Vietnam’s sovereignty over Paracel, Spratly as seen under international law

Vietnamese soldiers on the Truong Sa Archipelago.

On May 2, by deploying its oil rig within the exclusive economic zone of Vietnam, China blatantly violated the agreements with Vietnam and ASEAN in resolving disputes in the East Sea by peaceful means on the basis of international law.

In the current situation, each country's claim of sovereignty over the Paracels, the Spratlys and the East Sea must be based on convincing historical evidence and international law. They must take international law as the supreme standard to resolve the dispute over sovereignty.

Compliance with international law is also the civilized behavior and responsibilities that all nations, especially China, a member of the UN Security Council, must respect.

The series, "The sovereignty of Hoang Sa and Truong Sa as seen under international law", covers this content.

Vietnam - the first state that established sovereignty over Hoang Sa and Truong Sa

A claim for unclaimed territories must include two elements: intention and will as a sovereign state and exercising that intention and will in fact. Only when there are both factors will the acquisition of sovereignty be accepted under international law.

Accordingly, the findings together with the public assertion of sovereignty only generate a preliminary nominal. To complete this nominal, to make it full and sure, the actual possession, together with the clear intention of taking over the territory, are a must. Thus, there are two elements: one is the physical element or the discovery and then the element of intention or the public assertion of sovereignty, and after all, the enhancement of material elements.

In the material elements, it is necessary to distinguish the difference between the mere knowing of the territory and the actual possession.

A territory, especially an island or archipelago, can be known for a long time by sailors, fishermen or geographers because they want to expand the study to all areas, regardless of the sovereignty. Then, this territory is not the object of the "discovery" of legal effect. The discovery alone never provides grounds for a claim to unclaimed land. That's just mere knowledge of the territory.

The main content of the principles of true possession in international law include:

- The establishment of territorial sovereignty must be conducted by the State;

- The appropriation must be conducted peacefully on a derelict territory or on a territory abandoned by a country that has owned it before. The use of force to invade is an unlawful act;

- The occupying state must enforce its sovereignty with only the necessary and minimum steps appropriate to the natural conditions and population on that territory;

- The exercise of the sovereignty must be continuous and peaceful.

Based on this legal principle (as of 1884), compared with the process of setting and enforcing sovereignty over the Paracels and Spratlys dispute announced by the parties involved in the dispute, there will definitely be an objective and scientific review of the right of acquisition of territory for the two islands.

First of all, lets consider the evidence of China:

Facing historical and legal evidence provided by Vietnam to prove her sovereignty over both Hoang Sa and Truong Sa archipelagoes, several Chinese scholars and officials have quoted ancient documents in an attempt to prove their country’s discovery of the archipelagoes and the exercise of sovereignty there.

They have cited evidence in the geography books to prove its sovereignty over the Paracels and Spratlys. Research shows that it is true that these islands were recorded and described in these books but these books only noted the understanding of contemporary Chinese about geography, history, customs ... in the countries of Southeast Asia and South Asia and the maritime routes from China to foreign countries.

Therefore, these documents would be considered as documents proving general understanding of locations rather than in the legal sense to prove that the two archipelagos of Paracels and Spratlys belong to China.

The book “Nanzhou Yiwu Zhi” (220-265) is a maritime guidebook in the East Sea, but it is inaccurate, so that book cannot be the ground to verify the islands in dispute today.

The book “Stories about Funan” by Kang Tai which was also written during this period wrote about some atolls, and China confirmed that the book was written about the Spratly Islands. However, this excerpt is very vague and imprecise, so it cannot be the grounds for such assertions.

They also cited books such as “ Hou Han Shu ”(Book of Later Han) and “Yi Wu Zhi” (Records of strange things) from the Han era and “Zhu Fan Zhi ” (Notes on foreign countries) (the 13th century), “Hai Lu” (Oceanic records) by Yang Ping-nan (1820-1842), Nanzhou Yi wu zhi (Exotic things of the Southern region), Daoyi Zhilue (Overview of barbarous island countries), Guangdong Tongzhi (General Records of Guangdong province)  to prove that China discovered and exercised its sovereignty in Hoang Sa and Truong Sa archipelagoes from an early date.

But in fact, the excerpts extracted from China’s historical documents dating back before the 13th century and cited by Chinese scholars do not mention the name of any particular island, but only the Nanhai. In addition, in those quoted pieces, the two archipelagoes were described only as physical landmarks observed by navigators during their voyages crossing the East Sea. Only from the 13th century, the quoted pieces mentioned the name of some islands, but there were no such names as ‘Xi Sha’ and ‘Nan Sha’ (the names China gives to Hoang Sa and Truong Sa in Vietnam).

Some later historical sources described inspection, expeditionary and exploration trips China conducted in the region, including Hoang Sa and Truong Sa. In particular, China argued that under the Ming dynasty in the 15th century, explorer Zhenghe made seven journeys crossing the East Sea and after that he put the name of the two archipelagoes on the map.

However, those trips were not intended to claim land. They in fact were meant to explore the sea to get a deeper understanding of its being, seek trade partners and show off force to regional countries. China cannot name any historical book that testifies to its sovereignty over the two archipelagoes. Even in its historical documents in the 19th century, when Vietnam’s Nguyen Kings declared their ownership and exercise of sovereignty over Hoang Sa and Truong Sa, the two archipelagoes were only described as things seen accidently by Chinese ships on their journey passing the East Sea.

China’s ancient documents, such as Qiongzhou fu zhi (Geography of Qiongzhou), Guangdong sheng zhi (1731-Geography of Guangdong), Hoang Chao Yitong Yudi Zongtu (Chinese map of the unified empire) in 1894, all described and stated clearly that China’s southernmost point was Hainan. In the Zhongguo Sihixue Jiao Keshu (Chinese Textbook of Geography), published in 1906, page 241 reads “the southernmost point of China is the Jie Zhou coast, Qiongzhou Island, at 18 degrees 13 minutes north latitude”.

More than that, there are documents that implicitly acknowledge the link between these archipelagoes and Vietnam, or even recognise these archipelagoes as the defence line of Vietnam. For example, Yang Ping Nan’s book “Hai Lu” (1820-1842) wrote “the external route is connected with the inner route by Van Ly Truong Sa which lies in the middle of the sea. The archipelago stretches tens of thousands of “dam” in length. It serves as a shield to defend the outer part of Annam.”

China has many times cited the France-Qing agreement signed in 1887 to confirm that Hoang Sa and Truong Sa belonged to them. However, the agreement did not regulate the demarcation of islands off the coast of Vietnam and China, but mandated the boundary between Vietnam’s northern region and China.

Recently, China has quoted a number of speeches and documents of Vietnam, in particular Prime Minister Pham Van Dong’s diplomatic letter dated September 14, 1958 addressed to the then Premier of China Zhou En Lai, and argued that Vietnam had acknowledged China’s sovereignty over Hoang Sa archipelago.

In fact, the late Prime Minister Pham Van Dong’s diplomatic letter did not mention territorial and sovereignty issues relating to Hoang Sa and Truong Sa archipelagoes. It only acknowledged and approved China’s expansion of its territorial sea to 12 nautical miles and at the same time instructed Vietnamese agencies to respect the 12-nautical mile limit declared by China.

In addition, China knows only too well that the issue of defining borders and territory between the two nations could not be handled via a diplomatic letter. It must go through official negotiations by the two States and an agreement reached on the issue needs to be signed by representatives of the two States.

Haiyang Shiyou-981 – a pretext for bigger scheme

An ambitious plan

The Philippines published pictures showing China is reclaiming land in the Spratly archipelago (Photo: Philstar).

Sources report that China has moved earth and other materials to Johnson South Reef in the Spratly archipelago to build infrastructure for an artificial island, a military base and a seaport.

Observers said the move is one of Beijing’s efforts to expand its influence and realise its groundless sovereign claim [nine-dash line] in the East Sea.

China’s land reclamation is taking place in rocks and coral reefs of the Spratly archipelago, hotly contested by both Vietnam and the Philippines.

Since April 2014 the Philippines has accused China of reclaiming soil in the two reefs. In early June Filipino President Benigno Aquino III criticised China for building artificial islands in two other locations.

At the recent 13th Shangri-La meeting in Singapore, US Defence Secretary Chuck Hagel also condemned China’s land reclamation in the Spratly archipelago.

Analysts revealed that once China’s artificial islands are built, they will set up radar stations capable of overseeing the whole East Sea, and serve as a logistic base for its ships to operate farther in the region.

They warned that realising China’s groundless claim in the East Sea is just the first step in its long-term strategy to expand in to the Western Pacific.

Associate Professor Taylor Fravel, a political scientist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, said, "By creating the appearance of an island, China may be seeking to strengthen the merits of its claims."

In doing so, analysts feared that China would then legalise its exclusive 200 nautical mile zone around these islands in accordance with the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).

In fact, these islands do not meet the necessary conditions enshrined in the UNCLOS to establish the exclusive zone.

A blatant violation of DOC

The Philippines said China is likely to build a runway on the Johnson South Reef.

In a statement last month, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Hua Chunying affirmed that China has the right to build islands in the Spratly archipelago because they are Chinese territory, and that China has indisputable sovereignty over Nansha [Spratly] Islands.

Chinese officials insist that Vietnam and the Philippines have built more structures in the disputed region than China, giving China free reign to do the same.

Experts noted that other countries did not build artificial islands, but instead erected structures before 2002 when ASEAN and China signed the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the East Sea (DOC).

A DOC clause reads the parties must "exercise self-restraint in the conduct of activities" that would escalate tensions and must refrain from inhabiting any currently uninhabited land features.

China’s recent actions in the Spratly archipelago have violated DOC. Professor Carlyle A. Thayer from the University of New South Wales in Australia said that China is intentionally changing the status quo in the region. "It's not self-restraint. It's unilateral. It can only raise tensions," he said.

According to a Western official, China has been building three or four islands since January 2014, and at least one of these structures is intended for military use.

A bigger scheme

Vietnam Foreign Ministry spokesperson Le Hai Binh refuted China's slanderous allegations about sovereignty over the Spratly archipelago.

In early May 2014 China unilaterally positioned its floating drilling rig Haiyang Shiyou-981 deep inside Vietnam’s exclusive economic zone and continental shelf, sparking tensions in the region.

Yet, many experts and scholars argue that the building of artificial islands is more serious than the oil rig placement, because these islands will be permanent and serve as a pretext for China to carry out other projects.

Recently published pictures by the Philippines show that China plans not only to reclaim land on the Johnson South Reef but also to build an airstrip there. A Western official, who speaks on the condition of anonymity, confirmed that China is turning the Johnson South Reef into Johnson Island.

Filipino Foreign Affairs Department spokesperson Charles Rose said the pictures show Chinese aggressiveness in asserting its sovereign claims over the East Sea.

Vietnamese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Le Hai Binh stated that what China is doing on the Johnson South Reef and other islands of the Spratly archipelago is illegal and a violation of Vietnam’s sovereignty.

“Vietnam resolutely opposes China’s illegal actions, and asks China to strictly respect Vietnam’s sovereignty and DOC.

“Vietnam demands that China immediately stop its illegal expansion in the Spratly archipelago, as well as other unilateral actions to change the status quo of the archipelago and other areas in the East Sea.”

Binh also urged China to withdraw vessels and equipment from the area and not repeat similar actions in the future,e as they threaten peace and stability in the region.

China meandering

Vietnam has shown its goodwill towards settling the East Sea dispute by proposing negotiations, but China fails to respond.  Professor Jin Canrong of the Beijing-based Renmin University said China’s land reclamation in the Johnson South Reef is just a technical test to regional response, and its main objective is the Fiery Cross Reef, about 144km west of the Johnson South Reef.

Vietnam Foreign Ministry spokesperson Le Hai Binh (standing) refuted China's slanderous allegations about sovereignty over the Spratly archipelago

Wu Shicun, President of the China National Institute for South China Sea Studies, admitted that China is reclaiming soil on several islands of the Spratly archipelago. However, he insisted that the new installation is to strengthen aquatic management and humanitarian aid capacity, not for military purposes.

 He even said that Chinese structures there are poorer than those of the Philippines and Vietnam, and that Vietnam has even built a sport field over there.

Wu’s comments imply the June 7 volleyball exchange between the navies of the Philippines and Vietnam in the Spratly archipelago. The exchange is a normal occurrence between the two navies in ASEAN, but, it displeased China.

“Don't you think this little trick by Vietnam and the Philippines is at most a clumsy farce?” said Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Hua Chunying in response to foreign reporters in Beijing on June 9.

She affirmed China has indisputable sovereignty over the Spratly Islands and their adjacent waters, and asked the Philippines and Vietnam to refrain from any action that may complicate and aggravate the disputes.

China – a destabilising factor

However, the USNews commented that the so-called indisputable sovereignty is the most controversial given the fact that China put forward its nine-dash line claim that covers more than 80% of the East Sea’s area. This claim has so far received no international support, except for China itself.

Christopher K. Johnson, the chief China analyst at the Washington-based Centre for Strategic and International Studies, said China’s recent moves are partly to compensate for the fact that the Chinese military focused mainly on Taiwan for more than a decade, while Vietnam and the Philippines developed facilities on shoals and reefs they controlled.

He said Chinese military officials are probably keeping in mind future long-range naval power projections. “There’s no doubt that they would love to have some kind of a naval facility on one of these islands,” he said.

Chinese military leaders have talked in recent years about building up a navy capable of operating beyond what is commonly called the “the first island chain” - islands closer to mainland Asia that include the Spratly and Paracel archipelagos - to penetrate the “second island chain,” which includes Guam and other territories farther east.

Professor Thayer said he has seen no signs yet that China is building large military facilities or a runway on the new islands. But he said there is a clear conclusion to be drawn from China’s actions in both the East Sea and the East China Sea, where China contends with Japan over islands.

“None of this is an isolated incident,” he said. “It seems to be a new plan to assert Chinese sovereignty. This isn’t something that will go away. This is a constant thing that will raise tensions, and at the same time no one has a good response to it.”

Cambodian Government Will Reopen Freedom Park if 'People Obey Laws': Official

The Cambodian government will not reopen Freedom Park, which has been kept off limits to political gatherings most of this year, until protesters learn to “obey the law,” a spokesman for the Interior Minister said Friday, following talks with a U.N. human rights envoy pressing for democratic reforms.

“People have abused the park. If people obey the laws, we will reopen it,” spokesman Por Pheak told reporters in the capital Phnom Penh following talks between Interior Minister Sar Kheng and United Nations Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Cambodia Surya Subedi, who is on a 10-day fact-finding mission to assess the government’s progress in improving human rights and democratic and land reforms.

It was not immediately clear whether Subedi raised the closure of Freedom Park during his meeting with the minister lasting about two hours.

Subedi’s last mission to Cambodia in January came just after security forces violently dispersed supporters of the the opposition Cambodia National Rescue Party (CNRP) from Freedom Park on Jan. 4 and closed the site, which has been the focus of protests against Prime Minister Hun Sen's rule following disputed July 2013 elections.

A day earlier, security forces opened fire in a Jan. 3 crackdown on opposition-supported strikes by garment workers demanding a higher minimum wage, leaving five people dead and scores wounded.

Freedom Park remains closed despite an announcement by Hun Sen in February that a ban on public protests had been lifted.

Last month, security forces violently dispersed a group of opposition supporters who had gathered outside Freedom Park in defiance of the ban on rallies in the Cambodian capital.

Issues discussed in the meeting between Subedi and Sar Kheng included forced evictions and the repatriation of Cambodian workers from Thailand, Por Pheak said.

“Sar Kheng said the government has provided transportation and food to help them return home,” he said.

Asked about the forced evictions of Cambodians from land acquired by developers, “the minister said the government is resolving this problem according to the law,” he said.

Sar Kheng also told Subedi that Cambodian authorities would not tolerate the practice of torture in detention, Por Pheak said.

Need for electoral reform

During his mission that began June 15, Subedi will have met with senior members of Prime Minister Hun Sen’s administration, as well as with representatives of civil society organizations, the business community, the U.N. country team, and international donors, a statement from his office said.

Subedi is scheduled to hold a press conference at the end of his visit on June 24 at the U.N. Human Rights Office in Phnom Penh.

In a separate two-hour meeting on Friday with deputy CNRP president Kem Sokha, Subedi discussed Cambodia’s political deadlock following elections which the opposition said was fraught with irregularities.

Cambodia’s National Election Committee (NEC) had declared Hun Sen’s Cambodian People’s Party (CPP) the winner with 68 seats in parliament to the CNRP’s 55.

CNRP lawmakers are currently boycotting parliament after their call for reelections were dismissed by Hun Sen.

“We discussed the political deadlock and talked about the CNRP’s and the CPP’s different proposals to reform the NEC,” Kem  Sokha told RFA’s Khmer Service on Friday.

In recent talks to forge a political compromise, the CPP agreed to a CNRP proposal to make the NEC a constitutionally mandated body but refused the opposition party’s demand that the panel’s membership be endorsed by a two-thirds majority in parliament.

The CPP insisted that NEC members be approved by only an absolute majority, officials had said.

“Though Subedi said he hopes for land reform and for reforms in Cambodia’s judiciary and national assembly, I stressed that we must first reform the electoral process,” Kem Sokha said, adding that if the NEC is not reformed, the ruling party will continue to win elections.

Myanmar Frees Monks Detained in Monastery Raid on Bail

A court in Myanmar freed five monks on bail Friday pending their trial on charges of defaming Buddhism following a controversial raid on a monastery which has been linked to the dismissal of the country’s religious affairs minister.

Hundreds of supporters gathered outside the court in Yangon Friday in support of the five monks, who were charged with disobeying the State Sangha Maha Nayaka, or official Buddhist monastic committee, and defiling a place of worship with the intent to insult religion.

“These monks were charged under Article 295 and Religious Law 20/90,” Nay La, lawyer for one of the monks, British citizen Ottara, told RFA’s Myanmar Service after the hearing.

“They can be sentenced to six months in jail under 20/90 and [an additional] two years imprisonment under Article 295,” he said.

Nay La questioned the prosecutor’s decision to charge the five monks under Article 295, saying the higher-level authorities had not recommended such action.

“Our defense today focused on how the action [taken against the monks] is opposite from what the [Yangon regional] government ordered,” he said.

“Article 295 was not included in orders to charge these monks by either the State Sangha or the [regional] government.”

The five monks were freed on bail and Nay La said they would reconvene at the court for a follow up hearing on June 27.

The case of the five monks and the raid on the disputed Mahasantisukha monastery in Yangon’s Tamwe township has drawn the ire of Myanmar’s monastic community, which is revered by the public, with some monks threatening to hold large protests if the five were not released.

Twenty monks, including Ottara who was visiting from Britain, were held in the June 10 raid when officials from Myanmar’s Ministry of Religious Affairs, accompanied by around 300 riot police, took control of the monastery while its popular abbot, Pyinya Wuntha, was visiting Japan.

Fifteen of the monks were released a day after the raid, but Ottara and four others were stripped of their clerical status by senior monks and sent to Yangon’s notorious Insein prison on June 13, according to reports.

After their release Friday, the five monks took part in a ceremony at a monastery near Mahasantisukha to regain their status as clerics.

After the ceremony, Ottara called for a fair trial for himself and the four others ahead of next week’s hearing.

“Members of the State Sangha are religious MPs who represent 500,000 Sangha (Buddhist monks) in Myanmar,” he said.

“They must be fair in making decisions regarding all Sanghas. I call for a fair trial … as a representative of Myanmar’s 500,000 monks.”

Minister sacked

The hearing of the five monks came a day after an announcement in Myanmar’s state media that Minister of Religious Affairs Hsan Sint had been removed from office by President Thein Sein and local media reports that he was being investigated for corruption.

On Friday, spokesperson for the President’s Office Ye Htut said that action had been taken against him because he had “failed in his duties” as a minister, using the case of the monastery raid as an example.

Hsan Sint is being detained in Yamethin prison in the Mandalay region, he said.

“Hsan Sint was appointed to Minister of Religious Affairs with the responsibility to steward the four major religions of Myanmar according to law,” he told journalists at a parliamentary meeting in the capital Naypyidaw.

“He also had a responsibility to develop Buddhism as the major religion of Myanmar and to prevent divisiveness between the Sangha, the State Sangha and the people … He failed in carrying out all of these [responsibilities].”

He said that the monastery raid was “one of the reasons” for the action against the former minister.

“Since this monastery raid took place, the president called on him to solve the problem peacefully, not only as a religious minister, but as a follower of monks,” Ye Htut said.

“However, his efforts only led to a misunderstanding between the government and the Sangha, and he acted outside of what he was asked by the president. That’s why we detained him,” he said, without elaborating on what Hsan Sint’s role in the raid was.

Eleven news media reported Friday that Hsan Sint, who was appointed to head the Religious Affairs Ministry in January last year, had also been charged under Sec. 409/109 of the Misappropriations of State Funds Act.

It said an investigation had revealed that Hsan Sint used some 10.5 million kyat (U.S. $10,740) in funds earmarked for the ministry to construct a pagoda in his family’s name in Naypyidaw’s Lewe township in October last year and had only repaid 2.8 million kyat (U.S. $2,860) of the money.

Rakhine chief retires

Ye Htut also told reporters Friday that the government had accepted the retirement of Hla Maung Tin, the chief minister of western Myanmar’s troubled Rakhine state, where communal clashes since 2012 have left more than 250 mostly Muslim Rohingyas dead and tens of thousands displaced. 

“Hla Maung Tin did as much as he could as Rakhine chief minister during these three years, but he requested that the government allow him to retire, as his health would not let him continue his duties while the situation in Rakhine state has become worse and more challenging,” he said.

“[The government] accepted his request and allowed him to retire.”

Earlier this week, the United Nations’ Assistant Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs Kyung-wha Kang told reporters in New York that she witnessed "appalling conditions" and the worst human suffering she has ever seen in camps for displaced Rohingyas in Rakhine state.

She said many Rohingyas suffer from “wholly inadequate access to basic services including health, education, water and sanitation.”

Ukraine implements cease-fire in restive east

Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko declared the start Friday of his anticipated cease-fire in the fight against separatists in the country's pro-Russian east.He said military units will respond only if they're attacked, and warned militant fighters to abandon their weapons before the cease-fire expires on June 27.

"Those who will not lay down their weapons will be destroyed," Poroshenko said, according to a statement issued by the Interior Ministry.Despite Poroshenko's declaration, the Russian Foreign Ministry said one of its border units in Novoshahtinsk was shelled Friday, injuring one customs officer.

"It is a direct provocation, which aims to prevent the implementation of the Geneva Agreement and immediate de-escalation of Ukrainian domestic conflict," the ministry said.

Ukraine denied it fired artillery or mortar at the Russian unit.The Ukrainian Defense Ministry said in a statement that during the anti-terrorist operation, its forces approached Dolzhansky and militants, who recently occupied this border unit, responded with fire towards Ukrainian forces. A mortar mine exploded near the border line, according to the Ministry.Poroshenko had announced Wednesday plans for the cease-fire.He and Russian President Vladimir Putin spoke by phone Thursday, according to Poroshenko's office.

It was not immediately clear what impact the cease-fire was having.

Putin, according to the statement, backs an effort to de-escalate tensions in eastern regions and a process to forge a ceasefire and a peace plan.Still, NATO chief Anders Fogh Rasmussen said Thursday that the military alliance had seen a "new Russian military buildup" near the border with Ukraine.This, Rasmussen said, involved "at least a few thousand more Russian troops deployed to the Ukrainian border, and we see troop maneuvers in the neighborhood of Ukraine."The U.S. government also believes that additional Russian tanks have been deployed as potential reinforcements for separatists in Ukraine, a senior administration official said Friday.President: Free hostagesPoroshenko's cease-fire includes the closure of the Ukraine-Russia border and changes to the constitution to decentralize power.

It also offers amnesty to those who didn't commit serious crimes, the President said. An escape corridor will be offered for those who disarm to leave Ukraine."We expect that hostages and seized premises will be liberated. We expect that a large number of civilians will use the security guarantees for the citizens of Donbas," Poroshenko said, referring to Ukraine's eastern region.In his conversation with Putin, Poroshenko stressed the need for the release of Ukrainian hostages and to establish effective security controls on the border with Russia.Poroshenko also met Thursday with representatives of the "legitimate authorities" in Donetsk and Luhansk regions, his office said. They discussed ways to decentralize power and revive the region's economy.Calls to reduce tensions

Russia and Ukraine have been engaged in a tense standoff since March, when Russia annexed Crimea and massed troops along its border with Ukraine.Before the cease-fire took effect, the speaker of Ukraine's parliament told lawmakers on Friday that Ukrainian forces had completed an operation to close off the country's eastern border with Russia.Troops and separatist fights clashed in Artemovsk and Luhansk on Thursday night before the ceasefire went into effect, a government spokesman said.Ukraine's government in Kiev has accused Russia of allowing weapons and military equipment to cross the border illegally into the hands of pro-Russia separatists, who have led uprisings in Ukraine's eastern Donetsk and Luhansk regions.

The United States is calling on the Russian government to cease its activities in eastern Ukraine as Poroshenko implements his cease-fire plan, a senior administration official said Friday.

The official warned the Russian government of potential for more sanctions if these activities continue. The Treasury Department on Friday released new sanctions for seven Ukrainians who are separatist leaders.