Protesting German surveys in 1883, 1887 Treaty with France

> In 1883, the Chinese protested against German surveys of the Paracels and the Spratlys. As a result of China's defeat by France in a war over French designs on Vietnam, the Chinese were compelled in 1887 to sign a treaty that, among other provisions, apparently assigned the Paracels and the Spratlys to China. To pre-empt further French moves and thwart French ambitions, China sent in 1902 a naval task force to inspect the South China Sea islands, planting flags and markers there. In 1907, as an outcome of another inspection tour, detailed plans were drawn up for the exploration of resources in and around the islands. In 1911, the new republic that had replaced the Qing Dynasty (1644-1911) placed the Paracels and the Spratlys under a county on Hainan. In December 1947, even as the Chinese civil war was going on, the Chinese communists incorporated the two groups of islands into Guangdong province.(26)

[Source](https://books.google.com/books?id=83BIxG7Ig2cC&pg=PA76#v=onepage&q&f=false)

> China's claims to the islands are based on historic usage by Chinese fishermen as early as 200 B.C.E. and on the 1887 Chinese-Vietnamese Boundary Convention.

[Source](https://books.google.com/books?id=rfu-hR8msh4C&pg=PA180#v=onepage&q&f=false)

France Historical View on Paracel Islands: In the 1910s-20s, they thought it was under Chinese sovereignty.

> In the 1910s–20s, the French Ministry of Colonies and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs more or less agreed that the Paracel Islands were under Chinese sovereignty, and that France should not try to claim them either on behalf of itself or Annam. Therefore France did not protest in 1921 when the government of Guangdong province declared the Paracels to be under the administration of Hainan Island.[4]

> Five years later, in 1926, France refused an application from a French company to exploit guano in the Paracels. It also refused a similar application from a Japanese company. By 1926, however, China was divided into a number of warring states that had little capacity for looking after peripheral interests as the Paracels. Actually, the Japanese had proceeded with their guano project, without authorisation from either France or China. [5] By 1930, however, the French authorities in Annam (the central part of today's Vietnam, which formed a separate French protectorate within the Indochinese Union) started to actively push for a French claim on behalf of the protected state, based on the fact that Emperor Gia Long had officially taken possession of the islands in 1816, and that Emperor Minh Mang had sent a mission to erect a marker and build a pagoda there in 1835. The French Foreign Ministry was skeptical, in view of the fact that Annam had done little to uphold its claim, but concluded that it might be worth a try. If France could establish and maintain a presence in the islands, the claim would of course be strengthened.

[Source](http://www.scribd.com/doc/56468/The-South-China-Sea-in-the-Age-of-European-Decline)

France Historical View on Spratly Islands: Belongs to France, not Vietnam.

> The question of whether the Spratlys were French or Vietnamese was brought to the fore in May 1951, when a French businessman asked for permission to exploit the guano in these islands. France then had to make up its mind as to who should decide. The High Commissioner in Indochina, in his capacity as advisor to the Vietnamese government? The Vietnamese government itself? The Ministry of Associated States, which was responsible for relations with Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos? Or the Ministry of Overseas France, who was responsible for the French colonies in the Pacific, the Caribbean and Africa? The request was sent to the Minister for Associated States, Jean Letourneau. He forwarded it, however, to the Minister of Overseas France, arguing that the Spratlys had never been claimed or occupied by Annam, had only administratively been attached to the French colony Cochinchina, and should now be considered French territory, on a par with the French territories in the Pacific. The French Foreign Ministry supported this view.118

> By September 1953, the French Foreign Ministry maintained the view that the Spratlys belonged to France, not Vietnam: ‘These islands, French, were not attached to Vietnam in 1949, when the former colony of Cochinchina was ceded to this Associated State. They therefore depend on the Ministry of Overseas France’.122

> The French Ministry of Associated States asked the opinion of the French Foreign Ministry, who prepared yet another ‘note’ claiming beyond doubt that the Spratlys belonged to the French Union, not Vietnam, citing several reasons. One of them was that the Democratic Republic of Vietnam had failed to protest when the People’s Republic of China claimed the Spratlys as Chinese.

[Source](http://www.scribd.com/doc/56468/The-South-China-Sea-in-the-Age-of-European-Decline)

British Historical View on Paracel Islands: China had the best claim, but the British did not feel China could defend against Japan.

> Concerning the Paracel islands, the British authorities were not sure what to do if Japan were to push its claim and clash with the French. On the one hand they thought China had the best claim there. On the other hand the most effective way of opposing the Japanese occupation would be to back the French claim on behalf of Annam.

> Already in October 1936, before the Japanese invasion of China, the French and the British admiralties worried that Japan might intend to occupy Hainan Island, and use it together with Taiwan to challenge Europe's and the United State's naval hegemony in the South China Sea. [20] Chiang Kai-Shek also warned Britain of this eventuality, [21] which would prejudice the security of Hong Kong and of French Indochina. France also worried that Japan might try to establish a military presence in the Paracels. An Anglo-Chinese project for establishing a base in the Paracels had come to nothing, so now the French started secretly preparing a move to pre-empt a Japanese occupation. [22]

> At this time France worried deeply about Japanese designs on Hainan, and suggested to Britain that they should ask China to neutralise the Chinese island and place it under temporary Anglo-French control. [32] In the same month, France sent a mission to the Paracels with instructions to establish lighthouses and a typhoon warning station, and leave behind a detachment of 'Annamite police' at Woody and Pattle Islands. Their official task would be to combat piracy. The French had informed Chinese authorities about this move, and assured them that the action should in no way be regarded as a prejudging the question of sovereignty. It was meant to prevent Japan from utilising the islands, a shared Sino-French concern. However, Japan had already established a military presence on Woody Island in January 1938, and on Lincoln Island in April, [33] so when the French forces arrived, they were met by two Japanese warships. The Japanese made no difficulty about allowing the French to land, and the ship's commanders exchanged courtesy visit. The French then proceeded to hoist the French flag, whereupon the Japanese Senior Naval Officer politely pointed out that the islands were Japanese and had been Japanese for the last sixy years. [34]

[Source](http://www.scribd.com/doc/56468/The-South-China-Sea-in-the-Age-of-European-Decline)

British Historical View on Spratly Islands: Belongs to British

>  Spratly Island itself had been ‘discovered’ by the British whaler Cyrus in 1843 (and named after its captain); it had been surveyed by the HMS Rifleman in 1863, and as mentioned, Labuan had issued a license to three businessmen to exploit guano on Spratly Island and Amboyna Cay in 1877. On this occasion the businessmen had even been authorised to plant the British flag, and since then the two islands had been listed as British possessions in official British documents. Anew license had been given to the Central Borneo Company in 1889 after the islands had been visited by a British ship who found no trace of actual exploitation by the former licensees. However, the Central Borneo Company also failed to exploit the guano.In 1930, when learning about the French occupation, the British Consul General in Saigon asked the Governor of Cochinchina for an explanation, and afterwards reported to London that the French seemed to have made a mistake; apparently they had been unaware of the British claim.12 A drawn out but silent dispute followed between Britain and France, generating a number of legal studies in London and Paris. The reason why the dispute was not made public may partly be that the Foreign Office did not want to disturb Franco-British relations in a region where the French navy and territories served as highly desirable buffers against threats to British possessions. Key Foreign Office officials also felt that Britain’s own claim was weak in law and not really worth pursuing. The reasons they cited were that the British licensees had not really utilised the islands, and that Britain had never effectively administered them. On the other hand, the Foreign Office did not want to give up the British claim since it might be pursued in the future, if France should forfeit its claim.Therefore, while not officially protesting the French claim, Britain also did not recognise it.

[Source](http://www.scribd.com/doc/56468/The-South-China-Sea-in-the-Age-of-European-Decline)

British found Chinese fishermen on Taiping Island, Spratlys.

> Independent witness of Chinese activity in the Spratly islands dates to 1867, when a British survey ship allegedly encountered Chinese fishermen on Itu Aba.26

[Source](https://books.google.ca/books?id=o5P4U4UlucMC&pg=PA8#v=onepage&q&f=false)

[Source](https://www.dur.ac.uk/ibru/publications/download/?id=232)

French only found Chinese living on the islands. Japanese books and periodicals documented Chinese activities on the islands.

> Between 1930 and 1933, the period when the French invaded the nine features, they also acknowledged that there were only Chinese fishermen living on the islands. The periodical Colonizing the World published in 1933 recorded that when the French warship Malicieuse surveyed the Nansha group, there were three Chinese fishermen living on the island (Wu, 1999:51). In April 1933, when the French invaded the Nansha features, the residents there were Chinese: seven people on Southwest Cay, five on Thitu Island and four on the Nansha Islands, plus huts, wells and temples left behind by the Chinese on Loaita Island (ibid.: 14)

> Before the French arrived at the Nansha Islands in 1930, many Japanese books and periodicals documented the production activities of Chinese fishermen on the islands. For instance, it is recorded in the Xin Nan Qun Dao Yan Ge Lue Ji, a document deposited with the Archive Department of the Taiwan Administration, that there were two Chinese tombstones on Northeast Cay. One was erected for Weng Wengiong in the eleventh year and the other for someone with the surname Wu in the thirteenth year of Emperor Tongzhi's era (1872 and 1874 AD, respectively) during the Qing dynasty.

[Source](https://books.google.ca/books?id=zc5ZAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA73#v=onepage&q&f=false)

Japanese also found Chinese living on the islands.

> A Japanese exploration team visited the Spratly islands in 1918 and met with Chinese fishermen who lived on Southwest Cay.37

[Source](https://books.google.ca/books?id=o5P4U4UlucMC&pg=PA9#v=onepage&q&f=false)

Japan view on Paracel Islands: That both Britain and France declared Paracels to be under Hainan. Both French and Vietnamese claims "totally unjustifiable".

> On July 3, 1938, French troops invaded and occupied China's Paracel Islands. This took place shortly after the Japanese War of Aggression against China broke out; it was a time when China was fully engaged in resisting Japan's invasion. Ambassador William Koo in France immediately lodged a diplomatic protest with the French Government.(118) On July 6, 1938, the Japanese Foreign Ministry also issued a declaration in protest of the French occupation:

>  "The statements of Great Britain and France made respectively in 1900 and 1921 already declared that the Xisha Islands were part of the Administrative Prefecture of Hainan Island. Therefore, the current claims made by An'nan or France to the Xisha Islands are totally unjustifiable."

[Source](http://books.google.ca/books?id=DKXRRfWtkw8C&pg=PA181#v=onepage&q&f=false)

Japan view on Spratly Islands: claim based on its possession of Taiwan

> On the other hand, the Foreign Office did not want to give up the British claim since it might be pursued in the future, if France should forfeit its claim.Therefore, while not officially protesting the French claim, Britain also did not recognise it. By contrast, the Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs officially protested the French annexation, and prepared its own claim to Spratly Island, based on its possession of Taiwan.

[Source](http://www.scribd.com/doc/56468/The-South-China-Sea-in-the-Age-of-European-Decline)

Japan did not attack Vietnam until 1941, actions on Spratly and Paracel based on attacking perceived Chinese territory.

> Some authors have argued that the Japanese did not attack Vietnam until late 1941; therefore their earlier occupation of the Spratly and Paracel islands must be viewed as movements against what they recognised as Chinese territory.47

[Source](https://books.google.ca/books?id=o5P4U4UlucMC&pg=PA10#v=onepage&q&f=false)

[Source](https://www.dur.ac.uk/ibru/publications/download/?id=232)

Japanese administration: Paracel under Hainan jurisdiction, Spratly under Taiwan jurisdiction.

> Within the Japanese administrative system, the Spratlys depended on Taiwan and the Paracels on Hainan.

[Source](https://books.google.ca/books?id=CNVf9R_L5FAC&pg=PA10#v=onepage&q&f=false)

After Japanese administration: Republic of China formally reclaimed the islands

> After Japan surrendered in 1945, the Republic of China took over the Paracels and Shin'nan from Japan and stationed troops on Itu Abu island, which is the only island to produce fresh water in the Spratlys.

[Source](https://books.google.ca/books?id=taOrjN83rLEC&pg=PA124#v=onepage&q&f=false)

> After the Japanese defeat in the Pacific War, those forces had planted Nationalist Chinese flags and stone markers on Itu Aba, Spratly Island and West York Island and set up a garrison on Itu Aba in December 1946, mainly to forestall apparent French attempts to return to the area. Moreover, the Allies had designated (Nationalist) Chinese as recipients of the surrender of the Japanese forces in the area north of 16 North latitude.

[Source](https://books.google.ca/books?id=83BIxG7Ig2cC&pg=PA74#v=onepage&q&f=false)

> At the end of the Second World War (Asian-Pacific Region), Japanese forces withdrew from the Paracel and Spratly Islands on August 26, 1945.(121) Chinese fishermen resumed fishing and other commercial activities in the Paracels and Spratlys.(122) In October and November 1946, the Nationalist Government of the Republic of China formally retook the Paracels, Spratlys and other islands in the South China Sea, once again confirmed the division of China’s islands in the South China Sea into the Dongsha, Zhongsha Islands (including Huangyuan Island), Xisha Islands and Nansha Islands, and reiterated China’s territorial sovereignty over these islands.(123)

[Source](https://books.google.ca/books?id=DKXRRfWtkw8C&pg=PA182#v=onepage&q&f=false)

Japanese forces were to surrender to Chinese forces in northern Vietnam and the South China Sea islands.

> Chinese forces accepted the surrender of Japanese troops in northern Vietnam and were instructed to do so in the South China Sea islands.

> Two Chinese naval patrols were ordered to the Spratly islands in 1945-46. The French naval battleship, Chevreud, landed crews on Spratly Island and Itu Aba, where they placed a stone marker in October 1946.51 China protested the French action, and the two countries conducted inconclusive talks on the dispute. Another Chinese naval patrol sailed to the islands and arrived at Itu Aba on 12 December 1947. It reportedly erected markers on Itu Aba, Spratly Island, and West York Island. A garrison was established on Itu Aba, the largest of the islands. In 1946-47 China published official names for the islands and incorporated them into Guangdong province.52

[Source](https://books.google.ca/books?id=o5P4U4UlucMC&pg=PA10#v=onepage&q&f=false)

[Source](https://www.dur.ac.uk/ibru/publications/download/?id=232)

Russia Historical View on Paracel Islands: Taiwan, Pescadores, Paracel and other Chinese territories should be returned to the Chinese People's Republic.

> 2) Statement of the First Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of the USSR, A.A. Gromyko, at the Conference in San Francisco (1951)

> The peace treaty with Japan should, naturally, resolve a number of territorial questions connected with the peace settlement with Japan. It is known that in this respect as well the United States, Great Britain, China and the Soviet Union undertook specific obligations. These obligations are outlined in the Cairo Declaration, in the Potsdam Declaration, and in the Yalta Agreement.

> These agreements recognize the absolutely indisputable rights of China, now the Chinese People's Republic, to territories severed from it. It is an indisputable fact that original Chinese territories which were severed from it, such as Taiwan (Formosa), the Pescadores, the Paracel Islands and other Chinese territories, should be returned to the Chinese People's Republic.

> ...As regards the American-British draft peace treaty with Japan in the part pertaining to territorial questions, the Delegation of the USSR considers it necessary to state that this draft grossly violates the indisputable rights of China to the return of integral parts of Chinese territory: Taiwan, the Pescadores, the Paracel and other islands severed from it by the Japanese militarists. The draft contains only a reference to the renunciation by Japan of its rights to these territories but intentionally omits any mention of the further fate of these territories. In reality, however, Taiwan and the said islands have been captured by the United States of America and the United States wants to legalize these aggressive actions in the draft peace treaty under discussion. Meanwhile the fate of these territories should be absolutely clear -- they must be returned to the Chinese people, the master of their land.

> Meanwhile the fate of these territories should be absolutely clear -- they must be returned to the Chinese people, the master of their land.

[Source](http://www.mofa.go.jp/region/europe/russia/territory/edition92/period4.html)

Prime Minister Shigeru Yoshida's Speech at the San Francisco Peace Conference: No disagreement to Russian comments about Chinese territory

> As regards China, I confine my remarks to two points. The first point is that like others, we regret that disunity prevents China from being here. The second is that the role of China trade in Japanese economy, important as it is, has often been exaggerated, as proven by our experience of the past 6 years.

[Source](http://www.ioc.u-tokyo.ac.jp/%7Eworldjpn/documents/texts/JPUS/19510907.S1E.html)

Bilateral treaties, where Japan specifically insisted renunciation article only deal with Chinese territory, included by name the Paracels, Spratlys, Taiwan and the Pescadores.

> Taiwan has argued that the explicit reference to the Spratly and Paracel islands in the text of this bilateral treaty implies Japanese recognition of Chinese sovereignty.82 Samuels and Lu have observed that, unlike the 1951 treaty, the Sino-Japanese text mentions the Spratly and Paracel islands in the same sentence with Taiwan and the Pescadores islands. The latter are generally recognised as Chinese territories. Moreover, according to the negotiating record Japan insisted that the renunciation article deal only with Chinese territory. This shows that the ROC and Japan viewed the islands of Taiwan, the Pescadores, the Spratlys, and the Paracels as having similar status – that is, belonging to China.83

[Source](https://books.google.ca/books?id=o5P4U4UlucMC&pg=PA15#v=onepage&q&f=false)

[Source](https://www.dur.ac.uk/ibru/publications/download/?id=232)

Burma on the Disputes: Backs China

> Burma’s general-turned-President Thein Sein managed the one-two punch while leading a large delegation of ministers and officials from the new regime to Beijing last week.

> First he announced that his government fully backs China in its long-running dispute with ASEAN members Vietnam, Philippines, Brunei and Malaysia over the ownership of clusters of islands and reefs in the South China Sea.

[Source](http://www.burmanet.org/news/2011/06/06/vancouver-sun-burma-china-alliance-threatens-asean-unity-%E2%80%93-jonathan-manthorpe/)

[Source](http://www.canada.com/story_print.html?id=102a0a21-cf3b-4bfb-9f7b-d3aca972dac7)

Russia Supports China’s Stance on South China Sea

> Russian President Vladimir Putin said that Moscow supports China’s stance on the South China Sea court dispute and opposes any third-party interference. Russia supports China’s stance on the South China Sea court dispute and opposes any third-party interference, Russian President Vladimir Putin said Monday. “Chairman Xi Jinping and I have developed very trusting, I would say friendly, relations. But he never – I want to emphasize this – never approached me requesting to somehow comment, somehow intervene in the matter,” Putin told reporters.

[Source](https://sputniknews.com/world/20160905/1044988523/russia-china-putin.html)

Congo supports China on sovereignty, including Taiwan and South China Sea

> Republic of Congo’ President Denis Sassou Nguesso said Tuesday that his country appreciates China’s support for his country’s development. Sassou Nguesso noted that his country firmly supports China’s legitimate positions with regard to issues concerning its sovereignty and territorial integrity, including Taiwan and the South China Sea.

[Source](http://allafrica.com/stories/201701120317.html)

Chinese Statement Upon Ratifying UNCLOS: UNCLOS does not affect the claims

> 3) The People's Republic of China reaffirms its sovereignty over all its archipelagos and islands as listed in article 2 of the Law of the People's Republic of China on the territorial sea and the contiguous zone, which was promulgated on 25 February 1992.

[Source](http://www.un.org/Depts/los/convention_agreements/convention_declarations.htm#China%20Upon%20ratification)

Article 2 of the Law of the People's Republic of China on the territorial sea and the contiguous zone

>  The territorial sea of the People's Republic of China is the sea belt adjacent to the land territory and the internal waters of the People's Republic of China. The land territory of the People's Republic of China includes the mainland of the People's Republic of China and its coastal islands; Taiwan and all islands appertaining thereto including the Diaoyu Islands; the Penghu Islands; the Dongsha Islands; the Xisha Islands; the Zhongsha Islands and the Nansha Islands; as well as all the other islands belonging to the People's Republic of China. The waters on the landward side of the baselines of the territorial sea of the People's Republic of China constitute the internal waters of the People's Republic of China

[Source](http://www.fdi.gov.cn/pub/FDI_EN/Laws/GeneralLawsandRegulations/BasicLaws/P020060620318668126917.pdf)

[Source](http://www.asianlii.org/cn/legis/cen/laws/lotprocottsatcz739/)

Vietnam Statement Upon Ratifying UNCLOS: UNCLOS does not affect the claims

> The National Assembly reaffirms the sovereignty of the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam over its internal waters and territorial sea; the sovereign rights and jurisdiction in the contiguous zone, the exclusive economic zone and the continental shelf of Viet Nam, based on the provisions of the Convention and principles of international law; and calls on other countries to respect the above-said rights of Viet Nam.

> The National Assembly reiterates Viet Nam's sovereignty over the Hoang Sa and Truong Sa archipelagos and its position to settle those disputes relating to territorial claims as well as other disputes in the Eastern Sea through peaceful negotiations

[Source](http://www.un.org/Depts/los/convention_agreements/convention_declarations.htm#Viet%20Nam%20Upon%20ratification)

North Vietnam Pham Van Dong 1958 letter: Recognizes Chinese claims

http://i.imgur.com/wJnpZaL.jpg

Translation:

> The Democratic Republic of Vietnam's Government agreed to terms of China's public statement in 9-4-1958 about China's sea territory claim.The Democratic Republic of Vietnam Government respect it, and will direct all Agencies to absolute respect the 12 nautical miles sea territory of China in all matters with the People's Republic of China in the East Sea.

> sincerely.

> Hanoi 14-9-1958.

China's public statement in 9-4-1958 about China's sea territory claim

> 1) The breadth of the territorial sea of the People's Republic of China shall be twelve nautical miles. This provision applies to all territories of the People's Republic of China, including the Chinese mainland and its coastal islands, as well as Taiwan and its surrounding islands, the Penghu Islands and all other islands belonging to China which are separated from the mainland and its coastal islands by the high seas.

> 4) The principles provided in paragraphs 2) and 3) likewise apply to Taiwan and its surrounding Islands, the Penghu Islands, the Tungsha Islands, and Hsisha Islands, the Chungsha Islands, the Nansha Islands, and all other islands belonging to China.

[Source](http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/58832.pdf)

Philippines and Spratly: Philippine Vice-President Quirino wanted America to claim Spratly for them, America did not, respected treaty with Spain (note that Spratly was not included). In 1950, Quiriono said as long as Chiang Kai-shek maintained control, Philippines would not pursue claim, unless threat of Communist Occupation. Considered buying them from Chiang Kai-Shek.

>  As a colonial power, the USA had never had designs on the islands, but had respected the parameters established in its 1898 treaty with Spain. In July 1946, Philippine Vice-President Quirino, who had eagerly tried to convince the USA to occupy the Spratlys on behalf of the Philippines already in 1938, state data press conference that the Philippines would claim the island group west of Palawan as essential to its security. The French Consul in Manila reported that the Philippine press was so eagerly demanding an active Spratly policy that the government had decided to undertake a study. However, although the US Navy had itself displayed an active interest in the Spratlys, it did not seem to encourage the Philippines to assert itself in this is land group. [59] In August 1947, the French consul in Manila met Quirino, now foreign minister, and told him the island group he wanted west of Palawan was the same island group (the Spratlys) that France had declared to be under French sovereignty in 1933. The French Consul reported that he had never seen anyone so surprised as Quirino when learning this news. He apparently had thought that the French were claiming islands further west, and that his islands were positioned between the area claimed by France and the Philippines proper. The French consul thought that after this encounter, the affair would be put to rest and filed by the Philippine authorities. [61] Quirino, however, did not quite give up. In May 1950 he held another press conference, saying the Philippines would not push its claim as long as Chiang Kai-shek maintained control, but if there were a danger of Chinese communist occupation, the Philippines would assert its rights. [62] A French report said the Philippine government had rejected a proposal from the Ministry of War to occupy the Spratlys, but that Quirino was harbouring the idea of buying the Spratlys from Chiang Kai-shek for money. [63]

[Source](http://www.scribd.com/doc/56468/The-South-China-Sea-in-the-Age-of-European-Decline)

> The governments in Beijing and Taipei were both quick to protest the setup of the Philippine ‘Freedomland’, and both reiterated the Chinese claim to the Nansha (Spratlys). A series of high-level meetings were held between Taiwan and the Philippines to prevent any violent incident. Taiwan apparently rejected a proposal from the Philippines to send the dispute to US arbitration. Instead, in early June, Taiwan decided to send a naval force to Itu Aba and other Spratly islands, under the command of Commodore Yao.156

[Source](http://www.scribd.com/doc/56468/The-South-China-Sea-in-the-Age-of-European-Decline)

Philippines Territorial boundary based on treaties

http://i.imgur.com/vMv5gaD.png

[Source](https://books.google.ca/books?id=2KZEEuaS6RIC&pg=PA46#v=onepage&q&f=false)

"The Monarch Standard Atlas of the Commercial, Geographical, and Historical World" by J. Martin Miller. Chicago, 1906. http://i.imgur.com/Aav76A1.jpg

[Source](http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/historical/monarch_standard_atlas_1906/txu-pclmaps-oclc-14693961-philippine-islands-1899.jpg)

[Source](http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/historical/monarch_standard_atlas_1906/index.html)

> The Philippines gained independence in 1946, but when nationalists within the Philippine government wanted to claim the Spratlys, their American advisors discouraged them. The Spanish-American treaty of 1898 made it clear that the western limit of the Philippine islands did not include the Spratlys, and the United States was not keen to carry the cost of a Philippine irredentist adventure that might bring conflict with Chiang Kai-shek's regime in China.

[Source](https://books.google.com/books?id=CNVf9R_L5FAC&pg=PA11#v=onepage&q&f=false)

Scarborough Shoal left off 1908 US map of Philippines: scholar

> The disputed territory was also excluded in the Philippine territory taken after the 1898 Spanish-American Treaty of Paris, the 1900 Spanish-American Treaty of Washington, and the 1930 Anglo-American Treaty, Zhen said.

[Source](http://globalbalita.com/2013/05/30/scarborough-shoal-left-off-1908-us-map-of-philippines-scholar/)

[Source](http://www.wantchinatimes.com/news-subclass-cnt.aspx?id=20130530000027&cid=1101)

> Scarborough Shoal is outside the limits set by the Treaty of Paris for Philippine territory

[Source](http://opinion.inquirer.net/27369/scarborough-shoal)

Scarborough Shoal not Philippines’

> On April 19, the Philippine Department of Foreign Affairs published a paper titled Philippine position on Bajo de Masinloc and the waters within its vicinity.

> The paper is an official presentation of the legal arguments by which the Philippines seeks to prove its ownership of the Scarborough Shoal

> First, the paper states that the Philippines’ claim over the Scarborough Shoal is not based on the Treaty of Paris between Spain and the US, or on the Philippines’ exclusive economic zone (EEZ) as defined by the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). Nor is it based on the principle of proximity, but rather, on the international legal principles of effective exercise of jurisdiction and occupation.

[Source](http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/editorials/archives/2012/04/28/2003531445)

US Ambassador confirmation of above

> Ambassador Chas W. Freeman, Jr. (USFS, Ret.)

> China first asserted sovereignty in the modern sense to the South China Sea’s  islands when it formally objected to France’s efforts to incorporate them into French Indochina during the 1884 – 1885 Sino-French war.  Chinese maps since then have consistently shown China’s claims, first as a solid and then as a dotted line.

> In 1932, France nonetheless formally claimed both the Paracel and Spratly Islands.  China and Japan both protested.  In 1933, France seized the Paracels and Spratlys, announced their annexation, formally included them in French Indochina, and built a couple of weather stations on them, but did not disturb the numerous Chinese fishermen it found there. In 1938 Japan took the islands from France, garrisoned them, and built a submarine base at Itu Aba (now Taiping / 太平) Island. In 1941, the Japanese Empire made the Paracel and Spratly islands part of Taiwan, then under its rule.

> In 1945, in accordance with the Cairo and Potsdam Declarations and with American help, the armed forces of the Republic of China government at Nanjing accepted the surrender of the Japanese garrisons in Taiwan, including the Paracel and Spratly Islands.  Nanjing then declared both archipelagoes to be part of Guangdong Province.  In 1946 it established garrisons on both Woody (now Yongxing / 永兴) Island in the Paracels and Taiping Island in the Spratlys.  France protested.  The French tried but failed to dislodge Chinese nationalist troops from Yongxing Island (the only habitable island in the Paracels), but were able to establish a small camp on Pattle (now Shanhu / 珊瑚) Island in the southwestern part of the archipelago.

> In 1950, after the Chinese nationalists were driven from Hainan by the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), they withdrew their garrisons in both the Paracels and Spratlys to Taiwan.

> In 1956 North Vietnam formally accepted that the Paracel and Spratly islands were historically Chinese.  About the same time, the PLA reestablished a Chinese garrison on Yongxing Island in the Paracels, while the Republic of China (Taipei) put troops back on Taiping Island in the Spratlys.

> From 1946 to 1950, Chinese nationalist forces maintained a garrison on Taiping Island, the only habitable island in the Spratlys.  This military presence was reestablished by Taipei in 1956 in response to the activities of a Filipino lawyer and businessman, Tomás Cloma.

> Spain and the United States exercised sovereignty in the Philippines consecutively for four centuries (1543-1946) but never annexed the Spratlys.

[Source](http://chasfreeman.net/diplomacy-on-the-rocks-china-and-other-claimants-in-the-south-china-sea/)

[backup](https://archive.is/yKiB2)