It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
I've KNOWN for over 20yrs that China was the future and NOW its coming true!
MANILA, Philippines – The Philippines has taken the step of bringing its West Philippine Sea (South China Sea) disputes to China before an Arbitral Tribunal under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (Unclos) for a peaceful resolution, Foreign Affairs Secretary Albert Del Rosario announced Tuesday. Del Rosario, in a press conference, said that a note verbale detailing the Philippine’s claim that “challenges before the Arbitral Tribunal the validity of China’s nine-dash claim to almost the entire South China Sea (SCS) including the West Philippine Sea and asking China to desist from unlawful activities that violate the sovereign rights and jurisdiction of the Philippines under the 1982 UNCLOS” was handed to Chinese Ambassador to the Philippines Ma Keqing at around 1 p.m. Tuesday.
Del Rosario, in the press conference, said that the Philippines wants the UN arbitral tribunal to issue a declaration saying that China’s nine-dash line claim were invalid and were contrary to Unclos; directing China to respect the Philippines’ sovereign rights and jurisdiction over its Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), continental shelf, contiguous zone, and territorial sea over the West Philippine Sea; and to ask China to desist from activities that violate the country’s sovereign rights.
China said it was normal for its marine surveillance aircraft to fly over the disputed Diaoyu islands after Japan scrambled fighter jets to intercept the Chinese aircraft early on Thursday. Within hours of the incident, Communist Party of China (CPC) general secretary was quoted by the state media as ordering the largest armed forces in the world, People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to be ready to win “regional wars.”
Why do the Chinese hate wolves? Sarah Palin and her husband would feel right at home there. Wolves are loving and intelligent animals, so for the Chinese to hate them puts a strange twist on this current issue. Well, hopefully Obama and other world leaders will get China and Japan into neutral corners and defuse the situation. As Oliver Stone would say "Where is Henry Wallace when you need him."
Originally posted by michael1983l
reply to post by Flavian
I don't think they share your view in Taiwan or Tiebet.
Originally posted by Flavian
reply to post by HelenConway
China is not an outwardly aggressive nation, never has been. Possibly that position will change in the future but we have no way of judging that yet. Future years will indicate what the future holds in store.
So why can't Australia be a fence sitter? It works well enough for Switzerland. I think it would be a sensible position for Australia to adopt a similar position regarding South East Asia.
Treaties signed by Britain and Russia in the early years of the 20th century, and others signed by Nepal and India in the 1950s, recognized Tibet's political subordination to China. The United States presented a similar viewpoint in 1943. Goldstein also says that a 1943 British official letter "reconfirmed that Britain considered Tibet as part of China."
When Tibet complained to the United Nations through El Salvador about Chinese invasion in November 1950—after China captured Chamdo (or Qamdo) when Tibet failed to respond by the deadline to China's demand for negotiation-- members debated about it but refused to admit the "Tibet Question" into the agenda of the U.N. General Assembly. Key stakeholder India told the General Assembly that "the Peking Government had declared that it had not abandoned its intention to settle the difficulties by peaceful means", and that "the Indian Government was certain that the Tibet Question could still be settled by peaceful means". The Russian delegate said that "China's sovereignty over Tibet had been recognized for a long time by the United Kingdom, the United States, and the U.S.S.R." The United Nations postponed this matter on the pretext Tibet was officially an "autonomous nationality region belonging to territorial China", and because the outlook of peaceful settlement seemed good.
The Agreement was finally accepted by Tibet's National Assembly, which then advised the Dalai Lama to accept it. Finally, on 24 October 1951, the Dalai Lama dispatched a telegram to Mao Zedong:
The Tibet Local Government as well as the ecclesiastic and secular People unanimously support this agreement, and under the leadership of Chairman Mao and the Central People's Government, will actively support the People's Liberation Army in Tibet to consolidate defence, drive out imperialist influences from Tibet and safeguard the unification of the territory and sovereignty of the Motherland.
In 2008, European Union leader Jose Manuel Barroso stated that the EU recognized Tibet as integral part of China: On 1 April 2009, the French Government reaffirmed its position on the Tibet issue.
The United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, Republic of India, Pakistan and Japan have formally adopted the One China policy, under which the People's Republic of China is theoretically the sole legitimate government of China. However, the United States and Japan acknowledge rather than recognize the PRC position that Taiwan is part of China.
In 1979, the United States reestablished relations with Beijing and signed a joint communiqué that reasserted the One China policy. According to it, "the Government of the United States of America acknowledges the Chinese position that there is but one China and Taiwan is part of China." At that time, President Jimmy Carter terminated diplomatic relations with the ROC government in Taiwan.
In the case of the United States, the One-China Policy was first stated in the Shanghai Communiqué of 1972: "the United States acknowledges that Chinese on either side of the Taiwan Strait maintain there is but one China and that Taiwan is a part of China. The United States does not challenge that position."
Originally posted by woogleuk
reply to post by LeLeu
As long as you carry that union flag on your nations own flag, I think any one of us Brits would take up arms to defend you, so yes.
EDIT: Actually, scrap that, wrong thing to say as not all commonwealth countries display the union flag......
As long as you are part of the British commonwealth......is what I should have said.
Another reason I change what I said....apparently all of Cuba has gone union flag mad, they are all wearing it!! Have you seen the recent photos? There is more union flags walking around in cuba than there is flying in the whole bloody commonwealth!!! What gives??
For the record, for those who are unsure, Cuba is NOT part of the commonwealthedit on 22/1/13 by woogleuk because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by woogleuk
reply to post by daaskapital
In fairness Dass.......we did have our hands full during WWII.
If someone like me, who is borderline hippy/pacifist, and against war/guns etc etc, says he will pick up arms, I think it's a safe bet lots of others would.
Originally posted by michael1983l
reply to post by Iamschist
Austraila should not be concerned from bullying tactics from either side of the potential conflict. Australia should side with whoever their electorate want their government too. Australia also has no reason to be scared of either power as Geographically, Australia has to be one of the hardest countries in the world to attack. If anything does happen and Australia require any assistance from the UK, our boys would do it with honour for our Commonwealth partners, but I am sure they are capable of looking after themselves anyway.