2016年07月18日

Following precedents by great powers

China’S resolve on its sovereign claim to most of the South China Sea appears to harden after an international tribunal ruled against this new superpower in Asia.

On Tuesday, the international arbitratry at the Hague backed the Philippines’ argument that there was no legal basis for Beijing’s maritime claims.

The tribunal dismissed China’s vast claims in the vital waters, known to have vast oil and gas deposits.

From the start, China has insisted that it will ignore the tribunal decision.

It has also warned that increasing pressure on the issue could turn the resource-rich waters into a “cradle of war”.

Three days following the tribunal’s ruling, China’s state media reported that China may build mobile nuclear power plants in the South China Sea.

“China will soon start assembling its first maritime nuclear power platform and is expected to build 20 floating nuclear power stations in the future, which will largely beef up the power and water supplies on the South China Sea islands,” reported Global Times on Friday, citing China National Nuclear Cooperation (CNNC).

The state-owned Global Times added that “marine nuclear power platforms will be used” in the islands and reefs of the Spratly chain in the internationally contested sea.

And two days before the tribunal announcement, China had enhanced its military presence under the directive of President Xi Jinping.

Meanwhile, Chinese Premier Li Keqiang told visiting Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe that Tokyo should stop “hyping up and interfering” in the South China Sea issue, according to the official Xinhua News Agency.

Japan is not a state directly involved in the South China Sea issue, and thus should “exercise caution in its own words and deeds, and stop hyping up and interfering” in the issue, said Li.

Commenting on the decision of the tribunal in Hong Kong on Friday, a judge of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) said the award on the South China Sea arbitration had the effect of “pouring fuel on the flame”.

Xue Hanqin, while addressing a colloquium in Hong Kong, said: “Anyone can easily tell that this award will certainly aggregate the dispute between China and the Philippines, aggregate the current military tension between China and the US and definitely aggregate tension in the region.”

Indeed, countries in this region are keeping a close watch on the situation – paying particular attention to the actions of the United States, Japan and China.

The ruling of the tribunal – the legality and decision which has been questioned by academics from the East and West, has indeed caused an unprecedented level of tension in this part of the world since the Second World War.

This is despite the repeated assurance by China that it still prefers to resolve the disputes in the South China Sea via consultation and peaceful talks among the parties laying claims to the islands – which include Brunei, Malaysia, Vietnam and Taiwan.

To many analysts, the United States and Japan cannot turn away from the responsibility of instilling instability as both have in recent years provoked disputes with Beijing and challenged China’s sovereign claims to the South China Sea waters.

Indeed, China’s stand on not recognising the tribunal’s decision has won resounding support from commentators who know the history of the region.

China’s sovereignty over the islands and reefs in the South China Sea has been established in the course of history.

Until the 1930s, the United States had never regarded the South China Sea as part of the territory of the Philippines, according to professor of Political Science Peter Li of the University of Houston.

Li sees the tribunal’s award as “null and void”.

China’s rejection of and non-participation in the arbitration proceedings are in compliance with UNCLOS, which, adopted in the early 1980s, was not designed to settle territorial disputes.

Hence, arbitration over matters concerning the delineation of maritime boundaries is beyond the scope of the convention, Li opined.

The impartiality of the tribunal, headed by a Japanese, has also been questioned as it was biased from the start three years ago, he added.

The professor blamed the award for “putting regional peace at risk” as it will encourage other parties to the dispute to seek a similar approach to buttress their claims to the South China Sea.

“A worse scenario is that countries from outside the region (the US) shall impose themselves on the region, thus making a peaceful resolution of the dispute even more remote.”

And according to The Diplomat, in ignoring the verdict on the South China Sea, Beijing is following precedents by great powers as no permanent member of the UN Security Council has ever complied with a ruling by the Tribunal on an issue involving the Law of the Sea.

Graham Allison, director of Harvard Kennedy School’s Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, noted in his writing: “In fact, none of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council have ever accepted any international court’s ruling when (in their view) it infringed their sovereignty or national security interests. Thus, when China rejects the tribunal’s decision in this case, it will be doing just what the other great powers have repeatedly done.”

The United States and Britain have criticised Beijing on this issue, but they had forgotten the precedents they have set.

In the 1980s when Nicaragua sued Washington for mining its harbours, the United States argued that the ICJ did not have the authority to hear Nicaragua’s case.

When the court ruled in favour of Nicaragua and ordered the United States to pay reparations, the United States refused, and vetoed six UN Security Council resolutions ordering it to comply with the court’s ruling, according to The Diplomat.

Just last year the tribunal ruled that Britain had violated the Law of the Sea by unilaterally establishing a Marine Protected Area in the Chagos Islands. The British government disregarded the ruling, and remains in the Marine Protected Area.

In its commentary on Friday, Xinhua said the South China Sea arbitration “is just a start key for the United States having ulterior motives to agitate the South China Sea situation to reinforce its hegemony”.

“The superpower has always been trying to turn the western Pacific Ocean into its own sphere of influence, dreaming to turn the South China Sea into the Caribbean where its warships patrol at will.”

To increase its dominance in the Asia-Pacific region in the face of China’s growing economy and increasing influence, the United States has since 2009 began a rebalancing strategy to the Asia Pacific to contain China’s rise, exerts Xinhua.

The South China Sea arbitration is another plot hatched by the US government, as Alberto Encomienda, former secretary-general of Maritime and Ocean Affairs Center of the Philippine Foreign Affairs Department, had said the United States has instigated his country to initiate the arbitration.

But to the credit of the Philippines, its government under a newly elected president is adopting a softer and conciliatory line towards China as it calls for more economic cooperation with Beijing.

This floats the prospects of cutting down conflict in future.

Amid all the tension, what is important is that China has issued a long white paper that essentially reiterates its aspiration to maintain peace and stability in the South China Sea, jointly with Asean member countries.


The Star, Published: Monday, 18 July 2016
China hardens after tribunal ruling
In ignoring the verdict on the South China Sea, Beijing is following precedents by great powers as no permanent member of the UN Security Council has ever complied with a ruling by the Arbitration Tribunal on an issue involving the Law of the Sea.
By Ho Wah Foon
http://www.thestar.com.my/news/nation/2016/07/18/china-hardens-after-tribunal-ruling-in-ignoring-the-verdict-on-the-south-china-sea-beijing-is-follow/

MALAYSIA and Asean are perhaps best placed to negotiate on the South China Sea issue between Asean countries and China.

The recent ruling by the Arbitral Tribunal under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) in The Hague on a case brought by the Philippines against China must be viewed in the larger context of regional and global relations, mutual trust, peace and development.

The disagreement over the right to territory and resources in these waters concerns other countries as well in the region – Vietnam, Malaysia, Indonesia and Brunei – that have competing claims with China over large areas of the sea.

Indeed, access to the South China Sea’s rich maritime resources, vast oil and gas reserves and, more broadly, the nearly US$5tril worth of shipborne trade through its waterways each year makes it a regional and global concern.

Undeniably, China and the United States, arguably the two strongest powers today from all standpoints, consider the South China Sea as being of critical strategic importance. Each doesn’t want the other to exert overarching influence or control over the South China Sea.

While China had refused to participate in the international court hearings and rejected outright its ruling, the Chinese government stated its willingness “to enter into provisional arrangements of a practical nature, including joint development in relevant maritime areas, in order to achieve win-win results and jointly maintain peace and stability in the South China Sea.”

Philippine Foreign Affairs Secretary Perfecto Yasay Jr welcomed the court’s ruling in his country’s favour but called “on those concerned to exercise restraint and sobriety.”

He further said: “Claimant countries might consider entering into arrangements such as joint exploration and utilisation of resources in disputed areas that do not prejudice the parties’ claims and delimitation of boundaries in accordance with the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).”

The ruling in The Hague is regarded as legally binding but there is no mechanism to enforce it.

Malaysia’s long and mutually close and beneficial relations with China in terms of trade and cultural ties, and China being a major dialogue partner of Asean, make it eminently suited for both Malaysia and Asean to seriously engage in reaching a practical and workable agreement with China on the South China Sea issues.

It will be detrimental to all sides if the South China Sea dispute is allowed to further fester, lead to provocative and antagonistic rhetoric and posturing from within the region and beyond and, worse, result in conflict.

Clearly, inaction is not an option and time is of the essence. What can be of mutual gain to progress and prosper together must be the guiding principle going forward.


Letter to The Star, Published: Monday, 18 July 2016
Seeking consensus on South China Sea
By RUEBEN DUDLEY, Petaling Jaya
http://www.thestar.com.my/opinion/letters/2016/07/18/seeking-consensus-on-south-china-sea/



posted by fom_club at 13:19| Comment(0) | TrackBack(0) | 日記 | このブログの読者になる | 更新情報をチェックする
この記事へのコメント
コメントを書く
お名前: [必須入力]

メールアドレス: [必須入力]

ホームページアドレス: [必須入力]

コメント: [必須入力]

認証コード: [必須入力]


※画像の中の文字を半角で入力してください。
※ブログオーナーが承認したコメントのみ表示されます。

この記事へのトラックバック