A powerful piece by Bill Hayton

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....

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,

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,

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