Though Chinese Taipei has denied that it will cooperate with Beijing in terms of sovereignty claims on South China Sea, Dr. Mira Rapp-Hooper, Director of Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative of Center for Strategic & International Studies, noted in her [statement]:

“Perhaps the most complex political relationship among the South China Sea claimants is that between Taiwan and China.  Despite the many unsettled issues that define Cross Strait relations, Taiwan and China share South China Sea claims, as embodied by China’s Nine-Dash and Taiwan’s Eleven-Dash Line.  U.S. government officials have urged Taiwan to clarify or abandon its opaque claim line, but it has declined to do so.  In 2014, Taipei criticized Vietnam’s presence at Sand Cay in the Spratly Islands as dangerous and destabilizing.  More recently, as the International Tribunal on the Law of the Sea began South China Sea hearings at The Hague in July, Taiwan made public statements that appeared to align with China in its rejection of the court’s jurisdiction.”

In fact, all was started by Chinese Taipei and China.  The semi-official institutions of Chinese Taipei and China released the Evaluation Report on the Situation of South China Sea 2010.  In the joint conclusion from pages100 to102, they asserted that Chinese Taipei and China shared common Chinese national interests on South China Sea.  Hence, they had to build the Military Mutual Trust Mechanism and construct the combined fleet to cruise the region to preserve the national sovereignty as well as the integrity of territorial sea.

Here are my views and suggestions for DDP’s policy on South China Sea: 民進黨的南海政策??
1.  The Nine-Dashes Lines was in fact created in December, 1946 while China was authorized to survey and military occupy the area on behalf of the Allies.  The two Chinas across the Taiwan Strait have claimed the sovereignty ever since.  九段線是194612月,因戰後受降,中華民國內政部南沙群島專員鄭資約隨同接收艦隊南沙群島,完成了南海諸島的實地測量工作所繪製的。並首度提及九段線。(事實)

2.  The Nine-Dashes Lines are not in conformity with the rules in UNCLOS of 1982.九段線主張與現行1982年〈聯合國海洋法公約〉規定不盡相同。(事實)

3.  Spratly Island is under the factual jurisdiction of governing authority of Taiwan.  南沙太平島等,是台灣治理當局實際控制下的島嶼。(事實)

4.  The presence of Taiwan in South China Sea should be to cooperate with international community to preserve peace, freedom of navigation, humanitarian assistance as well as environmental protection.  台灣在南海的存在目的,旨在參與國際合作、維護和平、公海航行自由、人道救援與環境保護。(價值)    revised at 1650

南海主權 美學者批台與中國站在同一陣線○自由(2015.07.25)

外交部重申 海域問題不與中國聯手

葛萊儀:十一段線 美促台澄清源頭





Patrick M. Cronin, Ph.D.
Senior Advisor and Senior Director
Asia-Pacific Security Program
Center for a New American Security
[full text of statement]

Andrew S. Erickson, Ph.D.
Associate Professor
China Maritime Studies Institute
U.S. Naval War College
[full text of statement]

Mira Rapp Hooper, Ph.D.
Fellow, Asia Program
Director, Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative
Center for Strategic & International Studies
[full text of statement]

Michael D. Swaine, Ph.D.
Senior Associate
Asia Program
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
[full text of statement]

1 則留言:

  1. Whether one calls it 9 dash or 11 dash line, it looks too much like the obcene graffiti a pubescent, acneic youth drew on the map of the area as a prank. Nothing worth consideration, except for publicly flogging that repugnant acneic brat.

    The Treaty of Peace with Japan clearly handles territorial dispositions 2c and 2f separately. The administering authority on 2c should focus on administering 2c without undertaking far-flung military initiative of any kind. That agency of the principal occupying power can ill afford such initiative while it ought not maintain defense forces of its own in the first place.