam and from Hainan.

If continental shelf principle is the primary reason for sovereignty, then China needs to get out of the Spratly Is. right away because the Spratlys is over 600 nautical miles away from the closes Chinese undisputed territory, and clearly on Vietnam's continental shelf. So be careful about using one argument in one place and get trapped in another situation.

2) 30 years of administration as a result of a military invasion and illegal occupation does not warrant legimate administration. If the ICJ deems that this occupation is illegal, then China needs to vacate the islands. That's not a problem when China ha...

Reply | Quote

Tony	\|05-27-2008 07:00:17

needs to vacate the islands. Legitimate occupation is characterized by constant occupation, over a long period of time, carried out in a peaceful manner, and recognized by other countries. In this case, China's occupation of the Paracel Is. does not satisfy the criteria.

Reply | Quote

mao	\|05-27-2008 08:21:31

check out the geographically map, neither the paracel and spratley islands are on vietnamese and chinese continental shelves. Besides they are uninhahited by civilians So, they are free to be grab by whoever.
It just happened China grabbed it and administered for more 30 yrs already.

Tell you the truth because those islands far away from both countries and sit in the middle. EAch country has as much rights to them. It's up to each country's capibility.

Reply | Quote

bibo	\|05-27-2008 09:11:19

I don't think forceful invasion and occupation is acceptable in modern world anymore, unfortunately.

Military strength is important, but it's no longer the only way to go about things. If we keep using force to solve conflict and acquire things, this world can never be in peace.

China is strong now, but it was weak at some point in history, and it sure did experience many bitter losses. What guarantee China will not be weak again? Will you use the same argument by then?

Reply | Quote

china - when china is weak

|08-26-2008 04:01:03

we chinese have been suffered for almost 200 years, but now things changed and it is time for us to get back to the center stage of the world! sure china might be relatively weak some time in the future, but it sure will still be strong enough to defend itself from all the surrending nations!

Reply | Quote

mao	\|05-27-2008 10:06:19

what do you mean forceful invasion as of modern time not valid?? Don't be unclear. define a time.

Heck, China overtook Tibet and it 's recognzied internationally as chinese terriotory and it's populated unlike those islands.

So,you have to argue down the tibet issue first before it could proceed.

Reply | Quote

MAO's concubine

|05-27-2008 18:21:11

Dear Mao:

Allow me to quote yourself: "don't be unclear"
Can you name what country in this world recognized Tibet as part of Mr. Sino's territory?

Reply | Quote

mao	\|05-28-2008 10:30:08

Y R an idiot.
All the countries and even Dalai recognize Tibet is part of China.
The question is rather which country recongize Tibet is an independent country??

Reply | Quote

Tony	\|05-27-2008 21:44:29

"Besides they are uninhahited by
civilians So, they are free to be grab by whoever." - Mao

Mao, you apparently don't have knowledge of international law regarding legal occupation of territories. Please do some research first before you express ideas that are totally incorrect. Your method of expresssing ideas now is quite representative of the belligerent and arrogant attitude represented in the Chinese worldview.

Reply | Quote

mao	\|05-28-2008 10:54:30

classic case would the Falkland island grabbed by the British off the coast of Argentina. look at the map, the British went all the way to South America to grab that. And Britain , Argentina went to war for that in 1980s.

Reply | Quote

MAO's concubine

|05-29-2008 05:12:50

Dear Mao:

Allow me to remind you that when you join in any forum discussion, your educative attitude is expected.

Again you're unclear yourself. If this world ever recognized Tibet then it is in the sense of the land that China militarily and culturally invaded from peace-loving Tibetian.
The incidents of Falkland and Paracels and Spratlys islands involved 2 different powers with different attitudes. The British does not come with a security threat. The Chinese on the other hand comes with not only bullying attitude but also obvious military and political threats not just to Vietnam but also Southeast Asia as a whole.
Whatever, if you want to discuss Tibet or Falkland then you should go to their websites.

Reply | Quote

mao	\|05-29-2008 09:02:17

Pls educate you first before open your mouth. Your ignorance of historical facts amazes me.

Just ask any country does tibet has its own sovereign? That's a big FAT NO to your face.

What do you mean British is NOT a threat to the Argentina?? During the Falkland war, British sunk their destroyers and killed the Argentinan navy men.

R U a numb skull or just refuse acknowledge the facts and history.

Reply | Quote

Write comment

Name:

Email:

Website:

Title:

UBBCode: