that might be because China's claims are bullshit. They've got no claim to waters so far from their land. That's like America claiming the south Atlantic is ours because we had a few people living in the Falklands back in the 1800s

Well, not all of them are; the Chinese claim to the Paracel Islands, for instance, is reasonably strong compared to Vietnam's. But a great many of them stem from China's ridiculously fuckhueg claimed◊ sea territory in the South China Sea. I should have mentioned the more legit ones in my previous post.

edited 30th Mar '14 8:33:17 AM by Achaemenid

A comparison between Crimea and South China Sea Diplomacy.

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman said that the US must "respect the facts" with regards to the dispute between the Philippines and China. Oh and two JSDF ships docked in Manila Bay earlier.

Source on that please?

pic of the two.

And I almost forgot, the Singaporean president made a state visit yesterday (lol since it's almost 1am now, so it's yesterday). A "defense dialogue" was proposed by our president.

edited 3rd Apr '14 9:47:33 AM by entropy13

So, they're taking steps to cooperate and not let China roam around freely, basically.

China was never free in the waters to begin with. Taiwan, Japan, South Korea, Phillipines are all USA allies and they flux the islands together, forming a big blockade.

Looks like the JS Asayuki and the Shirane are on a goodwill visit.

They're based in Yokusuka and Sasebo. Japanese military classification considers them destroyers, but they are just frigates.

Apparently the likes of Tibet and Mongolia are "inalienable Chinese territories" for centuries, and of course that also includes those islands which are currently in dispute. So when an authentic 18th Century map made in Germany was given to the Chinese president contradicting those "facts", it's quite obvious that the map is a fake. Those stupid Europeans have no idea of Chinese geography! How dare they make such maps during the 1700s?

South China Sea: Regional States Push Back Against China.

Basically, a recap of the last three weeks.

Can I send you a PM?

With both Russia and China acting provocatively in expanding their borders, avoiding parallels with a certain time period in the early-mid 20th century is getting harder and harder.

The Asian disputes have been simmering for a long time, but it's not anything necessarily new. In the 70s and 80s, China kicked the Vietnamese off the Paracel Islands. Their claims are based on a line originally drawn by Chiang Kai-shek (which he never bothered to explain to anyone and is suspected of pulling out his arse).

Yeah, sure.

Wait, it was Chiang Kai-shek? I always had the impression that it was the PRC/Mao guys.

The conflict stems from China's "nine-dash line", which in essence claims the entirety of the South China sea as its "territory". The nine-dash line was first drawn by the KMT government of China in 1947. They've never actually explained how it works - are the dots a continuous line or simply maximal points? Is it territorial waters, a national border, an EEZ? Is justified by history or recent possession? Indeed, the PRC probably doesn't even know itself; they just use it because it's a convenient pretext for a nautical land grab.

That's not to say none of China's claims in the SCS and the wider Asia are legit, but the nine-dash line is a complete joke.

edited 13th Apr '14 3:09:50 PM by Achaemenid

I know the first part, but didn't knew the second.

You mean the First Island Chain?

Thanks. Sending now.

EDIT: PM sent

edited 14th Apr '14 6:08:04 AM by HallowHawk

No. The FIC is just a concept in Chinese strategic thinking: in the event of war, rush forward and set up an outer line of defense against USPACOM. They don't actually claim it as their territory; and indeed it presumably involves occupying or otherwise attacking Japan and the Phillipines. I was thinking more of their dispute with Vietnam over the Paracel Islands (which they settled by force during and after the Vietnam War anyway).

@Hallow Hawk

If you have something to say about Quag's article or its source, then please feel free to share it with the whole thread I'd be interested, and I'm sure everyone else would be too.

edited 14th Apr '14 6:14:36 AM by Achaemenid

With the Senkakus, China argues that they are not really "islands", and therefore you don't start the EEZ from them. Therefore the EEZ must be starting from their coast, or the nearest major Japanese island. Thus China's EEZ in this scenario includes the Senkakus, while Japan's would not.

With Spratlys, China argues that they are "islands", and as "Chinese" territory the EEZ starts from them. Therefore the Chinese EEZ begins in the middle of the sea, and thus essentially encompasses almost the entirety of it.

In terms of physical features, size, and other characteristics, the Senkakus and Spratlys are roughly the same...

What are you talking about?

I remember reading up on local netizen comments in PH as they question on whether Pinoys of Chinese descent can be counted on, especially the big businessmen who have business operations in mainland China.

Why the Senkaku/Diaoyu Dispute Isn't Going Away Anytime Soon. Obviously.