Beijing refuses to accept Hague ruling over South China Sea territorial claims

[Donutz]

I see I made an error:

The dotted line = Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ)

Red line = China’s “nine-dash line”

Yellow line = Philippines claim

other lines = claims of Vietnam etc.

Article (link provided) goes into more detail.

"The [China's] nine-dash line overlaps with some 531,000 sq km of waters that the Philippines considers part of its exclusive economic zone (EEZ) and extended continental shelf.

An EEZ is a United Nations-adopted concept that grants a coastal state exclusive rights to explore for and exploit marine resources inside a band extending 200 nautical miles (370km) from its shore. The nine-dash line also overlaps with territories in the South China Sea claimed by Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei and Taiwan."

Hague ruling is largely symbolic; how would they back it up, with an EU army? No lover of the Chinese but whatever the EU says/demands is just funny. Want to punish China; boycott Chinese-made goods because, aside from 'security' and fish, this SCSea farce is mostly about resources to churn out more crap.

So the Permanent Court of Settlements is part of the EU? You might want to check that out. I don't know why but I'd bet you're a Brexiteer.

Let's nt jump to conclusions, it could be somebody who thinks the UN falls under the UN and US Army since it's located in New York...

Edited July 13, 2016 by Donutz

[Mr Moo]

I am just so happy that the British public saw sense before Europe tries to flex it's (imaginary) muscles agจain.

Take a look at this report and thank your lucky stars we are out of that particular club;

http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/683739/EU-referendum-German-French-European-superstate-Brexit

Edited July 13, 2016 by Mr Moo

[boomerangutang]

Donutz, I don't think the court or the international community gives any credence to the "9 dash line."

Prove me wrong if you can.

[Donutz]

I am just so happy that the British public saw sense before Europe tries to flex is (imaginary) muscles again.

Take a look at this report and thank your lucky stars we are out of that particular club;

http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/683739/EU-referendum-German-French-European-superstate-Brexit

55555 *takes a breath 5555 *suffocates*

Oh my. Where to begin?

What on earth has the EU to do with this international courtas ruling?

Wikipedia says:

"The Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) is an intergovernmental organization located at The Hague in the Netherlands. The PCA is not a court, but rather an organiser of arbitral tribunals to resolve conflicts between member states.^[1] It should not be confused with the International Court of Justice, a separate institution (...) As of March 2016, 119 countries are party to one or both of the founding Conventions of the PCA.^[4."

Last time I checked the EU did not had 119 member states including the US and China.

Yuor post makes just as much sense as somebody walking in a topic saying "Just look at the UN ruling of (insert something here), nu suprise there seeing the mess the US is in with the Dallas shootings and election farse".

As for that totally unrelated and offtopic article.. the headline and first paragraph alone don't exactly come across as a neutral, unbiased, factual newsreporting. This sort of headline is more something you'd expect of The Sun... While it's true that SOME in the EU or it's members would see a United States of Europa (USE) as the ultimate dream, others do not. Just as with national politics there are various views on where the EU/country should be aim for if it came to reforms. That some wish to see a USE should be just as worrysome or worryless as that some wish to see the EU be disolved and all European countries returning to the 1950's with borders and such. Chanches of either happening are pretty slim.

Edited July 13, 2016 by Donutz

[boomerangutang]

When an EEZ from one country overlaps the EEZ from another, the dividing line is usually down the middle. You can see this when viewing maps of the Pacific Ocean. If two islands owned by different countries are close to each other, the zones look like a protist cell in the process of mitosis. It makes sense. What doesn't make sense is China, far to the north of the SCS deigning to own territory that is clearly much closer to other countries.

As for the soggy argument of 'historic precedence'; it's ridiculous. Particularly when talking about where Chinese fishing boats trolled in years past. Look at the coasts of England, for example. At least a dozen countries have fished off England's coast during past centuries. Do those dozen countries have claims to England's islands? Using that logic, Portugal could claim the Isle of Wight, and Sweden could claim Jersey.

[Donutz]

Donutz, I don't think the court or the international community gives any credence to the "9 dash line."

Prove me wrong if you can.

Indeed, that's why I made an additional post as I was too late to correct my silly error. China's claims are obviously pathetic. Don't know why I mixed the 9 dash and EEZborder up. Shame on me *stands in the corner*

[Scott]

The United States to doesn't give a dime about the Courts in the Hague.

No comment on the actualities of SCS ownership, but crikey the lads over in Beijing know how to play the game with the eurocrats. Yes, just tell them to bugger off and mind their own business. Toothless tigers. Something we should have done long ago over fisheries and non regulation straightness of bananas.

Uhm, the ICJ has nothing to do with the EU... But some countries like the US and China don't seem to give a damn about the ICJ (and international justice?).

I hope PH and the other nations will step to the UN so the world can sent some ships to there if need be (small problem: certain permanent members...).

Someone has already posted a little about this, but China and the US are both parties of the Hague Conventions. As mentioned this action is from the Permanent Court of Arbitration.

[up2u2]

No Nation is capable of taking on China militarily.

China will do whatever China wants. End of discussion.

[boomerangutang]

No Nation is capable of taking on China militarily. China will do whatever China wants. End of discussion.

If there is military action, it will be at (and under) sea and in the air, so China's many-person army won't be in the mix. Incidentally, the average PLA soldier has a budget of around $1,500/year and that includes a rifle, which takes about half that amount. The average cost for a US soldier is many times that. That's not to say more expenditure = a better soldier, but it is a factor affecting things like night-vision goggles, body armor, communications equip., medical facilities, search & rescue, battlefield assessment, etc.

A face off at sea favors the US. Even Chinese admirals admit that.

[up2u2]

No Nation is capable of taking on China militarily. China will do whatever China wants. End of discussion.

If there is military action, it will be at (and under) sea and in the air, so China's many-person army won't be in the mix. Incidentally, the average PLA soldier has a budget of around $1,500/year and that includes a rifle, which takes about half that amount. The average cost for a US soldier is many times that. That's not to say more expenditure = a better soldier, but it is a factor affecting things like night-vision goggles, body armor, communications equip., medical facilities, search & rescue, battlefield assessment, etc.

A face off at sea favors the US. Even Chinese admirals admit that.

Always America's downfall under estimating their enemy. Anyway, get back to me on how it goes. I hope no one is foolish enough to align themselves with America again. It always turns out a bloody disaster.

[xtrnuno41]

so now what? Boycot China? Ofcourse no one saw this coming?!

Same with MH17, Poetin

Just bla bla bla about integrity and ..........more of those stupid ideas and thoughts

Its just mankind as we were and are, me me me, want want want, kill kill kill, destroy destroy destroy

Well im sure we will destroy ourselves one day, isnt it by war then sure by virusses

Virusses used by for instance Australia for getting rit of rabbits and carps. And from where came HIV, H1N1, ebola, zirka ?

Wars by China combined with Russia. Lets get it on !

Time for a reset of the world, too many people around on this earth with lots of hitlers on the power.

But never the less lets talk again in NAVO, NATO or what ever other stupid oganisation.

WIshed i was born as Diomedeidae, gliding over oceans in wind, allthough probably would already be dead by human

[Publicus]

Just one look at the map China claims to show its territory is enough to show the absurdity of China's claim.

What happened to common sense?

China claims more territory and area outside of it than there is in it.

Siberia and Mongolia for example and the entire northern third of India (which is what the 1962 brief war was about).

South China Sea is the most important blue water claim by the CCP Dictators in Beijing for two big reasons and a bunch of other purposes.

First the minerals. Second, it is the only route the PLA Navy has of its ships and submarines to the open western Pacific. The Miyako Strait in the Ryukyu Archipelago between Taiwan and Japan is the only direct route PLA Navy has from the mainland to the Pacific, but the strait is controlled by Japan and the US navies and air forces (backed up by Guam and also Hawaii). Otherwise PLAN needs to sail north and around the Japanese islands then come back south again (if they made it past the Japanese Maritime Self-Defense Forces, which PLAN would be very hard pressed to do).

Because the PLA Navy can't get out to the open western Pacific it is a sitting duck trapped in the shallow waters of the continental shelf (300 meters). Dispose of the PLA Navy between breakfast and lunch kind of thingy. (Then take the afternoon off at the beach.)

CCP and its PLAN are locked inside the first strategic island chain of the Pacific, i.e., southernmost Japan, Taiwan, Philippines to Singapore. Then throw in the Strait of Malacca controlled by India with its new huge naval and air bases in the Andaman Islands.

CCP Dictators in Beijing do not care that virtually everyone in the region has more than one reason to oppose 'em on this SCS stuff. So it is what we know needs to be done, i.e., there comes a time when you gotta give the bully a square one right in the nose. Send him home crying.

Edited July 13, 2016 by Publicus

[Publicus]

I believe China has also claimed Australia is part of thier territory.

They don't have to claim it - they are buying it bit by bit. At least the National Party are trying to stop this stupidity regarding agricultural land. As for Australian real estate agents they don't care so long as they get their commissions. I recently picked up a listing from a Queensland Real Estate agency of properties for sale in the Gold Coast region. It was all in Chinese.

United States foreign direct investment in Australia totals $455 billion in usd terms. CCP Chinese FDI in Oz totals $21 bn and is focused on minerals. The Chinese are going to buy some properties y'know, both residential and commercial, however, Australia too has laws.

USA remains the largest foreign investor in Australia, by far. And USA remains the number one choice by far of Australian foreign direct investment.

Australia ranks sixth in US FDI, with Netherlands at the top of the list followed by UK, Luxembourg, Canada, Ireland. In East Asia, Singapore in SEA is second to Australia as the Americans FDI destination of choice and Singapore is also a proven and reliable (non-treaty) US ally in the region in intelligence, security, defense.

So keep your English sharp.

http://www.austrade.gov.au/about-austrade/economics-at-austrade/australia-the-largest-investment-destination-from-the-us-in-the-asia-pacific-region

[boomerangutang]

No Nation is capable of taking on China militarily. China will do whatever China wants. End of discussion.

If there is military action, it will be at (and under) sea and in the air, so China's many-person army won't be in the mix. Incidentally, the average PLA soldier has a budget of around $1,500/year and that includes a rifle, which takes about half that amount. The average cost for a US soldier is many times that. That's not to say more expenditure = a better soldier, but it is a factor affecting things like night-vision goggles, body armor, communications equip., medical facilities, search & rescue, battlefield assessment, etc.

A face off at sea favors the US. Even Chinese admirals admit that.

Always America's downfall under estimating their enemy. Anyway, get back to me on how it goes. I hope no one is foolish enough to align themselves with America again. It always turns out a bloody disaster.

Freeing Kuwait wasn't a disaster, was it? Or enabling Bosnia to break free from Serbia, .....or E.Timor from Indonesia.

[Publicus]

No Nation is capable of taking on China militarily. China will do whatever China wants. End of discussion.

If there is military action, it will be at (and under) sea and in the air, so China's many-person army won't be in the mix. Incidentally, the average PLA soldier has a budget of around $1,500/year and that includes a rifle, which takes about half that amount. The average cost for a US soldier is many times that. That's not to say more expenditure = a better soldier, but it is a factor affecting things like night-vision goggles, body armor, communications equip., medical facilities, search & rescue, battlefield assessment, etc.

A face off at sea favors the US. Even Chinese admirals admit that.

Always America's downfall under estimating their enemy. Anyway, get back to me on how it goes. I hope no one is foolish enough to align themselves with America again. It always turns out a bloody disaster.

The point is a thing of the past as it has always been a vital lesson of the past, i.e., never make the potentially disastrous error of underestimating your enemy. The Pentagon and all of Washington itself does not underestimate the PLA or its Navy or its Air Force.

After all, back in 1941 no one outside of Japan thought for a moment aircraft carriers could do what no Navy had ever done or conceived, i.e., steam 4000 nautical miles to attack the US Pacific Fleet at Pearl Harbor, Honolulu, Hawaii. So anyone who in present times would make the same kind of mistake, e.g., ISIS is the jayvee team needs a good smack upside the head for it.

That said, the fact remains however the bulk of the PLA and its Navy and Air Force are inert bureaucratic masses of a political party's armed forces poorly trained and led by commanders who are corrupt CCP politicos that can't say or think anything not already said by Marx or Mao. It's not a good fighting force that, although of a vastly superior number when PLA invaded Vietnam in 1979, quickly fell apart and was routed by Vietnamese reserve forces (VN General Staff held their regular divisions around Hanoi and other major cities).

Pentagon is instead prepared to engage elite and highly trained and excellently equipped special units of the PLA itself and of its Navy and its Air Force, commanded by colonels and generals/admirals who are seriously military. CCP cyberwarfare is second only to Russia and Russia is second only to the US (which in 2009 established a Cybercommand at the Pentagon).

US has had to create and install new defenses to its satellites due to CCP anti-satellite technology. The Pentagon has had to respond to CCP creating by hook or by crook a defensive weapon to each and every weapon in the US arsenal land, sea, undersea, air, space, cyber etc etc -- witness the anti-ship ballistic missile of the PLA. The PLA Second Artillery Force (missiles to include nuclaar armed) is top notch across the board right up to its commanders.

Consequently, in 2010 Congress voted to approve the recommendation of Potus and the Pentagon to establish a new war fighting doctrine of the United States, Air-Sea Battle. It combines the two branches of the military with the US Marine Corps to fight against CCP China, Iran, Russia, in that order. The US Army has been moved to the bottom of the go-to list. Air-Sea Battle is the opposite of fighting in a desert, or against an al Queda, or an ISIS, or a land war in Europe, a jungle war in Vietnam, desert combat against guerillas and all the rest of past misadventures or disasters.

The long and the short of it as I like to say in these instances is that while the PLA and its Navy and Air Force can give the USA a bloody nose in the SCS, the bout(s) will end in a knockout of CCP and its Party military. Air-Sea Battle doctrine is designed to aggressively win a war, whether conventional or worse, or a battle or two...or three or more. The bottom line is that Beijing knows not to test this. Problem is PLA disagrees from within the councils of CCP and Xi Jinping is beholden to the PLA, in which his father was a general. Xi has relied on the PLA throughout his entire career right to where he is now as he continues to rely on PLA against his political enemies foreign and domestic.

[JHolmesJr]

Who in their right mind would start a war with China?

It will be the end of buying and selling dirt cheap stuff.

Altho, if china were to vanish overnight, there'd be a lot more decent jobs in every country....fingers crossed.

Edited July 13, 2016 by JHolmesJr

[Rhys]

more please... I don't have my copy of Proceeding...

[MJP]

Who in their right mind would start a war with China?

It will be the end of buying and selling dirt cheap stuff.

Altho, if china were to vanish overnight, there'd be a lot more decent jobs in every country....fingers crossed.

Everything would vanish overnight. Gone in a flash.

[ddavidovsky]

Looking at today's Chinese newspapers, the entire population of China is now whipped into a hysterial, nationalistic frenzy. Well, here it is. We haven't seen this kind lunacy since Japan attacked Pearl Harbour. It took a couple of nuclear bombs to bring that to an end. That won't work this time. China still hasn't got over Nanjing and will push this to the brink and beyond.

Here's a prediction: there will be a nuclear bomb used in aggression, somewhere in the world, within the next ten years. Mankind seems to have a biological need for upheaval now and then, and it seems to be coming: mass migrations, rising nationalism, civil war within Islam, the breakdown of the EU, nuclear-empowered rogue nations, climate change, oil and water security issues - and now China annexing swathes of territory belonging to other nations.

Mankind has never been here before - there's never been so much insecurity, and never so many nukes around. The tension will break sooner or later. It will only take one moment of madness to trigger a chain of retributive attacks. It's coming, and I'm glad I don't have children.

[malinscky007]

And people worry about North Korea

[MJP]

Looking at today's Chinese newspapers, the entire population of China is now whipped into a hysterial, nationalistic frenzy. Well, here it is. We haven't seen this kind lunacy since Japan attacked Pearl Harbour. It took a couple of nuclear bombs to bring that to an end. That won't work this time. China still hasn't got over Nanjing and will push this to the brink and beyond.

Here's a prediction: there will be a nuclear bomb used in aggression, somewhere in the world, within the next ten years. Mankind seems to have a biological need for upheaval now and then, and it seems to be coming: mass migrations, rising nationalism, civil war within Islam, the breakdown of the EU, nuclear-empowered rogue nations, climate change, oil and water security issues - and now China annexing swathes of territory belonging to other nations.

Mankind has never been here before - there's never been so much insecurity, and never so many nukes around. The tension will break sooner or later. It will only take one moment of madness to trigger a chain of retributive attacks. It's coming, and I'm glad I don't have children.

Keep an eye on the time . . .

http://thebulletin.org/timeline

[boomerangutang]

Looking at today's Chinese newspapers, the entire population of China is now whipped into a hysterial, nationalistic frenzy. Well, here it is. We haven't seen this kind lunacy since Japan attacked Pearl Harbour. It took a couple of nuclear bombs to bring that to an end. That won't work this time. China still hasn't got over Nanjing and will push this to the brink and beyond.

Here's a prediction: there will be a nuclear bomb used in aggression, somewhere in the world, within the next ten years. Mankind seems to have a biological need for upheaval now and then, and it seems to be coming: mass migrations, rising nationalism, civil war within Islam, the breakdown of the EU, nuclear-empowered rogue nations, climate change, oil and water security issues - and now China annexing swathes of territory belonging to other nations.

Mankind has never been here before - there's never been so much insecurity, and never so many nukes around. The tension will break sooner or later. It will only take one moment of madness to trigger a chain of retributive attacks. It's coming, and I'm glad I don't have children.

Looked at another way; the world has been relatively peaceful since the end of the Korean War. Sure there have been many armed conflicts, but compared to the first half of the 20th century, it's been less insane. And prior to the 20th century, there was at least one serious war going on somewhere in the world at one given time since Salamis.

I agree somewhat with the missive above. Tensions are building, and a WW could break out. With a WW, however, there has to be coalitions on both sides. With the SCS debacle, China doesn't have any significant allies. Ok, there's N.Korea, possibly. And China backers have said Russia will side with China, but that won't happen. Russians suffered immensely in the WW's and their leaders aren't stupid.

The tensions in the SCS are 100% Made in China (like Trump's clothes lines). The quickest and easiest way for the problem to go away would be for Chinese to go back to China.

[Credo]

No Nation is capable of taking on China militarily. China will do whatever China wants. End of discussion.

If there is military action, it will be at (and under) sea and in the air, so China's many-person army won't be in the mix. Incidentally, the average PLA soldier has a budget of around $1,500/year and that includes a rifle, which takes about half that amount. The average cost for a US soldier is many times that. That's not to say more expenditure = a better soldier, but it is a factor affecting things like night-vision goggles, body armor, communications equip., medical facilities, search & rescue, battlefield assessment, etc.

A face off at sea favors the US. Even Chinese admirals admit that.

The US, at least with Obama in office, is not going to attack China. The area claimed is by the Philippines and if the Phil's want to claim it back, the US will back them militarily. A direct attack on China over a far away bit of water and sand would gain nothing. If the Phil's try to take the island back, then once it is extracted from the Chinese that should be the end of it; at least in theory.

Of course, these things never quite go according to plan. What action might Russia take? Will North Korea sit by quietly, or perhaps they will decide it's a good time to try take over South Korea? What about some of the other territorial claims in the SCS? Will other countries take the opportunity to lay a firm claim?

There are a lot of variables to consider. But an attack on China directly is unlikely and not in the interest of the US.

[boomerangutang]

No Nation is capable of taking on China militarily. China will do whatever China wants. End of discussion.

If there is military action, it will be at (and under) sea and in the air, so China's many-person army won't be in the mix. Incidentally, the average PLA soldier has a budget of around $1,500/year and that includes a rifle, which takes about half that amount. The average cost for a US soldier is many times that. That's not to say more expenditure = a better soldier, but it is a factor affecting things like night-vision goggles, body armor, communications equip., medical facilities, search & rescue, battlefield assessment, etc.

A face off at sea favors the US. Even Chinese admirals admit that.

The US, at least with Obama in office, is not going to attack China. The area claimed is by the Philippines and if the Phil's want to claim it back, the US will back them militarily. A direct attack on China over a far away bit of water and sand would gain nothing. If the Phil's try to take the island back, then once it is extracted from the Chinese that should be the end of it; at least in theory.

Of course, these things never quite go according to plan. What action might Russia take? Will North Korea sit by quietly, or perhaps they will decide it's a good time to try take over South Korea? What about some of the other territorial claims in the SCS? Will other countries take the opportunity to lay a firm claim?

There are a lot of variables to consider. But an attack on China directly is unlikely and not in the interest of the US.

We agree on most things, including 'there are many variables' when it comes to armed conflict.

However, there's zero chance the US will attack the Chinese mainland. There may be a possibility of a surgical strike on Hainan, if it's shown that fighter planes/ships are taking off from there.

I see it as highly unlikely N.Korea will get involved, more than sabre rattling, which it's shown to be so adept at.

Even less likely Russia would get involved. Russia has nothing to gain, and a lot to lose - in a military scrape in the SCS.

China is on its own re; the SCS. The pledges of support by small far-away countries doesn't mean anything, except perhaps affecting a vote in the UN general assembly. It's doubtful a half dozen sailors from The Gambia would paddle a dugout canoe halfway around the world to assist the Chinese against a US carrier group.

[craigt3365]

An interesting article.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/14/world/asia/beijing-south-china-sea-ruling-hague.html?emc=edit_ae_20160713&nl=todaysheadlines-asia&nlid=58582962&_r=0

[boomerangutang]

Two excerpts from the article linked above. . . . . .

"One of the enduring lessons Chinese schoolchildren are taught is that the South China Sea has belonged to China since ancient times, a nostrum that President Xi Jinping repeated to state media several hours after the decision was made public."

Boomer's comment: How many wrong things are Chinese school children taught? They're taught that Tibet has always been Chinese, and that dried tiger penis powder will give a man a hard-on. They're taught that Chinese people originated in China, .......and probably a whole load of other lies.

"In another sign intended to show the Chinese public that the government’s control of the sea remained untouched, the People’s Liberation Army newspaper announced the launch of a new advanced missile destroyer. The navy will soon receive a “massive number” of destroyers that would protect China’s maritime interests, CCTV said."

Boomer: Look who's militarizing the region.

Chinese politburo is also trying to demonize the 5 jurists. That's Trump-style, and so low-class as to hardly merit a response.

[steve654]

Where is all this going?

Obviously military confrontation down the road. Question is, who's going to back down first? We all know what happens when nobody backs down.

[Usernames]

Where is all this going?

Obviously military confrontation down the road. Question is, who's going to back down first? We all know what happens when nobody backs down.

Nobody is going to attack anybody else. The US doesn't need to. There are far too many internal social and economic problems in China for the Chinese to deal with. If the Chinese tried to attack another country in sufficient mass, it would crumble at home. And the US only need sit and watch, if it comes to that. Probably, the US is more worried about internal Chinese instability than Chinese expansion.

[steve654]

Where is all this going?

Obviously military confrontation down the road. Question is, who's going to back down first? We all know what happens when nobody backs down.

Nobody is going to attack anybody else. The US doesn't need to. There are far too many internal social and economic problems in China for the Chinese to deal with. If the Chinese tried to attack another country in sufficient mass, it would crumble at home. And the US only need sit and watch, if it comes to that. Probably, the US is more worried about internal Chinese instability than Chinese expansion.

Unlike the West, China prints their own money and owes interest on their freshly minted money to no one but themselves. That leads me to believe they have all the money in the world to start something without too much worry about it. Of course I hope it never happens, but when ego's flare, you just never know where it leads to. Hopefully our economies are intertwined enough that it leads to nothing, but history always seems to repeat itself.

[puck2]

Hague ruling is largely symbolic; how would they back it up, with an EU army? No lover of the Chinese but whatever the EU says/demands is just funny. Want to punish China; boycott Chinese-made goods because, aside from 'security' and fish, this SCSea farce is mostly about resources to churn out more crap.

A typical nonsense comment of "well informed" people.

It is already explained by other members that this court - ICC - is a world institution with its office in Le Hague, Europe. It's obvious that there are several members with the same problem in this forum.

What would you say if the Chinese or another state would take the top US - Iraq war criminals (GW Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and others) to this court because of their felony?

Probable answer of the USA: that doesn't work, we are not member of the ICC.

Copy/excerpt of -->

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_and_the_International_Criminal_Court

........Positions in the United States concerning the ICC vary widely. The Clinton Administration signed the Rome Statute in 2000, but did not submit it for Senate ratification. The Bush Administration, the US administration at the time of the ICC's founding, stated that it would not join the ICC. The Obama Administration has subsequently re-established a working relationship with the court. ........

Guess, why the Bush administration didn't sign the Rome statute (like China) ?

And now the US community would like to condemn the Chinese reaction. Very hypocritical !