copenlu/druid huggingface dataset:
Claim: Natuna Islands is a territory of People's Republic of China (Natuna Islands, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2021-12-02): Yesterday, Reuters published an interesting report on the recent months-long standoff between Indonesia and China over an oil rig planted in a maritime region claimed by both countries. According to the report, which cited four sources familiar with the matter, China told the Indonesian government to stop drilling for oil and natural gas near Indonesia’s Natuna islands on the grounds that the region was "Chinese territory." [...] Farhan also alleged that Chinese diplomats also sent a separate letter protested against the holding of the Garuda Shield military exercises with the United States in August, which took place amid the standoff around the Natuna islands. China and Indonesia have a recent history of friction around the Natunas, where Indonesia’s 200-nautical-mile Exclusive Economic Zone, a concept set out in the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), overlaps with the southernmost reaches of China’s expansive "nine-dash line" maritime claim.
Claim: Natuna Islands is a territory of People's Republic of China (Natuna Islands, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2021-09-23): The past week has brought news about the activity of Chinese ships around the Natuna Islands, in particular, the presence of the Chinese destroyer Kunming 172 inside Indonesia’s Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). According to local media reports Indonesian fishermen reported the presence of the Chinese vessel and other ships. This came after a Chinese survey ship escorted by China Coast Guard vessels was spotted last month sailing in the waters of the North Natuna Sea, as the Indonesian government refers to the waters around the Natuna islands. Given that the Chinese survey ship continues to lurk in the waters around the Natuna Islands, the Indonesian government must respond to the presence of Chinese ships in its 200-nautical-mile EEZ by making approaches through diplomatic channels and taking other constructive steps to protect the country’s national interests, including the security of Indonesian citizens who are carrying out economic activities in the Indonesian EEZ. [...] To deal with these two possible Chinese motives, the Indonesian government will certainly not open negotiations over the maritime boundaries around the Natuna Islands, recognizing that the "nine-dash line" claim has no legal basis and was declared invalid by an international arbitral tribunal in 2016. The country therefore needs to negotiate maritime boundaries and the protection and utilization of natural resources with neighboring countries that claim territories in the South China Sea, namely Malaysia, Brunei, the Philippines, and Vietnam. The results of these negotiations should then be immediately submitted to the United Nations in accordance with Article 75 of UNCLOS.
Claim: Natuna Islands is a territory of People's Republic of China (Natuna Islands, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2016-12-02): On 17 June 2016, a small Indonesian Navy corvette, the KRI Imam Bonjol, encountered at least seven Chinese fishing boats and two much larger Chinese Coast Guard vessels in Indonesia’s exclusive economic zone (EEZ) near the remote Natuna Islands.[1] The Natunas are the northernmost point of this part of the Indonesian archipelago, between Borneo and the Malaysian Peninsula, stretching into the far southern end of the South China Sea. Neighbours have long acknowledged the waters north of the Natunas as part of Indonesia’s EEZ, but the Chinese Foreign Ministry has since the 1990s implied — and in 2016 for the first time openly declared — that they are "traditional Chinese fishing grounds".[2] [...] Like many other territorial disputes in the South China Sea, the origin of the contemporary dispute between China and Indonesia can be found in the infamous 1947 map drawn by Nationalist Chinese diplomats featuring a dashed line encircling much of the South China Sea. The geography of the dashed line on Chinese maps varies; however, in every version, one of the dashes intersects the northern boundary of Indonesia’s declared EEZ north of the Natunas, around 1400 kilometres from the Chinese mainland.[6] The waters in the disputed area are an important fishery and the seabed below is home to large natural gas reserves.[7]
Claim: Natuna Islands is a territory of People's Republic of China (Natuna Islands, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2021-03-14): Beijing should tread carefully when it comes to the Natuna Islands, a region belonging to Indonesia that borders the disputed South China Sea, a global trade route rich in fishing stocks and energy reserves. [...] If China wanted to keep it that way, it needed to be cautious in the Natunas and understand the "points of sensitivity", said Mahbubani, now a distinguished Asia Research Institute fellow at the National University of Singapore. The fish-rich waters of the Natunas, which lie north of Kalimantan (as the Indonesian portion of Borneo island is known), are increasingly a source of tension in Indonesia’s relationship with China, which is otherwise largely positive.
Claim: Natuna Islands is a territory of People's Republic of China (Natuna Islands, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2024-10-03): Territorial disputes in the South China Sea involve conflicting island and maritime claims in the South China Sea made by Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, the People's Republic of China (PRC), Taiwan (Republic of China/ROC), and Vietnam. The disputes involve the islands, reefs, banks, and other features of the region, including the Spratly Islands, Paracel Islands, Scarborough Shoal, and various boundaries in the Gulf of Tonkin. The waters near the Indonesian Natuna Islands, which some regard as geographically part of the South China Sea, are disputed as well. [...] - Maritime boundary in waters north of the Natuna Islands between the PRC, Indonesia, Taiwan[citation needed] and Vietnam.[17]
Claim: Natuna Islands is a territory of People's Republic of China (Natuna Islands, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2017-02-08): Indonesia’s diplomacy is often regarded as not forceful enough, particularly about South China Sea disputes. When the Chinese survey vessel Haiyang Dizhi Shihao manoeuvred near an Indonesian oil rig inside the Indonesian Exclusive Economic Zone of the North Natuna Sea for almost a month in 2021, many analysts attributed Jakarta’s mute response to its economic relations with Beijing. [...] Indonesia made its priority completing the drilling project conducted by Premier Oil Company under Indonesia’s license, rather than resorting to "megaphone diplomacy" as had been done previously and the resulting tension would only favour China. Instead, Agusman writes, "success could demonstrate that Indonesia persisted [with] its legitimate rights to drill in the Natuna waters." [...] In Indonesia’s case, the goal was to see the oil exploration continue so as to assert its legal rights. Premier Oil successfully completed its exploration despite the intrusion from the Chinese survey vessel as well as coast guard ships. And this strategy might also go some way to explaining the decision to conduct the forthcoming ASEAN joint military drills in the North Natuna Sea, to strengthen Indonesia’s position against China’s claim of its nine-dash line without having a direct confrontation.
Claim: Natuna Islands is a territory of People's Republic of China (Natuna Islands, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2020-01-15): China’s latest use of grey zone fishing operations in the North Natuna Sea to challenge Indonesia’s sovereign right to fish and exploit the natural resources in its exclusive economic zone (EEZ) appeared to be a victory at first glance. At one point, about 50 Chinese fishing vessels accompanied by two oversized white hulls fished unimpeded in Indonesia’s EEZ. [...] Unlike the spate of bilateral incidents in 2016, where a warning shot from the Indonesian navy led to the injury of a Chinese sailor, having learned from experience the government prioritized peaceful diplomacy in handling the Natuna conflict. Responding vigorously yet proportionately was key to the resolution of this incident. [...] Through a combination of peaceful diplomacy and domestic engagement, Indonesia was able to manage the Natuna issue without significant domestic or international controversy. Its national interests in the North Natuna Sea were protected without jeopardizing its burgeoning economic relations with China, nor poisoning domestic opinion of Chinese investments.
Claim: Natuna Islands is a territory of People's Republic of China (Natuna Islands, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2020-06-26): Natuna: an idyll on the front line between Indonesia and China [...] More than a thousand kilometres north of Indonesia's sprawling capital Jakarta, Natuna Besar island is just a speck in the vast South China Sea. [...] A flotilla of as many as 63 Chinese fishing boats, four Chinese coast guard vessels and a Chinese maritime surveillance vessel sailed into the Natunas, causing a tense confrontation on the water and a furious exchange between Jakarta and Beijing.
Claim: Natuna Islands is a territory of People's Republic of China (Natuna Islands, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2024-10-04): Geography [edit]The Natuna Islands are a 272-island archipelago of Indonesia, located in the Natuna Sea[20][21] between Peninsular Malaysia to the west and Borneo to the east. They extend in a NNW direction for 300 km from Tanjung Api, the northwest extremity of Kalimantan/Borneo. The Natuna Sea itself is a section of the South China Sea. [...] The Natuna Islands is home to three species of non-human primates: the slow loris (Nycticebus coucang), the long-tailed macaque (Macaca fascicularis), and the Natuna leaf monkey (a.k.a. Natuna pale-thighed surili, Presbytis natunae).[24][25] A small number of wild goats live on the island as well as sea birds. Over 360 species of bird have been recorded on the island.[26] [...] - ^ "Natuna Islands: Indonesia says no 'overlapping' South China Sea claims with China". ABC News. 22 June 2016.
Claim: Natuna Islands is a territory of People's Republic of China (Natuna Islands, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2022-05-05): The Natuna islanders’ fishing grounds fall within Indonesia’s 200-nautical-mile exclusive economic zone (EEZ) — but also overlaps China’s nine-dash line claiming most of the South China Sea. [...] Besides defence installations, the islands are being developed for fisheries, oil and gas and tourism, said Natuna’s regent, Wan Siswandi. In 2018, the islands were added to the list of Indonesia’s national geoparks, which are protected landscapes of geological significance. "Natuna was already known internationally. But we don’t want people to know Natuna as an area of defence," he said.
Claim: Natuna Islands is a territory of People's Republic of China (Natuna Islands, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2017-07-09): The Natunas: Territorial Integrity in the Forefront of Indonesia–China Relations [...] In early 2016, three incidents took place in the Natuna Islands (Natunas) over the span of three months involving Indonesia and the People's Republic of China (hereafter, China). These took place on 19 March, 27 May and 17 June, when Chinese fishermen and their vessels encroached into Indonesian waters. [...] - Type - Chapter - Information - The NatunasTerritorial Integrity in the Forefront of Indonesia-China Relations, pp. 1 - 33Publisher: ISEAS–Yusof Ishak InstitutePrint publication year: 2017
Claim: Natuna Islands is a territory of People's Republic of China (Natuna Islands, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2016-01-20): The Natuna Islands are scattered across over 100,000 square miles of ocean—more than ten times the size of their total land area—and only 27 out of the 154 islands are inhabited, with a total population of around 76,000 people. [4] Despite the lack of infrastructure, the Natuna Islands are one of Indonesia’s richest regencies in offshore natural resources. Fisheries are estimated to yield a potential of 500,000 tons annually, but in reality the locals manage to haul in only a third of it through traditional methods. Chinese fishermen continually venture south into the fishing grounds around the islands, escorted by Chinese government fishery patrol vessels. A number of incidents have occurred between these vessels and Indonesian maritime authorities while the latter were trying to apprehend illegal Chinese fishermen, including one threatening encounter in which a Chinese government vessel trained its guns on an Indonesian patrol boat. [5]
Claim: Natuna Islands is a territory of People's Republic of China (Natuna Islands, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2014-10-19): There are fewer than 100,000 people on Natuna, most of them fisherman and farmers. [...] "Natuna is the furthermost island in Indonesia, and it's on our border in the South China Sea," said Bambang Hendratno, a senior military official in Natuna. [...] "Natuna Island is located up north in the South China Sea and the potential conflict zone where China's nine-dash line and Indonesia's exclusive economic zone off the coast of Natuna overlap," Iis Gindarsah, a defence researcher at the Centre of Strategic Studies in Jakarta tells me.
Claim: Natuna Islands is a territory of People's Republic of China (Natuna Islands, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2020-12-01): The PRC cannot lawfully assert a maritime claim â including any Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) claims derived from Scarborough Reef and the Spratly Islands â vis-a-vis the Philippines in areas that the Tribunal found to be in the Philippinesâ EEZ or on its continental shelf. Beijingâs harassment of Philippine fisheries and offshore energy development within those areas is unlawful, as are any unilateral PRC actions to exploit those resources. In line with the Tribunalâs legally binding decision, the PRC has no lawful territorial or maritime claim to Mischief Reef or Second Thomas Shoal, both of which fall fully under the Philippinesâ sovereign rights and jurisdiction, nor does Beijing have any territorial or maritime claims generated from these features. As Beijing has failed to put forth a lawful, coherent maritime claim in the South China Sea, the United States rejects any PRC claim to waters beyond a 12-nautical mile territorial sea derived from islands it claims in the Spratly Islands (without prejudice to other statesâ sovereignty claims over such islands). As such, the United States rejects any PRC maritime claim in the waters surrounding Vanguard Bank (off Vietnam), Luconia Shoals (off Malaysia), waters in Bruneiâs EEZ, and Natuna Besar (off Indonesia). Any PRC action to harass other statesâ fishing or hydrocarbon development in these waters â or to carry out such activities unilaterally â is unlawful.
Claim: Natuna Islands is a territory of People's Republic of China (Natuna Islands, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2017-11-09): Book contents - Frontmatter - Dedication - Contents - Preface - List of Maps and Graph - List of Acronyms - Introduction: Evaluating China’s Maritime Strategy in the South China Sea - 1 The Early History of the South China Sea Disputes - 2 China’s Maritime Territorial Disputes with Vietnam - 3 China’s Spratly-KIG Maritime Dispute with the Philippines - 4 China’s Continental Shelf Dispute with Malaysia - 5 China’s Energy Resources Dispute with Brunei - 6 China’s Natuna Island Fishing Dispute with Indonesia - 7 China’s Sovereignty Disputes with Taiwan - 8 The United States as the South China Sea Maritime Arbiter - Conclusions: China’s Contemporary and Future Maritime Strategy in the SCS - Appendix A Timeline - SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS - Selected Bibliography - Index [...] Published online by Cambridge University Press: 07 May 2022 - Frontmatter - Dedication - Contents - Preface - List of Maps and Graph - List of Acronyms - Introduction: Evaluating China’s Maritime Strategy in the South China Sea - 1 The Early History of the South China Sea Disputes - 2 China’s Maritime Territorial Disputes with Vietnam - 3 China’s Spratly-KIG Maritime Dispute with the Philippines - 4 China’s Continental Shelf Dispute with Malaysia - 5 China’s Energy Resources Dispute with Brunei - 6 China’s Natuna Island Fishing Dispute with Indonesia - 7 China’s Sovereignty Disputes with Taiwan - 8 The United States as the South China Sea Maritime Arbiter - Conclusions: China’s Contemporary and Future Maritime Strategy in the SCS - Appendix A Timeline - SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS - Selected Bibliography - Index
Claim: Natuna Islands is a territory of People's Republic of China (Natuna Islands, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2022-01-04): Assuming that PRC would control Taiwan, Vietnam, and the Philippines would have the largest areas of conflicting claims with the PRC in the SCS. Vietnam claims an ocean EEZ of 538,650 sq mi. The PRC claims 70 percent of Vietnam’s EEZ (~377,389 sq mi) with their Dash Line claim. The Philippines claims an ocean exclusive economic zone that covers 874,064 sq mi. The PRC claims about 50 percent of the Philippines’s EEZ (~437,000 sq mi). The small country of Brunei would lose 90 percent of their EEZ. Malaysia would lose about 40 percent of its EEZ. Finally, Indonesia would also lose some of its EEZ to China, northeast of Natuna Island. [...] If the PRC decides to take some or all of Vietnam’s or the Filipino islands in the SCS, how would they conduct the operation? The main PLA Navy and Air Forces needed can be forward deployed from Hainan Island military bases to the currently PRC occupied Spratly Islands, Paracel Islands, and possibly other locations, such as Scarborough Shoal, that will likely be militarized in the future.
Claim: Natuna Islands is a territory of People's Republic of China (Natuna Islands, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2024-06-04): So-called "gray zone" activities or tactics are recognizable and controversial elements of the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) strategy in maritime East Asia. Chinese leaders’ primary aims are to assert sovereignty over disputed island territories, effectively control strategic maritime and air space, and gradually erode U.S. power and alliance commitments in the region. [...] - Interference with legitimate commercial activity by coastal states (e.g., harassment of Indonesian oil and gas activities near Natuna, exclusion of Philippines fishing from Scarborough Shoal) [...] Leaders in Beijing have found this tactical package to work reasonably well against each of China’s maritime neighbors: Japan, North and South Korea, Taiwan the Philippines, Brunei, Malaysia, Indonesia, and Vietnam. Not one of these rival claimants has managed to settle its maritime boundaries with the PRC, which is unique among claimants in having no (0) settled maritime boundaries. Nor do any claimants have any meaningful bilateral negotiations underway with Beijing concerning disputed territorial sovereignty and maritime jurisdiction. In multilateral settings, only a protracted and dilute "Code of Conduct" process is in effect, which does not even aim to resolve but rather to palliate conflicts over some but not all of the disputed SCS islands.3
Claim: Natuna Islands is a territory of People's Republic of China (Natuna Islands, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2024-01-01): Introduction: Evaluating China’s Maritime Strategy in the South China Sea 1. The Early History of the South China Sea Disputes 2. China’s Maritime Territorial Disputes with Vietnam 3. China’s Spratly-KIG Maritime Dispute with the Philippines 4. China’s Continental Shelf Dispute with Malaysia 5. China’s Energy Resources Dispute with Brunei 6. China’s Natuna Island Fishing Dispute with Indonesia 7. China’s Sovereignty Disputes with Taiwan 8. The United States as the South China Sea Maritime Arbiter [...] Document 8: Declaration on China’s Territorial Sea, 4 September 1958 [...] Document 20: Anti-Secession Law adopted by NPC, 14 March 2005
Claim: Natuna Islands is a territory of People's Republic of China (Natuna Islands, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2016-07-26): China now is attempting to expand its control to the southernmost extent of its nine-dash-line claim in the South China Sea, in waters ever closer to Indonesian and Malaysian shores. This area of the South China Sea, spanning from Indonesia’s Natuna Islands to the South Luconia Shoals, has greater strategic importance than the Spratly or Paracel Island chains farther to the north. Whereas the Spratlys have for centuries been regarded as "dangerous ground" and commercial mariners have avoided them, the vital sea lines of communication (SLOCs) connecting the Pacific and Indian Oceans flow through this part of the southern South China Sea. Therefore, these areas are far more vital to international commerce and navigation than the dangerous grounds closer to China’s Spratly Islands outposts. [...] On April 10, 2012, two Chinese law-enforcement cutters on joint patrol in the South China Sea received orders to proceed immediately to Scarborough Shoal, a disputed cluster of rocks 140 nautical miles west of Subic Bay, the Philippines. Earlier that day, a Chinese fisherman aboard one of several boats moored in the lagoon had transmitted an alarming message to authorities in his home port in Hainan: "Philippine Navy ship number 15 heading this way."
Claim: Natuna Islands is a territory of People's Republic of China (Natuna Islands, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2020-10-22): Message from Ambassador Robert F. Godec on the 92nd Birthday of Her Majesty Queen Sirikit The Queen Mother [...] On April 1, Beijing declared a new maritime law enforcement campaign called "Blue Sea 2020." Its announced purpose was to "enhance marine environmental protection," but its real purpose was suggested a day later, when a PRC ship sank a Vietnamese fishing vessel. Beijing has bolstered its military bases in the contested Spratly Islands with new aircraft deployments and "research stations," dispatched an energy survey vessel and armed flotilla to intimidate Malaysian offshore oil and gas work, and provoked Indonesia by sending hundreds of fishing boats and escorts into waters off Indonesia’s Natuna Island. Beijing warned that anyone bucking its ridiculous claims to sovereignty over the South China Sea is "doomed to fail." [...] The PRC’s maritime claims in the South China Sea have no basis in international law. Some even lack any basis in reality, such as its absurd insistence that James Shoal is the southernmost tip of China. James Shoal, which is more than 1,000 miles from China, is fewer than 50 miles from Malaysia—and 70 feet underwater, so it isn’t territory at all. Beijing’s sovereignty claim appears to derive from an old British atlas and a translation error suggesting the underwater shoal was actually a sandbank above the waves. It isn’t – yet Beijing continues pushing maritime misinformation.
Claim: Natuna Islands is a territory of People's Republic of China (Natuna Islands, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2015-07-16): For the non-territorial claimants, the story is even more confusing. For example, Indonesia has an undisputed claim to the Natuna Islands in the southwest part of the South China Sea. These populous islands rate an EEZ, which easily projects into the area enclosed by the U-shaped line yet does not come within 200nm of any Spratly feature. If China intends to translate its claim to "maritime rights and interests" in this area into a legal claim sovereign rights and jurisdiction, Indonesia will further intensify its domestic campaign to build capacity to effectively administer and control its UNCLOS-defined zones. Growing friction between Chinese and Indonesian MLE vessels and fishermen in this area is the product of as-yet unaccountable Chinese exercises of maritime rights.[10]
Claim: Natuna Islands is a territory of People's Republic of China (Natuna Islands, 2024-10-09)
Evidence (2020-07-15): Webinar with Carolyn Kissane and Irina A. Faskianos April 12, 2023 -