南海——中国的南海对策（1）

作者认为简单的不介入UNCLOS仲裁给中国造成了一定的被动局面。中国应该以技术性的策略，最大程度的推迟UNCLOS的裁决。让主权问题有机会成为主要问题。以前中国在国际舞台上的话语权不大，所以被迫选择通过双边谈判来解决边界问题。在中国传统的方法解决双边问题行不通的情况下，加上中国日益增加的影响力，中国不妨试着将南沙问题放到UNCLOS的“上级”机构来解决。

既然中国反对UNCLOS介入的理由是主权而非海洋事物，那么中国的第一选择是主动将问题激化到主权的冲突。在主权冲突的情况下，中国可以将问题带到联合国，从而在战略上防止了UNCLOS对南海的裁决。在联合国漫长的解决过程中，中国可以将南海问题变成一张牌，才有可能和美国进行交易。此一方法最大的不利是，美国将问题拖着，那中国是否在乎在建设“台湾”（南海）的同时又一个“台湾（南海）问题”呢？

菲律宾在将南海问题提交给UNCLOS以后，对南沙问题在实际冲突上的降温，正体现了美国日本菲律宾在这一问题上的协调和一致。打破僵局让“在南沙主权上没有立场的”美国，成为一个“傍观者”而非“参与者”，让美国在联合国发言要好过让美国在美菲，美日，7国集团的发言来的对中国有利——因为我们在联合国也有声音和同盟者。

在南海的岛建是一个被动而且长期的应对，这个被动的应对在今后会变成主动的优势，然而这个长期的应对不解决明天可能的出现的问题。UNCLOS判决的问题会让中国有一个事倍功半的将来，让美国日本在中国南海得以先手，让中国在台湾问题和南海问题上长期的陷于一个被动。

南海问题不是台湾问题，但台湾问题可以成为南海问题的一部分。我们将南海问题和台湾问题混在一起不是解决问题的方法。设想一下，一个有台湾问题的南海问题不是真是台湾当局所要的吗？只要时间足够长，台湾问题，南海问题，他妈（航）妈，他奶（日）奶的问题，都不是问题。问题我们能将时间的优势放到中国这边吗？美国不愿意，日本不愿意，中国呢？

 

• 南海——中国的南海对策（1） - CNNed - ♂ (3039 bytes) (4225 reads) 04/18/2016  14:50:28  (1)

• 有想法，大家好好的谈，我的能力有限，也无法一一回答，请原谅！周末写的，今天在Service Car的时候重编了，献丑了！ - CNNed - ♂ (0 bytes) (15 reads) 04/18/2016  14:54:06

• 南海问题的真正问题是，中国本以为找到一个申诉主权的方法--人工建岛，但不慎扯了一下美国的淡。 - 西风沙 - ♂ (38 bytes) (135 reads) 04/18/2016  15:00:36

。。打断第一岛链。

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

• 填岛是一个妙计，必须的。 - 西风沙 - ♂ (140 bytes) (170 reads) 04/18/2016  15:21:56

但扯了人家的淡

人家会不断给你找麻烦

须用计破解

形势不容乐观

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

• 不对！兔鹰有很多共同点，双方高层都很清楚，避免误会最重要。 - 西风沙 - ♂ (80 bytes) (45 reads) 04/18/2016  15:53:48

你可能一时理解不了

不急

• 中国也应该越来越像美国才合理！ - CNNed - ♂ (0 bytes) (3 reads) 04/18/2016  18:58:25

• 填岛是妙招，赶快收回一两个被菲越占的岛（不是礁）应该是正招。 - quest - (59 bytes) (71 reads) 04/18/2016  15:46:30

大陆在南沙一个自然岛都没占到啊！

• 岛建不是一天两天的事，有点远水解不了近渴的感觉？ - 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: "有点远水解不了近渴的感觉". If you think building islands is 远水, 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: "那么中国的第一选择是主动将问题激化到主权的冲突。在主权冲突的情况下，中国可以将问题带到联合国." If this is 主权冲突，why would China 将问题带到联合国? Does China need to have UN approval to defend its sovereignty?

"打破僵局让“在南沙主权上没有立场的”美国，成为一个“傍观者”而非“参与者”，让美国在联合国发言要好过让美国在美菲，美日，7国集团的发言来 的对中国有利——因为我们在联合国也有声音和同盟者。" 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对南海的裁决 is useless, non-binding. UNCLOS has no authority over territoral disputes. What China is doing is the best approach for China.

"在南海的岛建是一个被动而且长期的应对，这个被动的应对在今后会变成主动的优势，然而这个长期的应对不解决明天可能的出现的问题"  We really don't understand what you mean?  "然而这个长期的应对不解决明天可能的出现的问题". 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?

"只要时间足够长，台湾问题，南海问题....." How long is 只要时间足够长? 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

• 美国一战二战的策略是让你们先打，等你们打残废了美国出来收尾。在东亚美国仍旧是这么个思路，鼓动周边小国与中国热战。。。... - pieta - ♂ (0 bytes) (12 reads) 04/18/2016  16:39:03

• 所以呢，如果美国人一定要战争，中国人宁可直接与美国或日本开战，也不要被越南废铝等垃圾股套牢。。。。。。。 - pieta - ♂ (0 bytes) (10 reads) 04/18/2016  16:41:08

• 这个战略可行！ - world123 - ♂ (0 bytes) (2 reads) 04/18/2016  17:20:45

• 伪命题，一没有小国会傻到和兔子动手，二兔子有核大国美帝摘不了果子。类似二战的便宜米国捡不到了 - 楼梯 - ♂ (0 bytes) (12 reads) 04/18/2016  18:13:45

• 连日本都不是个事。何况菲越？对于菲越，敢挑事，就收礁岛。必须收一些菲占岛礁。否则其他有样学样！ - 逐鹿中东 - ♂ (0 bytes) (5 reads) 04/18/2016  18:26:25

• 被菲律宾越南套牢了，就等着经济封锁吧，美日只要付出极低代价，就能把中国拖垮。。。。。。 - pieta - ♂ (0 bytes) (7 reads) 04/18/2016  19:03:49

• 美国人希望的不是在核战争中两败俱伤，而是通过代理战争激化矛盾，通过经济制裁中国，促使中国国内出问题发... - pieta - ♂ (0 bytes) (5 reads) 04/18/2016  19:05:33

• 这也是我的担心所在！但中国对付经济制裁也还是有其他的方法的！ - CNNed - ♂ (0 bytes) (4 reads) 04/18/2016  19:48:56

• 俄国人让人羡慕之处就是地广人稀，干点啥都能吃饱饭，不怕美国经济制裁。。。。。。。 - pieta - ♂ (0 bytes) (3 reads) 04/19/2016  04:10:49

• “经济制裁中国”垮台的会是全世界的经济。再说一旦菲越挑起热战，兔肯定会拿回所有想要的（南台琉），... - 诗词欣赏 - (41 bytes) (17 reads) 04/18/2016  23:53:22

• 只有敢走这样的险棋，中国才有和平 - slz80 - ♂ (0 bytes) (2 reads) 04/19/2016  05:48:18

• 呵呵，美国天天被人骂，so what. - sebastopol - ♂ (0 bytes) (4 reads) 04/18/2016  18:49:00

• 不要太把西方当回事。以后是西方必须把兔子当回事。 - sebastopol - ♂ (0 bytes) (4 reads) 04/18/2016  18:49:40

• 南海应该划定海洋特区。 - robak328 - ♂ (0 bytes) (4 reads) 04/18/2016  18:54:28

• 以前有人提，但没有一个好的方案。你能否展开“海洋特区”的想法？ - CNNed - ♂ (0 bytes) (6 reads) 04/18/2016  19:05:45

• 是没有特别好的方法， 中国自己填得那么带劲， 别人占的那是提也不提啊。 - robak328 - ♂ (53 bytes) (18 reads) 04/18/2016  19:29:03

这样的险棋谁敢走？！

• 海洋经济特区的前提是中国主权。但在拥有岛屿的纵横交错的情况下，特区一词怕误认为中国愿意接受岛屿被占领... - CNNed - ♂ (0 bytes) (6 reads) 04/18/2016  19:53:46

• 德国两度崛起都变了撅起，就是坐不住。时间在谁的一边？在有文化底蕴的一边。进两步退一步是不是进步呢？急什么。 - walkalong - ♂ (0 bytes) (12 reads) 04/18/2016  19:06:23

• 有道理。 - 西风沙 - ♂ (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: "那么中国的第一选择是主动将问题激化到主权的冲突。在主权冲突的情况下，中国可以将问题带到联合国." If this is 主权冲突，why would China 将问题带到联合国? Does China need to have UN approval to defend its sovereignty?

"打破僵局让“在南沙主权上没有立场的”美国，成为一个“傍观者”而非“参与者”，让美国在联合国发言要好过让美国在美菲，美日，7国集团的发言来 的对中国有利——因为我们在联合国也有声音和同盟者。" 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对南海的裁决 is useless, non-binding. UNCLOS has no authority over territoral disputes. What China is doing is the best approach for China.

"在南海的岛建是一个被动而且长期的应对，这个被动的应对在今后会变成主动的优势，然而这个长期的应对不解决明天可能的出现的问题"  We really don't understand what you mean?  "然而这个长期的应对不解决明天可能的出现的问题". 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?

"只要时间足够长，台湾问题，南海问题....." How long is 只要时间足够长? 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