Category Archives: News

Swedish reaction on Nice attack

By Xuefei Chen Axelsson

Stockholm, July 26(Greenpost)–“The reports from Nice are horrific. This is an attack on innocent people and at the same time it is an attack on our open and democratic society,” said Stefan Löfven, Swedish Prime Minister. ” I would like to convey my deepest condolences to the people of France. My thoughts tonight are with the victims and their loved ones.” he added.

In Nice, a deadly attack by a man who drove a truck both by truck and by shooting caused 84 innocent people dead and more than 300 wounded.

 

Swedish Prime Minister Löfven’s comment on Turkey’s Coup

By Xuefei Chen Axelsson

STOCKHOLM, July 26(Greenpost)–“The situation in Turkey is serious and continues to be of great concern.” said Swedish Prime Minister Stefan Löfven. ” The military coup appears to have failed but the situation still doesn’t seem to be completely under the control of the Turkish Government.”

“I understand that many Swedes in Turkey are worried and afraid in these uncertain circumstances. The Swedish Government is working with the relevant authorities to ensure that you can feel safe and secure. At this point in time, we have no information regarding Swedish casualties, but those who are in the country are urged to contact their families and keep themselves updated”.

The Swedish Ministry for Foreign Affairs’ advice against all unnecessary travel to Turkey remains in place.

种瓜得瓜 种豆得豆

北欧绿色邮报网评论 陈雪霏

耶稣基督告诉人们不要担心,就像鸟儿可以自由飞翔,也可以自由觅食。他还告诉人们只要你祈福,你是不会得到灾难的。就是说有一番耕耘就有收获。

针对前段时间欧洲杯赛冰岛小国居然冲进8强最后在与法国四强决赛时输了。但是针对冰岛能战胜英国这样的大新闻真是让全世界都有点儿看不懂。

其实,种瓜得瓜种豆得豆,在冰岛和瑞典再适合不过了。冰岛人2000年的时候,经济开始上升,金融玩的非常顺手,闲钱较多,于是冰岛投资建了很多足球场地,而且都是室内足球场地,利用取之不尽用之不竭的地热能做为能源,冰岛为孩子们提供了非常好的硬件设施。

同时,冰岛大量派人到英国去学习,接受训练,培养了大批标准的国际资历的教练,让孩子很小就了解真正的球员是什么样,国际水准是什么样。

另外,冰岛还有很多投资商,政客支持足球。冰岛的电视观众也是非常热情地支持足球,电视台的电视转播或者直播都能得到广大冰岛人的支持。冰岛有32万人。

就这样,即使2008年冰岛发生了金融危机,但是,足球人才已经培养出来了。硬件软件都具备了。所以,今年的欧洲杯能踢出这么好的成绩与上面说的多种原因都有关系。

同样,瑞典在50年代开始,大量投资音乐,在很多学校设音乐课,同时开办免费音乐学校,在社会上形成了一股音乐和流行歌曲之风。英国有甲壳虫乐队,瑞典有ABBA演唱组。造就很多乐队和演唱组。瑞典的教堂,学校,幼儿园到处都充满歌声。瑞典人太喜欢音乐了。也正是这样的投入,使得音乐有很大发展。

各种乐器,各种音乐学校,培养大量音乐人才。他们甚至跑到好莱坞去作词作曲。他们在欧洲歌曲电视大赛中屡屡获奖。仅次于爱尔兰,获得第二多的冠军。

这就是种瓜得瓜,种豆得豆。一个国家投资任何一项积极健康的产业都会产生非常好的效果。无论是音乐还是体育,如果能够以全民健康娱乐为目标,必将产生很好的效果。国民的素质也会有很大提高。

如果什么场地都是商业性的,普通百姓资源缺乏,有钱人资源过剩甚至浪费,那么,结果就不会好到哪里去。

评论:中国政府展现出成熟和理性

北欧绿色邮报网评论员 陈雪霏

7月12日海牙仲裁廷发布仲裁结果,中国对南海没有历史性主权。南海大部分是礁,不是岛。对于这样的“糊涂僧错判糊涂案”,中国一片哗然。

中国政府立即做出反应,发表声明称,南海两千多年前就有华人在那里活动,是最早命名,最早给予行政管辖的国家,驳斥了仲裁廷的裁决,表示对裁决结果不承认,不参与,不执行。

随即中国外交部发表声明持同样的立场。紧接着,发表声明表示坚决通过协商解决南海问题。这个声明体现了中国政府的理性。也是这一纸声明,让美国的航空母舰立即退出南海海域。

随即世界华人华侨一片哗然。华声出奇地一致表示坚决支持中国政府的决定,无论祖国怎么做,我们坚决听中国政府的。这是前所未有的一幕。

中国国家主席习近平在同欧洲领导人会面时也特意提到,南海诸岛自古以来就是中国的领土。

中国人为什么会生气呢?因为我们从小学习的地理课本上写的就是我们的南疆在曾母暗沙。几个仲裁员大笔一挥,就把这个历史給抹掉了,这是怎样的一种震惊啊!太过分了吧!

凡事过犹不及。南海诸岛的仲裁太过份,太平岛不是岛。《联合国海洋公约》没有约定领土主权的权力,于是仲裁员就说南海不属于领土主权范围,真是开国际玩笑。这也自然让他们的仲裁失去了公允性和可信性。

中国政府知道仲裁员可能偏向菲律宾,中国曾经签署《联合国海洋公约》,后来发现它实际上有瓜分南海之嫌,于是,1996年发表声明,对有关条款提出排除性。

但是仲裁员对中国的声明置之不理,只要有人给钱,让我们仲裁,我们就顺着菲律宾的想法去裁决。这让明眼人贻笑大方。当然,在西方人看来,如果几次让你出庭,你都不出,人家就会在你缺席的情况下裁判。法官罢庭,律师罢庭都是有效的。但是,被告罢庭需要分情况。

仲裁前,美国在南海布置航空母舰,他们想中国有可能象他们一样大打出手。中国就在仲裁前也进行了实地军演。真是战云密布,剑拔弩张。

偏偏在美国准备接招的时候,中国政府说,我们坚决通过协商解决问题。我不先动手,公里在我一边。如果你要动手,别怪我不客气。就这样,一场闹剧,一张废纸,一个国际玩笑。中国人对此确实做好了两手准备。好说好商量。如果你要打,我们也不会客气。

当然,以西方人的思维,只有小布什,和布莱尔才相信45分钟之内萨达姆就会发动化学武器战争。于是,对伊拉克大打出手。于是打掉了萨达姆,但是,美国也因此限于战争的泥潭,国际上失去很多道义和朋友,战场上,伊拉克人并不是那么好对付的。美国人应该好好吸取伊拉克战争的教训。

然而,以金融和军火为主要产品的国家,她所输出的大概就只能是金融危机和战争冲突。他们觉得中国要强大了,中国也会象他们一样欺负弱小民族,欺软怕硬,恃强凌弱。他们以为中国也会说打就打。

他们不明白中国是多么的热爱和平,多么的与邻为善。在解放初期的社会主义阵营中,中国毫不犹豫地给予越南,朝鲜,亚非拉数不尽的好处。中国慷慨为南部非洲修建坦赞铁路。当西方盯住某个地方主要是因为那里有石油,有资源的时候,中国对亚非拉的支持就是够哥们儿意思。只要你们政治上支持我们,我们就是一个战壕里的战友。即使是我们自己勒紧裤腰带,我们也慷慨支持你们。

然而,世界上任何事情都是有因果的。种瓜得瓜,种豆得痘。改革开放以后,中国在非洲的贸易和开发都非常顺利,很多人西方人给中国扣上各种帽子,以为中国是象他们一样去“殖民”了。殊不知,这是因为以前有政治基础。这是因为中国在那里有影响力。

东方文化里边注定有感情成份更深,因此,有时缺乏理性,这是西方人搞不懂的。

中国是爱好和平的。中国人也希望能和平200年,300年。很多人都相信,只要不打丈,只要我们好好地发展,中国人民是有智慧的。

但是,正如瑞典外交大臣瓦尔斯特罗姆所说,为了实现长久和平,我们需要为战争做准备。这也让我想起毛泽东在60年代的话,“深挖洞,广积粮,不称霸。”其实,这也是“韬光养晦”。

就是说,你总是想搅局,总是想整事,但我们并不愿意这样。但是,如果你真要打,我们也不怕。其实,即使是美国,如果能和平解决它也不是非要战争。只是苍蝇不叮无缝的蛋。

瑞典朋友古纳在回答记者提问时说,“首先,中国有军事能力,想怎么做就怎么做,但,我相信,中国人一向是有长远眼光的,他们知道如何从长远考虑,这是中国几千年历史决定的,也是中国人的聪明智慧决定的。”

 

The South China Sea nine-dash line

Stockholm, July 15(Greenpost)–The South China Sea territorial disputes between China and its neighbours can be partly traced to an internal map published by the Republic of China government in 1947 that included an “eleven-dash line” enclosing much of the waters. China did not explain the significance of the line at the time. It was adopted by the People’s Republic of China government after the Communists came to power two years later. Then, in 1953, China unveiled a new map with a “nine-dash line” that covered a slightly smaller area of the South China Sea, losing two dashes that ran through the Gulf of Tonkin between China and Vietnam.
The US remained silent on the “nine-dash line” until February 2014 when Daniel Russel, a top state department official, said China should clarify its meaning.
Trefor Moss, 12 September, 2013:
Diaoyu/Senkaku islands … administered from Taiwan long before Japan annexed them.
China arguably has a decent case regarding Scarborough Shoal. Here’s one important element of the case: China publicised its claim in 1948, and it took the Philippines five decades to object and counter with a claim of its own. Prima facie, that strengthens China’s claim quite substantially.
On the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA):
From wikipedia:
The Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) is an intergovernmental organization located at The Hague in the Netherlands. The PCA is not a court, but rather an organiser of arbitral tribunals to resolve conflicts between member states, international organizations, or private parties. It should not be confused with the International Court of Justice which is the primary judicial branch of the United Nations, while the PCA is not a UN agency.
1899
The court was established in 1899 by the first Hague Peace Conference. The Peace Palace was built for the Court in 1913 with funds from American steel magnate Andrew Carnegie.
Unlike the judges from the International Court of Justice who are paid by the UN, members of the PCA are paid from that same income the PCA earns.
South China Morning Post, 14 July, 2016:
The Permanent Court of Arbitration rents space in the same building as the UN’s International Court of Justice, but the two organisations are not related.
Members of «the court»:
Most of them come from countries unfriendly towards China – and most of these countries are characterized by heavy American news domination:
Many «international courts» are also dominated by American lawyers. Here is one reasons:
From Yale Law School guide (2012):
This guide provides information regarding some of the courts outside of the U.S.—international tribunals and intergovernmental courts, as well as national courts—where current law students and graduates may find temporary positions, paid and unpaid:
On UNCLOS
Huffington Post on UNCLOS: China, the Philippines and the Rule of Law
The threshold question really is whether the PRC can be bound by UNCLOS courts and tribunals, including its arbitral panels. The PRC ratified UNCLOS in 1996, but in 2006 the Chinese government filed a statement with UNCLOS saying that it “does not accept any of the procedures provided for in Section 2 of Part XV of the Convention with respect to all the categories of disputes referred to in paragraph 1 (a), (b), and (c) of Article 298 of the Convention.” These provisions of the Convention refer to “Compulsory Procedures Entailing Binding Decisions” issued by at least four venues: the International Tribunal on the Law of the Sea, the International Court of Justice, an “arbitral tribunal” which may refer to the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA), and a “special arbitral tribunal.”
While there are venues available for the resolutions of disputes under the UNCLOS regime, the PRC does not wish to be bound by its compulsory processes — the ICJ and PCA included.
The PRC knew this day would come. Its 2006 statement effectively served as a “reservation” against any binding outcome of UNCLOS’s grievance procedure in the future.
Maps:
By LPJ: «The South China Sea Arbitration: A Chinese Perspective», most part of the book are accessible through Google Books:
From page 193:
(By Demetri Sevastopulo )

今日头条:瑞典华人华侨及留学生发表联合声明坚决支持中国政府对南海仲裁案的立场

北欧绿色邮报网报道(记者陈雪霏)——7月13日下午,由瑞典中国和平统一促进会主办,瑞典各华人社团、留学生代表,华文媒体代表在首都斯德哥尔摩举行座谈会,就海牙国际仲裁法院12日关于南海仲裁案的裁决发表联合声明。声明全文如下:

DSC_1586一、瑞典华人华侨、留学生支持中国政府不承认、不接受、不执行、不参与 菲律宾提起仲裁决定。

 

二、南海仲裁案完全是菲律宾强加给中国的,它建立在菲律宾一系列违法行 为和非法诉求基础之上。背后隐藏着不良政治 图谋,即有人有意挑事,刻意激 化矛盾,怂恿对抗,唯恐南海不乱。仲裁庭没有管辖权,其自行扩权、越权审理 并做出裁决,违背了《联合国海洋法公约》,是非 法的、无效的。中国不参与、 不接受这样的仲裁,不承认所谓的裁决

三、在南海问题上中国绝不是加害者、肇事者,而是完完全全的受害者。根 据国际法,中国完全享有自保权和自卫权,有能力收复上述岛礁。但从维护地区 和平稳定的角度出发, 中国长期以来一直保持高度克制,寻求通过谈判和平解 决。近年来中国采取的一些行动,只是在忍无可忍的情况下针对个别国家侵权行 动升级的最低限度的响应。

DSC_1595四、在领土问题和海域划界争议上,中国不接受任何第三方争端解决方式, 不接受任何强加于中国的争端解决方案。中国政府将继续遵循《联合国宪章》确 认的国际法和国际关系基本准则,坚持与直接有关当事国在尊重历史事实的基础 上,根据国际法,通过谈判协商解决南海有关争议,维护南海和平稳定。

DSC_1601五、海峡两岸中国人应团结起来一起维护中华民族的共同权益。

DSC_1606

出席座谈会的有中国驻瑞典大使陈育明,领事部主任郭延航,瑞典中国和平统一促进会会长叶克清,瑞典华人总会执行主席叶沛群,秘书长唐兵,王钰清,瑞典华人联合会名誉主席王吉生,瑞典华人工商联常务副会长夏海龙,瑞典广东同乡会代表梁振德,人民网记者李玫忆,北欧华人网的宗金波,瑞典留学生代表熊梓懿,瑞典华文学校代表王梅霜和潮州同乡会会长陈德忠。

DSC_1603代表们在座谈会上纷纷表示积极支持中国政府在南海问题上的立场,同时号召海峡两岸中国人应该团结起来一起维护中华民族的共同权益。

DSC_1583瑞典中国和平统一促进会会长叶克清说:南海仲裁案不过是一场披着法律外衣的闹剧,实际上是美国在搅乱南海,遏制中国和平发展的险恶用心。天下人包括菲律宾、美国在内的所有人都很清楚,南海仲裁案“既不合理也不合法”,解决不了南海问题,仲裁庭一意孤行接受菲律宾单方面诉求,丝毫没有顾及《南海各方行为宣言》等已经建立的国际法规则,丝毫没有顾及正在发挥作用的对话机制、平台与框架。仲裁庭把《联合国海洋法公约》强制凌驾于受国际法保护的和平对话框架之上,构成了对国际法的伤害和对地区和平对话机制的损害,这是扩权和滥权。并且,仲裁庭的扩权和滥权还侵犯了《公约》缔约国所享有的权利。从仲裁的后果看,其丝毫无助于维护南海的和平稳定。

DSC_1593瑞典华人总会执行主席叶沛群说:这种仲裁闹剧使两岸不约而同地坚决反对,共同维护南海主权的一致行动,将能更好地维护中华民族的共同利益,有助于促进两岸关系向前发展。只要祖国继续快速发展和安定,只要祖国更强大,类似的闹剧就不会发生了。

DSC_1618中国驻瑞典大使陈育明听完华人华侨和留学生代表的发言后说,他为华人华侨捍卫国家主权积极支持中国政府的心声深为感动。

他说:大家的心声充分显示了炎黄子孙心连心,肩并肩直面挑战的坚强意志。

陈大使说,中国在南海的领土主权不可否定,中国是最早給南海诸岛命名并实施有效管辖的。

中国不接受南海仲裁案闹剧是对国际法制和地区规则的权威性和严肃性的尊重。领土主权问题超出了联合国海洋法公约的调整范围。联合国海洋法公约的宗旨是在顾及国家主权的情况下对海洋建立的国际秩序。而国际仲裁廷超越了联合国海洋法公约的调整范围。

DSC_1609中国愿意通过谈判来解决边界争端。已经与12个邻国签订了边界条约。

陈大使说他希望华人华侨通过朋友同事解释中国的立场和观点。

DSC_1582出席座谈会的还有瑞典中国和平统一促进会的周斌,伍王令,华人工商联副会长的黄炳旺,理事曹海嘉,华人联合会的郭彦彩,中欧文化协会会长陈雪霏,青田同乡会的周民伟,瑞中企业家协会会长张巧珍,两湖同乡会副会长吕长琳。

Top story: China rejects the ruling of the Arbitral Tribunal in the South China Sea Arbitration

STOCKHOLM, July 12(Greenpost)–Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs has rejected the Arbitral Tribunal’s ruling on the South China Sea on July 12, 2016.

The following is the full text translation of Statement of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People’s Republic of China on the Award of 12 July 2016 of the Arbitral Tribunal in the South China Sea Arbitration Established at the Request of the Republic of the Philippines

2016/07/12

With regard to the award rendered on 12 July 2016 by the Arbitral Tribunal in the South China Sea arbitration established at the unilateral request of the Republic of the Philippines (hereinafter referred to as the “Arbitral Tribunal”), the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People’s Republic of China solemnly declares that the award is null and void and has no binding force. China neither accepts nor recognizes it.

1. On 22 January 2013, the then government of the Republic of the Philippines unilaterally initiated arbitration on the relevant disputes in the South China Sea between China and the Philippines. On 19 February 2013, the Chinese government solemnly declared that it neither accepts nor participates in that arbitration and has since repeatedly reiterated that position. On 7 December 2014, the Chinese government released the Position Paper of the Government of the People’s Republic of China on the Matter of Jurisdiction in the South China Sea Arbitration Initiated by the Republic of the Philippines, pointing out that the Philippines’ initiation of arbitration breaches the agreement between the two states, violates the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), and goes against the general practice of international arbitration, and that the Arbitral Tribunal has no jurisdiction. On 29 October 2015, the Arbitral Tribunal rendered an award on jurisdiction and admissibility. The Chinese government immediately stated that the award is null and void and has no binding force. China’s positions are clear and consistent.

2. The unilateral initiation of arbitration by the Philippines is out 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. The initiation of this arbitration violates international law. First, the subject-matter of the arbitration initiated by the Philippines is in essence an issue of territorial sovereignty over some islands and reefs of Nansha Qundao (the Nansha Islands), and inevitably concerns and cannot be separated from maritime delimitation between China and the Philippines. Fully aware that territorial issues are not subject to UNCLOS, and that maritime delimitation disputes have been excluded from the UNCLOS compulsory dispute settlement procedures by China’s 2006 declaration, the Philippines deliberately packaged the relevant disputes as mere issues concerning the interpretation or application of UNCLOS. Second, the Philippines’ unilateral initiation of arbitration infringes upon China’s right as a state party to UNCLOS to choose on its own will the procedures and means for dispute settlement. As early as in 2006, pursuant to Article 298 of UNCLOS, China excluded from the compulsory dispute settlement procedures of UNCLOS disputes concerning, among others, maritime delimitation, historic bays or titles, military and law enforcement activities. Third, the Philippines’ unilateral initiation of arbitration violates the bilateral agreement reached between China and the Philippines, and repeatedly reaffirmed over the years, to resolve relevant disputes in the South China Sea through negotiations. Fourth, the Philippines’ unilateral initiation of arbitration violates the commitment made by China and ASEAN Member States, including the Philippines, in the 2002 Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea (DOC) to resolve the relevant disputes through negotiations by states directly concerned. By unilaterally initiating the arbitration, the Philippines violates UNCLOS and its provisions on the application of dispute settlement procedures, the principle of “pacta sunt servanda” and other rules and principles of international law.

3. The Arbitral Tribunal disregards the fact that the essence of the subject-matter of the arbitration initiated by the Philippines is issues of territorial sovereignty and maritime delimitation, erroneously interprets the common choice of means of dispute settlement already made jointly by China and the Philippines, erroneously construes the legal effect of the relevant commitment in the DOC, deliberately circumvents the optional exceptions declaration made by China under Article 298 of UNCLOS, selectively takes relevant islands and reefs out of the macro-geographical framework of Nanhai Zhudao (the South China Sea Islands), subjectively and speculatively interprets and applies UNCLOS, and obviously errs in ascertaining facts and applying the law. The conduct of the Arbitral Tribunal and its awards seriously contravene the general practice of international arbitration, completely deviate from the object and purpose of UNCLOS to promote peaceful settlement of disputes, substantially impair the integrity and authority of UNCLOS, gravely infringe upon China’s legitimate rights as a sovereign state and state party to UNCLOS, and are unjust and unlawful.

4. 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.

5. The Chinese government reiterates that, regarding territorial issues and maritime delimitation disputes, China does not accept any means of third party dispute settlement or any solution imposed on China. The Chinese government will continue to abide by international law and basic norms governing international relations as enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations, including the principles of respecting state sovereignty and territorial integrity and peaceful settlement of disputes, and continue to work with states directly concerned to resolve the relevant disputes in the South China Sea through negotiations and consultations on the basis of respecting historical facts and in accordance with international law, so as to maintain peace and stability in the South China Sea.

Source: Foreign Affairs Ministry of People’s Republic of China.

Suggest to a friend Print

Top story: China’s stance on its Territorial Sovereignty and Maritime Rights and interests in the South China Sea

STOCKHOLM, July 12, (Greenpost)- Chinese government has issued a statement on its stance on the South China Sea.

The following is the full text of the statement:

Statement of the Government of the People’s Republic of China on China’s Territorial Sovereignty and Maritime Rights and Interests in the South China Sea

2016/07/12

To reaffirm China’s territorial sovereignty and maritime rights and interests in the South China Sea, enhance cooperation in the South China Sea with other countries, and uphold peace and stability in the South China Sea, the Government of the People’s Republic of China hereby states as follows:

I. China’s Nanhai Zhudao (the South China Sea Islands) consist of Dongsha Qundao (the Dongsha Islands), Xisha Qundao (the Xisha Islands), Zhongsha Qundao (the Zhongsha Islands) and Nansha Qundao (the Nansha Islands). The activities of the Chinese people in the South China Sea date back to over 2,000 years ago. China is the first to have discovered, named, and explored and exploited Nanhai Zhudao and relevant waters, and the first to have exercised sovereignty and jurisdiction over them continuously, peacefully and effectively, thus establishing territorial sovereignty and relevant rights and interests in the South China Sea.

Following the end of the Second World War, China recovered and resumed the exercise of sovereignty over Nanhai Zhudao which had been illegally occupied by Japan during its war of aggression against China. To strengthen the administration over Nanhai Zhudao, the Chinese government in 1947 reviewed and updated the geographical names of Nanhai Zhudao, compiled Nan Hai Zhu Dao Di Li Zhi Lüe (A Brief Account of the Geography of the South China Sea Islands), and drew Nan Hai Zhu Dao Wei Zhi Tu (Location Map of the South China Sea Islands) on which the dotted line is marked. This map was officially published and made known to the world by the Chinese government in February 1948.

II. Since its founding on 1 October 1949, the People’s Republic of China has been firm in upholding China’s territorial sovereignty and maritime rights and interests in the South China Sea. A series of legal instruments, such as the 1958 Declaration of the Government of the People’s Republic of China on China’s Territorial Sea, the 1992 Law of the People’s Republic of China on the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone, the 1998 Law of the People’s Republic of China on the Exclusive Economic Zone and the Continental Shelf and the 1996 Decision of the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress of the People’s Republic of China on the Ratification of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, have further reaffirmed China’s territorial sovereignty and maritime rights and interests in the South China Sea.

III. Based on the practice of the Chinese people and the Chinese government in the long course of history and the position consistently upheld by successive Chinese governments, and in accordance with national law and international law, including the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, China has territorial sovereignty and maritime rights and interests in the South China Sea, including, inter alia:

i. China has sovereignty over Nanhai Zhudao, consisting of Dongsha Qundao, Xisha Qundao, Zhongsha Qundao and Nansha Qundao;

ii. China has internal waters, territorial sea and contiguous zone, based on Nanhai Zhudao;

iii. China has exclusive economic zone and continental shelf, based on Nanhai Zhudao;

iv. China has historic rights in the South China Sea.

The above positions are consistent with relevant international law and practice.

IV. China is always firmly opposed to the invasion and illegal occupation by certain states of some islands and reefs of China’s Nansha Qundao, and activities infringing upon China’s rights and interests in relevant maritime areas under China’s jurisdiction. China stands ready to continue to resolve the relevant disputes peacefully through negotiation and consultation with the states directly concerned on the basis of respecting historical facts and in accordance with international law. Pending final settlement, China is also ready to make every effort with the states directly concerned to enter into provisional arrangements of a practical nature, including joint development in relevant maritime areas, in order to achieve win-win results and jointly maintain peace and stability in the South China Sea.

V. China respects and upholds the freedom of navigation and overflight enjoyed by all states under international law in the South China Sea, and stays ready to work with other coastal states and the international community to ensure the safety of and the unimpeded access to the international shipping lanes in the South China Sea.

Source: Website of Chinese Ministry for  Foreign Affairs.

头条要闻:中华人民共和国外交部关于应菲律宾共和国请求建立的南海仲裁案仲裁庭所作裁决的声明

 北欧绿色邮报网7月12日特约授权发布:《中华人民共和国外交部关于应菲律宾共和国请求建立的南海仲裁》。全文如下:

 关于应菲律宾共和国单方面请求建立的南海仲裁案仲裁庭(以下简称“仲裁庭”)于2016年7月12日作出的裁决,中华人民共和国外交部郑重声明,该裁决是无效的,没有拘束力,中国不接受、不承认。

一、2013年1月22日,菲律宾共和国时任政府单方面就中菲在南海的有关争议提起仲裁。2013年2月19日,中国政府郑重宣布不接受、不参与菲律宾提起的仲裁,此后多次重申此立场。2014年12月7日,中国政府发表《中华人民共和国政府关于菲律宾共和国所提南海仲裁案管辖权问题的立场文件》,指出菲律宾提起仲裁违背中菲协议,违背《联合国海洋法公约》(以下简称《公约》),违背国际仲裁一般实践,仲裁庭不具有管辖权。2015年10月29日,仲裁庭作出管辖权和可受理性问题的裁决。中国政府当即声明该裁决是无效的,没有拘束力。中国上述立场是明确的、一贯的。

二、菲律宾单方面提起仲裁,目的是恶意的,不是为了解决与中国的争议,也不是为了维护南海的和平与稳定,而是为了否定中国在南海的领土主权和海洋权益。菲律宾提起仲裁的行为违反国际法。一是菲律宾提起仲裁事项的实质是南沙群岛部分岛礁的领土主权问题,有关事项也必然涉及中菲海洋划界,与之不可分割。在明知领土问题不属于《公约》调整范围,海洋划界争议已被中国2006年有关声明排除的情况下,菲律宾将有关争议刻意包装成单纯的《公约》解释或适用问题。二是菲律宾单方面提起仲裁,侵犯中国作为《公约》缔约国享有的自主选择争端解决程序和方式的权利。中国早在2006年即根据《公约》第298条将涉及海洋划界、历史性海湾或所有权、军事和执法活动等方面的争端排除出《公约》强制争端解决程序。三是菲律宾单方面提起仲裁,违反中菲两国达成并多年来一再确认的通过谈判解决南海有关争议的双边协议。四是菲律宾单方面提起仲裁,违反中国与包括菲律宾在内的东盟国家在2002年《南海各方行为宣言》(以下简称《宣言》)中作出的由直接有关当事国通过谈判解决有关争议的承诺。菲律宾单方面提起仲裁,违反了《公约》及其适用争端解决程序的规定,违反了“约定必须遵守”原则,也违反了其他国际法原则和规则。

三、仲裁庭无视菲律宾提起仲裁事项的实质是领土主权和海洋划界问题,错误解读中菲对争端解决方式的共同选择,错误解读《宣言》中有关承诺的法律效力,恶意规避中国根据《公约》第298条作出的排除性声明,有选择性地把有关岛礁从南海诸岛的宏观地理背景中剥离出来并主观想象地解释和适用《公约》,在认定事实和适用法律上存在明显错误。仲裁庭的行为及其裁决严重背离国际仲裁一般实践,完全背离《公约》促进和平解决争端的目的及宗旨,严重损害《公约》的完整性和权威性,严重侵犯中国作为主权国家和《公约》缔约国的合法权利,是不公正和不合法的。

四、中国在南海的领土主权和海洋权益在任何情况下不受仲裁裁决的影响,中国反对且不接受任何基于该仲裁裁决的主张和行动。

五、中国政府重申,在领土问题和海洋划界争议上,中国不接受任何第三方争端解决方式,不接受任何强加于中国的争端解决方案。中国政府将继续遵循《联合国宪章》确认的国际法和国际关系基本准则,包括尊重国家主权和领土完整以及和平解决争端原则,坚持与直接有关当事国在尊重历史事实的基础上,根据国际法,通过谈判协商解决南海有关争议,维护南海和平稳定。

来源:中国驻瑞典大使馆网站

法国中北部遭洪水侵袭

北欧绿色邮报网报道(编辑陈雪霏)--这是6月1日在法国巴黎拍摄的水位暴涨的塞纳河。

254891448_8
近日,强降雨天气造成法国中北部多地发生洪涝灾害。根据法国气象台网站的消息,截至巴黎时间6月1日14时,塞纳河奥茨特里茨桥水文站测量的水位已超过正常水位4.3米,河道航运被停止、临河道路和游乐设施被关闭。气象台预计塞纳河河水将继续上涨。
新华社记者李根兴摄