• Thu
  • Dec 25, 2014
  • Updated: 11:36pm

China warns Vietnam to leave South China Sea drilling area

Beijing accuses Vietnamese vessels of ramming Chinese ships, and tells Washington to mind its own business as tensions rise in South China Sea

PUBLISHED : Friday, 09 May, 2014, 2:43am
UPDATED : Friday, 09 May, 2014, 7:47am


  • Yes: 37%
  • No: 63%
9 May 2014
  • Yes
  • No
Total number of votes recorded: 527

China has demanded that Vietnam withdraw its ships from a part of the disputed South China Sea where a Chinese firm is establishing an oil rig, and accused Vietnamese vessels of ramming Chinese ships in the area.

After the latest confrontation between vessels from the two countries, a senior Foreign Ministry official in Beijing said China was "shocked" at the "provocations of Vietnam" and vowed the drilling in the disputed Paracel Islands would continue.

"Vietnamese vessels are colliding intentionally with Chinese vessels carrying out normal operations, trying to disturb and stop the drilling work by Chinese," said Yi Xianliang, deputy director general of the ministry's boundary and ocean affairs department. He also warned Washington not to interfere, referring to remarks by US officials about "dangerous conduct and intimidation by vessels" in the area.

"The remarks by US officials have pushed some parties to resort to provocations," Yi said. "This is a matter between China and Vietnam, and has nothing to do with any other third party."

Daniel Russel, US assistant secretary of state for East Asia and the Pacific, who was in Hanoi, reiterated Washington's concerns.

"It's within the rights of the United States and the international community to call all parties to address the dispute in a peaceful way," Russel said.

Tensions flared on Saturday when Beijing announced the drilling off Triton Island, known as Zhongjian Island in China. Hanoi said the drilling was illegal and sent patrol vessels. On Wednesday, Hanoi said Chinese vessels had used water cannon to attack Vietnamese law enforcement vessels.

Yi said using water cannon was the "most restrained measure" that could be taken and China had to send more ships, as its vessels had suffered 171 clashes with 35 Vietnamese vessels.

"Vietnam is sending more and more ships to the area," Yi said. "We need to have some forces around to avoid unnecessary loss and ensure a safe environment for the drilling operation."

Vietnam said China had stationed about 80 ships around the rig, seven of them military. Yi declined to say how many Chinese vessels were deployed, but said none was military.

He said China had been drilling in the area for more than 10 years, and the location, 17 nautical miles from China and 130 to 150 nautical miles from Vietnam, was under the administration of Sansha in the Paracels, which China declared a prefecture-level city in 2012.

"China has indisputable sovereignty over there," Yi said.

He said Beijing would resolve the dispute through diplomatic channels. Officials from the two nations have met 14 times in recent days.

Li Yong, chief executive officer of the China National Offshore Oil Corporation, which is conducting the drill, said the Vietnamese vessels posed a serious danger to Chinese workers.


For unlimited access to:

SCMP.com SCMP Tablet Edition SCMP Mobile Edition 10-year news archive



This article is now closed to comments

How About
@Sifu_628, your selective version of alternative 'history' is deplorable:
1) "Historically, China and Vietnam ..disputes through military force .. Chinese got its **** kicked royally there" : obviously you didn't know why China stopped at Vietnam's borders and you fail to include USSR's involvement.
2) "Philippines .. relied almost entirely on American goodwill .. for over a century" : again check how many Filipinos were killed by USA in that century, who was Marcos and who kicked them out of Suvic Bay and what their Constitution says .
3) "China would have long invaded and taken over all disputed area including Taiwan and some part of Japan and the Philippines. " - correct on Taiwan but no truth on Japan or PP. USA has been distorting history from 1950s to 1970s, failed to recognize the winner of the China's civil war - KMT was the loser and USA backed the wrong horse which it denied until 1972 Nixon's normalization; saying anything else would be like saying the Confederate South was the winner of the USA civil war and had the mandate- pure rant.
Go read what some of the USA media has been writing about BHO in the past 6 months..
Formerly ******
Ms. jenniepc:
Do you really believe that S. Korea, Japan, Taiwan, the Philippines, Indonesia, Vietnam, Brunei, and Malaysia are going to let China own the Asian part of the Pacific Ocean, based upon disputed facts? Do you believe that these countries will allow China to claim this part of the Pacific Ocean right up to just a few miles from their shorelines?
If the people of China believe this, then prepare for war and count on India jumping in to regain land taken from it by China.
Jenniepc 女士:
你真的相信韓國、 日本、 臺灣、 菲律賓、 印尼、 越南、 汶萊和馬來西亞要讓中國自己的太平洋,以有爭議的事實為基礎的亞洲部分?你相信這些國家將會允許中國聲稱太平洋到幾英里的從其海岸線的這一部分嗎?
The US military now has access to Philippine bases.
China may soon find the US military at Vietnam's Cam Ran Bay.
Jonathan Smith
The Vietnamese economy is just about to collapse because of all the mismanagements and corruptions. The Vietnamese military card could end up with Vietnam divided into two warring parts again as the south Vietnamese with US encouragement are itching for a showdown again with the North Vietnamese. India helping Vietnam would result in India being conquered by Pakistan with China's help.
In 1958, the People's Republic of China (PRC) issued a declaration defining its territorial waters within what is known as the nine-dotted line which encompassed the Spratly Islands. North Vietnam's prime minister sent a diplomatic note to Zhou Enlai,stating that "The Government of Vietnam respects this decision."The diplomatic note was written on September 14 and was publicized on Nhan Dan newspaper (Vietnam) on September 22, 1958. In 1959, the islands were put under at the administrative level of banshichu in 1959. In 1988, the banshichu were switched to the administration of the newly-founded Hainan Province.
The Philippines justifies its claims to the Spratlys principally on discovery of certain islands by Thomas Cloma in 1947. In 1956 Cloma proclaimed the creation of a new island state, Kalayaan/Freedomland, with himself as chairman of its supreme Council. While no government ever recognized the lawfulness of this “state”, Cloma persisted with his claim until 1974, when “ownership” was officially transferred under a “Deed of Assignment and Waiver of Rights” to the Philippine government.
The first official claim by the Philippine government came in 1971, mainly in response to a Philippine fishing vessel being fired upon by Taiwanese forces stationed on Itu Aba Island. The Philippine government reacted by protesting the incident and then asserted legal title by annexing islands in the Spratly group based on Cloma’s claim.
Pg. 3/3
Jennie PC Chiang/江佩珍
Mr. Johathan London, An Englishman who teaches at Hung Kong university, reads some history books and claim to be experts in Asia without any knowledge of historical facts.
Yes, historically, China has sufficient evidences to underpin its claims of sovereignty of the South China Sea. Chinese still prevail over other nations Under Modern International Laws as Chinese Kuomintang was first government to establish a physical presence on of the Spratlys following Japanese departure after WWII. Chinese Kuomintang occupants have continued and have not been challenged by other countries which is the criteria of modern International maritime Laws.
China and Taiwan, again, I am a Taiwanese originally and my comments are always based on the facts, not politics. Chinese sovereignty over South China Sea well documented, going back to Sung dynasty (12th Century) and in the records of Chinese navigators during the Qing dynasty (18th century).
Alone among claimants, China is capable of coupling ‘continuous and effective occupation’ of the islands, islets and reefs with a robust modern international law-based claim backed by relevant multilateral and bilateral instruments.
In 1952, Japan renounced all right, title and claim to the Spratly and Paracel Islands to the Republic of China (Taiwan), by way of Article 2 of the bilateral Japan–Taiwan Treaty of Taipei. This treaty followed — and referenced —
**CONTINUING** Pg. 1/3
Jennie PC Chiang/江佩珍 05/09/14
the territorial renunciations of the Islands by Japan under the 1951 San Francisco Peace Treaty, which had not identified the beneficiary at the time — a treaty that was ratified by both the Philippine and (South) Vietnamese governments. And although neither country is bound by provisions in the bilateral Japan–Taiwan treaty, neither can produce a Spratlys/Paracels cession or reversion clause in their own bilateral treaties with Japan. Rather, their claims are supplementarily based on historical cartography in the case of Vietnam or, for the Philippines, ‘historical discovery’ that is (incredibly) of a post-World War II vintage!
Vietnam claims all Spratly Islands belong to a district, first in 1973, of the Phuoc Tuy Province, then, of the Khanh Hoa Province. Vietnam bases its claims to sovereignty over the Spratlys by right of cession from a French claim to the islands firs made in the 1933. However, France occupied Indochina and claimed control Spratly Islands yet the Islands were annexed by Japan. The Japanese and the French renounced their claims as soon as their respective occupations ended. North Vietnam's prime minister, Ph?m Van Ð?ng, sent a diplomatic note to Zhou Enlai,
**CONTINUING** Pg. 2/3
Jennie PC Chiang/江佩珍 05/09/14
Following I quoted from Vikipedia:
In 1958, the People's Republic of China (PRC) issued a declaration defining its territorial waters within what is known as the nine-dotted line which encompassed the Spratly Islands.
This location is 180 nm from Vietnam's coast line, under 200 nm which's in Vietnam's EEZ by UNCLOS 1982 that both Vietnam and China are members. We (ALL Vietnamese) do not want to be your enemy, just protect the justice recognized by all of the world including all Chinese people.Respecting others (even they're too small and weak) mean you're bigger.We respect all.
There are two think NEEED to be clear:
1. Paracel islands and Spratly islands DO NOT have in the map that's Germany's Prime Minister gifted for China's President (You can find infomation from internet on Mar 28, 2014. HOW DO YOU THINK? WHY CHINA’S GOV HIDDEN THE MAP?). And many maps of China showed that extreme south of China is Hainan island (even in many your maps printed in 1904) WHILE all of Vietnam's maps from 1834 with our Paracel militiamen team had been created from 17th century meaning from 1800s (with 70 people). So, we have clear evidences showed Paracel islands and Spratly islands belong to Vietnam.
2. Paracel islands and Spratly islands can not be defined to determine EEZ because that is not an islands nation such as Indonesia, Cuba, just islands only. So you can not argue that one country has rights to its EEZ base on Paracel islands.
Last: China had used army to own Paracel in 1974 while Vietnam had tried to reunited our country. That was not only inlegal but also not a good act of a big nation as China. That can not be standard for territory.
Formerly ******
@ How About:
Have you ever written anything other than a fragmented sentence? Do you have any concept of English-language punctuation? Why the phony pseudo, claptrap, rambling semi-literate junk prose? Do you think that this is intellectual? It's not.
So, in your self-described brilliant mind, the US should've backed the winner, which winner went on to murder at least 40M Chinese. Obviously, you're in favor of mass murder, so your mindless ramblings are ludicrous.
By the way, it's Subic, not Suvic. So much for your understanding about anything concerning the Philippines.
Further, no one needs to follow you around clicking "Dislike" on your posts. It seems that there are plenty others who've done this.
@ 怎麼樣:
你寫過一個支離破碎的句子之外的任何內容嗎?你有任何的英文標點的概念嗎?為什麼假偽、 嘩眾取寵,漫步半文盲垃圾散文嗎?你認為這是智慧財產權?它不是。
所以,在你自我描述的輝煌腦子裡,美國應支援過的優勝者,哪個獲勝者去謀殺至少 40 M 中文。很明顯,你是支援大規模謀殺,所以你沒腦子的散漫是可笑。
順便說一句,它是蘇比克,不 Suvic。您瞭解任何有關菲律賓這麼多。
Jenniepc, I like your analysis based on historical facts and understanding. Unfortunately, we are dealing with rule-abiding countries that respect international and/or maritime laws. Historically, China and Vietnam have dealt with their disputes through military force - ie: the war between an unified Vietnam and China (its staunchest ally when fighting Americans) after the fall of Saigon. Chinese got its **** kicked royally there!
China sees Vietnam as its subservient and will not allow it to share in oil or other essential resources in open water. Unlike their battle over territory along the Sino-Vietnamese borders, Vietnam has little to no recourse against a vastly superior Chinese naval fleet. The Philippines is more interesting, for it has relied almost entirely on American goodwill and protection for over a century. Again, it has recently signed an extended protection pact with Washington, granting the US a strategic base of support to launch potential counter-attacks against aggressive Chinese force. Without American presence and military supremacy in the Pacific theater, China would have long invaded and taken over all disputed area including Taiwan and some part of Japan and the Philippines. The only question remains, will America risk loosing Chinese economic, trading and political support to defend its allies? President Obama has "pivoted" American military focus on an expanding Chinese presence in the Pacific, will he enact this power imminently?



SCMP.com Account