Posted: July 29th, 2023

South China Sea and the Maritime Law

South China Sea and the Maritime Law
The South China Sea has been a source of ongoing tensions between China and its Southeast Asian neighbors including the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei and Taiwan. This is primarily due to overlapping claims on the Spratly and Paracel Islands by these countries based on historical claims as well as their significance as a strategic trade route and potential oil and gas reserves (Baviera, 2021). China claims most of the South China Sea based on its nine-dash line map which overlaps with the exclusive economic zones of its neighbors as defined by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). This has led to disputes and tensions as countries seek to assert their maritime claims and rights.
The UNCLOS, which came into force in 1994, is the international treaty that defines the maritime zones of countries and governs maritime law. It defines territorial waters, contiguous zones, exclusive economic zones (EEZs) and continental shelf rights. The EEZ extends up to 200 nautical miles from a country’s coastline and gives it sovereign rights over natural resources and economic activities within this zone (UN, 2022). However, China’s nine-dash line map predates UNCLOS and encompasses over 80% of the South China Sea, conflicting with the EEZs of its neighbors as defined by UNCLOS. This has been a key source of the ongoing disputes.
In 2013, the Philippines initiated arbitration proceedings against China’s nine-dash line map and activities in the South China Sea under UNCLOS. In 2016, the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague ruled largely in favor of the Philippines, stating that China’s claims had no legal basis under UNCLOS. It ruled that China’s nine-dash line map was invalid and that it had violated the Philippines’ sovereign rights within its EEZ by interfering with Philippine fishing and petroleum exploration (BBC, 2016). However, China rejected the ruling, calling it “null and void” (Reuters, 2016). This highlighted the limitations of UNCLOS in resolving complex territorial disputes where countries reject its jurisdiction or authority as the final arbiter.
While UNCLOS provides a framework for maritime rights and resolving disputes, ongoing tensions in the South China Sea show that legal mechanisms alone may not resolve conflicts that involve overlapping historical claims and strategic interests. Countries continue to assert their claims through activities like island-building and military exercises within the disputed waters, risking escalation. Cooperative approaches will still be needed to manage tensions and address disputes over territorial sovereignty, resource rights and freedom of navigation (Buszynski, 2021). International support for UNCLOS and peaceful resolution of disputes based on international law also remains important to discourage unilateral actions that could undermine regional stability.
References:
Baviera, A. S. (2021). The South China Sea disputes: Philippine foreign policy challenges. Asian Politics & Policy, 13(3), 453–469. https://doi.org/10.1111/aspp.12584
BBC. (2016, July 12). South China Sea: Tribunal backs case against China brought by Philippines. BBC News. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-36773581
Buszynski, L. (2021). The South China Sea: Oil, Maritime Claims, and U.S.–China Strategic Rivalry. The Washington Quarterly, 44(2), 89–106. https://doi.org/10.1080/0163660X.2021.1951473
Reuters. (2016, July 12). China rejects South China Sea ruling by U.N. court. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-southchinasea-ruling-china-idUSKCN0ZV0EI
UN. (2022). United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. United Nations. https://www.un.org/Depts/los/convention_agreements/convention_overview_convention.htm