New China rules allow detention of foreigners in South China Sea

sferrin said:
Imagine the outrage if the US started hauling anybody it wanted to prison for the crime of sailing in the Gulf of Mexico.
Click to expand...
Or fishing as much as 2,000km from the US coast and right next to their own coast.

1718554196422.png

Equivalent BS claim for the US, claiming Cuba because it's on a continel shelf:

1718554311981.png
 
us.yahoo.com

In South China Sea dispute, Philippines' bolder hand tests Beijing

Huddled in the presidential situation room in February last year, senior Philippines officials faced a stark choice. Military and intelligence leaders watched as coast guard officers showed photos of what the agency said was a military-grade laser that China had pointed at a Philippines ship in...
us.yahoo.com us.yahoo.com

Military and intelligence leaders watched as coast guard officers showed photos of what the agency said was a military-grade laser that China had pointed at a Philippines ship in disputed waters days earlier.
Click to expand...
 
Oh dear...

www.nknews.org

New North Korean defense line crosses border with South, armistice maps confirm | NK PRO

North Korea is building new forward defense lines that touch and even cross the Military Demarcation Line (MDL) dividing the two Koreas, according to NK Pro analysis of satellite imagery. Experts told NK Pro that the apparent DPRK activity across the MDL will likely require a South Korean...
www.nknews.org www.nknews.org

www.nbcnews.com

North Koreans face increasing repression and threat of starvation, U.N. says

“People are becoming increasingly desperate,” the U.N. rights chief told the Security Council in its first open meeting on human rights in North Korea since 2017.
www.nbcnews.com www.nbcnews.com
 
Last edited:
sferrin said:
Imagine the outrage if the US started hauling anybody it wanted to prison for the crime of sailing in the Gulf of Mexico.
Click to expand...
Probably the equivalent claim for the US would be insisting on sovereignty over anything claimed under the Guano Islands Act. Which, in the Caribbean, would look a bit like this, not allowing for median lines etc.

It would put the US in dispute with most of the Caribbean, and its neighbouring states, plus France, the United Kingdom, and the Netherlands. I suspect that China wouldn't give a damn, making it useless as a retaliatory measure
 
Yellow Palace said:
Probably the equivalent claim for the US would be insisting on sovereignty over anything claimed under the Guano Islands Act. Which, in the Caribbean, would look a bit like this, not allowing for median lines etc.

It would put the US in dispute with most of the Caribbean, and its neighbouring states, plus France, the United Kingdom, and the Netherlands. I suspect that China wouldn't give a damn, making it useless as a retaliatory measure
Click to expand...
Yes, but no. Once we dropped our lines around the entire West Coast, East Coast, Alaska, Hawaii, Midway, the Johnston Atoll, etc. Well, I think we know what kind of tantrums we'd hear out of China. Especially if we started attacking all comers with water cannon and ramming. Any Chinese fishing vessels would be fair game.
 
sferrin said:
Once we dropped our lines around Alaska, Hawaii, Midway, the Johnston Atoll, etc.
Click to expand...
The US already claims territorial waters and an exclusive economic zone based on those territories. Much more aggressive maritime law enforcement in those waters would probably raise eyebrows, but nobody really questions that they're United States territory. If you look at a shipping traffic density map, you'll see a lot of arcs with a radius of about 200 nautical miles. That's the fishing fleets avoiding other people's territory.

The various uninhabited islands once claimed under the Guano Islands Act - list here - are a better analogy for what the Chinese are up to in the South China Sea. Not quite equivalent, but still basically amounts to 'uninhabited island of no real value that we're insisting is ours'.

The way they enforce their position under international law isn't nearly as concerning as the fact that they seem to think anywhere a Chinese foot once stood belongs to them.
 
Yellow Palace said:
The US already claims territorial waters and an exclusive economic zone based on those territories. Much more aggressive maritime law enforcement in those waters would probably raise eyebrows, but nobody really questions that they're United States territory. If you look at a shipping traffic density map, you'll see a lot of arcs with a radius of about 200 nautical miles. That's the fishing fleets avoiding other people's territory.

The various uninhabited islands once claimed under the Guano Islands Act - list here - are a better analogy for what the Chinese are up to in the South China Sea. Not quite equivalent, but still basically amounts to 'uninhabited island of no real value that we're insisting is ours'.

The way they enforce their position under international law isn't nearly as concerning as the fact that they seem to think anywhere a Chinese foot once stood belongs to them.
Click to expand...
Need to mirror China and have our own 10-dash line around all of our territory. (We could let everybody, except China, continue business as usual.)

breakingdefense.com

New Chinese 10-Dash map sparks furor across Indo-Pacific: Vietnam, India, Philippines, Malaysia - Breaking Defense

The new map sparked sharp reactions from India, Nepal, Vietnam, Malaysia and Taiwan. The new document was released one week before the G-20 summit in India. President Xi Jinping was to attend but news reports now indicate he will not.
breakingdefense.com breakingdefense.com

 
Last edited:
Ah well, they're making the classic mistake of turning of their neighbours against them. Who else made that mistake recently?
 
Wonder how long before some US folks get picked up?

And I don't mean USN sailors, I mean actual civilian merchant ship crew or captains.
 
Scott Kenny said:
Wonder how long before some US folks get picked up?

And I don't mean USN sailors, I mean actual civilian merchant ship crew or captains.
Click to expand...
If they keep this up their neighbours will likely start playing chicken with them using anonymous naval drones packed with high explosive.
 
Yellow Palace said:
Probably the equivalent claim for the US would be insisting on sovereignty over anything claimed under the Guano Islands Act. Which, in the Caribbean, would look a bit like this, not allowing for median lines etc.
Click to expand...
Monroe Doctrine to Manchu Doctrine

When was the last time folks got 'pressed at sea in any numbers--Barbary Coast?

Impressment used to be rather common.

I wonder how well the QBZ-191s will compare with Krags against the sons of Moro.

What was left there, outside of Pinatubo ash and lots of women's shoes?
 
Last edited:
www.spacewar.com

Philippines, Japan to hold security talks next month

Manila (AFP) June 28, 2024 - Japan and the Philippines will hold high-level defence talks next month, Manila said Friday, as the two countries seek to boost ties in the face of an increasingly confrontational China.
www.spacewar.com

www.spacewar.com

Death penalty among China's punishment guidelines for Taiwan independence advocates

Beijing (AFP) June 21, 2024 - China included the death penalty for particularly serious cases among judicial guidelines on criminal punishments for diehard supporters of Taiwanese independence published on Friday, state media reported.
www.spacewar.com
 
Scott Kenny said:
Wonder how long before some US folks get picked up?

And I don't mean USN sailors, I mean actual civilian merchant ship crew or captains.
Click to expand...

There really aren’t any American merchant mariners who aren’t associated government contracted vessels, domestic barge traffic or the very expensive and inefficient lines servicing Alaska, Hawaii and Puerto Rico. You’re unlikely to find very many American merchant mariners working at global wage scales on foreign vessels either. It’s hard to imagine how any Americans would be found navigating disputed South China Sea, aside from aboard USN or government chartered ships? Do around-the-world yachtsmen tend to pass through the area? I would think that sailing yachts would pass through the Torres Strait. So basically, the Chinese are unlikely to ever find a single America in the contested area.
 
TinWing said:
There really aren’t any American merchant mariners who aren’t associated government contracted vessels, domestic barge traffic or the very expensive and inefficient lines servicing Alaska, Hawaii and Puerto Rico. You’re unlikely to find very many American merchant mariners working at global wage scales on foreign vessels either. It’s hard to imagine how any Americans would be found navigating disputed South China Sea, aside from aboard USN or government chartered ships? Do around-the-world yachtsmen tend to pass through the area? I would think that sailing yachts would pass through the Torres Strait. So basically, the Chinese are unlikely to ever find a single America in the contested area.
Click to expand...
I could see China boarding an entire cruise ship. I'm sure some of the cabin attendants and bridge crew may be Americans, but the engineering crew wouldn't be.

Nevermind the passengers.
 
Scott Kenny said:
I could see China boarding an entire cruise ship. I'm sure some of the cabin attendants and bridge crew may be Americans, but the engineering crew wouldn't be.

Nevermind the passengers.
Click to expand...
You’re unlikely to find American “cabin attendants and bridge crew” unless the ship in Hawaiian inter-island service. And those ships are known for their horrendously bad service from American all-union crews. I’ve seen the occasional American on the entertainment, childcare or activity staff on normal cruise ships but never any bridge officers and certainly not any cabin attendants. So I think we Americans are safe enough on the high seas.
 
I wish more folks were angry about vessels flying Flags-Of-Convenience in the hopes that no one boards/inspects them.

More folks should worry about that
 
FoC are usually because the shipping register is closed or opaque not really because they don't want people to board them.
 
I'd be surprised if some of the wrecks these were replacing weren't already examined and exploited.
 
Yellow Palace said:
The way they enforce their position under international law isn't nearly as concerning as the fact that they seem to think anywhere a Chinese foot once stood belongs to them.
Click to expand...
Yeah, in their minds that should cover the entire world.
 
publiusr said:
I wish more folks were angry about vessels flying Flags-Of-Convenience in the hopes that no one boards/inspects them.

More folks should worry about that
Click to expand...
To be clear, many well known “flag of convenience” foreign ship registries are perfectly legitimate. The Liberian registry is actually managed from just outside Washington D.C. All of the better known foreign registries have standards and the ships are fully insured. It’s a legitimate practice.

That’s not to suggest that there isn’t an emerging threat with some previously little know foreign registries and novel maritime insurers. That’s a much broader topic and has nothing to do with the South China Sea or China itself.
 
MrPhantomMan said:
FoC are usually because the shipping register is closed or opaque not really because they don't want people to board them.
Click to expand...
I’d argue that overregulation like the infamous Jones Act is responsible for the prevalence of flags of convenience in the international maritime trade. The foreign registries can obfuscate ownership to a certain extent but that was not the original or primary motivation. Also, I’d think that a flag-of-convenience would make a ship more subject to boarding but that’s not a major issue as the vast majority of maritime trade is fully legitimate. I think that the most prevalent illegal acts at sea revolve around distant waters foreign fishing fleets and unenforced or poorly enforced 200 mile EEZs.
 
TinWing said:
I’d argue that overregulation like the infamous Jones Act is responsible for the prevalence of flags of convenience in the international maritime trade. The foreign registries can obfuscate ownership to a certain extent but that was not the original or primary motivation. Also, I’d think that a flag-of-convenience would make a ship more subject to boarding but that’s not a major issue as the vast majority of maritime trade is fully legitimate. I think that the most prevalent illegal acts at sea revolve around distant waters foreign fishing fleets and unenforced or poorly enforced 200 mile EEZs.
Click to expand...

I was really just trying to give one example of why they don't want people to board them is a low priority for those flags but yes I agree with everything you've said.
 
Dealing with Mr Xi is not unlike dealing with a street thug .
More and more the Chinese government insists in bullying other to get what they want.
For all the bad-mouthing the Americans get I yet to see an active duty American GOFO threaten to immolate millions of somebody else's civilian population. Just to prove how tough his country is
It's like dealing with mentally challenged 8 year holding a firearm with a hair trigger.
 
TinWing said:
I’d argue that overregulation like the infamous Jones Act is responsible for the prevalence of flags of convenience in the international maritime trade. The foreign registries can obfuscate ownership to a certain extent but that was not the original or primary motivation. Also, I’d think that a flag-of-convenience would make a ship more subject to boarding but that’s not a major issue as the vast majority of maritime trade is fully legitimate. I think that the most prevalent illegal acts at sea revolve around distant waters foreign fishing fleets and unenforced or poorly enforced 200 mile EEZs.
Click to expand...
Not so much overregulation - the better flags of convenience apply essentially the same regulations as most countries; Port State Control and the classification societies cover a lot of the shortfall - as financial incentives. Registering a ship with a FoC is usually cheaper, and conveys tax advantages (profit being made in the country of registration). The main regulatory difference is with labour laws: a ship registered in the UK or USA (say) needs to comply with that country's regulations around pay and working conditions. It's safe to say that those are more restrictive than those of Liberia.

That's not to say that overregulation isn't an issue (the Jones Act is, of course, notorious) or that some shipowners select their flag state to avoid regulations or accountability. But, in general, the maritime industry is under a lot more control - partly thanks to the tripartite system of Flag State, Port State and Class - than it's given credit for. The days when all you needed to be a shipowner were a line of credit with a bank and the phone number of a retired sea captain are long gone.

The real issues come when Luvanian-flagged ships, sailing from Luvanian ports, and inspected by the Luvanian Bureau of Shipping, turn out to be built entirely of chewing gum and baling twine. Which tends to get discovered when one either puts into a non-Luvanian port, gets bought by a non-Luvanian shipowner, or becomes involved in some kind of incident.
 
Non-Chinese ships in that area need to start carrying retro-reflector panels: Lase those and it's right back in your face...
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom