Viet Nam Human Rights
»
Analysis-Comment
»
home
»
China’s historical arguements definitely unfounded
China’s historical arguements definitely unfounded
24/6/14
Recently, in a number of international conferences, many senior officials,
generals, diplomats, scholars from China
voiced that from the second century BC, the Chinese had conducted maritime
operations in the South China Sea and
discovered “Xisha” (Hoang Sa) and it had sovereignty over “Nansha” island (Spratly)... All “arguments” that are
aimed at justifying the Paracel and Spratly
Islands locating in the territory of China. However, if we have futher
analysis, we will see them as baseless arguments from the Chinese.
Principles for determining the “right of acquiring territory” in
international law
In the long historical development of international law, the principles and
establishment of legal sovereignty have been formed on the basis of
international practice but the principle of “territorial acquisition” is new
method of objectively assessing science for a legal opinion by the parties, who
have disputes, outlined principles and are recognized by the world and widely
used such as the principle of “the right of acquiring territory”.
From the sixteenth century, the global maritime powers figured out the
legal principles to the acquisition of territory to the discovered territory,
including the principle of “priority to possess” (or also known as the
principle of “right to discovery”) and together with the principle that “truly
possess”.
Under the principle of “the right to possess priority”, international law
takes precedence to nation discovered that territory first. The “discovery” was
later supplemented by the “nominal possessor”, ie countries discovered a
territory must leave traces on the newly discovered territories. However, the
principle of “nominal possess” does not basically solve complicated disputes between
the great powers for the “promised land”, in contrast, leads to many drastical
confrontations between major powers bacause of unexplainable the concept of
“nominal possess”... So how, after meeting in Africa in 1885 among 13 European
countries and United States,
especially, after the session of the International Law Institute in Lausanne (Switzerland)
in 1888, it was agreed to adopt a new rule acquisition, which is the principle
of “truly possess”.
Due to the rationality and validity of this assumption so jurists and
international tribunals applied this principle to resolve the sovereignty
disputes over the islands.
Therefore, the arguments that China uses to justify their views after using
force to occupy Hoang Sa and Truong Sa of Vietnam based on the so-called theory
of “historic rights” is an extremely thesis backward, contrary to international
law and is not used to handle disputes over territorial acquisition of the
Archipelago.
Vietnam has sovereignty over
Hoang Sa and Truong Sa
First, Vietnam has sufficient historical evidences and legal basis to assert sovereignty over the Paracels and Spratlys. The official historical records have shown that, at least since the seventeenth century, the emperors of Vietnam has established its sovereignty and activities claims, enforced state sovereignty peacefully and continuously for the Paracels and Spratlys when the territory was considered derelict. After the Nguyen Dynasty, the French protectorate and Vietnam continued to maintain sovereignty and manager for the two islands.
First, Vietnam has sufficient historical evidences and legal basis to assert sovereignty over the Paracels and Spratlys. The official historical records have shown that, at least since the seventeenth century, the emperors of Vietnam has established its sovereignty and activities claims, enforced state sovereignty peacefully and continuously for the Paracels and Spratlys when the territory was considered derelict. After the Nguyen Dynasty, the French protectorate and Vietnam continued to maintain sovereignty and manager for the two islands.
On August 1951, at San Francisco peace conference to resolve territorial
disputes after World War II, 51 national leaders, recognized the sovereignty of
Vietnam over Paracels and Spratlys. On July 1954, the parties, including China, participated in the 1954 Geneva
Convention on restoring peace in Indochina, signed the Geneva Treaty to
recognize and respect the independence and territorial integrity of Vietnam. After
the French’s withdrawal, in 1956, Chinese troops invaded eastern region and in
January 1974, representing the left western region of Paracel
Islands from Vietnam. Then,
in March 1988, China used
force to conquer the Johnson Island under Vietnam’s management.
According to international law, the use of force to take possession of territory
is not recognized. The aforementioned action of China has violated a fundamental
principle of international law that prohibits the use of force in international
relations, stated in Article 2, paragraph 4 of the UN Charter. Therefore, China’s occupation of the Paracel and Spratly
islands today is not valuable, though how long China has been there and what
measures implemented to enforce the management. China claims indisputable
sovereignty for “Xisha” (Hoang Sa), “Nansha” (Truong Sa) is illegal.
The A decade ago, China
introduced the concept of' “peaceful rise” and “peaceful development” then reassured
the world of its development. However, with the aggression and provocation from
2009 back here in the South China Sea and East China Sea, the world has seen a
growing gap between words and actions of China. The world is looking at China as a superpower is increasingly popular to
use the power to change the status quo in the region, claims by creating the
“new reality” in the South China Sea.
Popular Posts
-
Religion is a part of the spiritual life in society, this phenomenon of the superstructure has been strongly changed with economic - social... -
Vietnam has just done well for the second cycle of Universal Periodical Review (UPR) in Geneva, Switzerland. So, what’s the UPR? an... -
Thai people in Shutdown Bangkok protests Not until this crisis, we have realized the ne... -
Representatives from foreign countries congratulate Viet Nam on its election to the Human Rights Council for the first time on November ... -
A street flowers vendor in Hanoi Another new spring has come to Vietnam, bring... -
If nothing changes, there will be a preferential credit program with hundreds of thousands billion of capital for agriculture and r... -
Recently, several anti-governmental individuals have established series of illegal groups and organizations in the name of civil soci... -
Radio Free Asia (RFA) is a private, nonprofit international broadcasting agency of the United States government that broadcasts and...
All comments [ 10 ]
China’s deployment of its drilling rig in Vietnam’s exclusive economic zone and continental shelf is a serious violation of international law. Vietnam can sue China in the international court.
The coastal states have jurisdiction (allowing or not allowing, checking, monitoring, handling or judging) for the installation of artificial islands and works such as underground cables, underground pipelines, oil rigs.
It is an exclusive right, meaning that if the coastal states do not explore or exploit natural resources in their continental shelf, no one has the right to exploit without the consent and agreement of that country (Article 77).
The deployment of a drilling platform in Vietnam’s waters has seriously violated the laws of Vietnam, especially the Law of the Sea 2012.
China’s actions make the public feel like they have "forgotten" their responsibility to the commitments that they signed.
China's actions have completely broken the agreement in principle resolving maritime issues between Vietnam and China that the most senior leaders of two sides signed in 2011.
The Law of the Sea 2012 was enacted on the basis of inheriting the laws of the sea that Vietnam had issued before, such as the Declaration of the Government of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam on Vietnam’s waters dated 12/5/1977; the Declaration of the Government of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam on Vietnam’s baseline dated 12/11/1982; the National Borders Act 2003 and other legal documents.
China, as a permanent member of the UN Security Council, must play an important role in the construction and protection of international law, and as an economic, military and cultural powerhouse, must be exemplary.
The two sides should alternately hold biannual meetings between the heads of Government-level border negotiation delegations and extraordinary meetings if necessary.
China must establish a direct hotline between the government-level delegations to help with the timely resolution of maritime issues.
Your comments