SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Arthur T Knackerbracket has found the following story:
Foreign Minister Saifuddin says Malaysia's decision to take South China Sea claim to UN is its 'sovereign right'. Malaysian Minister of Foreign Affairs Saifuddin Abdullah said late on Friday that Kuala Lumpur has the "sovereign right to claim whatever that is there that is within our waters".
"For China to claim that the whole of South China Sea belongs to China, I think that is ridiculous," Saifuddin said in response to an Al Jazeera question about Malaysia's decision last week to take its case to the United Nations.
"It is a claim that we have made, and we will defend our claim. But of course, having said that, anyone can challenge and dispute, which is not something unusual."
The move has angered China, which claims "historic rights" over all of South China Sea. It has also blamed the United States for raising tensions in the area.
In response, the US Navy's Pacific Fleet commander, Admiral John Aquilino accused China of "bullying" its Southeast Asian neighbours.
Malaysia and China are both signatories of the UN Convention for the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), which codifies the rights and responsibilities of independent states' use of the oceans.
Under the UNCLOS, coastal states like Malaysia are entitled to an EEZ. Beyond that is considered the high seas, common to all nations. UNCLOS also defines rules in case of overlapping EEZs.
It was on this basis that the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague rejected in 2016 China's claims to the large swaths of water, which sees an estimated $3 trillion of trade pass each year.
China, however, rejects the ruling in The Hague, and since then has expanded its presence in the region, building artificial islands with runways and installing advanced missile system.
(Score: 2) by corey on Sunday December 22 2019, @08:37PM (4 children)
Yes, and by "historic rights", Hong Kong can be claimed by the British, Taiwan by the Dutch, etc. Let's give it all back and China can have the South China Sea. Doubt that'll go down well.
(Score: 2) by RamiK on Sunday December 22 2019, @10:36PM (3 children)
Well no Hong Kong was chartered to the British for a limited period and the term simply expired without the British ever arguing for a right to stay there. Taiwan's circumstances is a bit more special since both ROC and PRC agree Taiwan belongs to China, but oddly enough disagree on who is the legitimate government that should rule China...
Convenient as it may be, I'm afraid generalizations don't work in matters of sovereignty. Historical claims can and do stick at times. Just not this time.
compiling...
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 23 2019, @12:34AM (1 child)
The New Territories were 'chartered' (99 year lease), Hong Kong itself was ceded in perpetuity.
(Score: 2) by RamiK on Monday December 23 2019, @01:37AM
Hong Kong and Kowloon specifically. Not that it matters considering the British themselves believed they're inseparable and ceded them back to China:
( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Hong_Kong [wikipedia.org] )
For reference: The island is 80km2, Kowloon is 70km2 and the new territories are 1000km2.
compiling...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 23 2019, @03:41PM
Macau was also a Chinese territory administrated by Portuguses. Portuguese could do business there and in turn they would hunt and take down pirates and paid a rent and some taxed. In the beginning, they could only park the navy, dry food and refill, not even allowed to build any building in land... later negotiations allowed expanded rights, giving total administration to the Macau region for almost 500 years, returning to China administration in 1999, one year later than Hong Kong (the first to arrive, the last to leave)