10 ms·

Monroe doctrine implies the US navy has ownership too.

everybodyknows 5y ago
US navy does not "own" Argentine waters. Maybe US could help Argentina enforce its fishing rights, in return for a lease of port space. The sort of win-win arrangement that builds mutual good will.
- adolph 5y ago
  Would the benefit of potentially decreased fishing outweigh the cost to the current gov't of pissing off the CCP?
  - Jeff_Brown 5y ago
    Good question. How much leverage does China have over Argentina? It seems unlikely that Argentina exports much to China. It surely imports a lot but China doesn't seem to punish anyone by limiting its own exports.
    - huntertwo 5y ago
      https://tradingeconomics.com/argentina/exports-by-country https://tradingeconomics.com/argentina/exports-by-country China accounts for 11% of Argentina’s exports. I’d imagine a lot of it is soy and maybe lithium.
      - Jeff_Brown 5y ago
        Wow! And most of that is agriculture. And perhaps ironically, about 6% of Argentine exports to China are "Fish, crustaceans, molluscs, aquatics invertebrates". The World Bank says[2] that exports make up 14.25% of Argentine GDP. Assuming no substitution, if China cut off all Argentine exports, it would therefore reduce Argentine GDP by 1.56% -- a very big deal. There would of course be substitution, so that's a weak upper bound. And maybe an extremely weak one. According to this[3] (apparently Australian news outlet which I admit I've never heard of), China's trade sanctions against Australia following the latter's suggestion that the world look more into the origins of the coronavirus only reduced Australian exports to China by 2%. [1] https://tradingeconomics.com/argentina/exports/china https://tradingeconomics.com/argentina/exports/china [2] https://wits.worldbank.org/CountryProfile/en/ARG#:~:text=Argentina%20exports%20of%20goods%20and,percentage%20of%20GDP%20is%2016.42%25 https://wits.worldbank.org/CountryProfile/en/ARG#:~:text=Arg.... [3] https://www.news.com.au/finance/economy/australian-economy/chinas-unofficial-ban-on-australian-products-fails-to-inflict-significant-damage/news-story/1858bb05a6030bfcad0bcf2a3aacef62#:~:text=Mr%20Rajah%20told%20The%20Australian,to%20less%20than%20%241%20billion https://www.news.com.au/finance/economy/australian-economy/c....
        caf 5y ago
        news.com.au is the umbrella for Murdoch's Australian print media.
  - lostlogin 5y ago
    Being scared of the bully is how we got here. This behaviour is happing all over the pacific, and due to dependence on Chinese money, China gets away with it.
    - throwawayboise 5y ago
      China seems to get away with whatever they want lately. When are "we" going to stop tolerating their wanton disregard for global ecological and human rights standards?
      - bobthechef 5y ago
        Honestly, probably nothing. There is no will to do anything about increasing Chinese belligerence and I suspect a fair amount of perks offered by China to keep it that way. Look at the silence about the Uyghurs. Nobody cares about them. Why would they care about some fish? (Granted, people often care more about fish than human beings.)
        tasogare 5y ago
        > Look at the silence about the Uyghurs. Uyghurs is an internal affair and they brought Beijing pressure on themselves by making terrorism acts. Fishing in other nations' waters, bullying Taiwan, leaking virus are international acts that are serious enough for retaliation from the international community, if they wanted to do something about it.
        sumedh 5y ago
        > they brought Beijing pressure on themselves by making terrorism acts. like what?
        yourapostasy 5y ago
        > like what? List of incidents covered within this general Wikipedia article [1]. A factor I haven't seen discussed much in non-Chinese press is that the Xinjiang region was one of the last (if not the very last) to resist the CCP in the Chinese Civil War [2] [3], with some relatively non-trivial, remotely-originated clandestine support by both the (by then) Taiwan-based KMT and CIA until well after (around 1953) the generally-recognized end of the civil war (around 1949). I'd like to hear the perspective of native-born Chinese "CCP-ologist" and "CIA-ologist" HN readers on how this historical background might color the CCP's current handling of the region. IMHO, both the CCP and CIA have long memories, but I could be off base. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_China https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_China [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incorporation_of_Xinjiang_into_the_People%27s_Republic_of_China https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incorporation_of_Xinjiang_into... [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuomintang_Islamic_insurgency https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuomintang_Islamic_insurgency
  - ac29 5y ago
    The CCP is not going to publicly get behind illegal fishing operations. Perhaps they tolerate it behind closed doors, but taking a stance that violating another countries sovereign waters is OK would be politically insane.
    - niij 5y ago
      I wouldn't say so. Nearly every country that borders the South China Sea is having their sovereignty trampled on right now https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Territorial_disputes_in_the_South_China_Sea https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Territorial_disputes_in_the_...
      - notahacker 5y ago
        That's China claiming sovereignty over that particular sea though. China publicly taking the stance that all waters were international would be the opposite of that
rtkwe 5y ago
Ah yes the doctrine used to justify things like training and arming right wing death squads to put down popular uprisings because it might introduce communism into the Americas...

US navy does not "own" Argentine waters. Maybe US could help Argentina enforce its fishing rights, in return for a lease of port space. The sort of win-win arrangement that builds mutual good will.

adolph 5y ago
Would the benefit of potentially decreased fishing outweigh the cost to the current gov't of pissing off the CCP?
- Jeff_Brown 5y ago
  Good question. How much leverage does China have over Argentina? It seems unlikely that Argentina exports much to China. It surely imports a lot but China doesn't seem to punish anyone by limiting its own exports.
  - huntertwo 5y ago
    https://tradingeconomics.com/argentina/exports-by-country https://tradingeconomics.com/argentina/exports-by-country China accounts for 11% of Argentina’s exports. I’d imagine a lot of it is soy and maybe lithium.
    - Jeff_Brown 5y ago
      Wow! And most of that is agriculture. And perhaps ironically, about 6% of Argentine exports to China are "Fish, crustaceans, molluscs, aquatics invertebrates". The World Bank says[2] that exports make up 14.25% of Argentine GDP. Assuming no substitution, if China cut off all Argentine exports, it would therefore reduce Argentine GDP by 1.56% -- a very big deal. There would of course be substitution, so that's a weak upper bound. And maybe an extremely weak one. According to this[3] (apparently Australian news outlet which I admit I've never heard of), China's trade sanctions against Australia following the latter's suggestion that the world look more into the origins of the coronavirus only reduced Australian exports to China by 2%. [1] https://tradingeconomics.com/argentina/exports/china https://tradingeconomics.com/argentina/exports/china [2] https://wits.worldbank.org/CountryProfile/en/ARG#:~:text=Argentina%20exports%20of%20goods%20and,percentage%20of%20GDP%20is%2016.42%25 https://wits.worldbank.org/CountryProfile/en/ARG#:~:text=Arg.... [3] https://www.news.com.au/finance/economy/australian-economy/chinas-unofficial-ban-on-australian-products-fails-to-inflict-significant-damage/news-story/1858bb05a6030bfcad0bcf2a3aacef62#:~:text=Mr%20Rajah%20told%20The%20Australian,to%20less%20than%20%241%20billion https://www.news.com.au/finance/economy/australian-economy/c....
      - caf 5y ago
        news.com.au is the umbrella for Murdoch's Australian print media.
- lostlogin 5y ago
  Being scared of the bully is how we got here. This behaviour is happing all over the pacific, and due to dependence on Chinese money, China gets away with it.
  - throwawayboise 5y ago
    China seems to get away with whatever they want lately. When are "we" going to stop tolerating their wanton disregard for global ecological and human rights standards?
    - bobthechef 5y ago
      Honestly, probably nothing. There is no will to do anything about increasing Chinese belligerence and I suspect a fair amount of perks offered by China to keep it that way. Look at the silence about the Uyghurs. Nobody cares about them. Why would they care about some fish? (Granted, people often care more about fish than human beings.)
      - tasogare 5y ago
        > Look at the silence about the Uyghurs. Uyghurs is an internal affair and they brought Beijing pressure on themselves by making terrorism acts. Fishing in other nations' waters, bullying Taiwan, leaking virus are international acts that are serious enough for retaliation from the international community, if they wanted to do something about it.
        sumedh 5y ago
        > they brought Beijing pressure on themselves by making terrorism acts. like what?
        yourapostasy 5y ago
        > like what? List of incidents covered within this general Wikipedia article [1]. A factor I haven't seen discussed much in non-Chinese press is that the Xinjiang region was one of the last (if not the very last) to resist the CCP in the Chinese Civil War [2] [3], with some relatively non-trivial, remotely-originated clandestine support by both the (by then) Taiwan-based KMT and CIA until well after (around 1953) the generally-recognized end of the civil war (around 1949). I'd like to hear the perspective of native-born Chinese "CCP-ologist" and "CIA-ologist" HN readers on how this historical background might color the CCP's current handling of the region. IMHO, both the CCP and CIA have long memories, but I could be off base. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_China https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism_in_China [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incorporation_of_Xinjiang_into_the_People%27s_Republic_of_China https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incorporation_of_Xinjiang_into... [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuomintang_Islamic_insurgency https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuomintang_Islamic_insurgency
- ac29 5y ago
  The CCP is not going to publicly get behind illegal fishing operations. Perhaps they tolerate it behind closed doors, but taking a stance that violating another countries sovereign waters is OK would be politically insane.
  - niij 5y ago
    I wouldn't say so. Nearly every country that borders the South China Sea is having their sovereignty trampled on right now https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Territorial_disputes_in_the_South_China_Sea https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Territorial_disputes_in_the_...
    - notahacker 5y ago
      That's China claiming sovereignty over that particular sea though. China publicly taking the stance that all waters were international would be the opposite of that

rtkwe 5y ago

Ah yes the doctrine used to justify things like training and arming right wing death squads to put down popular uprisings because it might introduce communism into the Americas...