T
he South China Sea disputes are
complex and confusing. Here are the
key questions answered.1
Who claims what and how
valid are the claims?
China and Taiwan claim sovereignty over
all of the Spratly features (rocks some-
times called ‘islands’) based on history,
discovery, usage, administration and –
for some – effective control. Vietnam, the
Philippines and Malaysia also claim and
occupy some of them. All these claims
have serious weaknesses in modern inter-
national law, which requires continuous,
effective administration and control, and
acquiescence by other claimants. China’s
sovereignty claims are just as valid or
invalid as those of the other claimants.
China also claims unspecified rights
within a nine-dash-line ‘historic claim’
encompassing much of the South China
Sea (see map right). But an internationalarbitration panel set up under the aus-
pices of the UN Convention on the Law of
the Sea (UNCLOS) to hear a Philippines
complaint ruled in 2016 that any such
claim is ‘contrary to the Convention and
without lawful effect’. Moreover, it ruled
that none of the features in the Spratlys
are legal islands and thus are not entitled
to claims of 200-nautical-mile Exclusive
Economic Zones (EEZs) or continental
shelves. Regarding China’s claims to con-
struction on and occupation of several
rocks which were underwater at high
tide, the panel ruled that the latter are not
entitled to a territorial sea (the surround-
ing 12 nautical miles). China rejected the
entire arbitration process and its deci-
sion. All parties plus Brunei and Indo-
nesia claim EEZs from their mainland
and some of these claims overlap. All also
claim, or are entitled to claim, extended
continental shelves and these claims are
likely to overlap as well.WHO IS MILITARIZING
THE SOUTH CHINA SEA?
This area is a simmering
cauldron for conflict
between China and its
neighbours – and the US.
Mark J Valencia makes
sense of the situation.
32 NEW INTERNATIONALIST