THIS AFFIRMS THE ADAGE THAT WHILE ONE MAY FOOL SOME PEOPLE ALL THE TIME, NOT EVERYONE GETS FOOLED ALL THE TIME. REAL SCHOLARS SPEAK THE TRUTH AFTER CAREFUL RESEARCH AND THOROUGH ASSESSMENT. Chinese Scholars Call For The Elimination Of Baseless Claim Of 9-Dash Line The 9-dash line (or cow-tongue line) which China unilaterally draws in the East Sea has provoked not only Vietnamese scholars and researchers, but also Chinese scholars. Recently, a Chinese scholar whose pen name is Li Woteng, posted on Sina, China’s biggest internet forum, an article entitled “The nine-dash line: keep or eliminate” to expose the irrational claim. The article shows that truth is still respected and China cannot arbitrarily announce sovereignty over territory it has never owned. The article says international scholars have always said that the key issue in the East Sea isn’t sovereignty over the islands, but the “9-dash line”. Li says nations bordering the East Sea have arguments and evidence of their sovereignty over the islands. Only China’s “9-dash line” claim has no evidence. China has talked a lot about the “9-dash line” but has only a vague explanation of what the “9-dash line” is. The Chinese government has no original documents that clearly define the “9-dash line”. In fact, the “9-dash line” was drawn on the map arbitrarily. This shows the “9-dash line” has no concrete Here is Li Woteng’s article: “For the international scholar circle, the key issue in the East Sea is not the sovereignty of islands, but the “nine-dash line”, which should be resolved first to ensure peace in the East Sea. The elimination of the “nine-dash line” is of both theoretical and practical importance. Here is some analysis of the issue: First, setting up the “nine-dash line” is baseless. All parties in the East Sea have arguments for their sovereignty over islands, but only China’s “nine-dash line” has no basis. In 1936, Bai Mei Chu drew the dashed line during China’s reconstruction without any justification. He wrote “those were the places that our fishermen earned their livelihood and they obviously belong to our sovereignty”. There is no evidence that people conducted any investigation before drawing that line. So we can say that the line was drawn subjectively. The “nine-dash line” was officially drawn on the Chinese map when the second map of the East Sea was drawn (at that time, it had 11 dashes). Since then, the “nine-dash line” has had no definition, no one knows what it is, and the government hasn’t got any explanation. There’s an assumption that an official in charge of home affairs Zheng Si Yue drew it on the map arbitrarily”. Second, the “nine-dash line” is not the sea territory line of China and lacks any legal basis. China has talked about the “nine-dash line”, but it has never clarified what the “nine-dash line” is. It is ridiculous that the “nine-dash line” has been on the Chinese map for more than 60 years, but Chinese experts still argue about it. The Chinese government has neither declared its opinions nor issued a document or a definition about the “nine-dash line”. The 9-dash line has been adjusted several times on Chinese maps. The adjustment includes the omission of 2 dashes within the Tonkin Gulf (making the 11-dash line under Chinese Nationalist Party rule the 9-dash line of today) and some other minor changes. This suggests there is no clear legal origin for the 9-dash line. Legally, the 9-dash line does not define China’s territorial waters. The 1992 Law on the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone of the People’s Republic of China stipulated that China’s waters extend 12 nautical miles from the baseline. The 1996 Declaration on the Baseline of the Territorial Sea defined the Shisha archipelago (known in Vietnam as the Hoang Sa archipelago) as the baseline. So the waters 12 nautical miles out from this baseline do not belong to China but still are contained within the 9-dash line. This proves that the 9-dash line is not China’s sea demarcation line. Chinese experts on maritime law have said the 9-dash line is neither a territorial line nor an indication of China’s territory. It just refers to islands claimed by China. So deletion of the line creates no legal difficulty. This analysis by author Li Woteng from the perspective of history and national legacy was posted on China’s Sina online forum. This is not the first time Chinese scholars have voiced an objection to the “9-dash line”. Li’s arguments echo many other opinions against the claim. An article entitled “Erroneous war illusion” posted on China’s Global News publicly rejected the “9-dash line” and warned that “People who advocate war have weak minds. A fragile and deceitful self-respect cannot make success. Warlike minds will lead to injustice”. Xue Litai, a famous scholar and commentator for Hongkong’s Phoenix online newspaper, pointed out 3 problems with the “9-dash line”. First, China drew 11 dashes on the map without demarcating the marine boundary with neighboring countries and without international acknowledgement. Second, China has never said whether the “9-dash line” is a national border line or a traditional demarcation in the sea. Beijing has not presented any definition, longitude, or latitude for the line, but has simply drawn the line on their maps. How can they persuade others? Xue said if Beijing affirms that the “9-dash line” is China’s national border line, why has China never mentioned this during diplomatic exchanges since Vietnam’s national unification and claim of sovereignty over scores of big and small islands within this sea area? Thirdly, if Beijing stresses that the previous 11-dotted line was the national border line that could not be violated, why after the new China was born, Beijing itself removed two dots on the map in the Tonkin Gulf. Does China consider the fixing of national border line a joke? Li Linghua, a prestigious scholar on law and marine law, has said that China cannot evade an international questioning of the legitimacy of the “9-dash line” and must abide by international law in the East Sea. Li Linghua agreed with the article “the 9-dash line: keep or eliminate” and once again called on the Chinese government to seriously consider Li Woteng’s proposal to abandon the unjust “9-dash line”, paving the way for a resolution of all East Sea disputes. Li Linghua wrote in a preface “Mr. Li Woteng’s article is worthy of appreciation. Our country unilaterally intended to impose the “nine-dash line” on a large part of the 200- square mile- exclusive economic zone defined by the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea and this has caused a series of conflicts and disputes. In an increasingly integrated global economy, our country needs to seriously consider Mr. Li’s proposal and promptly eliminate this “traditional” line to pave the way for resolving the East Sea dispute”. It’s obvious that China’s “9-dash line” claim cannot persuade people who comprehend the issue. Considering the East Sea as its private bay, China seems to hope the world community will mistake the “9-dash line” for its marine border line. But the truth must be respected, because in the globalization, people can not believe in unclear arguments in term of history, law, and reality. Sources: Some Chinese Scholars Call For The Elimination Of Baseless Claim Of U-Shaped Line eyedrd.org/2013/05/some-chinese-scholars-call-for-the-elimination-of-baseless-claim-of-u-shaped-line.html Various Chinese scholars criticize “9-dashed line” 119.15.167.94/qdndsubsite/en-US/75/72/306/306/306/200466/Default.aspx Arbitrary sovereignty claim worthless vovworld.vn/en-us/Current-Affairs/Arbitrary-sovereignty-claim-worthless/156272.vov Photo: A Chinese map drawn in 1904 doesn’t include the Paracel Islands and the Spratlys Islands as well as Scarborough Shoal. (photo: tuoitre.vn) MORE HERE w11.zetaboards/NDSFP/topic/10183853/
Posted on: Mon, 07 Apr 2014 23:06:43 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015