maritime law

China and Russian Maritime Disputes – become a US issue?

Posted on by Helena

If Clinton is elected will we go to war with Russia?  As a Soros mouthpiece, it is a well known truth that Soros wants to reduce Russia to rubble… 

And why is Japan suddenly instigating ownership rights to the Kuril Islands despite a US/UK Treaty that went into effect in 1952 specifically designating the islands as Russian territory or jurisdiction?

The islands have been a source of tension for centuries. The Ainu people are the earliest known settlers of the islands and are said to be both indigenous of Russia and Japan. In the sixteenth century, the ‘barbaric Ainu people’ were decimated by the Matsumae clan, a Japanese officiate. Since then the islands have been traded back and forth sometimes with tension and sometimes with peaceable dealings.

Today they are inhabited by Russians, Ukrainians, Belarusians, Tatars, Nivkhs, Oroch, and Ainus. No Japanese at all. But like the dispute in the South China Sea, it isn’t the islands that are important, it is the abundance of fisheries. The waters surrounding these islands are cited as the MOST productive in the North Pacific. But they also represent passage. The Sea of Okhotska is a major naval access point to Russia and the Kuril Islands stand between the Sea and the Pacific Ocean. They provide strategic access and any disruption of that access that Japan and the US might administer, would be hugely detrimental to Russia. And thirdly, the islands are a source of gold, silver, iron, hydrocarbon and titanium.

Suddenly, the US is recognizing Japanese sovereignty over the islands. How is that possible? The US State Department spokesperson who made this wild claim against Russia was Marie Harf, the same Harf who publicly stated that ISIS is misunderstood and that they just need ‘jobs’ to become nice people. She is currently John Kerry’s ‘senior spokesperson’ and was thus instrumental in the Iran nuclear deal.

Mz. Harf has not stated why the San Francisco Treaty is no longer recognized by the US State Department, she merely said that Japan has sovereign rights.

But the obvious declaration is most likely backed by the inference of creating chaos between Russia and it’s neighbors so as to keep the negative pour on the country which could be declared ‘grounds’ for instigating war.

While Russia did attempt negotiations with Japan in 2005 and 2010, they have consistently fallen short with the result being a win-lose proposition for Japan who wanted all of nothing and so got – nothing. Japan is concerned about ‘face’, if they concede, if they compromise, they fear they will look – weak. As a result, the conflict continues with Russia having the upper hand as they have possession and the right to do what they wish.

Still, Japan recently turned down Merkel’s offer to have them join NATO claiming relations with Russia would be damaged and those relations are a priority.

With Japan stripped of its right to a military after WWII, rising terrorism, China tensions in the South China Sea, North and South Korea cockfights, and a tired US military claiming that we will support you, their government is feeling uncertain and vulnerable. Add to the fray the claims of sexual assaults against Japanese by US military forces, and the entire fortitude of trust begins to crumble.

Japan is separated from Russia, China, and Korea by The sea of Japan whose greatest width is a mere 1070 kilometers or roughly 650 miles. This proximity places challenges on the security of Japan.

But these territorial disputes are hardly confined to China and Russia. The Falkland Islands which sit just east of Argentina are still claimed a UK territory citing the islanders right to decide and the fact that they have been under British rule for a century…

Territorial disputes rage between Sudan and South Sudan, Spain and Morocco, Cameroon and Guinea, Madagascar and France, Ireland and UK, Croatia and Serbia, Greece and Turkey, Pakistan and India, Iran and UAE… the list goes on ad nauseum. The South China Sea Islands were at one point annexed by France with a few being donated to the British. During WWII the islands were annexed by the Japanese.

The Timur Islands have been fighting Australia for maritime rights for 15 years. East Timur took the issue to the UN and Australia promptly withdrew from the maritime boundary jurisdiction of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). Why? Oil. In the meantime, poverty, disease and death in Timur is left to a spattering of very humble doctors, including Dr. Dan. And despite the Timur SeaTreaty being signed by both Australia and Timur, which allocated 90% of oil royalties to Timur, Australia refuses acknowledge the agreement. ConocoPhillips, AED and Woodside Petroleum currently operate in the sea.

So why do we involve ourselves in China and Russia as in ‘selective disputes’ that don’t involve the US? Why does Obama lecture China and Russia and give a nod to Australia? Negotiations are ongoing between Russia and Japan and between China and The Philippines. How those negotiations progress should be a cause and effect of the diplomacy of the respective countries as it would seem the UN Convention is only so good as long as it benefits one.

The South Sea of China; At The Helm of The Art of Diplomacy

Posted on by Helena

China is dredging waters off it’s coast and expanding its land mass. The US is nervous because they believe it is a ‘ploy’ to create a greater military presence over the waters which the US claims are international.

So that’s the story, but what does it all mean?

The South China Sea is more of an inlet that is bordered by China, Vietnam, Malaysia, The Philippines, and Brunei. The area is home to vast oil and gas reserves. While the Chinese government demarcated a dotted line of territory sometime in 1949, it only came under dispute in the 1970’s when The Philippines and Malaysia wanted a fair share. Given that the strait is not just a potential for oil and gas but also serves as a fishing center and a major shipping territory, the dispute heightened. By the 1990’s Brunei and Vietnam also made a claim to the waters.

An agreement was signed between Vietnam and China. But just two months later India stated that Vietnam had sold to it rights to engage in oil and gas exploration within areas that had been retained by China. That didn’t go over well.

In the meantime, Vietnam, Malaysia, The Philippines and Taiwan have quietly been building their own maritime defensives in the sea. Nothing was said. But China was tired of the games and out-sized them all building land masses that dwarfed their neighbors. Everyone became miffed because China’s aggression was bigger and better.

Enter McCain. McCain has a penchant for stoking aggression. He also has a penchant for butting into regime change agendas. Granted that will never happen in China, but coup disruption has plagued Malaysia of late, Thailand, and a failed coup in The Philippines within just the last year. So McCain’s solution is to allow for the US exchange of weapons to Vietnam, a communist Marxist regime, for the purpose of standing up against China. Really? Sort of reminds me of the Arab swordsman wielding an over-sized scimitar while fiercely challenging Indian Jones to his death only to be swiftly peeled away with one shot from his pistol.

US interference has absolutely no positive gain. If the US determines it has the right to step in as the divier of rights, much like the Israel and Palestine agenda, the US will not prevail. Adding tension to tension does not make for peace. But McCain has an ulterior agenda. Malaysia news makes no mention of the China dredging. In Vietnam, the US is pressuring their government to halt ‘wave erosion’ land reclamation. And while The Philippines news only makes reference to the concerns pressed by the US, it would seem that the Asian countries really haven’t much issue and that the issue is a US creation.

Perhaps the true concern is that the Asian countries will form an alliance that makes these waters restricted from US shipping. One third of the world’s liquified natural gas passes through the South China Sea. The bulk of it originates in the Persian Gulf. In 1994, the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea was ratified by most Asian countries in the maritime area. It defined rights and uses of natural resources in the area. The US did not sign the agreement. Unfortunately, by definition the rights that allow for a 200 nautical mile entitlement – overlap. Another oops factor of the UN.

Bottom line – we, the US do not have a lick of upper hand in this dispute. We do not have any legal rights whatsoever as we are not a party to the maritime treaty. What we do have is the ability to politely bow in deference to some countries who simply refuse to be policed by the US. Instigating further animosity with China will not be in our best interest – ever. Sometimes, it is simply best to remove ourselves from a situation that can not and will not have a positive outcome and pocket our ego.

In 1959 the art of diplomacy was over shadowed by the release of a game by the same name. It’s stated objective was:

“Luck plays no part in Diplomacy. Cunning and cleverness honesty and perfectly-timed betrayal are the tools needed to outwit your fellow players. The most skillful negotiator will climb to victory over the backs of both enemies and friends. Who do you trust?”