Embedded Files
Mark Sidel mark.sidel at wisc.edu
Mon May 25 12:50:26 PDT 2015
Worth reading:
http://www.asiasentinel.com/politics/fact-fiction-south-china-sea/
Thanks to David Brown for mentioning this to me....
MS
Mark Sidel
University of Wisconsin-Madison
Shawn McHale mchale at gwu.edu
Mon May 25 13:28:02 PDT 2015
Excellent article. The seeming inability of the world policy community to
address these historical claims in a rigorous way has been remarkable. I
have discussed with people the issue of the historical claims, and stated
that the ones for the Spratlys are nonsense, but the reply I often get is
that possession is nine-tenths of the law. But in my view, the historical
claims ARE key. China's historical claims are built on a foundation that
is incredibly rickety, and this undermines the legitimacy of China's
actions.
Marwyn Samuels's book is actually quite useful, even if it has
shortcomings.
You will notice that France is almost never mentioned in these debates. But
certainly, in French and Chinese archives, are documents which lay out the
claims and counter-claims before 1945.
Shawn McHale
Guillemot Francois francois.guillemot at ens-lyon.fr
Mon May 25 14:36:19 PDT 2015
Yes, great article and very good analysis by Bill Hayton about the
sources and the Chinese "soft power" on their so-called historical
claims.
An occasion to remember the book of Vo Long Te published in Saigon in
1974 :
Võ Long Tê : Les archipels de Hoàng Sa et de Trường-Sa … [préface de
Nguyễn Thế Anh], see : http://indomemoires.hypotheses.org/15375
Affaire à suivre... To be followed
Best,
F
Tai VanTa taivanta at yahoo.com
Mon May 25 16:16:48 PDT 2015
Tai Van Ta herein sending in attachment a paper--presented already at international conferences--on South China Sea disputes with unimpeachable facts (no fiction as Tom Hayton described in the pro-Chinese paper and books) and law, both customary international law and the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea.Cordially, Tai
François Guillemot francois.guillemot at ens-lyon.fr
Tue May 26 03:15:40 PDT 2015
Dear Professor Ta Van Tai, thank you very much for your detailed paper
(and not only a "synopsis") on this subject.
Best regards,
FG
Bill Hayton bill.hayton at bbc.co.uk
Tue May 26 03:25:43 PDT 2015
Thanks all - if anyone is interested in scans of the original Chinese articles from 1933/4 and 1974 please feel free to contact me off list.
Cheers
Bill Hayton
Bill Hayton bill.hayton at bbc.co.uk
Tue May 26 03:38:54 PDT 2015
I would agree. The solution to the disputes lies in front of us - each claimant recognises what the others currently possess and the world sits back and relaxes. Vietnam 'loses' the Paracels but gains legitimacy in the Spratlys, China 'loses' the U-shaped line. The major obstacle is the historical imagination or rather the imaginary history.
Gerard Sasges from Singapore has just sent me a fascinating paper about French scientific activity in the islands in the 30s - an entertaining story. It's lined up for the JAS.
Bill Hayton
David Marr david.marr at anu.edu.au
Wed May 27 19:05:22 PDT 2015
In 1980 I suggested to the Chinese and Vietnamese ambassadors (separately) in Canberra that the two governments negotiate the Paracels to China and Spratlys to VN, the Philippines and Malaysia. Both men rejected to idea with such vehemence that I no longer pursued it anywhere.
David Marr
ANU
Page updated
Report abuse