South China Sea

2017 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 9-24 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hui Zhong ◽  
Michael White
Keyword(s):  
South China Sea ◽  
South China ◽  
Oil And Gas ◽  
Negative Impact ◽  
The Philippines ◽  
The South China Sea ◽  
The South ◽  
China Sea ◽  
Global Commerce ◽  
The Republic

The South China Sea is a maritime space where States have overlapping claims and unsettled maritime boundaries. While driven by territorial competition for ownership of some of the islands, the core contradictions are more related to freedom of navigation. This sea is one of the world’s most important shipping, trade and energy routes, a rich potential source of sub-sea oil and gas and a major fisheries area. The Republic of the Philippines v The People’s Republic of China Arbitral Tribunal Decision of 12 July 2016 1 (the arbitral ruling) under the United Nations Convention for the Law of the Sea 1982 heightened the tensions in the area but they had previously been long standing and it merely escalated the concern that the tensions would impede or even halt regional and global commerce. This article focuses on the importance of the South China Sea and argues that if the South China Sea issue is not handled properly, it would be damaging to the exporting and the importing countries in this region in particular and worldwide trade in general. There has already been a negative impact on economic cooperation and the long term development in Southeast Asia and further tensions could be highly damaging for all of the countries concerned.

On the History of Formation of Modern Taiwan Stance on the Rights to Maritime Features and Area in the South China Sea

2021 ◽  
pp. 38
Author(s):  
Andrei D. Dikarev
Keyword(s):  
South China Sea ◽  
South China ◽  
The Philippines ◽  
The South China Sea ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
The South ◽  
China Sea ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Republic ◽  
History Of Formation

The article highlights the history of formation of the official Taiwanese discourse on the problems of territorial affiliation and legal claims to the islands in the South China Sea. Two leading political parties of Taiwan (Guomindang and DPP) have substantial differences in their approach to the sovereignty on the features in SCS and “historical rights” to the sea. Details are given about reasons for emergence and disappearance of the concept of "historical waters" in the Taiwanese law, which allegedly should have been subject to the jurisdiction of the Republic of China. Taiwan's activities on the two features in the SCS aimed at demonstrating their "effective occupation" are highlighted. Official stance of different administrations and its changes are considered in detail. While sharing the same approach to the status of Taiping island, Guomindang and DPP disagree on affiliation of all other land features in the SCS. When considering the interpretation of the notorious "U-shaped line" by Taiwanese politicians, a conclusion is made about the actual proximity of the foreign policy stances of the PRC and the Guomindang, which are based on the idea of the common Chinese identity, revealed by significant part of the Taiwan inhabitants. As for the approach of DPP to the problem of SCS, the determining factor here is the Taiwanese identity of its supporters. This further complicates the situation: the DPP, on the one hand, proclaims sovereignty over all SCS facilities to demonstrate unity with PRC on the issue of China's territorial integrity, on the other hand — pragmatically recognizes the impossibility of actual exercising its nominal sovereignty over the disputed territories. Thus an obvious contradiction between theory and practice in the Taiwanese policy is revealed. The nuances of Taiwanese attitude to the award of the Hague Tribunal on the Philippines vs China case are elucidated. The reasons of the tribunal’s refusal to provide status of island to the biggest feature in Nansha group are determined.

scholarly journals “Rocks” or “ISLANDS” ?Sailing Towards Legal Clarity in the Turbulent South China Sea

AJIL Unbound ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 110 ◽  
pp. 279-284
Author(s):  
Nilufer Oral
Keyword(s):  
South China Sea ◽  
South China ◽  
The Philippines ◽  
The South China Sea ◽  
The South ◽  
China Sea ◽  
Arbitral Award ◽  
Recent Memory ◽  
The Republic

The Arbitral Award handed down by the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) on 12 July 2016 in In the Matter of the South China Sea Arbitration between the Republic of the Philippines and the People’s Republic of Chinais undoubtedly one of the most anticipated decisions in recent memory.

Philippines’s Duterte faces pressure over China ties

2018 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
South China Sea ◽  
South China ◽  
Oil And Gas ◽  
Code Of Conduct ◽  
The Philippines ◽  
The South China Sea ◽  
The South ◽  
Content Type ◽  
China Sea ◽  
Two Sides

Subject The Duterte administration's relationship with China. Significance President Xi Jinping’s first state visit to the Philippines late last month highlighted the risks and opportunities associated with President Rodrigo Duterte’s close embrace of China. The two sides signed several deals including one furthering talks over joint exploration for oil and gas in the South China Sea, in which both countries are claimants. Impacts The Philippines will be central to ASEAN-China negotiations over a Code of Conduct for the South China Sea. Recently appointed Foreign Secretary Teodoro Locsin will be less supportive of close China ties than his predecessor Alan Peter Cayetano. Debate over deals with China will likely feature prominently in the 2022 presidential election. China will explore joint energy development with Brunei in its exclusive economic zone.

The South China Sea Arbitration: Bindingness, Finality, and Compliance with UNCLOS Dispute Settlement Decisions

2017 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 36-50
Author(s):  
Hao Duy PHAN ◽  
Lan Ngoc NGUYEN
Keyword(s):  
South China Sea ◽  
South China ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
The Philippines ◽  
The South China Sea ◽  
The South ◽  
China Sea ◽  
Binding Force ◽  
State Compliance ◽  
Dispute Settlement Mechanisms

AbstractOn 12 July 2016, the Tribunal in theSouth China Seaarbitration issued its final award. China rejected the ruling as “null and void”. The Philippines dismissed it as “a piece of paper” after initially hailing the ruling a “milestone decision”. The reactions of the parties concerned raise important questions about the bindingness, finality, and state compliance with UNCLOS dispute settlement decisions. This paper addresses these questions by dissecting China’s arguments that the award “has no binding force” and by examining the options available for promoting compliance with the award. The paper also considers the broader question of how states generally comply with UNCLOS dispute settlement decisions and evaluates the significance of UNCLOS dispute settlement mechanisms, including theSouth China Seaarbitration, in the absence of external enforcement.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document