China rejects third-party imposition on South China Sea

ศาสตร์เกษตรดินปุ๋ย : ขอบคุณแหล่งข้อมูล : หนังสือพิมพ์ The Nation

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/asean&beyon/China-rejects-third-party-imposition-on-South-Chin-30290451.html

China Daily
Asia News Network
HOME ASEAN&BEYON AEC TUE, 12 JUL, 2016 8:47 PM

China does not accept any third party trying to impose a settlement or any solution forced on China, the Foreign Ministry said in a statement issued on Tuesday after a ruling, technically described as an award, by an arbitral tribunal in the unilaterally-initiated case on the South China Sea.

“China’s territorial sovereignty and maritime rights and interests in the South China Sea shall, under no circumstances, be affected by those awards. China opposes and will never accept any claim or action based on those awards,” the statement said.

The statement said the unilateral initiation of the arbitration case was an act “of bad faith”.

“It aims not to resolve the relevant disputes between China and the Philippines, or to maintain peace and stability in the South China Sea, but to deny China’s territorial sovereignty and maritime rights and interests in the South China Sea,” said the statement.

The tribunal, appointed by the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague, announced on Tuesday that China has no “historic title” over the South China Sea.

The conduct of the tribunal and its awards are “unjust and unlawful”, the statement said and added that it seriously contravened the general practice of international arbitration and completely deviated from the object and purpose of UNCLOS to promote the peaceful settlement of disputes.

In 2002, China and the member states of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations signed the Declaration of Conduct in the South China Sea, which rules that the relevant parties should resolve disputes through peaceful dialogue and negotiation.

“By unilaterally initiating the arbitration, the Philippines violated UNCLOS and its provisions on the application of dispute settlement procedures, the principle of ’pacta sunt servanda’ (agreements must be kept) and other rules and principles of international law,” said the statement.

VN rice exports plunge

ศาสตร์เกษตรดินปุ๋ย : ขอบคุณแหล่งข้อมูล : หนังสือพิมพ์ The Nation

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/asean&beyon/VN-rice-exports-plunge-30290432.html

Viet Nam News
HOME ASEAN&BEYON AEC TUE, 12 JUL, 2016 7:24 PM

HANOI – Vietnam’s rice exports in the first half of the year fell by 32 per cent from the same period last year, mostly due to competition from other countries, according to the Vietnam Food Association.

Besides Myanmar, Pakistan and India, Vietnamese exporters had to contend with Thailand selling off a huge stockpile of its rice.

In the first quarter, rice exports soared more than 50 per cent, mostly because of contracts signed last year.

But with domestic rice prices higher than global rice prices in March and April, many domestic enterprises were unable to sign new contracts, leading to a fall in exports in the second quarter.

Asian countries remained the main buyers, taking 67 per cent of total rice exports, followed by Africa with 16.4 per cent and the Americas with 11.9 per cent, according to a report released at an association meeting held last Friday.

Blockchain innovation centre in Singapore

ศาสตร์เกษตรดินปุ๋ย : ขอบคุณแหล่งข้อมูล : หนังสือพิมพ์ The Nation

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/asean&beyon/Blockchain-innovation-centre-in-Singapore-30290404.html

HOME ASEAN&BEYON AEC TUE, 12 JUL, 2016 5:00 PM

SINGAPORE – IBM plans to open a blockchain innovation centre in Singapore in collaboration with the government, as the city-state strives to become Asia’s main financial technology hub.

The tech giant will be working with the main economic planning agency, the Singapore Economic Development Board (EDB), and the Monetary Authority of Singapore to accelerate blockchain adoption for finance and trade.

One project, together with PSA International – one of the world’s largest container transshipment ports owned by state investor Temasek Holdings – aims to connect fintech with global trade and logistics.

The blockchain technology works by creating permanent, public “ledgers” of all transactions that could potentially replace complicated systems such as clearing and settlement with one simple database.

Singapore is rushing to reinvent itself as Asia’s fintech hub to fend off a regulatory threat to its wealth management industry and revive a sluggish economy.

Observers say it is ahead of long-time rival Hong Kong, but measures to curb the number of foreign workers and previous regulations creating a risk-averse culture at odds with the trial-and-error approach of fintech startups remain key obstacles in developing the industry.

– REUTERS

Timeline of the Philippines vs. China case

ศาสตร์เกษตรดินปุ๋ย : ขอบคุณแหล่งข้อมูล : หนังสือพิมพ์ The Nation

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/asean&beyon/Timeline-of-the-Philippines-vs-China-case-30290375.html

HOME ASEAN&BEYON AEC TUE, 12 JUL, 2016 3:11 PM

JAN. 22, 2013. After more than 17 years of fruitless bilateral consultations with China, the Philippines files a motion for arbitration in a UN tribunal to challenge Beijing’s claim to most of the South China Sea and compel it to respect the Philippines’ right to its exclusive economic zone (EEZ) in the West Philippine Sea and stop Chinese incursions into those waters.

In its submission, the Philippines asked for the nullification of China’s so-called “nine-dash-line” claim, which encompasses almost all of the South China Sea, including parts within the West Philippine Sea.

The Philippines initiated the compulsory proceedings against China as provided for under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (Unclos), and asked the arbitral court to declare the Chinese nine-dash line outlining its claim to most of the South China Sea, including waters and islands close to its neighbors, invalid and illegal.

It demands that China “desist from unlawful activities that violate the sovereign rights and jurisdiction of the Philippines under the 1982 Unclos.”

Both countries are signatories to the 1982 treaty.

The arbitration will be held at an overseas location to be agreed by the two parties.

According to Unclos provisions on arbitration, the adversaries are entitled to nominate their representatives to the five-member arbitration panel, to be “drawn up and maintained” by the UN secretary general.

The Philippines appoints Judge Rudiger Wolfrum, a German international law expert and justice on the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, as a member of the panel.

Feb. 19, 2013. China’s foreign ministry spokesperson Hong Lei says China rejects the Philippines’ attempt to seek international arbitration. On the same day, Ma Keqing, China’s ambassador to Manila, returns the Philippines’ notification through a note verbale handed to the Department of Foreign Affairs.

July 11, 2013. Nearly six months after the Philippines filed the complaint, the five-member tribunal tasked to deliberate the case meets and drafts the rules of procedure to govern the proceedings.

Aug. 1, 2013. Through a note verbale addressed to the tribunal, China rejects the proceedings, reiterating “it does not accept the arbitration initiated by the Philippines.” The tribunal says proceedings will continue even with only one party participating, in accordance with the provisions of the Unclos.

Aug. 27, 2013. The tribunal, currently holding court in The Hague in The Netherlands, directs the Philippines to submit by March 30, 2014, a memorandum—called “memorial” in international law—detailing the merits of its case and its position on the panel’s jurisdiction over the case.

Sept. 2, 2013. President Aquino cancels a planned trip to China for a trade fair in Nanning after Beijing reportedly required the withdrawal of the arbitration case as a condition for the trip.

March 30, 2014. Despite threats from China, the government files as scheduled the Philippines’ 4,000-page memorial or formal pleading to the UN arbitral tribunal, which will enable the court to study Manila’s argument that the Chinese claim covers parts of Philippine territory.

April 2015. The tribunal acknowledges China’s objections and announces that a hearing on jurisdiction will be held first before the court proceeds to hear the merits of the case.

June 9, 2015. The Inquirer reports that the government will submit a 300-year-old map of the Philippines to the tribunal to support its petition to nullify China’s claim to Philippine territory in the West Philippine Sea.

Published in Manila by the Jesuit friar Pedro Murillo Velarde in 1734, the map shows Panatag Shoal (Scarborough Shoal), off the coast of Zambales province, as part of the Philippines.

China seized Panatag Shoal, also known as Bajo de Masinloc, after a two-month standoff between Chinese and Philippine Coast Guard vessels in 2012.

July 7, 2015. Oral arguments to determine whether the UN tribunal has jurisdiction over the complaint begin. The Philippine case is argued by Solicitor General Florin Hilbay, assisted by American lawyer Paul Reichler.

July 10, 2015. The Philippines prepares for a second round of oral arguments after the arbitral tribunal decided to ask more questions about the country’s suit against China over a territorial dispute in the South China Sea. The Inquirer learns that aside from Hilbay, Supreme Court Justice Francis Jardeleza and Presidential chief legal counsel Benjamin Caguioa will remain in The Hague for the second round of arguments.

July 13, 2015. The second round of oral arguments in The Hague takes place. In the first round of oral arguments the week before, the Philippine legal team told the court that China was violating Unclos by depriving the Philippines of its right to fish and explore resources within its own EEZ.

The team also made it clear to the court that the Philippines was not asking the tribunal to rule on the sovereignty aspects of the case but only on the entitlements of the claimants to territory in the South China Sea as recognized under Unclos.

The question of sovereignty is a matter for the International Court of Justice to decide.

Oct. 29, 2015. The UN arbitral tribunal unanimously decides it has jurisdiction over the dispute between China and the Philippines. This means that the tribunal will hold further hearings to settle the dispute.

Nov. 24 – 30, 2015. Four days of hearings were convened to discuss the merits of the case. The Philippines presented its arguments before the arbitral tribunal while the judges asked questions to clarify the Philippines claims.

Due to China’s absence in the proceedings, they were not able to present their counter-arguments.

Jun. 29, 2016. The Tribunal announced that they have set July 12, 2016 as the date when they will issue their Award or decision on the arbitration case.

Source: Inquirer Archives, Inquirer Research

South China Sea watch

ศาสตร์เกษตรดินปุ๋ย : ขอบคุณแหล่งข้อมูล : หนังสือพิมพ์ The Nation

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/asean&beyon/South-China-Sea-watch-30290374.html

Hague ruling

 

HOME ASEAN&BEYON AEC TUE, 12 JUL, 2016 2:27 PM

As the Permanent Court of Arbitrary at The Hague is about to deliver its verdict on the South China Sea, which the Philippines filed against China since 2013. The verdict could post significant consequence on political and maritime security in the region. The Nation is updating the development, please stay tune.

18:49pm: China Daily reports China does not accept any third party trying to impose a settlement or any solution forced on China.

16:33pm: China “does not accept and does not recognise” the ruling by a UN-backed tribunal on its dispute with the Philippines over the South China Sea, the official Xinhua news agency said Tuesday.

16:32pm: The Philippines welcomes a ruling by a UN-backed tribunal on Tuesday that declares China has no “historic rights” in the South China Sea, Foreign Secretary Perfecto Yasay said, as he urged restraint.

16:30 pm: The United Nations (UN) Arbitral Tribunalrules that the West Philippines Sea (South China Sea) rightfully belongs to the Philippines and not to China.

14:00pm: Thailand’s Foreign Ministry Tuesday issued astatement, urging the South China Sea conflict be addressed through joint efforts and by all means on the basis of mutual trust and confidence as well as equitable benefit.

12:49pm: DPA reports that Philippine activists on Tuesday protested outsidethe Chinese Embassy.

12:47 pm: AFP reports that Vietnam has accused the Chinese coastguard of sinking a fishing boat near a disputed island chain, authorities said Tuesday, ahead of key UN-backed ruling on claims in the flashpoint South China Sea.

10:40 am: AFP reports that the Philippine embassy in China has warned its citizens to beware of personal “threats” and avoid political debates ahead of a tribunal ruling Tuesday over a bitter dispute in the South China Sea.

9:57 am: China Daily says The arbitration tribunal in the South China Sea dispute has explained the case in an irresponsible way and set a bad precedent.

9:41am: AFP reports Beijing braced Tuesday for an international tribunal’s ruling on the South China Sea.

How will the tribunal verdict on PH-vs-China case be issued?

ศาสตร์เกษตรดินปุ๋ย : ขอบคุณแหล่งข้อมูล : หนังสือพิมพ์ The Nation

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/asean&beyon/How-will-the-tribunal-verdict-on-PH-vs-China-case–30290368.html

A satellite image shows construction of possible radar tower facilities in the Spratly Islands in the disputed South China Sea in this image released on February 23, 2016./ CSIS Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative/DigitalGlobe/Reuters

 

Matikas Santos
The Philippine Inquirer
HOME ASEAN&BEYON AEC TUE, 12 JUL, 2016 12:57 PM

There will be no ceremonies, no photo ops, not even a speech to announce the decision of the arbitral tribunal on the Philippines versus China case over the South China Sea dispute.

Later today, the verdict of one of the most high-profile international arbitration cases in recent history will be handed down to parties and to the public digitally.

“There will be no in-person meeting or ceremony for the rendering of the Award,” the International Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) said in its statement last June 29, 2016.

“The Award will first be issued via e-mail to the Parties, along with an accompanying Press Release containing a summary of the Award,” it said.

Nations who observed the proceedings, PCA Member States, PCA Members of Court, the public and the media will also receive e-mails of the decision.

After the e-mails have been sent, the decision will also be uploaded to their website.

Philippines initiated the arbitration proceedings against China on Jan 22, 2013 following the tense standoff between Philippine and Chinese naval vessels at Scarborough shoal the previous year.

China claims the entire South China Sea as part of its “nine-dash line” claim which overlaps with the Philippines 200-nautical mile exclusive economic zone (EEZ).

China has refused to participate in any part of the arbitration proceedings insisting it has “undisputed sovereignty” over the South China Sea.

The tribunal has previously ruled that it has jurisdiction over the case and has heard the arguments submitted by the Philippines.

The historic case aims to invalidate China’s claim of “historic rights” over the South China Sea through its “nine-dash line” claim that overlaps with the Philippines 200-nautical mile exclusive economic zone (EEZ).

China has refused to participate in the proceedings saying it does not recognize the jurisdiction of the tribunal and has reiterated that it will not abide by any decision of the court.

Why did the Philippines file a case against China?

The 2012 Scarborough Shoal standoff was one of the factors that prompted the Philippines to file a case against China.

Tensions between the two countries escalated when Chinese surveillance ships prevented Philippine authorities from apprehending Chinese vessels found poaching endangered Philippine marine species at the shoal.

The dispute over maritime features in the South China Sea has been ongoing for decades prior and involved other Southeast Asian countries such as Vietnam, Malaysia, Indonesia.

“The Philippines has exhausted almost all political and diplomatic avenues for a peaceful negotiated settlement of its maritime dispute with China. On numerous occasions, dating back to 1995, the Philippines has been exchanging views with China to peacefully settle these disputes. To this day, a solution is still elusive,” the Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) said in a statement on Jan 22, 2013 when it first initiated arbitration proceedings.

“We hope that the Arbitral Proceedings shall bring this dispute to a durable solution,” it said.

Philippines asked the Arbitration Tribunal to invalidate China’s “nine-dash line” claim because it does not conform to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), an international treaty signed and ratified by both China and the Philippines. It is regarded as the constitution of the seas.

2. What does “arbitration” mean and what will it achieve?

Arbitration refers to a process in which a party submits a “dispute” to an unbiased, independent third party. Its main goal is to settle and conclude the disputes presented.

The Permanent Court of Arbitration is an intergovernmental organization established in 1899 that designates arbitral tribunals to resolve disputes between and among nations. It is based in The Hague, Netherlands, and currently presides over the arbitration case.

Philippines brought the case before the tribunal to dispute China’s claim of “indisputable sovereignty” over almost the entire South China sea through its “nine-dash line” claim.

3. What is Unclos and what is the EEZ?

The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (Unclos) is an international treaty that defines the limits of a nation’s maritime sovereignty claims. This convention was ratified by both the Philippines and China. Under its provisions, areas within 200 nm from the country’s baselines would be part of the EEZ.

Unclos states three basic maritime features:

– Islands under the sovereignty of a country are entitled to a 12 nm (approximately 22 kilometers) territorial sea and a 200 nm (approximately 370 km) exclusive economic zone (EEZ). The state may exclude foreign entities within its territorial sea and has sole right to exploit resources found within the EEZ.

– Rocks or reefs are maritime features that are mostly below water but have protrusions that remain above water during high tide. Such features are entitled to only a 12 nm territorial sea and no EEZ. Examples of such are Bajo de Masinloc, also known as Panatag shoal or Scarborough shoal, which lies 120 nm off the coast of Zambales province. “Low-tide elevations” are fully submerged rocks or reefs. These are not entitled to any territorial sea or EEZ. In the past several years, China has conducted massive land reclamation projects on several submerged reefs in the Spratly group of islands turning them into artificial islands and establishing military installations.

– Unclos states that artificial islands “do not possess the status of islands” and are not allowed to have a “territorial sea.” It also states that only the coastal state has the right to build artificial islands in its EEZ.

4. What is so important about the South China Sea?

The South China Sea contains three groups of maritime features—the Spratly and Paracel groups of Islands and Scarborough Shoal. All countries involved in the maritime dispute recognize that the sea is rich in resources such as fish and other marine life, and reserves of oil.

The sea is also a major shipping lane in Southeast Asia prompting many countries worldwide to call for restraint so as not to disrupt the vital trade route. The 3.5 million square km sea is also strategic as it provides access to nearly the entire Southeast Asian region.

5. What are the bases of the Philippines’ and China’s claims?

Former Foreign Secretary Albert del Rosario listed the Philippines’ five main claims during his speech delivered in front of the UN tribunal last July 7, 2015:

– China’s “historic rights” claim violates Article 57 of the Unclos, containing the provisions of the 200 nautical miles EEZ;

– China’s “nine-dash line” has no basis under international law; rather, it only emphasizes the limitations presented by their “historic rights”;

– Some parts of the South China Sea are “rocks” that therefore have no EEZ. In accordance with Article 121, Paragraph 3 of the Unclos, China cannot claim these maritime features as most of these are reefs and low-tide elevations;

– “China has breached the Convention by interfering with the Philippines’ exercise of its sovereign rights and jurisdiction”; and

– Destructive fishing practices done by China brought about permanent damage on coral reefs and marine life, including some areas within the Philippines’ EEZ.

In 2002, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) and China issued a Declaration on the Conduct (DOC) of Parties in the South China Sea to ensure “peaceful settlements” of disputes.

In line with this, China asserted that bilateral consultations would be the best solution in settling the rift.

Del Rosario, however, countered that despite the Philippines’ “diplomatic efforts” in resolving this issue with China through the provisions of the DOC, the latter still continued its “cabbage” strategy in claiming majority of the South China Sea—taking small steps at a time such as enforcing its “nine-dash” claim in 2009 and “forcefully exploiting” living and nonliving resources from the islands and the Scarborough Shoal.

The Philippines then concluded that submitting an arbitration case to the UN, under international law, would be the most appropriate way to resolve this dispute.

6. Are there other countries involved in the arbitration case?

The territorial disputes in the South China Sea began decades ago when Japan decided to renounce its claims on the Spratly Islands. The Philippines, Brunei and Malaysia all argue that either all or some parts of the Spratlys are part of their respective EEZs; Vietnam says they have already occupied both the Spratly and Paracel islands centuries ago; and China claims that they have “historic rights” over the Islands since their ancestors were the first to discover and name them.

Two of these claimant countries attended as observers during the hearings of the tribunal, namely Vietnam and Malaysia. Also part of the observer team were Indonesia, Thailand and Japan.

7. What will happen after the arbitral tribunal issues a decision?

Once the tribunal issues a decision on July 12, the case could go either way: The tribunal could consider China’s “historic rights” and “nine-dash line” claims, or they could agree with the Philippines’ claim that some maritime features being claimed by China are not entitled to the 200 nautical mile EEZ.

Whatever the decision may be, both the Philippines and China cannot make an appeal. According to the UN Conference on Trade and Development, “awards” or decisions are “final and binding, and there is no right of appeal.”

The Philippines claimed an initial victory on October 29, 2015 when it won the first round of the proceedings after the tribunal decided it had jurisdiction over the case. The tribunal at The Hague, Netherlands concluded that they had “every right” to hear the case, thus thrashing China’s “strongest argument.” -Philippines Daily Inquirer/Asia News Network

Holland Village bank robbery: Suspect was in Bangkok within six hours of crime

ศาสตร์เกษตรดินปุ๋ย : ขอบคุณแหล่งข้อมูล : หนังสือพิมพ์ The Nation

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/asean&beyon/Holland-Village-bank-robbery-Suspect-was-in-Bangko-30290367.html

The suspect, a Canadian, fled Singapore last Thursday with $30,000 in cash after robbing StanChart’s branch in Holland Village.ST PHOTO: MARK CHEONG

 

Ng Huiwen
The Straits Times
Singapore
HOME ASEAN&BEYON AEC TUE, 12 JUL, 2016 12:47 PM

Within just six hours of the bank robbery in Holland Village, the suspect was roaming the streets of Bangkok.

Former police officers told The Straits Times yesterday that they were puzzled as to how that could have happened.

The suspect, a Canadian, had fled Singapore last Thursday with $30,000 in cash after allegedly robbing a Standard Chartered Bank branch in Holland Village at 11.25am that day. He is believed to have first escaped by foot towards the nearby Chip Bee Gardens estate.

The suspect flew from Singapore and arrived in Thailand at about 5pm Thailand time (6pm Singapore time), said Major-General Apichart Suriboonya, who heads Thailand’s Interpol unit.

He declined to name the suspect, who was arrested on Sunday at Boxpackers Hostel in the Ratchathewi district of central Bangkok.

That the suspect could leave Singapore without being detected at the checkpoints has stumped Mr Joseph Tan, who served in the police force from 1985 to 1992.

“With today’s technology, it’s surprising that he could have escaped there. Once the police have established his identity, the protocol would be to alert the Immigration and Checkpoints Authority,” said Mr Tan, founder of the Crime Library, a voluntary group that tracks missing people.

Retired police officer Lionel de Souza, who has 27 years of experience, said: “He would have been detained at the immigration counter if his name was on the list. Speed is the essence of success. So the question is whether the police did it quickly enough.”

In a statement on their Facebook page, the police said they established the identity of the suspect on the day that the crime was committed, but he had already left Singapore.

Mr de Souza said it was unlikely that the suspect could have used a false identity to leave the country.

He added that the police would have provided the suspect’s identity to Interpol, in order for the arrest to have been made on Sunday.

Mr Tan believes that with the arrest, the suspect would be “severely punished” by the authorities here to deter others.

“Although nobody was harmed, robbing a bank is a very serious crime. It is where we keep large sums of money and now it seems there is a loophole,” said Mr Tan.

If found guilty of robbery, the suspect would face up to 10 years’ jail and at least six strokes of the cane.

The man is currently being detained at an immigration detention centre in Bangkok, said Maj-Gen Apichart yesterday.

Singapore does not have an extradition treaty with Thailand. But the police said the Singapore authorities are “engaging our counterparts in Thailand to see whether the suspect can be released into our custody”.

Full speech by Surakiart

ศาสตร์เกษตรดินปุ๋ย : ขอบคุณแหล่งข้อมูล : หนังสือพิมพ์ The Nation

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/asean&beyon/Full-speech-by-Surakiart-30290366.html

Seminar : A Move for Peace and Prosperity in the South China Sea

HOME ASEAN&BEYON AEC TUE, 12 JUL, 2016 12:35 PM

The Asian Peace and Reconciliation Council organized a seminar entitled “A Move for Peace and Prosperity in the South China Sea”in Vientiane, Laos on the eve of Arbitrary Tribunal between the Republic of the Philippines and the People’s Republic of China on the South China Sea later this afternoon.

This is an excerpt of the opening remarks by APRC Chairman Professor Dr Surakiart Sathirathai, who is a former Thai Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister.

This high-level seminar may be thought to be taking place just so timely on the appropriate date, albeit totally unintended, on the day where the Arbitral Tribunal between the Republic of the Philippines and the People’s Republic of China on the South China Sea will be delivering its decision. In fact the date of the seminar had been planned months before the announcement of the date of the arbitral award. The intention of this seminar is to further consolidate the perception on functional cooperation as a genuine way forward for peace and prosperity in the South China Sea. But as it happens, our deliberations today, coinciding with the arbitral award, could be very relevant and important for the future of the South China Sea.

As we have heard in His Excellency Foreign Minister Saleumxay’s speech, as the current Chair of ASEAN, Lao PDR, will have to undertake a huge responsibility in the handling of the South China Sea dispute in the wake of the Arbitral award as 4 ASEAN countries have overlapping maritime claims with the People’s Republic of China in the South China Sea while Indonesia, a fifth ASEAN country, seems also to encounter some fishery jurisdiction in the vicinity.

The ASEAN-China Foreign Ministers’ meeting, held recently in Kunming before the Summit to mark the 25th Anniversary of ASEAN-China relations in September also illustrated the difficult task in containing this particular issue. The ASEAN Foreign Ministers Meeting or AMM later this month in Vientiane will be the first ASEAN high level meetings after the Award deliberation. This is to be followed by the PMC, the meetings between ASEAN foreign ministers and their dialogue partner counterparts, including China and the US and the ARF which is ASEAN security regional forum. It is, therefore, so incumbent upon Lao PDR as ASEAN Chairman to ensure that this issue of South China Sea will not become a thorn in our relations both within ASEAN ourselves and with China and other dialogue partners. I have every confidence in the leadership of His Excellency Prime Minister Dr Thongloun Sisoulith and Foreign Minister Saleumxay in successfully steering ASEAN and the ASEAN-China relations in the wake of this Arbitral award.

Given the importance of the South China Sea to the peace and prosperity in this region and its importance to the development of the ASEAN Economic Community, the APRC has taken its decision to avail its resources through quiet diplomacy and academic exercises to help mitigate the South China Sea disputes and avoid possible armed and military encounters in these troubled waters. I myself have travelled and held many talks and discussions with foreign ministers and leaders in all the claimant states and ASEAN non-claimant states to canvass on the idea of functional cooperation as a plausible peaceful solution for the South China Sea.

As part of these endeavours, in July 2014, in conjunction with Myanmar Institute of Strategic and International Studies or Myanmar ISIS, APRC organized a seminar on Functional Cooperation in the South China Sea. All the expert participants at that seminar agreed that functional cooperation could be a way forward. It has been APRC’s strong conviction all along that the maritime territorial disputes in the South China Sea, like in several other areas in the world will never be resolved speedily through negotiations. But the South China Sea issue should not be allowed to disturb the promise for further stability and the growing prosperity that we have worked tirelessly to achieve in Asia, or further jeopardise or politicize ongoing efforts toward resolution. We have a responsibility to make sure the dispute does not harm the realization of the ASEAN Community. We have a responsibility to make sure the dispute does not disturb ongoing negotiations of the RCEP, our relationship with China and indeed ASEAN itself.

The Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea (DOC) may have played certain roles towards averting any military actions by claimant states. And the on-going ASEAN efforts to conclude the Code of Conduct (COC) in the South China Sea may need to find a fruitful solution. But evidently, the South China Sea remains largely the sea of much troubled waters. Therefore, the APRC believes that attempts to try to put in place functional cooperation between each pair of claimant states can serve as a genuine effort for all parties to look for common interests and cooperative uses of the disputed areas and their natural resources while the questions of sovereignty negotiations may continue on the parallel tracks. Notwithstanding this afternoon arbitral award, we are of the view that both the general principles of international law and the provisions of UNCLOS 1982 provide legal basis for joint development arrangements between disputed parties while parties remain unable to reach a maritime delimitation agreement. Examples are abundant in several parts of the world where this has been the case. The Thai-Malaysian Joint Development Area Agreement for the joint exploration and exploitation of oil and gas in the yet to be delimited southern part of the Gulf of Thailand, now in operation for almost 40 years, also stands as a testimony to the use of functional cooperation in the absence of agreed maritime boundary.

More recently, Malaysia and Vietnam signed an MOU for oil and gas exploration and development in 1992. Australia and Timor Leste signed the Timor Sea Treaty which established the Joint Petroleum Development Area between both countries. And indeed in the early 2000s, China and Vietnam together delimited their boundary and signed an agreement for a joint fishing area in the Gulf of Tonkin.

Outside of Southeast Asia, Japan and Korea agreed in 1974 on joint development of the southern part of their continental shelf and we can also take lessons from the Antarctic Treaty, and similar successful functional cooperation models in the Baltic Sea, the Mediterranean, and in the North Sea in the Atlantic Ocean.

Functional cooperation thus emerges as a mechanism for cooperation and peace which can sit above and catalyze the necessary cooperation and trust required to commit to disentangle the differences in the South China Sea.

It may be granted that the phrase functional cooperation may be too vague. Suffice it to say though that functional cooperation constitutes any joint development cooperation in any field that each pair of claimant states have enough comfort level to agree upon. It is also my humble suggestion that ASEAN may even try to set up an EPG or an eminent persons group whose task is to look into all the possible modalities of functional cooperation that could be operational in the various cases of disputed areas in the South China Sea. Within a given period of time the EPG shall report back to ASEAN. At least in this manner, it can be said that there is now an ongoing interim effort to work on the functional cooperation in the South China Sea. The final outcome and acceptance to any of the EPG recommendations would be entirely up to the consideration of the claimant parties concerned.

Functional cooperation is not a solution in itself. But it provides another track to preserve peace and avert future armed confrontations. It can run parallel with sovereignty negotiations and the attempts to conclude the COC. Functional cooperation dialogue could become a confidence building measures for the other 2 parallel tracks as well.

This exercise is also in compliance with the DOC where under Article 6, pending a comprehensive and durable settlement of the disputes, the Parties concerned may explore or undertake cooperative activities. Besides, the DOC also provides for the possibility of setting up such an EPG.

Excellencies,

Ladies and gentlemen,

Continuing the current status quo is unsustainable.

Lack of progress, muddling through or continuing the current stand-off will cause all sides to dig-in further to consolidate their already entrenched positions. It would further fuel the vicious cycle of ultra-national narratives. It would hinder an amicable solution to the dispute and threaten to increase the growing brinkmanship at sea.

Thus, collectively it is time for all of us to step back and to take stock of where we are and what we want to achieve moving forward. The situation at sea must be de-politicized, cooled down in order for us to build a shared vision for cooperation moving forward.

There is no one single comprehensive solution for a complex situation, but functional cooperation offers that way forward through cooperation. Areas for cooperation can range from fishery cooperation, management of sustainable fisheries, joint scientific research, environmental protection, research on marine life, joint investment ventures, resource exploration and exploitation, humanitarian and disaster relief, establishment of protected marine nature reserves, joint management of maritime navigation, and joint tourism cooperation. In all these areas, any cooperation will become the benefit of the people and the livelihood of people of all countries. It also fits with provisions in UNCLOS that allow “provisional arrangements of a practical nature.”

That is why the APRC decided to organize today’s High-level seminar entitled, ” Functional Cooperation : A Move for Peace and Prosperity in the South China Sea” to continue to reiterate our conviction, after our seminar in Yangon two years ago, that functional cooperation between claimant states in the South China Sea should be given a chance as a move for peace and prosperity.

Functional cooperation is not the final solution to the disputes. Functional cooperation may not solve the overlapping claims and sovereignty. Functional cooperation may not eliminate all the differences between claimant states over the Spratlys and Paracels. The benefits of functional cooperation do not focus on the geopolitical statehood or governments. But to put in place functional cooperation that is acceptable by claimant states, at least, is to allow all sides, states and people alike, to reap some benefits from peace and the resources therein and create a less confrontational atmosphere between claimant states.

Today’s seminar is attended by a number of APRC Council Members and I am particularly grateful for the precious participation of His Excellency Former Prime Minister Jigmi Thinley of Bhutan, His Excellency Tan Sri Syed Hamid Albar, former Foreign Minister of Malaysia and His Excellency Former President of Timor Leste, Excellency Jose Ramos-Horta, who will be with us this afternoon. I also would like to welcome all other participants and speakers who are all experts in the field. I am certain that their deliberations will enrich our conviction to find a peaceful way forward for the South China Sea issue.

It is my fervent hope that all of us here today share the same aspiration that the South China Sea, whatever it is called by its littoral states, the Sea that is semi enclosed by all the ASEAN maritime members, ought to be given a chance to turn from the sea of conflicts into the sea of cooperation.

It is also heartening that no matter the outcome of the Arbitration Award at The Hague in the afternoon, in the past week the new Philippines Foreign Secretary Perfecto Yasay announced that President Duterte’s administration would seek to pursue joint development in areas of overlapping economic zone claims with China. This is an encouraging early sign and hopefully it is seen by all sides as a first step towards more concrete cooperation.

In the wake of the Arbitration Award, it is time for parties to make sure that no military and armed intervention would follow. Functional cooperation agreements at the early stage from now on will help secure the peace of the South China Sea in the short and medium term, and ensure stability, growth and prosperity in the ASEAN Community and East Asia as a whole in the long term.

The South China Sea is vast and rich with the promise of resources and fisheries, and is one of the most frequently sailed passages on earth, carrying more than half of the world’s merchant fleet tonnage. Yet, in so many ways, its wealth is fast becoming a curse. Geo-politics and competition threaten to upend the rise to prosperity we have all enjoyed in East Asia.

Functional cooperation can build confidence, improve the atmosphere and increase the comfort levels needed before claims on sovereignty can be discussed. No matter our standpoint, no one here wants to see the South China Sea crumble into conflict.

Thus ladies and gentlemen, it is incumbent on us to transform the growing calls for functional cooperation and joint development into concrete solutions for the region, to ensure that our moves are not toward conflict and brinkmanship, but toward peace and security for all in the South China Sea, a sea of cooperation and prosperity.

Whatever the decision of the Arbitral award this afternoon would be, I hope it should be treated as a starting point for alternative, creative, constructive and friendly dialogue between ASEAN and China cooperation for peace and prosperity in the region.

Thank you for your kind attention.

Surakiart calls for calm ahead of south china sea ruling

ศาสตร์เกษตรดินปุ๋ย : ขอบคุณแหล่งข้อมูล : หนังสือพิมพ์ The Nation

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/asean&beyon/Surakiart-calls-for-calm-ahead-of-south-china-sea–30290356.html

HOME ASEAN&BEYON AEC TUE, 12 JUL, 2016 9:26 AM

Former Foreign Minister Surakiart Sathirathai has called for calm ahead of the verdict of Arbitral Tribunal between Philippines and China on the South China Sea later this afternoon.

He was speaking at the opening of a seminar, entitled “A Move for Peace and Prosperity in the South China Sea” in Vientiane, Laos. The seminar was organised by the Asian Peace and Reconciliation Council.

Surakiart said that the intention of this seminar is to further consolidate the perception on functional cooperation as a genuine way forward for peace and prosperity in the South China Sea.

“But as it happens, our deliberations today, coinciding with the arbitral award, could be very relevant and important for the future of the South China Sea.”

“Given the importance of the South China Sea to the peace and prosperity in this region and its importance to the development of the Asean Economic Community, the APRC has taken its decision to avail its resources through quiet diplomacy and academic exercises to help mitigate the South China Sea disputes and avoid possible armed and military encounters in these troubled waters.”

The South China Sea issue should not be allowed to disturb the promise for further stability and the growing prosperity that we have worked tirelessly to achieve in Asia, or further jeopardise or politicize ongoing efforts toward resolution, he said.

“We have a responsibility to make sure the dispute does not harm the realization of the AseanCommunity. We have a responsibility to make sure the dispute does not disturb ongoing negotiations of the RCEP, our relationship with China and indeed Asean itself.

“APRC believes that attempts to try to put in place functional cooperation between each pair of claimant states can serve as a genuine effort for all parties to look for common interests and cooperative uses of the disputed areas and their natural resources while the questions of sovereignty negotiations may continue on the parallel tracks.”

Notwithstanding this afternoon arbitral award, we are of the view that both the general principles of international law and the provisions of UNCLOS 1982 provide legal basis for joint development arrangements between disputed parties while parties remain unable to reach a maritime delimitation agreement.

Lack of progress, muddling through or continuing the current stand-off will cause all sides to dig-in further to consolidate their already entrenched positions. It would further fuel the vicious cycle of ultra-national narratives. It would hinder an amicable solution to the dispute and threaten to increase the growing brinkmanship at sea.

Thus, collectively it is time for all of us to step back and to take stock of where we are and what we want to achieve moving forward. The situation at sea must be de-politicized, cooled down in order for us to build a shared vision for cooperation moving forward.

There is no one single comprehensive solution for a complex situation, but functional cooperation offers that way forward through cooperation which could range from fishery cooperation, management of sustainable fisheries and joint scientific research.

In the wake of the Arbitration Award, it is time for parties to make sure that no military and armed intervention would follow, Surakiart said, functional cooperation agreements at the early stage from now on will help secure the peace of the South China Sea in the short and medium term, and ensure stability, growth and prosperity in the Asean Community and East Asia as a whole in the long term.

Functional cooperation can build confidence, improve the atmosphere and increase the comfort levels needed before claims on sovereignty can be discussed.

“No matter our standpoint, no one here wants to see the South China Sea crumble into conflict.”

“Whatever the decision of the Arbitral award this afternoon would be, I hope it should be treated as a starting point for alternative, creative, constructive and friendly dialogue between Asean and China cooperation for peace and prosperity in the region, Surakiart said.

Read full speech :

Philippine manufacturing grows 9% in May

ศาสตร์เกษตรดินปุ๋ย : ขอบคุณแหล่งข้อมูล : หนังสือพิมพ์ The Nation

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/asean&beyon/Philippine-manufacturing-grows-9-in-May-30290348.html

Ben O de Vera
Philippine Daily Inquirer
HOME ASEAN&BEYON AEC TUE, 12 JUL, 2016 2:51 AM

MANILA – Manufacturing growth in May likely slowed although the sector is seen to continue growing on the back of robust domestic demand, according to Moody’s Analytics.

The research arm of debt watcher Moody’s expects industrial production to have grown 9 per cent year-on-year in May, slower than the 10.5-per-cent jump in April. The government would be releasing the May manufacturing and exports performance data on Tuesday.

But as a whole, “Philippine manufacturing has been expanding rapidly in 2016 due to the strongly performing domestic economy,” Moody’s Analytics noted in a report issued last week.

The gross domestic product grew by a better-than-expected 6.9 per cent in the first quarter. The economy was widely expected to have expanded faster in the second quarter due to election spending.

The economic managers of the Duterte administration last week cut to a “conservative” 6-7 per cent the growth target for 2016 from the 6.8-7.8 per cent goal earlier set by the Aquino administration as the new government undergoes an adjustment before it could perform at full speed.

According to Moody’s Analytics, “food manufacturing in particular has been performing well, as the agriculture sector recovers from the negative effects of 2015’s El Niño climate pattern.”

State planning agency National Eco nomic and Development Authority (Neda) last week urged the government to start preparing for the prolonged wet season due to La Niña while farmers recover from the impact of the dry spell brought by El Niño, which was seen to end by midyear.

“We should intensify monitoring the status of flood control projects and the clearing of drains and waterways. We also need to improve the agriculture logistics chain by constructing more bridges to connect farming areas separated from markets by rivers that are non-traversable during the rainy days,” Neda Director-General and Socioeconomic Planning Secretary Ernesto M. Pernia said.

Last week, DBS Bank Ltd. economist Gundy Cahyadi said the Duterte administration’s plan to further liberalise the economy by raising the cap of foreign ownership of local firms to 70 per cent from about 40 per cent at present while also lifting limits on land lease to 40 years from 25 years would benefit foreign direct investment flows, especially on manufacturing.

“About 60 per cent of FDI applications over the past five years have been directed in the manufacturing sector. We reckon this high interest in the sector will continue. Manufacturing is a key sector that the Duterte administration will focus on to absorb the growth in labor force. It would also fulfill the ambition to diversify the economy from an over-dependency on services,” Cahyadi said.