MANILA - The Philippine government will be submitting to the United Nations Tribunal on the Law of the Sea in The Hague this week an almost 300-year-old map of the Philippines showing the disputed Scarborough Shoal being part of Philippine territory as far back as three centuries ago. The map debunks the so-called nine-dash-line China has been using as proof of its claim over the South China Sea. It also locates Scarborough shoal, then known as “Panacot,” also called “Panatag” by Filipinos, off the shores of Luzon, then known as Nueva Castilla. Scarborough shoal has been a source of conflict between the Philippines and China. http://www.interaksyon.com/article/...-map-to-un-to-debunk-chinas-9-dash-line-claim
Good stuff. Those interested in going further may find this a good read: https://books.google.co.uk/books?id...ce=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false
What might Newcastle and Harry Potter have to do with all this? See in the news article below: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-under-newcastle-housing-estate-10317024.html I often wondered where the name "Scarborough Shoal" came from.
Even if the Philippines win its cases, implementing it would be the problem. China already has infrastructures set up around the disputed islands. It is said that 'possession is 9/10 of the law.' They also have a bigger and strong military force. Also, I don't think countries like the US, UK, Australia, Canada, Russia, etc. would implement a trade embargo against China to force them to follow the rulings. It is also unlikely that will go to war for the Philippine's sake. US owes a huge debt from China. They also have a lot of trade deals with them. Same as the UK. They will lose a lot more by antagonising China, compared to losing us. If push comes to shove, our so-called allies will not go to war with us, especially the US. Just look back at Cambodia, Vietnam, Iraq, and even the Philippines during WW2. They have a history of abandoning their allies.
Interesting read here: http://joeam.com/2015/06/14/managing-america-to-assure-philippine-sovereignty/#respond
The U.S. Treaty with the Philippines is carefully written. But if the disputes are framed not in terms of supporting the Philippines (and I agree - few Americans will want to go to war for a country that they see as "ungrateful") but in terms of the freedom of the seas, then things are different. There is no precedent for China's assertion of sovereignty over the high seas - which amounts to putting its foot on Japan's throat.
Hence, why I said the US won't go to war with the Philippines if push comes to shove, and we try to assert our jurisdiction. The US support only extends up to 'freedom of navigation' and not about Philippine's jurisdiction regarding the disputed islands. Even if the disputed islands belongs within the EEZ (Exclusive Economic Zone) of the Philippines, if there can be an option- say both countries agree to a joint-venture of resource mining of the islands, or both countries agree to make it a 'No Man's Island/International Waters/Land', they will push for so. Anything that will keep their face as the 'International Watch-dog, Safekeepers of Peace, and Most Powerful Country in the World', without losing much resources. Japan is a different case, as it was the US who wrote the country's constitution after the WW2. Plus, it's a first-world country. China too is not stupid enough to think they can man-handle Japan, like how they've been doing to the Philippines. All these talks that US will be our savior. That they will be there for us in case things become 'grave' should be 'taken for a grain of salt'. The US have made promises in Cambodia (Khmer Rouge). Have made promises in Vietnam (Vietnam War). Have made promises in Iraq (Gulf War). And they have also made promises with the Philippines (WW2) before. They have all been broken.
I know that you are expressing what most Filipinos think and feel. The Philippines needs to manage its relationship with the United States. Let me proceed by analogy Churchill was the expert at managing a relationship with the United States. Britain had no treaty with the USA, and a recently as the mid 1930's the US Navy's "War Plan Number One" was for an attack on the British Empire. The assumption amongst Americans when he became Prime Minister in 1940 was that Britain would make peace with Germany, and the US Ambassador to the UK, Joe Kennedy, was reporting that Britain would certainly be defeated. Churchill leveraged his personal relationship with FD Roosevelt for all it was worth. He persuaded FDR to send a trusted adviser, Harry Hopkins, to Britain to check up on what Joe Kennedy was saying. Harry Hopkins was no military man; he was one of the architects of the New Deal and well to the Left of Churchill, but his report was positive and FDR set up Lend Lease and took Naval responsibility for the western edge of the Atlantic. Britain maintained a massive propaganda effort in the United States - films like "Mrs Miniver", "In which we Serve" and others were made for the US market. US journalists like Ed Murrrow were given every assistance. Churchill writes in his History of the Second World War that on the night of Pearl Harbor, when Hitler (for some reason that nobody understands) declared war on the USA in support of Japan "That night, for the first time since the war began, I went to bed and slept soundly.." He knew he would win. The moral for the Philippines is that you need to step up your game and win hearts and minds in the USA. We want the American middle class to think "Those Filipinos have not got much, but they have got guts..."
Contrary actually, most of my countrymen are expecting the Americans would fight for us. That they would die for us. Some of the most stupid ones are actually saying, 'Nuke this, and nuke that', without knowing the repercussions, and without realising that China too has arrived on the world stage. That it is now a world power rivaling that of the US. They still think of them as 'chekwas, or Intsik behos.' That just because they're not white, that they are not as strong as the traditional Western Powers. What we need is to stop relying on the Americans. But don't get me wrong, sure their help of course is appreciated. But we must stop our delusions, that just because we are on the right when it comes to the disputed islands that it would mean that every thing would turn out well. That the UN would rule in our favour, and force China to submit. Or that the US would come with all of its ships and jets and come clash with China. No, the strong would always overpower the weak. It has been true during the Roman times, have been true during the Napoleonic era, have been true during the Age of the New World, have been true during the British Empire. The only way to defeat the strong if you are weak, is to band together. Mahatma Gandhi's crusade against the British, the various People Powers can attest to that (no matter if some of them are ridiculous). Instead of relying on a country such as the US with their own agenda, it would be best if the Philippines bands together with Vietnam, Indonesia, Malaysia and all those countries with their own territorial claims, but weak enough to stand against China on their own. We should try our best to join forces with them instead. Hence, one the reasons why China is opting for bilateral talks instead of arbitration. They fear the unity of the weak. So they want 'Divide et Impera'- Divide and Conquer.
I think that China is doing a wonderful job of promoting unity in ASEAN. And there is no reason not to pursue a policy of better relations with ASEAN and with the USA. But the absurd claim on Sabah must be dropped if Malaysia is to come on side. (I can bore for Britain on both the Nine Dash Line and the Sabah Question...)
Yes, quite. By disregarding every one else's claim, and giving each weak country a kick on the arse. Their various reclamation projects, military infrastructures, and garrisons indeed have a way of inspiring and promoting unity. No reason indeed for not pursuing 'better relations' with the ASEAN, and with the USA. But there's a difference between good relationship, and over-reliance. Don't put all your eggs in one basket. Regarding the Sabah question, it already belongs to Malaysia. Ninoy Aquino and Cory Aquino once attested to that. In exchange for Malaysia's support against Mr. Marcos, the Philippines will give up the Sabah claim. Hence why in 2013, when Jamalul Kiram III of the Sultanate Sulu, when he tried to re-assert his claims on 'North Borneo/Sabah', they were not given any support by Noynoy Aquino and his government. And why they were treated as terrorists, even if their claims are just and valid. History is always written by the victors. We should never forget that. If the Philippines is to become great again, its citizens should stop being naive and relying too much on others. After WW2, we were once one of the 'Tigers of Asia.' We were right there with Japan. Malaysians, Singaporeans, Indonesians, South Koreans, they once looked up to us. They wanted to be like us. But since then, we have fallen so low. Hence, 'the Sick Man of Asia.'
