南海——中國的南海對策（1）

作者認為簡單的不介入UNCLOS仲裁給中國造成了一定的被動局麵。中國應該以技術性的策略，最大程度的推遲UNCLOS的裁決。讓主權問題有機會成為主要問題。以前中國在國際舞台上的話語權不大，所以被迫選擇通過雙邊談判來解決邊界問題。在中國傳統的方法解決雙邊問題行不通的情況下，加上中國日益增加的影響力，中國不妨試著將南沙問題放到UNCLOS的“上級”機構來解決。

既然中國反對UNCLOS介入的理由是主權而非海洋事物，那麽中國的第一選擇是主動將問題激化到主權的衝突。在主權衝突的情況下，中國可以將問題帶到聯合國，從而在戰略上防止了UNCLOS對南海的裁決。在聯合國漫長的解決過程中，中國可以將南海問題變成一張牌，才有可能和美國進行交易。此一方法最大的不利是，美國將問題拖著，那中國是否在乎在建設“台灣”（南海）的同時又一個“台灣（南海）問題”呢？

菲律賓在將南海問題提交給UNCLOS以後，對南沙問題在實際衝突上的降溫，正體現了美國日本菲律賓在這一問題上的協調和一致。打破僵局讓“在南沙主權上沒有立場的”美國，成為一個“傍觀者”而非“參與者”，讓美國在聯合國發言要好過讓美國在美菲，美日，7國集團的發言來的對中國有利——因為我們在聯合國也有聲音和同盟者。

在南海的島建是一個被動而且長期的應對，這個被動的應對在今後會變成主動的優勢，然而這個長期的應對不解決明天可能的出現的問題。UNCLOS判決的問題會讓中國有一個事倍功半的將來，讓美國日本在中國南海得以先手，讓中國在台灣問題和南海問題上長期的陷於一個被動。

南海問題不是台灣問題，但台灣問題可以成為南海問題的一部分。我們將南海問題和台灣問題混在一起不是解決問題的方法。設想一下，一個有台灣問題的南海問題不是真是台灣當局所要的嗎？隻要時間足夠長，台灣問題，南海問題，他媽（航）媽，他奶（日）奶的問題，都不是問題。問題我們能將時間的優勢放到中國這邊嗎？美國不願意，日本不願意，中國呢？

 

• 南海——中國的南海對策（1） - CNNed - ♂ (3039 bytes) (4225 reads) 04/18/2016  14:50:28  (1)

• 有想法，大家好好的談，我的能力有限，也無法一一回答，請原諒！周末寫的，今天在Service Car的時候重編了，獻醜了！ - CNNed - ♂ (0 bytes) (15 reads) 04/18/2016  14:54:06

• 南海問題的真正問題是，中國本以為找到一個申訴主權的方法--人工建島，但不慎扯了一下美國的淡。 - 西風沙 - ♂ (38 bytes) (135 reads) 04/18/2016  15:00:36

。。打斷第一島鏈。

• 那你說填島對不對？ - 南天北雲 - ♂ (0 bytes) (7 reads) 04/18/2016  15:07:02

• 填島是一個妙計，必須的。 - 西風沙 - ♂ (140 bytes) (170 reads) 04/18/2016  15:21:56

但扯了人家的淡

人家會不斷給你找麻煩

須用計破解

形勢不容樂觀

• 不管兔子咋做，鷹都會找麻煩。哈也不做最好，對不？ - 南天北雲 - ♂ (0 bytes) (6 reads) 04/18/2016  15:41:02

• 不對！兔鷹有很多共同點，雙方高層都很清楚，避免誤會最重要。 - 西風沙 - ♂ (80 bytes) (45 reads) 04/18/2016  15:53:48

你可能一時理解不了

不急

• 中國也應該越來越像美國才合理！ - CNNed - ♂ (0 bytes) (3 reads) 04/18/2016  18:58:25

• 填島是妙招，趕快收回一兩個被菲越占的島（不是礁）應該是正招。 - quest - (59 bytes) (71 reads) 04/18/2016  15:46:30

大陸在南沙一個自然島都沒占到啊！

• 島建不是一天兩天的事，有點遠水解不了近渴的感覺？ - CNNed - ♂ (0 bytes) (5 reads) 04/18/2016  19:03:22

• What is 近渴 for you? - TheJudge - ♂ (2707 bytes) (27 reads) 04/18/2016  19:52:00

You said: "有點遠水解不了近渴的感覺". If you think building islands is 遠水, what is jin 水? Asking UN to decide who own these islands?  CHina does not need UN approval to defend its territory.

The following is my earlier response to your bad, bad idea:

If you really think this way, at least, you are naive.  If you know this is a bad idea, you have ulterior motive.

You said: "那麽中國的第一選擇是主動將問題激化到主權的衝突。在主權衝突的情況下，中國可以將問題帶到聯合國." If this is 主權衝突，why would China 將問題帶到聯合國? Does China need to have UN approval to defend its sovereignty?

"打破僵局讓“在南沙主權上沒有立場的”美國，成為一個“傍觀者”而非“參與者”，讓美國在聯合國發言要好過讓美國在美菲，美日，7國集團的發言來 的對中國有利——因為我們在聯合國也有聲音和同盟者。" This is a joke. You have to be stupid to believe this, otherwise you have ulterior motive.  US  said it does not take position on territorial disputes, such as Diao yu Island, But later US changed its official position. What US is saying & doing now in the South China Sea is already clearly taking a position--just not on the side of CHina.

UNCLOS對南海的裁決 is useless, non-binding. UNCLOS has no authority over territoral disputes. What China is doing is the best approach for China.

"在南海的島建是一個被動而且長期的應對，這個被動的應對在今後會變成主動的優勢，然而這個長期的應對不解決明天可能的出現的問題"  We really don't understand what you mean?  "然而這個長期的應對不解決明天可能的出現的問題". So what is the future problem?

China has been very restraint while watching the smaller countries stealing the islands one by one. Finally, China started to take action & the speed shocked the US. That is why we have all this problems. Do you really think US will be impartial if China did bring the matter to the UN? Why US did not say anything when Vietnam or Philippines were ocupying & building the islands?

"隻要時間足夠長，台灣問題，南海問題....." How long is 隻要時間足夠長? 10 years? 20 years? Forget it. Taiwan problem has already dragged on toooooo long.

I don't know whom you support. But I know who like your idea - US, Japs, Tai du, Philippines, Vietnam.

• Please read my response below. Here is the answer for the press - CNNed - ♂ (738 bytes) (26 reads) 04/18/2016  20:08:28

The upcoming UNCLOS ruling, and 520 Ms. Cai's statement.  If it is coupled, and the threat is unthinkable.  I understand, China can always choose to ignore and even denounce.  But, as I said in the short article, that is a one-step further towards Taiwan's independency.

Based on that, I believe "island building" is not going to help much.  However, I agree that, in a longer term, "island building" eventually will affect all aspects of the South China Sea, including the conflicts.

If you are really a "TheJudge" , please help us understand the significance of the Philippine's documents to UNCLOS in a legal way, not as a prosecutor.

• As I said before UNCLOS has no authority ruling over - TheJudge - ♂ (324 bytes) (10 reads) 04/18/2016  20:21:31

territorial disputes between countries. Though the current "territorial" dispute is in the ocean, it does not change the fact UNCLOS is the body for dispute. Territorial disputes can not resolved at UN. They are resolved by either negotiatation or war. That may sound bad, but that is the reality today.

• You are not qualified to be a judge! Please read my article. - CNNed - ♂ (338 bytes) (10 reads) 04/18/2016  20:35:30

FYI, I don't even have any intention to resolve the conflicts, but to enlongate the time - that is what China is lack of - that is also U.S. doesn't want to give.

I think we just had one example two years ago, Ukraine brought Russia to UN for Crimea.  China need an unsolvable issue for a time being.

• Hope you don't mind that I joke about your ID - CNNed - ♂ (0 bytes) (3 reads) 04/18/2016  20:37:42

• 美國一戰二戰的策略是讓你們先打，等你們打殘廢了美國出來收尾。在東亞美國仍舊是這麽個思路，鼓動周邊小國與中國熱戰。。。... - pieta - ♂ (0 bytes) (12 reads) 04/18/2016  16:39:03

• 所以呢，如果美國人一定要戰爭，中國人寧可直接與美國或日本開戰，也不要被越南廢鋁等垃圾股套牢。。。。。。。 - pieta - ♂ (0 bytes) (10 reads) 04/18/2016  16:41:08

• 這個戰略可行！ - world123 - ♂ (0 bytes) (2 reads) 04/18/2016  17:20:45

• 偽命題，一沒有小國會傻到和兔子動手，二兔子有核大國美帝摘不了果子。類似二戰的便宜米國撿不到了 - 樓梯 - ♂ (0 bytes) (12 reads) 04/18/2016  18:13:45

• 連日本都不是個事。何況菲越？對於菲越，敢挑事，就收礁島。必須收一些菲占島礁。否則其他有樣學樣！ - 逐鹿中東 - ♂ (0 bytes) (5 reads) 04/18/2016  18:26:25

• 被菲律賓越南套牢了，就等著經濟封鎖吧，美日隻要付出極低代價，就能把中國拖垮。。。。。。 - pieta - ♂ (0 bytes) (7 reads) 04/18/2016  19:03:49

• 美國人希望的不是在核戰爭中兩敗俱傷，而是通過代理戰爭激化矛盾，通過經濟製裁中國，促使中國國內出問題發... - pieta - ♂ (0 bytes) (5 reads) 04/18/2016  19:05:33

• 這也是我的擔心所在！但中國對付經濟製裁也還是有其他的方法的！ - CNNed - ♂ (0 bytes) (4 reads) 04/18/2016  19:48:56

• 俄國人讓人羨慕之處就是地廣人稀，幹點啥都能吃飽飯，不怕美國經濟製裁。。。。。。。 - pieta - ♂ (0 bytes) (3 reads) 04/19/2016  04:10:49

• “經濟製裁中國”垮台的會是全世界的經濟。再說一旦菲越挑起熱戰，兔肯定會拿回所有想要的（南台琉），... - 詩詞欣賞 - (41 bytes) (17 reads) 04/18/2016  23:53:22

• 隻有敢走這樣的險棋，中國才有和平 - slz80 - ♂ (0 bytes) (2 reads) 04/19/2016  05:48:18

• 嗬嗬，美國天天被人罵，so what. - sebastopol - ♂ (0 bytes) (4 reads) 04/18/2016  18:49:00

• 不要太把西方當回事。以後是西方必須把兔子當回事。 - sebastopol - ♂ (0 bytes) (4 reads) 04/18/2016  18:49:40

• 南海應該劃定海洋特區。 - robak328 - ♂ (0 bytes) (4 reads) 04/18/2016  18:54:28

• 以前有人提，但沒有一個好的方案。你能否展開“海洋特區”的想法？ - CNNed - ♂ (0 bytes) (6 reads) 04/18/2016  19:05:45

• 是沒有特別好的方法， 中國自己填得那麽帶勁， 別人占的那是提也不提啊。 - robak328 - ♂ (53 bytes) (18 reads) 04/18/2016  19:29:03

這樣的險棋誰敢走？！

• 海洋經濟特區的前提是中國主權。但在擁有島嶼的縱橫交錯的情況下，特區一詞怕誤認為中國願意接受島嶼被占領... - CNNed - ♂ (0 bytes) (6 reads) 04/18/2016  19:53:46

• 德國兩度崛起都變了撅起，就是坐不住。時間在誰的一邊？在有文化底蘊的一邊。進兩步退一步是不是進步呢？急什麽。 - walkalong - ♂ (0 bytes) (12 reads) 04/18/2016  19:06:23

• 有道理。 - 西風沙 - ♂ (0 bytes) (3 reads) 04/18/2016  19:08:00

• This is realy, really a bad idea. - TheJudge - ♂ (2395 bytes) (68 reads) 04/18/2016  19:13:48  (1)

If you really think this way, at least, you are naive.  If you know this is a bad idea, you have ulterior motive.

You said: "那麽中國的第一選擇是主動將問題激化到主權的衝突。在主權衝突的情況下，中國可以將問題帶到聯合國." If this is 主權衝突，why would China 將問題帶到聯合國? Does China need to have UN approval to defend its sovereignty?

"打破僵局讓“在南沙主權上沒有立場的”美國，成為一個“傍觀者”而非“參與者”，讓美國在聯合國發言要好過讓美國在美菲，美日，7國集團的發言來 的對中國有利——因為我們在聯合國也有聲音和同盟者。" This is a joke. You have to be stupid to believe this, otherwise you have ulterior motive.  US  said it does not take position on territorial disputes, such as Diao yu Island, But later US changed its official position. What US is saying & doing now in the South China Sea is already clearly taking a position--just not on the side of CHina.

UNCLOS對南海的裁決 is useless, non-binding. UNCLOS has no authority over territoral disputes. What China is doing is the best approach for China.

"在南海的島建是一個被動而且長期的應對，這個被動的應對在今後會變成主動的優勢，然而這個長期的應對不解決明天可能的出現的問題"  We really don't understand what you mean?  "然而這個長期的應對不解決明天可能的出現的問題". So what is the future problem?

China has been very restraint while watching the smaller countries stealing the islands one by one. Finally, China started to take action & the speed shocked the US. That is why we have all this problems. Do you really think US will be impartial if China did bring the matter to the UN? Why US did not say anything when Vietnam or Philippines were ocupying & building the islands?

"隻要時間足夠長，台灣問題，南海問題....." How long is 隻要時間足夠長? 10 years? 20 years? Forget it. Taiwan problem has already dragged on toooooo long.

I don't know whom you support. But I know who like your idea - US, Japs, Tai du, Philippines, Vietnam.

• I wish you were not really a Judge (a joke). Here is the part o - CNNed - ♂ (964 bytes) (24 reads) 04/18/2016  19:45:42

The upcoming UNCLOS ruling will be something China has to face on way or another.  We have seen G7 foreign minister's Statement on maritime security.  That is their "moral" and/or geopolitical base for intervention to South China Sea conflicts.  Philippine schematically asked for the ruling of the legitimacy of the Nine-Dotted Line, not the sovereignty of the South China Sea.  If they achieve the goal of illegitimacy of the Nine-Dotted Line in historical and geographical, as well as geological bases, I believe they will ask for the ruling for their EES right over 200 miles.  I have read the document briefly, I think their argument is well prepared and quite substantial.

So an establishment of the illegitimacy on Chinese Nine-Dotted Line and its EES legitimacy, it provides Philippine with a great advantage to defend their EES according to the international laws.  That is the problem.

• Again, this is naive thinking - TheJudge - ♂ (746 bytes) (20 reads) 04/18/2016  20:11:16

Even if China did bring it to the UN, do you think the outcome will be  in China's favor? Not likely. Do you the G7 will support China on the Nine Dash Line issue? No way. Otherwise they would not issue the statement at the G7 meeting. It really does not matter at what forum the South China Sea issue is decided. They are not going to be on China's side.

Instead of wasting time at UN, China should keep building more islands. The actual control of the area is the key, not some UN bs.

Why wouldn't UK bring the Falklnd Island dispute to the UN? UK controlled the island &  there was nothing UN could do. Argentina can say anything it wants. But it is still under UK control.

• I am getting better - from a bad, bad idea to a naive thinking - - CNNed - ♂ (0 bytes) (4 reads) 04/18/2016  20:17:44

• If I response again, will you say "It is good"? - CNNed - ♂ (0 bytes) (2 reads) 04/18/2016  20:20:34