Thailand 'supports' China's efforts to maintain maritime peace

[williamgeorgeallen]

15 hours ago, autanic said:

 

Is that what China is doing in the South China Sea ?  

 

china is trying to take a larger 'peace' of the south china seas. quite a bit of this article got screwed up in translation.

[yardrunner]

Shouldn't the headline say Thailand supports China's maritime bullying

[Lupatria]

Did nobody ever say: "You won't get a high speed railway for free general, Sir?'

[Yann55]

Quote : 'China's efforts to maintain maritime peace' ...

 

why, oh why does this sound a bit like : IS's efforts to maintain religious tolerance ...

Edited September 8, 2016 by Yann55

[Srikcir]

10 minutes ago, Lupatria said:

Did nobody ever say: "You won't get a high speed railway for free general, Sir?'

According to China's current financial and operating terms for the project, Thailand isn't getting anything free. But maybe in exchange for Thailand's agreement to China's sovereignty over the China South Seas worth trillions of US dollars, China may have conceded China's demand to develop Thai properties adjacent to the railway that would be worth hundreds of billions baht.

[Fookhaht]

Wait, I'm confused here:  How can one maintain peace while provoking it?

[IAMHERE]

18 hours ago, HiSoLowSoNoSo said:

"supports China's efforts" to maintain maritime peace" 

This will not go home very well with your ASEAN partners Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia and Indonesia.   

Brunei and Singapore and Indonesia too. It is gonna get ugly, hope American blood and money isn't wasted this time around.

[IAMHERE]

15 hours ago, ThailandLOS said:

 

Less far fetched than US claim to Hawaii.

 

America does not claim all the sea/ocean between California and Hawaii.

[Thailand]

2 hours ago, Srikcir said:

Reuters - 2 star Major General Weerachon Sukondhapatipak

He's a military spokesman which doesn't require diplomacy nor intellect - just obediance to Prayut's NCPO.

Don't think he will be getting his 3 rd star any time soon!

[chainarong]

One would have to suspect China's sincerity in peace of any kind, it would appear that the Thai government is all at sea on this issue , however Thailand is well documented in history  for its traitorous past , so nothing surprises .................................................

[chainarong]

35 minutes ago, Fookhaht said:

Wait, I'm confused here:  How can one maintain peace while provoking it?

How very true,  How.

[Srikcir]

44 minutes ago, IAMHERE said:

America does not claim all the sea/ocean between California and Hawaii.

Mexico does not claim the Gulf of Mexico.

India does not claim the whole of the Indian Ocean.

[Fookhaht]

17 minutes ago, Srikcir said:

Mexico does not claim the Gulf of Mexico.

India does not claim the whole of the Indian Ocean.

Nor does Atlantis claim the Atlantic Ocean...   

[ThailandLOS]

2 hours ago, aussieinthailand said:

Ohhhhhh,,,  I had it all wrong then, China is trying to maintain peace in the South China Sea and Thailand is supporting China's peaceful moves.  So it's the Philippines, Vietnam, Indonesia, Malaysia, Brunei are the ones stirring up trouble with it's claiming territorial waters, Islands, Sholes, and atolls are being annexed by China.  

Some people think China's picking fight it will regret and can't win just as Japan did in WW 2 and Thailand backed the wrong side then as well, and when things tured against Japan the Thai's do what they do best, turncoat and back the winning side.

 

The message from Washington sent by US Navy operation is clear. US imperialism will continue to stoke up long-standing, competing claims over territory in the South China Sea to militarily encircle and destabilize the Chinese regime. The objective of the US ruling elite is not only to assert military dominance in Asia, but to intimidate Beijing into pulling back from its ambitions to exert greater global influence and compel it to make sweeping concessions to American demands on trade and access to Chinese markets. If Beijing nevertheless continues to assert the regional and global interests of the Chinese business oligarchs it represents, it will face war.

 

Btw, US has not signed the very same maritime treaty, that they demand the Chinese to comply with.

[smedly]

Chinas claims are so extreme that people taking a swim off some beaches in the Philippines would need to take their passport with them, it really is ridiculous what they are trying to claim as theirs

[heybruce]

17 hours ago, ThailandLOS said:

 

Less far fetched than US claim to Hawaii.

 

Does the US claim to Hawaii infringe on other countries territorial waters or exclusive economic zone?  Are the Hawaiian islands reefs that are submerged during high tide and have no natural source of fresh water?

[heybruce]

13 hours ago, ThailandLOS said:

Hawaii's government was overthrown on Jan. 17, 1893, by a relatively small group of men, most of them American by birth or heritage, who seized control of the Islands with the backing of American troops sent ashore from a warship in Honolulu Harbor. To this "superior force of the United States of America," Queen Lili`uokalani yielded her throne, under protest, in order to avoid bloodshed, trusting that the United States government would right the wrong that had been done to her and the Hawaiian people.

The US has expanded its borders by conquest and other means.  Much like England (ask Wales, Scotland and Ireland).  Much like China.  And much like the Kingdom of Thailand.

[heybruce]

58 minutes ago, ThailandLOS said:

 

The message from Washington sent by US Navy operation is clear. US imperialism will continue to stoke up long-standing, competing claims over territory in the South China Sea to militarily encircle and destabilize the Chinese regime. The objective of the US ruling elite is not only to assert military dominance in Asia, but to intimidate Beijing into pulling back from its ambitions to exert greater global influence and compel it to make sweeping concessions to American demands on trade and access to Chinese markets. If Beijing nevertheless continues to assert the regional and global interests of the Chinese business oligarchs it represents, it will face war.

 

Btw, US has not signed the very same maritime treaty, that they demand the Chinese to comply with.

So, you think it unreasonable for the US and other countries to expect China to abide by a treaty China has voluntarily signed?

[lvr181]

Trying to suck up with his foot in his mouth!

[elgordo38]

22 hours ago, HiSoLowSoNoSo said:

"supports China's efforts" to maintain maritime peace" 

This will not go home very well with your ASEAN partners Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia and Indonesia.   

This guy is all things to all people. I think the

American Indian had a name for this type of person. He who speak with f>>>>d tongue. He should be careful who he toadies up to. All snakes like toads to eat. 

[natway09]

This just confirms that ASEAN is a waste of time , money & effort.

China just divides the countries by offering them development monies .

One opportunity for the 10 ASEAN countries to "stick together" has now gone as Laos & Cambodia 

would not sign the letter of agreement on this issue & now some idiot from the Thai Ministry

spouts his or her mouth off just confirming that Thailand will become a part of China

[ThailandLOS]

1 hour ago, heybruce said:

So, you think it unreasonable for the US and other countries to expect China to abide by a treaty China has voluntarily signed?

 

Without going to deep into the legal aspects, which you are clearly not informed on, one must wonder then, just how “international” a tribunal is, whose ruling is not recognized internationally.

 

The ruling and the expected confrontation the US had hoped to spark, benefits Southeast Asia in no shape, form, or way and despite the considerable influence the United States still holds over the Philippines, it is apparent that the will for peace, prosperity, and progress is more considerable still.

 

Recalling that the US and Canada also have water boundary disputes. But this doesn’t mean that the Chinese Navy butts in and deploys its own ships to these areas.

 

This dispute would be much easier to resolve if it weren’t for US involvement, which is using the territorial disputes as part of its so-called ‘pivot to Asia’, “essentially preventing these countries from reaching negotiations, and building a situation of crisis within the Asia-Pacific region.

[heybruce]

13 minutes ago, ThailandLOS said:

 

Without going to deep into the legal aspects, which you are clearly not informed on, one must wonder then, just how “international” a tribunal is, whose ruling is not recognized internationally.

 

The ruling and the expected confrontation the US had hoped to spark, benefits Southeast Asia in no shape, form, or way and despite the considerable influence the United States still holds over the Philippines, it is apparent that the will for peace, prosperity, and progress is more considerable still.

 

Recalling that the US and Canada also have water boundary disputes. But this doesn’t mean that the Chinese Navy butts in and deploys its own ships to these areas.

 

This dispute would be much easier to resolve if it weren’t for US involvement, which is using the territorial disputes as part of its so-called ‘pivot to Asia’, “essentially preventing these countries from reaching negotiations, and building a situation of crisis within the Asia-Pacific region.

I understand that the international tribunal has no mechanism for enforcing its rulings.  Treaty signatories agree, in the treaties, to abide by the rulings.  China, by refusing to accept or abide by the ruling, has identified itself as an unreliable treaty partner.

 

The US has treaties and alliances with countries who's territory is being infringed by China's absurd claim to the entire South China Sea.  It is trying to support these allies without provoking a war.  It's not easy.

 

Clearly everything would be much more peaceful if the US abandoned its allies and all of east Asia submitted to China's dominance.  Why don't you explain this to the appropriate national leaders?

[elgordo38]

I guess Thailands new CHINESE subs will be patrolling the South China Sea in support. "Yankee Go Home"

Edited September 8, 2016 by elgordo38

[ThailandLOS]

12 minutes ago, heybruce said:

I understand that the international tribunal has no mechanism for enforcing its rulings.  Treaty signatories agree, in the treaties, to abide by the rulings.  China, by refusing to accept or abide by the ruling, has identified itself as an unreliable treaty partner.

 

The US has treaties and alliances with countries who's territory is being infringed by China's absurd claim to the entire South China Sea.  It is trying to support these allies without provoking a war.  It's not easy.

 

Clearly everything would be much more peaceful if the US abandoned its allies and all of east Asia submitted to China's dominance.  Why don't you explain this to the appropriate national leaders?

 

The Philippines is a former colony of Spain and the United States, and today it remains almost a de facto colony of the United States, in terms of its broad alignments, military cooperation agreements, and so on. Thus not exactly what one would call an "ally".

 

Despite the US claims that the case was “brought by the Philippines,” it was in fact headed by an American lawyer of a US-based law firm, Foley Hoag. Just like the court case itself, the apparent conflict in the South China Sea may be portrayed as being between China and its neighbors, but it is in reality a conflict cultivated by the US explicitly as a means of maintaining “primacy in Asia.”

 

In other words, what I think is deplorable here is that a legal dispute under the laws of the sea is being used by the United States to threaten China and militarize strategic waterways in the South China Sea

 

Through the use of soft power and America’s formidable media influence, it has attempted to amplify these manageable bilateral differences into a regional conflict, then place itself amid it, posing as an indispensable underwriter of Asian security and stability. It can then manage the crisis ensuring maximum tension and division across the region, weakening it as a whole and allowing the US to reassert its primacy.

[heybruce]

5 hours ago, ThailandLOS said:

 

The Philippines is a former colony of Spain and the United States, and today it remains almost a de facto colony of the United States, in terms of its broad alignments, military cooperation agreements, and so on. Thus not exactly what one would call an "ally".

 

Despite the US claims that the case was “brought by the Philippines,” it was in fact headed by an American lawyer of a US-based law firm, Foley Hoag. Just like the court case itself, the apparent conflict in the South China Sea may be portrayed as being between China and its neighbors, but it is in reality a conflict cultivated by the US explicitly as a means of maintaining “primacy in Asia.”

 

In other words, what I think is deplorable here is that a legal dispute under the laws of the sea is being used by the United States to threaten China and militarize strategic waterways in the South China Sea

 

Through the use of soft power and America’s formidable media influence, it has attempted to amplify these manageable bilateral differences into a regional conflict, then place itself amid it, posing as an indispensable underwriter of Asian security and stability. It can then manage the crisis ensuring maximum tension and division across the region, weakening it as a whole and allowing the US to reassert its primacy.

The Philippines remains a de facto colony of the United States?  You might want to tell the Philippine leaders that as well.  They may have a different opinion.

 

The Philippine government was trying to defend its territorial integrity without going to war.  To do this they hired an American lawyer.  So?  Perhaps they thought the American was better at this type of law than anyone in the Philippines.

 

"it is in reality a conflict cultivated by the US explicitly as a means of maintaining “primacy in Asia.”"

 

BS.  This is a conflict generated by China's absurd claim that the entire South China Sea is their lake.  No other country with a shore on the South China Sea recognizes this claim. 

 

I could go on, but it won't make a dent in your "blame America" rant.  Towards this end you clearly will defend any injustice and twist logic as much as possible to paint the US as the bad guy.

 

[ThailandLOS]

1 hour ago, heybruce said:

The Philippines remains a de facto colony of the United States?  You might want to tell the Philippine leaders that as well.  They may have a different opinion.

 

The Philippine government was trying to defend its territorial integrity without going to war.  To do this they hired an American lawyer.  So?  Perhaps they thought the American was better at this type of law than anyone in the Philippines.

 

"it is in reality a conflict cultivated by the US explicitly as a means of maintaining “primacy in Asia.”"

 

BS.  This is a conflict generated by China's absurd claim that the entire South China Sea is their lake.  No other country with a shore on the South China Sea recognizes this claim. 

 

I could go on, but it won't make a dent in your "blame America" rant.  Towards this end you clearly will defend any injustice and twist logic as much as possible to paint the US as the bad guy.

 

 

Or (and much more likely in the real world) Big Brother US just kindly offered to draw up the papers for them, as in fact the Philippines has promoted bilateral negotiations with China to resolve the issue.

 

When bemoaning how far China’s nine-dash-line delineating its claims in the South China Sea extends from the Chinese mainland, you should consider what a line encompassing your country's own far-flung possessions would look like. Your line, like China’s, would reflect past naval exploits, not proximity to US or someone else’s coast, and your line would extend much farther from our mainland than China’s does from theirs. US hypocrisy at its prime.

 

In reality, as the US military advantage declines day by day, it will be less confident that a potential war with China will conform to its plans. China’s improved military capabilities, particularly for anti-access and area denial (A2AD), mean that the United States cannot count on gaining operational control, destroying China’s defenses, and achieving decisive victory if a war occurred.

 

Pentagon's view is that a war with China must be fought sooner rather than later. The US military build-up envisages 60 percent of all air and naval assets in the Indo-Pacific region by 2020—now just over three years away. Moreover, Washington’s deliberate inflaming of dangerous flash points in Asia, especially in the South China Sea, is aimed at portraying Beijing as “aggressive” and “expansionist” and concocting the necessary casus belli.

 

In support to this, the “system of civilian control” in the United States is particularly sinister. Behind the backs of the American population, plans are being drawn up by think tanks like the RAND Corporation, by the military/police forces and by the broader state apparatus for police state measures to suppress anti-war opposition that go well beyond those employed in World War II.

[ThailandLOS]

7 hours ago, heybruce said:

I understand that the international tribunal has no mechanism for enforcing its rulings.  Treaty signatories agree, in the treaties, to abide by the rulings.  China, by refusing to accept or abide by the ruling, has identified itself as an unreliable treaty partner.

 

 

The court in question, the Permanent Court of Arbitration, is often referred to in the press as a “UN tribunal” to give it greater cachet, but, in fact, it is not part of the UN, being a body created in 1899 when imperialism ruled the waves. No wonder China refused to participate in the proceedings (a Palestinian in an Israeli court stands a better chance) and is ignoring the averse ruling.

 

Now, you can go on howling about China flaunting the rule of law, how outraged the “the international community” (read “NATO”) is, and the like.

But let's look at an example of US behavior to validate if it can be considered a "reliable treaty partner"

 

When Nicaragua took US before the International Court of Justice – an actual UN body – over US mining of their harbors and other offenses, US refused to participate in the proceedings, claiming the court did not have jurisdiction. When the court ruled against US, it blocked enforcement of the ruling through veto in the Security Council.

 

Embarrassingly, in light of current posturing, one of the charges levelled against the US was interrupting peaceful maritime commerce – this by the self-proclaimed protector of freedom of navigation in the western Pacific.

 

With this in mind, I would say that the US does an excellent job in painting itself as "the bad guy", demonstrating massive hypocrisy simultaneously.

Edited September 8, 2016 by ThailandLOS

[digibum]

14 hours ago, Lupatria said:

Did nobody ever say: "You won't get a high speed railway for free general, Sir?'

 

Thailand got taken to the world politics version of the upstairs show on Patpong.  

 

 

[worgeordie]

Just because it's called the China Sea, China thinks it owns the lot,

A long time ago someone said to me its not the Russians we should

worry about ,but the yellow peril,and it seems like its coming true.

regards worgeordie