US to operate 'wherever' law allows in South China Sea

[MowCowWhoHow III]

Source: AFP

Beijing (AFP) - The US military will continue to operate wherever international law allows, a top US admiral said in Beijing on Tuesday, a week after America infuriated China by sailing close to artificial islands it is building in the South China Sea.

"International seas and airspace belong to everyone and are not the dominion of any single nation," Admiral Harry Harris said at the Stanford Center at Peking University.

"Our military will continue to fly, sail, and operate whenever and wherever international law allows. The South China Sea is not -- and will not -- be an exception," he added, according to a transcript.

Harris is the head of the US Pacific Command and his public declaration in the Chinese capital is a mark of US resolve over the waterway, where Beijing has built up rocks and reefs into artificial islands with facilities for military use.

Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/us-operate-wherever-international-law-allows-china-sea-050639233.html

[bemildred]

1. So Admirals make our foreign policy these days? nt

[valerief]

2. The military gets all our money anyway. nt

[hack89]

3. You better believe this comes straight from the White House

remarks like this are carefully vetted.

[bemildred]

4. I hope you are wrong about that.

And the US' military has a long tradition of picking fights the political classes would prefer to avoid.

[hack89]

5. So you really think the White House doesn't support this policy?

they did, after all, order a Navy ship to challenge China's territorial claims only last week.

[bemildred]

6. I don't know. I don't think you know either.

I would say the "White House" is divided on the subject, if I had to hazard a guess.

[hack89]

8. The President is in charge. The White House can't be divided.

I am certain that President Obama was aware of these comments and approved them. Unless you think that he is weak and feckless and is not really in command. Is that what you really think?

[bemildred]

9. Bullshit. nt

[hack89]

11. So President Obama is not in charge? He can't control the military?

you really believe that?

[bemildred]

13. President Bush had a united White House. Whoopee.

I prefer a divided one, as far as that goes.

All this clueless belligerence is a road to nowhere.

[hack89]

19. So you agree that Obama approved this strategy.

you just don't like it.

Do you think China's belligerency in grabbing vast swathes of other country's territorial waters is justified? Or you just don't care?

[EX500rider]

26. "All this clueless belligerence is a road to nowhere."

"Clueless belligerence"?

Is that what it's called?

More like don't let China set a precedent of pumping in a artificial island far from China and then calling it part of their country and claiming all the waters for 360 kilometers in every direction. If that was the case then the US owns all the Gulf of Mexico due to our oil rigs.

Meanwhile the Philippines and its closest neighbors are slowly losing control of their offshore waters to increasingly aggressive Chinese claims. The Philippines faces losing control of 80 percent of its waters in the West Philippine Sea while Malaysia loses 80 percent of its coastal waters off Sabah and Sarawak. Vietnam loses half its coastal waters while Brunei loses 90 percent. Even Indonesia loses 30 percent of its coastal waters facing the South China Sea.
China is doing all this by ignoring the 1994 Law of the Sea treaty which they signed.

What we are doing here is standing up for some small weak countries to China's bullying.

[iandhr]

27. China's territorial claims should be challenged

They are claiming rights to the whole sea many of these waters are well within the 12 mile limit of Vietnam and the Philippines.

[hack89]

28. I agree. nt

[iandhr]

30. At least we agree on something

lol

[cstanleytech]

14. No, sounds more like they were stating the obvious which is that the US much every other

country has the legal right to sail its ships wherever it wants when it comes to international waters like the South China Sea.

[bemildred]

16. Dick waving is not a strategy. It is not even a good tactic. nt

[cstanleytech]

17. Never said it was.

Both are being dicks but one is just being a bigger one and its not the US.

[bemildred]

18. Well this has been interesting, but I have to go.

[iandhr]

29. No

China has claimed pretty much the entire South China Sea including waters that international law recognizing as the sovereign territory of other nations.


I guarantee you other nations are glad the US Navy is their to provide a check on China.

As long as the ship don't sail in the legitimate territorial water of China which is 12 nautical miles we are on sold legal grounds.

[geek tragedy]

23. No, this standard international maritime politics.

If someone makes a bogus claim, either you challenge it by sailing through there without permission, or you acquiesce.

[pennylane100]

25. Any time an Admiral makes a policy statement,

do you really think it is one that has not been approved or even written for him/her by the White House. On the rare occasion where a rogue statement has been issued, it is usually followed by a White House clarification and a change of employment status for the issuer of the statement.

[padfun]

7. So if Russia wants to put Nukes in Cuba again,

we would have no problems with that? It surely isn't against international law.

[hack89]

10. You would have to read the fine print of all the disarmament treaties signed since 1963

it might very well break an international treaty.

[Calista241]

12. There's always a price to pay for these kind of decisions

Russia is certainly capable of putting nuclear missiles in Cuba. Do they want us to counter that deployment by putting missiles in Poland? Or the Ukraine?

Does Cuba want us to initiate another full on embargo of Cuba (and not a half ass'd embargo like we had for 50 years)?

Essentially, China is telling us that a bunch of stuff we have been doing for 50 years is no longer allowable because they built an island. We're responding by saying "yes I see your island over there and I don't care."

[cstanleytech]

15. More like they are telling China that just because island in an area that they did not have

sovereignty over before does mean they now gain it.
It would be just as much BS if the US built an island there and tried to claim the area as part of its territorial waters, it wouldnt true for the US and its not true for China and besides there plenty of countries right next to these "islands" that have far more legitimate claims on the area than China.

[IthinkThereforeIAM]

22. Russia is not building an island chain to Florida...

... and calling it a valid piece of territory, as China is doing in the South China Sea, trying to encroach on Japanese, Philippine and Taiwan territorial rights. Sorry if you all missed that, because that is what this is all about. China illegally creating new territories by shipping in sand, dirt, rubbish or whatever will stick in place long enough for them to put in airstrips. Google is your friend.

[uawchild]

24. Actually, reefs/rocks are recognized as valid territory by international law.

If the reef/rock is above sea level at mean high tide, it is recognized as legitimate territory and can be used to assert claims of 12 mile zones around them and can also be enlarged by landfilling.

You raise an interesting point about China encroaching on Taiwan's territorial claims. Hmmm. Don't BOTH China and Taiwan claim to be the legitimate government of ALL of China? Don't both nations hold to a "one China" principle? So, in effect, if you think Taiwan has valid claims, you are acknowledging that the legitimate government of China has a right to that claim -- the only disagreement is WHO is the legitimate government of all of China.

"One-China policy

The One-China policy (simplified Chinese: 一个中国政策; traditional Chinese: 一個中國政策; pinyin: yīgè Zhōngguó zhèngcè) refers to the policy or view that there is only one state called China, despite the existence of two governments that claim to be "China".

As a policy, this means that countries seeking diplomatic relations with the People's Republic of China (PRC) must break official relations with the Republic of China (ROC) and vice versa. Hence, all the countries recognizing the ROC recognize it as the sole legitimate representative of all of China and not just the island of Taiwan and other islands which it controls.[1] Similarly, all states that recognize the PRC either recognise the PRC as the legitimate representative of Taiwan or acknowledge the PRC's views on the matter.[2]

The One China policy is also different from the "One China principle" (simplified Chinese: 一个中国原则; traditional Chinese: 一個中國原則; pinyin: yīgè Zhōngguó yuánzé), which is the principle that insists both Taiwan and mainland China are inalienable parts of a single "China".[3] A modified form of the "One China" principle known as the "1992 Consensus" is the current policy of both the PRC and ROC governments. Under this consensus, both governments agree that there is only one sovereign state encompassing both mainland China and Taiwan, but disagree about which of the two governments is the legitimate government of this state.

The One-China principle faces opposition from the movement for Taiwan independence, which pushes to establish the Republic of Taiwan and cultivate a separate identity apart from China called "Taiwanization". Taiwanization's influence on the government of the ROC has caused instability: after the Communist Party of China expelled the ROC in the Chinese Civil War from most of Chinese territory in 1949 and founded the PRC, the ROC's Chinese Nationalist government, which still held Taiwan, continued to claim legitimacy as the government of all of China. Under former President Lee Teng-hui, additional articles were appended to the ROC constitution in 1991 so that it applied effectively only to the Taiwan Area prior to national unification.[4] However, current ROC President Ma Ying-jeou has re-asserted claims on mainland China as recently as October 8, 2008.[5]"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-China_policy

[IthinkThereforeIAM]

31. Thanks for the diversion...

... while I have been cognizant of the "One China", dogmas of both Taiwan and mainland China for decades, my point, and just about everyone else's it appears, is that PRC is turning those REEFS into ISLANDS for the sake of encroachment and blocking of international access to the South China Sea.

As per the OP: "Harris is the head of the US Pacific Command and his public declaration in the Chinese capital is a mark of US resolve over the waterway, where Beijing has built up rocks and reefs into artificial islands with facilities for military use."

Good marks on your efforts to fully inform us.

[uawchild]

32. Here is more hard info on the Spratly Islands dispute backing my own point on this...

Last edited Wed Nov 4, 2015, 09:51 AM - Edit history (3)

"my point, and just about everyone else's it appears, is that PRC is turning those REEFS into ISLANDS for the sake of encroachment and blocking of international access to the South China Sea."

Blocking of international access? When has China done that more so than any other claimant nation? Oh, wait, they have not. It's just the media fear and warmongering while trying to speculate and hypothesize.

As for "encroachment", claimant nations all have bases and are occupying different isles and reefs in the Spratly Islands, the proper way to resolve these disputes is, of course, either in court or by arbitration between the respective nations.

Please note that besides China, that Viet Nam, Taiwan and Malaysia are all claiming AND occupying reefs/isles in the zone claimed by the Philippines -- so why is only China being demonized?



Also, are you aware that Vietnam is also doing massive landfilling in the South China Sea? And why not, landfilling to CREATE an island is illegal, but landfilling to enlarge a reef or isle that is above mean high tide sea level is completely legal under international law. Such enlarged reefs are only entitled to a 12 mile claim zone around them though. China and Vietnam have both been enlarging existing reef and isles.

"Satellite images captured by Taiwan indicate that Vietnam is pushing for land reclamation much harder than China in the disputed South China Sea, the Christian Science Monitor reported on Sept. 23.

Wang Cheng-gi from the Satellite Surveying Center of the Department of Land Administration under Taiwan's Ministry of the Interior, who is in charge of a US$3 million project to produce high-resolution satellite images of the disputed South China Sea, said he was surprised to find out that Vietnam is developing reefs and artificial islands in the disputed Spratlys. He also said that one Vietnamese landfill project spans 11 football fields.

"Everyone is talking about mainland China, but Vietnam is going all out," Wang said."

http://www.wantchinatimes.com/news-subclass-cnt.aspx?id=20141030000057&cid=1101



Additionally, are you aware that China is not the first but the FIFTH claimant nation to build an air strip in the disputed Spratly Islands? If not, please take this opportunity to read this informative article:

"AIRPOWER PROJECTION
Much attention has been paid to China’s new airstrip on Fiery Cross Reef. How does this runway compare to Malaysia’s on Swallow Reef, the Philippines’ on Thitu Island, Taiwan’s on Itu Aba, or Vietnam’s on Spratly Island? Below, explore infographics on each claimant’s airstrip size and the aerial operating range each enables. Watch an exclusive interview on China’s Fiery Cross runway with RAND Senior International Defense Analyst Timothy R. Heath. View satellite images of each Spratly airstrip and read more about the types of operations that each may enable."
http://amti.csis.org/airstrips-scs/

[IthinkThereforeIAM]

33. Still ignoring the fact that PRC/Mainland China/China...

... is working to obstruct international maritime laws. That 12 mile thingy, by extending these reefs, thereby creating less actual water in the South China Sea.

I am going to go take a nap.

There you go again, huh?

[uawchild]

34. More information and less rhetoric is always helpful, correct?

Information showing what is actually going on is a useful tool for readers. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to post so much information about this complex issue in my replies to you.

[Sunlei]

20. I bet ALL of Chinas 'tiny neighbor countries' want the same exact thing.

[uawchild]

21. Yawn. China will continue to ignore us and play the long game.

Last edited Tue Nov 3, 2015, 02:52 PM - Edit history (2)

What's the US going to do besides sail around aimlessly as China continues to build up a military presence in the middle of the South China Sea?

Restrict Chinese imports to the US? lol, um I mean no, of course not.

Stop borrowing money from China? Again, no.

Bomb or physically occupy these reefs? Hell no.

China will continue to assert it's historical claims in the Spratly Islands, while gradually expanding both their military and economic presence there. And there is nothing the US will do to stop it, besides public relations stunts.

Claimant nations all have bases and are occupying different isles and reefs in the Spratly Islands, the proper way to resolve these disputes is, of course, either in court or by arbitration between the respective nations.

Please note that besides China, that Viet Nam, Taiwan and Malaysia are all claiming AND occupying reefs/isles in the zone claimed by the Philippines -- so why is only China being demonized?