english
nederlands
Indymedia NL
Independent Media Centre of the Netherlands
Indymedia NL is an independent free communication organisation. Indymedia offers an alternative approach to the news by using an open publishing method for text, images, video and audio.
> contact > search > archive > help > join > publish news > open newswire > disclaimer > chat
Search

 
All Words
Any Word
Contains Media:
Only images
Only video
Only audio

Dossiers
Agenda
CHAT!
LINKS

European NewsReal

MDI's complaint against Indymedia.nl
Courtcase Deutsche Bahn vs. Indymedia.nl
Topics
anti-fascisme / racisme
europa
feminisme
gentechnologie
globalisering
kunst, cultuur en muziek
media
militarisme
natuur, dier en mens
oranje
vrijheid, repressie & mensenrechten
wereldcrisis
wonen/kraken
zonder rubriek
Events
G8
Oaxaca
Schinveld
Schoonmakers-Campagne
Help
Tips for newbies
A short intro into Indymedia NL
The policy of Indymedia NL
How to join?
Donate
Support Indymedia NL with donations!
Lawsuits cost a lot of money, we appreciate every (euro)cent you can spare!

You can also direct your donation to Dutch bank account 94.32.153 on behalf of Stichting Vrienden van Indymedia, Amsterdam (IBAN: NL41 PSTB 0009 4321 53)
Indymedia Network

www.indymedia.org

Projects
print
radio
satellite tv
video

Africa
ambazonia
canarias
estrecho / madiaq
kenya
nigeria
south africa

Canada
hamilton
london, ontario
maritimes
montreal
ontario
ottawa
quebec
thunder bay
vancouver
victoria
windsor
winnipeg

East Asia
burma
jakarta
japan
manila
qc

Europe
alacant
andorra
antwerpen
armenia
athens
austria
barcelona
belarus
belgium
belgrade
bristol
bulgaria
croatia
cyprus
estrecho / madiaq
euskal herria
galiza
germany
grenoble
hungary
ireland
istanbul
italy
la plana
liege
lille
madrid
malta
marseille
nantes
netherlands
nice
norway
oost-vlaanderen
paris/île-de-france
poland
portugal
romania
russia
scotland
sverige
switzerland
thessaloniki
toulouse
ukraine
united kingdom
valencia
west vlaanderen

Latin America
argentina
bolivia
brasil
chiapas
chile
chile sur
colombia
ecuador
mexico
peru
puerto rico
qollasuyu
rosario
santiago
tijuana
uruguay
valparaiso

Oceania
adelaide
aotearoa
brisbane
burma
darwin
jakarta
manila
melbourne
oceania
perth
qc
sydney

South Asia
india
mumbai

United States
arizona
arkansas
atlanta
austin
baltimore
big muddy
binghamton
boston
buffalo
charlottesville
chicago
cleveland
colorado
columbus
danbury, ct
dc
hampton roads, va
hawaii
houston
hudson mohawk
idaho
ithaca
kansas city
la
madison
maine
miami
michigan
milwaukee
minneapolis/st. paul
new hampshire
new jersey
new mexico
new orleans
north carolina
north texas
nyc
oklahoma
omaha
philadelphia
pittsburgh
portland
richmond
rochester
rogue valley
saint louis
san diego
san francisco
san francisco bay area
santa barbara
santa cruz, ca
seattle
tallahassee-red hills
tampa bay
tennessee
united states
urbana-champaign
utah
vermont
western mass
worcester

West Asia
armenia
beirut
israel
palestine

Topics
biotech

Process
discussion
fbi/legal updates
indymedia faq
mailing lists
process & imc docs
tech
volunteer
Credits
This site is produced by volunteers using free software where possible.

The system we use is available from:mir.indymedia.de
an alternative is available from: active.org.au/doc

Thanks to indymedia.de and mir-coders for creating and sharing mir!

Contact:
info @ indymedia.nl
A Negotiated Political Settlement to the Spratly Islands Dis
Party of the Laboring Masses (PLM) - 22.06.2011 09:58

No to Sabre-Rattling! The Party of the Laboring Masses - Philippines condemns any actions that increase military tensions in the region and contribute to a regional military conflict, by countries that lay claim to the Spratly Islands. We are opposed to any sabre-rattling and stand for a negotiated, political settlement, of the disputed claims to the area. Therefore we deplore China’s strong-arm tactics and bullying, which undermines efforts towards a peaceful, political settlement, of the disputed claims.









The Spratly Islands, less than four-square kilometres of land area spread over 425,000 square kilometres of sea and usually submerged under water, probably have strategic importance fuelling the numerous territorial disputes. The area holds significant reserves of oil and natural gas: reportedly some 17.7 billion tons of oil and natural gas reserves, larger than the 13 billion tons held by Kuwait, thus making it the fourth largest reserve bed in the world. In an energy hungry world, these reserves intensify the disputed claims over the area. Due to clashes over claims on the islands, no successful exploration of the area has as yet been successfully undertaken. It is a productive area for world fishing and accounted for 8% of the total world catch in 1988, a number which has most likely risen since then. China has estimated that the South China Sea holds one trillion dollars worth of oil, natural gas and fishing. The region is also one of the busiest shipping lanes in the world. Tanker traffic through the South China Sea is over three times greater than through the Suez Canal and five times greater than through the Panama Canal.

The history of the various claims is lengthy and contorted. Malaysia has militarily occupied three islands that it considers to be within its continental shelf. Swallow Reef (Layang Layang) has been turned into an island through land reclamation and the establishment of tourist facilities. China and Taiwan claim that the islands have historically been a part of China for nearly 2000 years, discovered during the Han Dynasty in 2 BC and marked on maps compiled from thereon. China also claims that neighbouring countries and European Powers took advantage of China’s situation during the revolutionary upheavals to impinge on its sovereignty. Today, China’s Peoples Liberation Army and the Taiwanese government armed forces are both stationed in several islands, including the largest, Taiping Island. Vietnam disputes China’s claims on the basis that the ancient Chinese records were about non-Chinese foreign territories and that China did not claim sovereignty over the Spratlys until after the Second World War. Vietnam claims the Spratlys based on international law on declaring and exercising sovereignty. Vietnam currently occupies 31 islands. Brunei's claims to the reef are based on the United Nations Law of the Sea. Brunei claims that the southern part of the Spratly Chain is actually a part of its continental shelf and therefore a part of its territory and resources.

The Philippines bases its claims of sovereignty over the Spratlys on the issues of Res nullius (literally ‘nobody’s property’) and geography. The claim was Res nullius as there was no effective sovereignty over the islands until the 1930s when France and then Japan acquired the islands. When Japan renounced their sovereignty over the islands, according to the San Francisco Treaty between Japan and the Allied powers signed in 1951, there was a relinquishment of the right to the islands without any special beneficiary. Therefore, argue the Philippines, the islands became Res nullius and available for annexation. The Philippines did not register these claims until the 1970s and annexed the islands in 1978, calling them the Kalayaan Island Group. The cornerstone of the Philippines claim of the Kalayaan islands is that the Spratlys lie within its 200-mile Exclusive Economic Zone according to the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. The Philippines also argues, under maritime law that China cannot extend its baseline claims to the Spratlys, because China is not an archipelagic state.

There are many geopolitical interests at play in the area. These include that of the United States, which has stated that it has ‘national interests’ in the South China Sea. The strategic importance of these islands, in a world faced with rapidly dwindling natural resources and increasingly precarious food security, are fuelling the disputes over territorial claims in this region. In a region which has had more than its share of war and conflict, due to colonial and imperialist aggression, we must reject all and every response which escalates military tensions in the region. We must stand for a negotiated, political resolution, to the disputed territories.

Furthermore, we do not believe the argument that the national sovereignty of the countries involved is at stake over the disputed claims, helps achieve this. The issue of national sovereignty is legitimate only if there are national islanders, i.e. an actual islander population inhabiting these islands, whose economic interests and culture historically coincide with the interests of a nation state, but this is not the case. Only a small number of military personnel occupy some of the islands. Sovereignty cannot be solely defined as authority over territories. The Spratlys is simply a disputed territory and therefore must be resolved through straightforward negotiations. To argue, as the various governments do, that national sovereignty is at stake or is being violated is not strictly accurate. It is also dangerous as it raises the stakes and therefore increases regional tensions around the issue.

We also oppose any attempts by the Philippine government and the defense department to purchase military equipment ‘to better address the Spratlys issue’, as described by AFP spokeman Commodore Rodriguez. In a country that continues to face an armed liberation movement struggling for self-determination of the Bangsamoro people in Mindanao, as well as a guerrilla warfare undertaken by left groups in pursuit of social justice, any ‘nationwide modernization upgrade’ as proposed by the AFP will inevitably be used by the government against the legitimate struggle of the Bangsamoro peoples and the left. Therefore, any moves by the AFP to purchase weapons under the guise of ‘national defence’ must also be opposed.

Partido Lakas ng Masa (PLM)

 http://www.masa.ph/

___________________________________________________________________________


Akbayan urges Chinese Gov’t: Demilitarize contested Spratly areas

By AKBAYAN (Citizens Action Party)

Around a hundred members from Akbayan Party protested outside of the Chinese Consular office inMakati Thursday morning to condemn the Chinese government’s military incursions into the West Philippine Sea even as they called for a peaceful resolution of the conflict and demilitarization of contested areas.

Wearing masks of the popular cartoon character Po from the popular Kung Fu Panda cartoon movie, the protesters said the gentle and happy cartoon protagonist in the fantasy world version of China is a hero who goes against bullies and those who upset the peace—something, which they asserted, the Chinese government is guilty of behaving like in the West Philippine Sea.

“We reiterate our call to the Chinese government to respect our sovereignty over the West Philippine Sea and refrain from making further military incursions,” Akbayan Rep. Walden bello said.

The partylist lawmaker said that with the rising tension in the area, involved country governments should take the lead in diffusing the tension by scaling down in military presence and work for the eventual demilitarization of contested areas.

“It’s just proper that all claimants go back to using diplomatic channels and demilitarize contested areas. As the saying goes, ‘you can’t talk peace and have a gun.’ However, in order to begin that process, there should be no further incursions into areas occupied by other claimants. China, being the biggest in the area and having the strongest armed forces among the claimants should show some magnanimity and set the first example,” Bello said.

Bello also disapproved of the Chinese government’s absolutist claims to the contested area.

“Offensive”

“Based on legitimate reports, the Chinese navy intruded into Philippine waters. Instead of apologizing and harmonizing future actions, they called on the Philippines and other claimants to respect their supreme sovereignty over the entire West Philippine Sea and refrain from making statements that are deemed irresponsible and incendiary. I think this is very offensive,” Bello said.

Bello claimed that the actions and statements of China are worlds apart.

“Saying that all claimants should return to the negotiating table is a step in the right direction. However, such statements seem to remain as mere statements especially with the strong military presence of the Chinese government in our territory,” Bello said.

US intervention, unnecessary

Akbayan also called on the United States government not to intervene in the issue saying it is a regional matter that should be addressed by the parties involved.

“The crisis started when a strong military power in the area threw its weight around instead of settling things in a diplomatic manner. We don’t need the US doing the same thing here since it will just complicate the matter even further. It would be best for the US to concentrate on its own affairs,” according to Bello.

Bello, together with fellow Akbayan lawmaker Kaka Bag-ao, filed a resolution urging the government to change the name South China Sea to Western Philippine Sea for areas that are within the EEZ of the Philippines. The Department of Foreign Affairs and the Department of National Defense have likewise followed Akbayan’s lead in referring to the South China Sea as the West Philippine Sea.

The West Philippine Sea, which contains all the area claimed by the Philippines under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), to which it is a signatory to has been a flashpoint in regional affairs with 6 countries claiming a part or all of the area.
The UNCLOs provides an exclusive economic zone (EEZ) 200 hundred nautical miles from the baseline of countries. Under this treaty, a country has sole exploitation rights over its own EEZ. The Spratlys are an estimated 700 nautical miles from the baseline of China.

 http://www.akbayan.org.ph/


 

Read more about: antimilitarisme

supplements
> indymedia.nl > search > archive > help > join > publish news > open newswire > disclaimer > chat
DISCLAIMER: Indymedia NL uses the 'open posting' principle to promote freedom of speech. The news (text, images, audio and video) posted in the open newswire of Indymedia NL remains the property of the author who posted it. The views in these postings do not necesseraly reflect the views of the editorial team of Indymedia NL. Furthermore, it is not always possible to guarantee the accuracy of the postings.