與曾祖母無關──PLA曾母的宣示

與曾祖母無關──PLA曾母的宣示

【Comment】
James Shoal is the Southmost island territories and waters claimed by ROC in 1935 and by PRC in 1983 respectively.  PLA Navy set a mark stone on the shoal in 1994.  Its Chinese translation “曾母暗沙”, literally “Great-grandmother Shoal,” is in fact a funny transliteration.
James Shoal, according to the UN Convention of Laws of the Sea of 1985, is in the EEZ of Malaysia, which leaves China, which did not occupied it until 1994, no legal base to claim the shoal but the political assertion of historical sovereignty.
PLA Navy sent her most advanced amphibious task force, including hovercrafts and escort vessels, to the region and conducted military operations there right on the next day of Chinese new President Xi Jin-ping’s state visit to Moscow.[1]  Did PLA conduct the military operation under Xi’s instruction, or was it another assertive move?  Either way, observers do agree that people should take PLA’s role into account in analyzing Beijing’s policy.
Intentionally building a routine course, PLA fleet circles Taiwan through Miyako channel and Bashi channel in and out the Pacific Ocean from the East China Sea and the South China Sea with increasing frequency.  PLA will thus be able to invade Taiwan from the east.    revised at 1000

被中文騙了幾十年！原來「曾母」暗沙與「祖父他媽媽」無關，是James的音譯。
「曾母」暗沙連稱為中國歷史的蜘蛛絲都很勉強，解放軍跑到那邊去宣示什麼？
曾母暗沙，也是馬來西亞的EEZ範圍內，解放軍海軍23日起在此爭議海域舉行先進機、艦的軍演，時間選在習近平上任後22日前腳剛出國訪問俄羅斯後。
軍演充滿挑釁意味：無論是解放軍對習近平，或北京對鄰近國家。
解放軍是否介入政治，眾說紛紜，但分析中國政策不能不考慮解放軍的立場，倒是事實。
解放軍艦隊已經數次透過巴士海峽與宮古水道環繞台灣並串連了東海、南海與太平洋。項莊舞劍之意，再明顯不過了。  

中國海軍深入南中國海“領土最南端”宣示主權◎VOA（2013.04.01）http://www.voafanti.com/gate/big5/www.voachinese.com/content/china-military-drill-south-china-sea-20130327/1630008.html

華盛頓 — 在越南、菲律賓等國家與中國持續不斷的領土爭議中，中國海軍艦隊這個星期以兩棲登陸艇和飛機組成聯合編隊，進入南中國海被其稱為“領土最南端”的曾母暗沙(James Shoal)，並在船艦上舉行宣示主權的儀式。

*美國務院發言人：盼中國軍力用於亞太和平穩定*
中國船艦編隊在南中國海宣示主權，是自3月23號開始，中國南海艦隊在有爭議的南沙群島進行軍事演練的一部分活動。
美國國務院發言人帕特裏克•文特雷爾星期三答覆記者有關這個軍事演練的提問時説，他對特定軍事演習沒有評論，但美國希望中國能運用其軍事能力來促進亞太地區的和平穩定。
文特雷爾説：“我們持續密切注意中國軍事發展，並鼓勵他們展現更大的透明度。我們希望他們能將其軍事能力運用在促進與維護亞太地區的和平穩定。”
至於南中國海的領土爭議，文特雷爾重申美國的立場，希望相關各方通過外交方式解決爭議。

*中西分析人士看法不同*
北京大學國際關係教授朱鋒認為，中國在南中國海的軍事演練和活動，目的在於對區域展現伸張主權的決心，軍事方面的意義不大，因為中國海軍此前即多次在這個海域活動，解放軍無意在曾母暗沙附近駐軍。
不過倫敦研究海洋事務的智庫IHS Fairplay專家加裏•李(Gary Li)説，和先前中國海軍在此地區的巡邏相比，派出這個聯合編隊的動作對該區域發出了令人意外的強烈資訊。
加裏•李指出，中國海軍這次並非只有零星船艦在當地海域巡邏，而是派出了兩棲登陸艦載著海軍陸戰部隊和氣墊艇，有中國海軍最好的護衛艦護航以及戰機支援，因此他説：“以質和量而言，從未看過像這樣的海軍編隊到達這麼南端的地方。”

*多方宣示主權*
曾母暗沙是南沙群島的一部分，距離馬來西亞大約80公里，距離中國本土1千800公里，接近被中國宣稱為其幾乎涵蓋整個南中國海的領土，所謂“九條虛線”的最邊緣地帶。越南、菲律賓、台灣、馬來西亞和汶萊都宣稱對這個海域的一部分擁有主權。
中國官方新華社報道説，包括井岡山、蘭州、玉林和衡水四艘軍艦的聯合編隊，在曾母暗沙海域執行戰備巡邏任務後將繼續在南中國海巡航，隨後將通過巴士海峽，進入西太平洋進行遠海訓練活動。  

美國國務院記者會（2013.03.23）http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/dpb/2013/03/206703.htm#CHINA

QUESTION:  Do you have any comment on the incident in the South China Sea, between Vietnam and China?

MR. VENTRELL:  Yeah.  So the United States is concerned by reports of an incident between a Chinese vessel and a Vietnamese fishing boat that resulted in the Vietnamese boat catching fire.  As a Pacific nation, the U.S. has a national interest in the maintenance of peace and stability, respect for international law, freedom of navigation, and unimpeded lawful commerce in the South China Sea.  So we strongly oppose the threat or use of force or coercion by any claimant to advance its claims in the South China Sea. But --

QUESTION:  Do you see this as an escalation --

MR. VENTRELL:  Right now we’re --

QUESTION:  -- to actually fire on a boat?

MR. VENTRELL:  -- looking into it.  Incidents like these underline the need for, as we’ve said, a code of conduct, so that these can be dealt with in a transparent and rules-based way.  But at this point, we’re seeking more information.

QUESTION:  From whom? From both sides?

MR. VENTRELL:  We’re interested in more information from both sides.

QUESTION:  You didn’t have any contact with Chinese Government about this issue?

MR. VENTRELL:  I’ll have to check on that and see if we’ve had any direct contact.  But at this point, we don’t have additional information.  

美國國務院記者會（2013.03.28）http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/dpb/2013/03/206763.htm#CHINA2

QUESTION: Okay.  And then I asked also – and this was more a principle question on Chinese naval exercises near Malaysia, and whether the U.S. has any problems with naval exercises in international waters, but in waters that one country claims as its exclusive economic zone.

MS. NULAND:  Well, first, with regard to the Malaysian exercise, and then we’ll go on to naval activity in EEZs, if that is all right, Brad.

QUESTION:  Okay.

MS. NULAND: So we’ve seen these reports that the Chinese navy is conducting military operations near disputed islands in the South China Sea along the Malaysian coast.  Until the region develops a common strategy for managing and preventing disputes, assertive actions by claimants could raise the risk of tensions, or the risk of conflict.  So we urge claimants to take that into account when they plan their military operations in disputed and currently occupied – currently unoccupied land features, that this could cause contention, there could be unexpected consequences, there could, in fact, be conflict, and we urge all claimants to avoid taking provocative actions.

That said, under international law, all states enjoy the freedom of navigation and overflight as well as other internationally lawful uses of the sea related to those freedoms in the exclusive economic zone of a coastal state.  And these activities do include military activity.  So the concern is about the existing political tensions, exercises looking provocative or incidents being sparked unintentionally, but as a legal matter, the – I spoke to the actual legal situation in EEZs.

QUESTION: Okay.

MS. NULAND: Okay.  Please.

QUESTION: Can I ask, what is this whole thing about this – just – you used the word – you talked about your concerns about coercion.  Are you meaning to imply that the flare incident you regard as an act of coercion?

MS. NULAND:  Two different things.  That was with regard to Vietnam.  We’re now talking about Chinese military exercises in --

QUESTION:  Okay.

QUESTION:  I have one.

MS. NULAND:  Please, here.

QUESTION:  Just briefly, going back to North Korea, do you have – at this point, do you have any reason to believe they will abide by their international obligations and come into line, or do any of your counterparts in South Korea or Japan have any optimism?

MS. NULAND:  We haven’t seen any positive steps in recent weeks.  That’s why we are continuing to work with our partners on how we can get our message across.