A political maelstrom in the South China Sea HAIKOU, CHINA – Beijing and Manila continue their increasingly shrill propaganda war over the South China Sea with each accusing the other of violating prior agreements and provoking tensions. What is going on and what are the possible outcomes of this dispute — and their implications? Over the past few years, the Philippines and China have engaged in a series of increasingly dangerous incidents stemming from their conflicting claims in the South China Sea. On Jan. 22, a potential watershed date in the politics of the South China Sea, the Philippines, with tacit U.S. support, filed a complaint against China with the Law of the Sea’s dispute settlement mechanism — the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea based in Hamburg, Germany. Despite China’s refusal to participate, the process is continuing and an arbitration panel has been appointed and convened. However, the arbitration is likely to be a long drawn-out process that may take years — and settle little or nothing. In an ideal world, the outcome of the arbitration would be based solely on the law and the facts. Both sides would accept it and continue their relations. But this is not an ideal world. Indeed the outcome of this case could have significant political implications for the Law of the Sea’s dispute settlement mechanism, for the Law of the Sea itself and for conduct and relations in the South China Sea and beyond. This is one of those “slippery” situations and — with sympathy for the arbiters — international politics will play a role — whether they like it or not. Indeed they are at the center of a political maelstrom. Already one of the initial arbiters — a very distinguished and experienced international figure as well as a law of the sea expert — withdrew because “his wife is a Filipina.” One of the reasons China refused to participate in the process is that when its leaders ratified the Convention in 1996 they assumed — obviously incorrectly — that the Law of the Sea dispute settlement mechanism could be avoided by direct negotiations to settle maritime jurisdictional disputes — where it could use its power to bend any settlement in its favor. Judging by China’s anger, this turn of events must have come as a surprise. japantimes.co.jp/opinion/2013/08/15/commentary/a-political-maelstrom-in-the-south-china-sea/#.Ug8SUNKOSSp
Posted on: Sat, 17 Aug 2013 06:09:55 +0000
Trending Topics
© 2015