Chinese ships have repeatedly rammed Philippine ships in the South China Sea. The U.S. has a mutual defense treaty with the Philippines, which could lead to American intervention.

An escalating series of clashes in the South China Sea between the Philippines and China could draw the U.S., which has a mutual defense treaty with the Philippines, into the conflict.

A 60 Minutes crew got a close look at the tense situation when traveling on a Philippine Coast Guard ship that was rammed by the Chinese Coast Guard.

China has repeatedly rammed Philippine ships and blasted them with water cannons over the last two years. There are ongoing conversations between Washington and Manila about which scenarios would trigger U.S. involvement, Philippine Secretary of National Defense Gilberto Teodoro said in an interview.

“I really don’t know the end state,” Teodoro said. “All I know is that we cannot let them get away with what they’re doing.”

China as “the proverbial schoolyard bully”

China claims sovereignty over almost all of the South China Sea, through which more than $3 trillion in goods flow annually. But in 2016, an international tribunal at the Hague ruled the Philippines has exclusive economic rights in a 200-mile zone that includes the area where the ship with the 60 Minutes team on board got rammed.

China does not recognize the international tribunal’s ruling.

  • Rinox@feddit.it
    45·
    2 months ago

    1. China’s claim is the same as Italy claiming the whole Mediterranean as their own because at some point the Roman empire claimed it (Mare Nostrum, literally “our sea”). That’s not how it works and it’s clearly bullshit

    2. I didn’t see Taiwan ramming anyone, did I? Also Taiwan is claiming to be China and all that because the PRC wants to keep the status quo. If Taiwan were to publicly renounce their pre revolution status and declare themselves an independent nation it would precipitate a crisis with China.

    • HomerianSymphony@lemmy.world
      7·
      2 months ago

      Also Taiwan is claiming to be China and all that because the PRC wants to keep the status quo.

      Taiwan actively asserts its ownership of the South China Sea.

      https://en.mofa.gov.tw/theme.aspx?n=1462&s=40&sms=294

      China’s claim is the same as Italy claiming the whole Mediterranean as their own because at some point the Roman empire claimed it

      The claims of both the PRC and the ROC are based on their continued and historical use of certain islands in the sea. Vietnam makes the same claim. The tribunal ruled that those islands are too small to count. (Vietnam accepted the ruling. The PRC and the ROC both rejected the ruling.)

      The Philippines, Malaysia, and Brunei base their claims to the sea on the concept of an Exclusive Economic Zone, which under international maritime law extends 200 nautical miles from their shores.

      • Rinox@feddit.it
        4·
        2 months ago

        The tribunal ruled that those islands are too small to count.

        Then it should be settled, no? It’s not the first time the UN commission refuses to recognize EEZ around uninhabited rocks in the middle of the sea

        • HomerianSymphony@lemmy.world
          2·
          2 months ago

          uninhabited rocks in the middle of the sea

          Well, part of the issue is that they technically aren’t uninhabited anymore.

          The largest naturally occurring island in the area is occupied by the ROC. A grand total of four civilians live there (and 220 troops). It has an airport that occupies the entire length of the island.

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taiping_Island

          Is four people enough to claim an island? Taiwan seems to think so, and they are a vital US ally.

          • Rinox@feddit.it
            4·
            2 months ago

            There are several military bases by several countries, yes, including but not limited to the PRC.

      • Rinox@feddit.it
        16·
        2 months ago

        Well, that’s a lie. It’s not from the 19th century, it’s from the 20th century. It’s not from a treaty, but a statement by the RoC government, and there was no signee, because it’s not a treaty.

        Specifically, the RoC published a map in 1947 showing 11 dashed lines. Mao then adopted the claim after he took power and changed the map in 9 dashed lines, in 2013 then the PRC added a 10th line near Taiwan. Also the PRC ratified the UNCLOS in 1996, which should make the whole point moot.

        It’s almost as if it’s made up bullshit to justify Chinese imperialism, don’t you think?

        Source: just look at fucking wikipedia

          • Rinox@feddit.it
            2·
            2 months ago

            1 - I’m not the one hyper focusing on the 9 or 10 or 11 dash line* China is the one hyper focusing

            2 - there’s no treaty that specifically mentions those territories, which is why China has to resort to a made up map with some unclear made up lines. If there were a real treaty, they’d use that to argue

            3 - Even if there were a treaty, the validity would be questionable. Is the treaty between Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union regarding the partitioning of Poland still valid? Would a German invasion of Poland be justified by that treaty? Or by Russia?

            4 - China has signed UNCLOS, a much more modern and real treaty, with clear laws. They then went to the UNCLOS tribune to plead their case and lost in court.

            5 - it’s just imperialism. They want to control more territory, so they do

            ^(* Historical claims may vary depending on current political objectives )