South China/West Philippine Sea

[Kapote]

 

May nagagalit ba na pwede na muling mangisda? SIno?

 

Eh meron ba dapat na ikagalak ng bonggang-bongga na pwede na tayong mangisda sa lugar na sinasabing may karapatan naman tayo at dati na naman tayong nakakapangisda doon dahil PINAYAGAN tayo ng umaangkin.

 

Para bang pag binully ka at kinuha gamit mo at finally isinoli sa iyo mag THANK YOU ka ng to the MAX

Meron, kung tatlong taon kang di nakapangisda. Kung naranasan mong kumain ng kanin at asin. Kung ginamit ka ng nakaraang administrasyon para sa sarili nilang hangarin pero hinayaan kang magutom ng walang kaakibat na plano kung paano ka bubuhayin. Kung ako ang nasa katayuan nila, magagalak ako.

 

Sabi nga ng isang Wise Man,pag nawala ang isa sa alaga mong tupa. Iiwan mo ang natitirang isang daan mong tupa para hanapin ang isa. At Kapag nahanap mo ay magdidiwang ka.

[rooster69ph]

Meron, kung tatlong taon kang di nakapangisda. Kung naranasan mong kumain ng kanin at asin. Kung ginamit ka ng nakaraang administrasyon para sa sarili nilang hangarin pero hinayaan kang magutom ng walang kaakibat na plano kung paano ka bubuhayin. Kung ako ang nasa katayuan nila, magagalak ako.

 

Sabi nga ng isang Wise Man,pag nawala ang isa sa alaga mong tupa. Iiwan mo ang natitirang isang daan mong tupa para hanapin ang isa. At Kapag nahanap mo ay magdidiwang ka.

 

 

Bro eto ang naunang tanong mo ...

 

Anyways, pag ganito ba ang balita dapat pa tayong magalit?

 

"Mga Pinoy na mangingisda, nakabalik na sa Scarborough Shoal"

 

 

So ang tanong ko may nagalit sa sa balitang yan?

 

Malayo naman yata ang sinagot mo sa tanong. Hindi naman tinatanong kung sino ang nagalit dahil hindi nakapangisda kundi sino ang nagagalit dahil nakabalik na sa pangingisda sa scarborough ang mga mangingisdang Pinoy.

[daphne loves derby]

Some people can't accept that we are only allowed by China to fish in Scarborough Shoal. I bet that person does not have an alternative pero hindi niya matanggap na pinayagan tayo ng China dun. How shallow can you get. Pride won't get you anywhere. The bottomline is our fishermen can now fish in the disputed waters. You can't eat pride.

 

Yeah.. Some people are just so blind that other peoples saving grace and salvation are just a laughing matter to them. Too much selfishness wont get you anywhere.

 

to me, its nothing but pure hatred and evil. bato bato sa langit, tamaan pikon

[juan t]

Being able to fish Scarborough is a welcome development but one has to wonder what is the cost. What is China expecting in return? If China doesn't get what it wants, we could very well be kicked out of Scarborough once again- then what? Will the US still back us up after all of DU30's tirades against them? DU30 seems to be pushing our country to the point where we have no choice BUT to bow to China.

Edited October 30, 2016 by juan t

[rooster69ph]

Hope there was no sellout.

[juan t]

What does China exactly want? Duterte just used his diplomacy so that our fishermen can put food in their table. There is no cost in being diplomatic. Aside from that diplomatic coup, Duterte also brought us investments from the Chinese. It seems to me that some Filipinos consider the US as the "end all and be all" of our foreign relations. What Duterte wants is for the US to respect us just as we respect them.

 

Sure there is a cost. There is always a cost. There is no such thing as a free lunch. For example: if we are agreeing that China is "allowing" us to fish there, then that, basically, is already costing us our sovereignty over the Scarborough Shoal.

[juan t]

So tell me, how do we enforce the UN arbitral ruling?

 

 

Well the original plan of the past administration was to take them to the Hague and get a favorable ruling (that was done). Step 2 was to, with the help of our allies, other claimant countries, and other sympathetic nations, put international pressure on China to comply.

[juan t]

The thing is our staunchest ally has not come to enforce our claim. Like I said, we can't enforce our claim so it is better to have bilateral talks than to depend on other nations to sympathize with us. We and only we can solve our problems and we can't depend on the sympathy of other nations because we can't control what they think or what they will do but we sure can control what we do.

 

First of all, the US will not enforce our claim for us. The US is only there to keep China in check. Nobody wants war here, not the US, not China and definitely not us.

 

Secondly, I welcome bilateral talks with China to try to soften them up. What i dont like is DU30 killing our other options just in case things don't go well with China. Our president needs to show diplomacy with ALL countries INCLUDING and especially the US.

[juan t]

Duterte is just trying to make the US respect us. The US does not need to interfere in our domestic issues like the EJK which the Senate cleared Duterte of.

 

C'mon now.. you and I know DU30 is going way overboard with his tirades. He could've handled this a lot better than he is doing.

 

 

 

The bilateral talks with China is not intended to soften China up. It is what China wanted in the first place. Look at what happened when Duterte talked to Xi. Our fishermen can now fish in the SS.

 

Being able to fish is a welcome development but it is not the end goal here. There are other more important issues here like sovereignty and freedom of navigation. Yes, we can fish.... But do we have sovereignty? Are we gonna be able to fly to HongKong without the fear of being shot down by a Chinese missile?

 

Edited October 31, 2016 by juan t

[juan t]

The end goal here is to have our fishermen ply their trade in the SS.

 

That's your opinion, not mine.

 

You talk about sovereignty over the SS. I ask you again. How do we enforce our sovereignty on the SS?

 

Are you trolling? That question has been answered above. Paulit-ulit ah! - International Pressure was the gameplan.

 

Huh? What does flying to Hongkong and being shot down have to do with the SS issue? First of all, if China doesn't want any Filipino to go to China, all it has to do is ban all PAL flights and deport all Filipinos there. The Chinese are not that dumb to shoot down commercial airliners.

 

Rhetoric my friend - Freedom of Navigation.

[juan t]

You were saying something about sovereignty on the SS which is why I asked you again how we will defend it. Don't say I am trolling because you never specifically answered my question on how we will defend our sovereignty in that area. If you don't wanna get asked that question again, then quit saying anything about defending our sovereignty in that area because you obviously have no answer to it. Again, you don't depend on international pressure because international pressure never stopped China from building structures in that area. Like I said and I will say it again, only we can control our own actions and Duterte decided on a course of action which is bilateral talks which worked because our fishermen can now fish in the SS.

 

 

If China is pressured into abiding by the rule of law, then we won’t have to defend our sovereignty from them right? How can you say that international pressure on China hasn’t worked when it hasn’t even been given the chance. The ruling from Hague only came out a few months ago. Only now can we put international pressure on China.

Edited November 1, 2016 by juan t

[juan t]

The end goal here is to have our fishermen ply their trade in the SS. You talk about sovereignty over the SS. I ask you again. How do we enforce our sovereignty on the SS?

 

 

 

If China said " The Philippines can fish here, but it has to recognize that this is Chinese territory" would you be satisfied?....

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(....yeah I didn't think so)

 

That is why fishing cannot be the end goal.

[juan t]

So did international pressure work on China? You can say everything about what the Hague handed down but the biggest question is: How can we enforce such a ruling? Obviously, you have no answer for this so don't even bring the ruling up because the important thing is enforcement and we can not enforce it so the next best thing is the bilateral talks, which worked.

 

Your a funny guy. You need to comprehend what I've been saying before you blurt out your replies otherwise paulit-ulit lang tayo.

 

 

As it is, I couldn't be angry because our fishermen can fish in the disputed area and that is the bottom line because we can't enforce the UN ruling. If China said but China never said anything to this effect. Accept it as it is. Our fishermen can fish and if only for that, Duterte should be commended. Now, if you can give an alternative to Duterte's diplomatic coup, give it.

 

 

Ive given my thoughts. You're making me repeat myself again.

 

Keep talking with China, but keep other options open. Be more diplomatic with the US as we may have to rely on them just in case dealing with China turns ugly.

[NooB]

Ang balita yung indonesia at australia mag anti-chinese fishermen sa west philippine sea. Yung vietnam at america din ay may pag-uusap tungkol sa anti-chinese fishermen. Pati daw germany may nilapitang bansa para sa anti-chinese fishermen, o germany nilapitan chismis pa lang kasi. Medyo seryoso na talaga ang sitwasyon sa west philippine sea.

[juan t]

Before telling me that, try to understand what you're talking about. It seems to me you are confused.

You still don't have any alternative on how to enforce our claim on the Spratlys. Again, what happened to the international pressure you were talking about?

 

Read and understand this statement so that the situation will be clearer to you: The international pressure has not swayed China one bit to stay out of the Spratlys. We are a treaty ally of the US, yet, during Aquino's time, nothing happened? Did the US enforce our claim during Aquino's time? Take note that Aquino was subservient to the US. Duterte did the next best thing which is holding bilateral talks. The bilateral talks worked. Don't reply with "we have to be diplomatic with the US" because this was the case during Aquino's time and nothing happened.

 

 

One more time for those who are a bit slow:

 

The arbitral ruling from UNCLOS only came out a few months ago. Because of this ruling, we can now put international pressure on China to abide by the decision. ONLY NOW. NOT DURING AQUINO'S TERM. ONLY NOW. Now that we have that favorable ruling.

 

Bilateral talks with China are very much welcome, but we have to keep all other options open. We should not burn bridges with the US. If, in case, dealing with China turns sour, it would be nice to know that we still have the option to go back to our long time friends.

 

At this point, it is premature to claim that bilateral talks worked. Yes we can fish (which is a wonderful development), but do we have sovereignty (which is the more important aspect)? Because if China does not recognize our maritime rights and is only "allowing" us to fish, then we pretty much have to kiss their ass for all time lest we be expelled again. We will basically just be transforming from being America's lapdog to China's lapdog.

Edited November 1, 2016 by juan t

[camiar]

 

 

One more time for those who are a bit slow:

 

The arbitral ruling from UNCLOS only came out a few months ago. Because of this ruling, we can now put international pressure on China to abide by the decision. ONLY NOW. NOT DURING AQUINO'S TERM. ONLY NOW. Now that we have that favorable ruling.

 

Bilateral talks with China are very much welcome, but we have to keep all other options open. We should not burn bridges with the US. If, in case, dealing with China turns sour, it would be nice to know that we still have the option to go back to our long time friends.

 

At this point, it is premature to claim that bilateral talks worked. Yes we can fish (which is a wonderful development), but do we have sovereignty (which is the more important aspect)? Because if China does not recognize our maritime rights and is only "allowing" us to fish, then we pretty much have to kiss their ass for all time lest we be expelled again. We will basically just be transforming from being America's lapdog to China's lapdog.

 

China has already stated that it will not recognize the Arbitral ruling, and has increased its military presence in the area.

 

The Philippines has admitted it cannot do anything about China's moves except through diplomatic protests. Without the military strength to enforce the ruling, the arbitral ruling is nothing but a piece of paper.

 

The US, Japan and the Western countries have not done much to help the Philippines to enforce the Ruling.

 

Other ASEAN countries who have similar disputes with China have been conspicuously SILENT about the ruling. The ASEAN itself, failed to even agree on a common statement about the issue and so, remained silent, too.

 

This means, no international pressure will deter China because she has the upper hand. We should at least drill this fact into our heads.

 

After hearing General Almonte talk about the South China Sea issue, I think I can now understand what Duterte is trying to do. I partly agree with him on what he has done so far on the issue.

 

One thing is certain. This is OUR fight. No other country will fight for us, unless those countries would stand to gain something from the risk of going against China. This is especially true for the US. So say goodbye to your international pressure.

Edited November 1, 2016 by camiar

[rooster69ph]

 

 

One more time for those who are a bit slow:

 

The arbitral ruling from UNCLOS only came out a few months ago. Because of this ruling, we can now put international pressure on China to abide by the decision. ONLY NOW. NOT DURING AQUINO'S TERM. ONLY NOW. Now that we have that favorable ruling.

 

Bilateral talks with China are very much welcome, but we have to keep all other options open. We should not burn bridges with the US. If, in case, dealing with China turns sour, it would be nice to know that we still have the option to go back to our long time friends.

 

At this point, it is premature to claim that bilateral talks worked. Yes we can fish (which is a wonderful development), but do we have sovereignty (which is the more important aspect)? Because if China does not recognize our maritime rights and is only "allowing" us to fish, then we pretty much have to kiss their ass for all time lest we be expelled again. We will basically just be transforming from being America's lapdog to China's lapdog.

 

i think we already have ...

[haroots2]

 

Sure there is a cost. There is always a cost. There is no such thing as a free lunch. For example: if we are agreeing that China is "allowing" us to fish there, then that, basically, is already costing us our sovereignty over the Scarborough Shoal.

 

If you are so sure about it then can you tell us exactly what is the cost? Baka kasi nandun ka sa meeting nila.

 

 

All arguments can be done the other way around. Kung nag pressure naman ang US and put their military might sa SS ang sasabihin naman ano naman ang kapalit nito sa US. Bakit naman bumaligtad si DU30, ano kaya ang sinuhol dito. Kasi kahit anong makuha nating advantage ang iniisip lagi may kapalit = "sovereignty".

 

Panahon pa ni Magellan hanggang ngayon we are controlled by the super powers. We are just pawns. Kahit saan ka kumampi if there is a war among superpowers pulbos pa rin tayo.

Edited November 2, 2016 by haroots2

[juan t]

If you are so sure about it then can you tell us exactly what is the cost? Baka kasi nandun ka sa meeting nila.

 

Hello...kaya ko nga tinatanong kung ano ang cost kasi hindi ko alam diba?

 

 

 

 

All arguments can be done the other way around. Kung nag pressure naman ang US and put their military might sa SS ang sasabihin naman ano naman ang kapalit nito sa US. Bakit naman bumaligtad si DU30, ano kaya ang sinuhol dito. Kasi kahit anong makuha nating advantage ang iniisip lagi may kapalit = "sovereignty".

 

Panahon pa ni Magellan hanggang ngayon we are controlled by the super powers. We are just pawns. Kahit saan ka kumampi if there is a war among superpowers pulbos pa rin tayo.

 

 

Hindi ko ma-gets ang point mo. I am not arguing about who we should deal with, I just want to know what is China expecting in return.

[juan t]

 

China has already stated that it will not recognize the Arbitral ruling, and has increased its military presence in the area.

 

That was expected even before we filed the case.

 

The Philippines has admitted it cannot do anything about China's moves except through diplomatic protests. Without the military strength to enforce the ruling, the arbitral ruling is nothing but a piece of paper.

 

Disagree. There are other things we can do with that "piece of paper" you are readily willing to throw away. For example: If a Chinese company decides it will explore for oil within our eez, then we take that company to court in a country where it has assets. If say that company has assets in Canada, we can tell the Canadian court that the area is ours and to seize that company's assets to compensate us for whatever damages. (Justice Carpio's idea)

 

The US, Japan and the Western countries have not done much to help the Philippines to enforce the Ruling.

 

Other ASEAN countries who have similar disputes with China have been conspicuously SILENT about the ruling. The ASEAN itself, failed to even agree on a common statement about the issue and so, remained silent, too.

 

This means, no international pressure will deter China because she has the upper hand. We should at least drill this fact into our heads.

 

After hearing General Almonte talk about the South China Sea issue, I think I can now understand what Duterte is trying to do. I partly agree with him on what he has done so far on the issue.

 

One thing is certain. This is OUR fight. No other country will fight for us, unless those countries would stand to gain something from the risk of going against China. This is especially true for the US. So say goodbye to your international pressure.

 

This is not just about the Philippines EEZ. Its about all of SCS. The US has been patrolling the area asserting freedom of navigation. Japan has been disputing China with their own claims. I dont know excactly what Vietnam and Indonesia are doing with China, but I am sure they are not being silent. India is also making some noise. This is a concerted effort. It will not happen overnight. How can you say it will not work after only 3 months after the release of the verdict?

Edited November 2, 2016 by juan t

[juan t]

Where is the international pressure? Huwag kang umasa sa wala. Uuwi kang luhaan. International pressure pa more!

You've been yakking since a couple of days back and I have been asking what alternatives we have aside from international pressure. You haven't answered because you really have no answer for it. Puro ka we should not burn bridges but did the US do anything? Reality check. Dream on.

 

 

Who's side are you on? The way you talk, it seems like you are siding with China instead of the Philippines.

 

You want to give up on pressuring China. You don't care about diplomacy with the US. So, let me ask you this:

 

 

If bilateral talks with China fails, what do we do next?

[juan t]

Bilateral talks with China has succeeded that is why our fishermen can now put food on their table. I am on the side of national interest. Read my replies again if you still don't know which side I am on. What I have been stating again and again is the pragmatic way to handle this situation and Duterte has done it with aplomb. At the end of the day, the only thing that matters is that our fishermen can harvest the bounty in our EEZ and won't go hungry. Don't reply with the sovereignty argument because I will ask you how we can enforce our sovereignty in that area again and I will ask you that question ad infinitum if you continue on bringing that argument up.

 

So you think this is over? Has there been agreements signed regarding Scarborough?

[NooB]

 

Eto gagamitin para ma enforce ang ating sovereignty sa west philippine sea.

[juan t]

Verbally, yes, there was. So this a de facto agreement. Because if there wasn't, our fishermen would not be able to fish in the SS until now.

 

...and what excactly does that agreement entail?

[juan t]

The fact that our fishermen can fish in the SS. As for the nitty gritty, ask Duterte because I am not privy to Xi and Duterte's agreement.

 

Ok so even if you do not have the complete details of the agreement, you are happy as long as the fishermen can fish, correct? It doesn't matter what China asks in return. China can ask for anything it wants, correct?