The award of the South China Sea arbitration will be issued at 5 pm Beijing time Tuesday. The US and Japan have claimed that relevant countries, including China, should comply with the arbitration result. They stand in sharp confrontation with China, which has announced that the award would be "nothing but a piece of paper." Whether the arbitration will lead to a severe geopolitical crisis has come under the global spotlight.
The Western media is analyzing how China will respond to the award. Bloomberg posited three scenarios from Beijing, from benign to moderately aggressive or aggressive. It considers that China establishing an South China Sea Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) would be moderately aggressive and towing away the Philippine warship grounded at Ren'ai Reef and construction on Huangyan Island as aggressive.
We believe the Chinese government must have made a series of contingency plans to deal with subsequent actions. What actions China may take on Huangyan and Ren'ai, and whether China will announce a South China Sea ADIZ depends on the reactions of the Philippines to the arbitration result and the degree of US and Japanese provocations.
So far, none of the concerned parties want military confrontation. But all are ratcheting up military preparations. The South China Sea has been clouded by unprecedented tensions. It's uncertain where the situation will head to.
Chinese society pays close attention to the South China Sea situation. After the the post-arbitration wrestling begins, the most important thing for China is to show the outside world the solidarity of its society. For one thing, Chinese society has full confidence in the country's diplomatic and maritime strength; for another, no matter what price China has to pay for the wrangling, all the Chinese will squarely accept it.
The Chinese people and government share the same interests and responsibilities. We should not only safeguard territorial sovereignty, but also make the utmost efforts to maintain peace in China's periphery, prolonging China's strategic opportunities for China's rise.
The South China Sea is a big arena. China will devote its varied resources there. China in the past was weak. It could only express determinations through demonstrations or a few activists visiting its own islands in the South China Sea. But now it has multiple means at its disposal. It has become a formidable competitor that deserves respect. No power in the world could split a united China. As long as we stick together, provocateurs are doomed to fail.
China calls for dialogues to resolve disagreement - CCTV News - CCTV.com English
http://english.cctv.com/2016/07/12/VIDEjonBZ4jsADHvtfqTLiBu160712.shtml
http://t.cn/R5DT1ML
Western media have hyped up the South China Sea
issue for a long time, with reports full of prejudice and distortion.
They have purposely created rumors, smeared China and deliberately
overlooked voices of justice. More countries voice support for China's stance
Jun 29, 2016 ...South China Sea arbitration abuses international law, threatens world .... in
maintaining a relatively stable international order after World War II.
Notorious Philippines's Abu Sayyaf & Law abusing tribunal on South China Sea
... ZAMBOANGA CITY: The Abu Sayyaf has announced that it will be ..... 2 million
listings worldwide, with revenue of about $2.4 billion in t.
Jul 2, 2016 ... America's objective is to contain a rising power, which presents itself as a major
challenge to US global hegemony. Geo-strategically, the most .
Jun 6, 2016 ... Dialogue 06/05/2016 South China Sea & Sino-US ties - CCTV ... Arbitral tribunal
abusing its power .... US containing a rising Chinese power.
The United States should stay away from the South
China Sea issue and avoid repeating its history of military intervention
and political manipulation in the Caribbean in the past century.
Notorious Philippines's Abu Sayyaf & Law abusing tribunal on South China Sea
... ZAMBOANGA CITY: The Abu Sayyaf has announced that it will be ..... 2 million
listings worldwide, with revenue of about $2.4 billion in t.
Jul 2, 2016 ... America's objective is to contain a rising power, which presents itself as a major
challenge to US global hegemony. Geo-strategically, the most .
Jun 6, 2016 ... Dialogue 06/05/2016 South China Sea & Sino-US ties - CCTV ... Arbitral tribunal
abusing its power .... US containing a rising Chinese power.
Might the rush to arbitration be nothing more than a US provocation to provide an excuse for military engagement? asks Shannon Ezra
The most effective way to halt China's global rise is to exert control over its gateway to the sea, through which it conducts 80 percent of its trade, says the writer. File picture: Eugene Hoshiko. Credit: AP
Johannesburg - If the containment of China is one of the key strategic pillars of US foreign policy, the impending outcome of The Hague’s arbitration on the South China Sea dispute is of critical importance to the US.
Even though China disregards the arbitration process as illegitimate, the decision of the tribunal, which is due in the next 10 days, will ratchet up tensions in one of the world's most hotly contested bodies of water. It will set the stage for what could degenerate into a serious conflagration, as the US pulls out all the stops to encircle China, and China takes measures to assert its sovereignty.
America’s objective is to contain a rising power, which presents itself as a major challenge to US global hegemony. Geo-strategically, the most effective way to impede China’s rise is to exert control, through proxies, over China’s gateway to the sea, through which it conducts 80 percent of its trade and transports its energy supplies.
This strategic waterway has turned into a game of chess between China, which claims sovereignty over four main archipelagos, and some of its neighbours along the South China Sea, which have made a series of territorial claims and are backed by the US.
The US claims its interest in the South China Sea is to protect the freedom of navigation as US trade through this waterway is worth $1.2 trillion (R17.6 trillion) annually. To date, China has posed no threat to international navigation in the waters of the South China Sea and also seeks to protect its annual $5 trillion worth of trade.
Despite the tug of war, the situation was under control prior to 2009. When President Barack Obama took office in that year, he announced his keystone foreign policy undertaking as a “strategic pivot to Asia” or rebalancing strategy to the Asia-Pacific. The entire region intuitively recognised that the rebalance was, and is, about China.
A new determination emerged within the US administration to support the territorial claims in the South China Sea of China’s neighbours. It was in this way that the US was arguably the invisible hand behind the rising tension in the region since 2009.
From the Chinese perspective, it was the US that plotted behind the scenes the arbitration of its South China Sea dispute with the Philippines. There have been allegations that the US staffed a team of lawyers to lead the Philippines through the arbitration process, and encouraged them to launch their arbitration case when a Japanese national was president of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea. The Japanese national in question had been previously opposed to China’s positions in previous cases and became one of the five arbitrators in the case.
From the time that the Philippines took the unilateral initiative of taking the South China Sea arbitration to the tribunal in January 2013, China has refused to accept or participate in the arbitration. It maintains that territorial sovereignty issues are beyond the purview of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).
As for maritime delimitation, China made an exclusion declaration in 2006, thereby lawfully excluding itself from any compulsory dispute settlement procedure by a third party. Apart from China, more than 30 other countries, including the UK, France, and Russia have made the same exclusion declaration.
China also maintains that, together with the Philippines, they have reaffirmed settling the South China Sea dispute through bilateral negotiations. This is in keeping with the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea, signed between China and the Association of South-east Asian Nations, which explicitly states that the parties concerned should undertake to resolve their disputes through consultations and negotiations.
From the perspective of the Philippines, there have been a number of exchanges of views with China since 1995, which led to no resolution. But China argues that the two states have never engaged in any serious negotiations on the dispute. According to UNCLOS, China has the right to choose the means of dispute settlement, which means it cannot be forced to accept dispute settlement which is imposed on it, including a third-party settlement. But this has not stopped the arbitration from continuing without China’s participation.
What kind of consequences could the rush to arbitration, encouraged by the US, result in? Would China withdraw from UNCLOS and expand its Air Defence Identification Zone over all its territories in the South China Sea?
This was always a likely scenario, which begs the question of whether the US is keen to provoke a military confrontation as part of its containment strategy. Why else would it be deploying 60 percent of its naval fleet and 60 percent of its overseas air force to the South China Sea by 2030?
By Shannon Ebrahim who is the foreign editor for Independent Media http://www.iol.co.za/
The
nine-dashed line was first discovered and owned by China. It is a
maritime boundary line formed after China’s long-term jurisdiction and
development of the South China Sea islands.
China holds sovereignty and jurisdiction rights within the nine-dashed
line. Other countries’ ships have the right to freedom of navigation and
their aircraft enjoy rights to fly over the territory.
There had been no problem with the nine-dashed line before the 1970s,
but with Vietnam, the Philippines and other countries pushing further
territorial claims, more governments are beginning to deny legitimacy of
the nine-dashed line.
The United States and other countries have intervened in the South China
Sea issue; using the so-called freedom of navigation in the South China
Sea to deny the nine-dashed line to disregard China’s territorial
rights.
Beijing
would like to improve relations with Manila through joint efforts,
President Xi Jinping told the Philippines' new president, who was sworn
in on Thursday.
Immediately prior to Rodrigo Duterte's inauguration as the new
Philippine leader, The Hague-based Permanent Court of Arbitration
announced it would deliver a ruling on July 12 in the Philippines' case
against China over their South China Sea dispute.
A seminar on the South China Sea Arbitration and International Rule of Law was held on Sunday in the Hague, the location of the Permanent Court of Arbitration's arbitral tribunal. At the seminar hosted by both Chinese and Dutch academic institutions, experts from various countries warned that the unilateral filing of the South China Sea arbitration case by the Aquino administration of the Philippines and the arbitral tribunal’s overreach and abuse of power is a desecration of the spirit of the rule of law and pose a threat to current international order.
A legal expert at the University of Oxford has published a
paper on resolving disputes in the South China Sea. It relates to the
arbitration unilaterally initiated by the Philippines against China.
With this move, the Philippines is just adorning itself with borrowed plumes. First of all, estoppel is a basic principle of international law. As is known to all, China and ASEAN countries, including the Philippines, signed the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea (DOC) in 2002, in which all sides agreed to settle disputes over the South China Sea through friendly negotiation and consultation by parties directly concerned.
A group of experts on international law have called the
arbitration that was unilaterally filed by the Philippines against China
over the South China Sea "questionable".
In 2011, the Philippines and China issued a joint statement, reiterating their respect and observation of the DOC. However, just two years later, the Aquino administration unilaterally submitted the South China Sea case for arbitration in spite of its previous commitments.
Secondly, the Philippines ignores basic historical facts by presumptuously claiming that the Chinese people never lived or conducted activities in the South China Sea region, thus bearing no sovereignty over the islands in the region.
Cambodia's ruling party has spoken out against the arbitration court's upcoming decision over the South China Sea issue.
Yet no one can deny the historical fact that those islands have been part of China’s territory since ancient times. Successive Chinese governments have continued to govern the islands through multiple approaches including setting administrative divisions, military patrols and conducting salvages at sea.
Respecting historical fact is an important principle of international law. Through its lack of respect for the facts, the South China Sea case violates this principle.
Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei has condemned
Japan's remarks over the South China Sea arbitration unilaterally
launched by the Philippines. He urged for Japan to stop making such
irresponsible remarks.
Moreover, the Philippines’ interpretation of the legal status of the islands and reefs in the South China Sea is not in line with the United Nations Convention on the Law of Sea (UNCLOS) and other international laws.
The requests raised by the Philippines in the arbitration
case are, in essence, about territorial sovereignty and maritime
demarcation.
The Southeast Asian nation claims that the Huangyan Island and the Nansha islands cannot be considered islands as such no one can establish exclusive economic zones or claim the continental shelves there. Such an argument flies in the face of objective reality.
SouthChinaSea FAQ ep13: China's solution for resolving the disputes. As tensions in the SouthChinaSea region continue, China
continues to insist on a dual-track approach to resolve disputes. This
is governed by the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the SouthChinaSea made in 2002 between China...
The Philippines deliberately misrepresented factual information about the islands and reefs in the South China Sea during the trial and carelessly negated the integrity of the Nansha islands as well as the island status of Taiping Island and other large islands in area. However, its claims are not only inconsistent with reality, but also incompatible with UNCLOS and other international laws.
The legal representatives of the Philippines also withheld necessary information concerning other islands in the South China Sea (not included in its arbitration request) on purpose, and refused to present them to the court. It is safe to say that the Philippines’ argument concerning the South China Sea islands and reefs lacks basic credibility.
Taking this into consideration, the arbitral tribunal has clearly violated UNCLOS, abused the UNCLOS settlement procedure and exceeded its jurisdiction by accepting the unilateral request of the Philippines and even trying to deliver a verdict on the South China Sea issue. Its self-proclaimed “jurisprudence” and “normative power” demonstrate great irony.
The core of the South China Sea issue between China and the Philippines are territorial and maritime delimitation disputes. Territorial issues do not fall within the scope of UNCLOS authority. Additionally, as early as 2006, China has excluded compulsory settlement procedures from maritime delimitation disputes in accordance with Article 298 of UNCLOS.
As a temporary institution founded on UNCLOS, the tribunal has zero jurisdiction over this case. Arbitration and other international judicial methods to resolve disputes means resorting to third-party settlement. However, this option has already been excluded by internationally binding bilateral agreements between China and the Philippines.
The tribunal chose to ignore these binding documents and breached the premises, exclusions and exceptions for compulsory settlement procedure stipulated in UNCLOS to establish jurisdiction on its own.
The tribunal’s blatant disregard for the agreement China and the Philippines made concerning settling disputes has irresponsibly broken the consensus reached between the two states and has seriously violated China’s right as a sovereign state and UNCLOS signatory to choose its own dispute settlement method.
What’s more, by repeatedly referencing UNCLOS and extending the convention’s coverage to all maritime issues, the tribunal has in fact turned a blind eye to conventional international law.
Any practitioner of international law is aware that articles in UNCLOS are a summary of the historical maritime practices and common will of all countries. UNCLOS shows nothing but respect to conventional international law. However, the tribunal today has discredited all previous practices, contradicting the basic purpose and spirit of UNCLOS.
International law has played a significant role in maintaining a relatively stable international order after World War II. In the decades after the war, hundreds of international treaties were drafted to regulate the conduct of states and people’s lives.
From the planet where we live to outer space, from security to arms control, from economic development to environmental protection, from human rights to judicial cooperation and other areas, these international laws are ubiquitous. The diplomatic actions of every county call for international law. In other words, it is a commonly recognized standard for the international community. The world would fall into chaos without it, and the law of the jungle would once again dominate.
Therefore, the abuse of international law by the Philippines and the tribunal has undermined the authority of the law, which will in turn greatly impact the stability of international order.
It is worth mentioning that the US, a country outside the region, has been eager to play a hand in the issue. Those who are familiar with the “America-style” of dealing with international affairs know that “safeguarding the integrity of international law” is a catchphrase for the country when it comes to international dealings.
However, as a country that attaches such importance to the protection of international law, why has the US supported the illegal acts of the Philippines and the tribunal? The answer is simple: The US only protects those international laws that benefit itself. In the eyes of the US, any illegal act can be considered “an act that protects international law” so long as it benefits its own strategic interests.
A scholar at the seminar pointed out that what the Philippines has done to China today could happen to other countries in the future. If the tribunal comes to a conclusion that does not conform to the facts and the law, then the same twisted logic could be misapplied to other countries with territorial disputes.
Such apprehension is not without merit. If the irresponsible actions of the Philippines, the US and the arbitral tribunal are not faced head on, they will severely affect the authority of international law. From this perspective, China's fight against the abuse of international law is not only the country safeguarding its territorial sovereignty, but also a contribution to lasting peace and stability in the world. - People daily
The Permanent Court of Arbitration in the Hague has said it
will deliver a verdict on July 12th, on the South China Sea case
unilaterally initiated by the Philippines. China has refused to
participate in the proceedings, and declared that it won't recognize the
verdict. Related posts:
Jun 9, 2016 ...China urges Philippines to quit arbitration; Pushes back against US ...
SINGAPORE: China rebuffed US pressure to curb its activity in the South ...
Jun 6, 2016 ...Analysts pooh-pooh US Defence Secretary's 'self-isolation' as an ... China "self-
isolation" claims at best "exaggerated," said Huang Jing, ...
RECENTLY, the South China Sea disputes had been hyped up as a hotspot issue in regional security and discussed in almost every regional and international forum, resulting from the high-profile interference of and the manipulation by some powers outside the region.
In fact, this issue should be solved through negotiation and consultation by parties directly concerned.
Furthermore, freedom of navigation in the South China Sea, which has never been affected, has been misinterpreted by some country as “freedom exclusive to its own military vessels and planes” and flexing its muscles.
The illegal arbitration unilaterally initiated by the Philippines has been labelled as a “benchmark of law-ruling” by the West, suggesting that judicial settlement is the only way to solve disputes in the South China Sea.
Meanwhile, the approach of non-conflicting and friendly consultation has been overshadowed by the noise and chaos.
One day, a friend of mine asked me, is Malaysia a claimant in the South China Sea? If yes, why is the Malaysia-China and Philippines-China relations poles apart? This is indeed a good question.
There is no essential difference between the two pairs of ties.
As China’s close neighbours, Malaysia and the Philippines have enjoyed traditional friendship with China.
Both were the first countries to establish diplomatic relations with China among Asean states. However, while the Malaysia-China relationship is “at the best time of history” and on the path to a new era of “Diamond 40 Years”, the Philippines-China relationship is experiencing severe difficulties.
The reason behind such a striking contrast lies in the different ways the two claimants chose to deal with the disputes with China.
While Malaysia has consistently been committed to maintaining friendly relationship, properly handling disputes, strengthening cooperation and enhancing comprehensive strategic partnership with China, the Philippine president Benigno Aquino III, on the contrary, misjudged the international situation, acted as a pawn of an outsider’s geopolitical strategy, and chose to confront China.
China and Malaysia Set a Model of Amicable Consultations
China and Malaysia enjoy a time-honoured friendship. There are lots of historical records in China about the Malay peninsula since the Tang and Song Dynasties.
In the 15th century, the Ming Dynasty established close relations with the Sultanate of Malacca. Over 600 years ago, Admiral Zheng He stationed at Malacca five times during seven voyages.
He promoted friendship, developed trade and maintained justice in the area. From Admiral Zheng, people have learned the essence of Chinese culture where peace and good neighbourliness always come first.
They do believe that China has no gene of expansion, plunder or aggression. Instead, China can be a trustworthy friend and reliable partner of Malaysia.
Then Prime Minister Tun Razak first adjusted the policy on China 42 years ago with strategic insight among Asean leaders in the context of the Cold War.
He went to China for “an ice-breaking trip” and signed the Communiqué of the Establishment of Diplomatic Relations with Premier Zhou Enlai which opened a new chapter in bilateral relations. Since then, China and Malaysia have helped each other and overcome many difficulties hand in hand.
The relations between the two countries have taken a lead in China’s relations with Asean countries and set a model of friendship in the region.
After four decades, bilateral relations between China and Malaysia are full of vitality and stimulus with deeper mutual trust, frequent high-level visits, constant party-to-party and local exchanges and fruitful cooperation.
China has become Malaysia’s largest trading partner for seven years and Malaysia is China’s largest trading partner in Asean for eight years, and sixth largest in the world.
The bilateral trade volume has reached US$100bil (RM407.5bil). There are also many iconic cooperation projects.
The high-tech cooperation has reached the skies and seas. Malaysia has long been a popular destination for Chinese tourists.
Consulates-general in Kota Kinabalu and Penang and Nanning have been set up. The Malay Studies Centre was established in the Beijing Foreign Studies University and the Confucius Institutes were set up in Universiti Malaya and Segi University.
Xiamen University Malaysia Campus welcomed its first batch of students this year. Pandas Xing Xing and Liang Liang settled in Zoo Negara and gave birth to a baby panda named “Nuan Nuan”, reflecting our heartwarming bond.
Bilateral cooperation in finance, technology, defence and other fields is also striding forward. The seed sowed by the leaders has grown into a flourishing tree, blossomed and yielded fruits.
It is normal for neighbours to have differences and problems. Malaysia is one of the claimants in the South China Sea.
However, this has never hindered the development of our relations. The key is that the leaders of both countries weigh the situation in the perspective of history and experiences, recognise the trend of the world and always place cooperation and mutual development as a priority.
The leaders have frequently exchanged views on the issue of the South China Sea and reached a series of important consensus.
Both sides agree to deal with disputes through friendly consultations and dialogues, avoiding the issue of sabotaging the bilateral relations.
Furthermore, both China and Malaysia object to intervention by forces outside the region. When the Philippines was unilaterally pursuing the South China Sea arbitration case in May 2014, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib revisited China to celebrate the 40th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations.
During the visit, the Joint Communiqué signed by the leaders reaffirmed a series of important consensus.
Both sides emphasised that “all sovereign states directly concerned shall exercise self-restraint and settle their differences by peaceful means, through friendly consultations and negotiations, and in accordance with universally recognised principles of international law, including the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea 1982.”
Both sides recognised that “intervention or involvement of parties not directly concerned could be counter-productive and further complicate the aforementioned differences.”
It is based on such consensus that the two sides have properly managed their differences, pushed forward their relations, benefited the two peoples and set a good example for regional countries in dealing with disputes.
Unilateral Arbitration is a Wrong Option
The Philippines’ conduct was contrary to Malaysia’s friendly and proper handling of the disputes with China.
In recent years, President Aquino abandoned the commitment of the former government, relied on a superpower to hype up the disputes in the South China Sea, and insisted on confronting China.
He became world “famous” as the arbitration case is a farce. When his term ends, apart from the severe consequences of undermining the China-Philippines traditional friendship, his political legacy will only be piles of bills from the tribunal.
China and the Philippines have a long history of friendly exchanges. The two countries established diplomatic relations in 1975, only one year after China and Malaysia.
Until 2012 when the Philippines deliberately stirred up the Huangyandao Incident and went on a path of confrontation, relations between the two countries had developed soundly and stably with fruitful cooperation in various fields which brought tangible benefits to their two peoples.
For instance, it was China and the Philippines that first launched joint maritime seismic undertaking which became a precious endeavour in the South China Sea.
The two sides launched friendly negotiations and achieved positive outcome in establishing dialogue mechanism, carrying out pragmatic cooperation and promoting joint development.
During President Arroyo’s visit to China in 2007, both sides praised the relations between two countries as a “golden era”.
It is deeply regrettable that on the occasion of the 40th anniversary of the establishment of China-Philippines relations in 2015, the bilateral ties were upset by the arbitration case, instead of entering a “diamond era” from the “golden era” as China and Malaysia has.
Compared with the breadth, depth and warmth of the friendly interaction between China and Malaysia, shouldn’t the Philippines introspect itself?
As a Chinese old saying goes, “close neighbors are more important than remote relatives.” Forces outside the region may come and go whenever they want, but China and Philippines are neighbours that cannot move away from each other.
As a country committed to regional peace and stability as well as promoting economic development, China sincerely welcomes all the regional countries to take a ride together for deeper mutual benefit and win-win cooperation.
The Philippines’ inflexibility on the arbitration case will only sacrifice its own opportunities and interest.
Amicable Consultation is the Only Way Out
People in littoral states along the South China Sea have lived for a long time in peace and harmony, ready to help each other when in need. Although in the 1960s and 1970s, some changes took place and new problems emerged, China and Asean states have consistently engaged in dialogues and communication and maintained overall peace and stability at sea without interference from powers outside the region.
The Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea (DOC) signed by China and Asean in 2002 has played an indispensable role.
Even if the South China Sea issue heats up, China will still stick to settling disputes through negotiation and consultation in a peaceful way. China has also proposed the “Dual Track Approach”, that is, the relevant disputes should be solved by the sovereign states directly concerned through consultation and negotiation, and that peace and stability in the South China Sea should be maintained through joint efforts of China and Asean member states.
The approach is in full accordance with international laws and practices, and has been supported by most of the Asean countries including Malaysia and Brunei which are also claimants in the South China Sea.
History will prove again that friendly consultation is the right way to settle the disputes in the South China Sea.
China is strongly opposed to the unilateral action by the Philippines and China’s position of non-acceptance and non-participation in the arbitration case will not change.
The new Philippine Government should discard illusions and return to the right track. As a matter of fact, Malaysia and Brunei have already set good examples.
Just as Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi stated, the arbitration case is a knot that has impeded the improvement and development of China-Philippines relations.
As to how to untie the knot, it depends on the Philippines. China wishes that the new Philippine Government will make a wise choice in consideration to improving the relations and enhancing mutually beneficial cooperation between the Philippines and China.
The Philippines should cease its arbitral proceedings, refuse to be a pawn anymore and return to bilateral negotiation with China.
China is standing ready to commit itself to full and effective implementation of the DOC and making continuous efforts with all relevant parties to maintain peace and stability in the region.
Dr. Huang Huikang
The writer is the Ambassador of the People’s Republic of China to Malaysia. The views expressed here are the writer’s own.
<<< Foreign Ministry spokesperson Hong Lei (Source: fmprc.gov.cn)
BEIJING, June 8 (Xinhua) -- China on Wednesday again urged the Philippines to stop its arbitral proceedings and return to the right track of settling relevant disputes in the South China Sea through bilateral negotiation with China.
Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei made the comment at a routine press briefing.
The Foreign Ministry on Wednesday issued a statement saying that disputes between China and the Philippines in the South China Sea should be settled through bilateral negotiation.
Hong said that by unilaterally initiating the arbitration in 2013, the Philippines had turned its back on the possibility of solving the issue through negotiation, leading to a dramatic deterioration of relations between China and the Philippines.
China and the Philippines have reached consensus on settling maritime disputes through bilateral negotiation in a number of bilateral documents, but the two countries have never engaged in any negotiation on the subject-matters of the arbitration, said Hong.
By unilaterally initiating the arbitration, the Philippines has violated its agreement with China as well as its own solemn commitment in the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea (DOC), he said.
This is an abuse of the dispute settlement procedures of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), and is against international law, including UNCLOS, he added.
The door of China-Philippines bilateral negotiation is always open, he said. "China will remain committed to settling through negotiation the relevant disputes with the Philippines in the South China Sea on the basis of respecting historical facts and in accordance with international law."
"China urges the Philippines to immediately cease its wrongful conduct of pushing forward the arbitral proceedings, and return to the right path of settling the relevant disputes in the South China Sea through bilateral negotiation with China," Hong said. - Xinhua
BEIJING: China has urged the Philippines to “immediately cease its wrongful conduct of pushing forward the arbitral proceedings” and “return to the right path” of settling the relevant disputes in the South China Sea, through bilateral negotiation.
In an official statement released yesterday, the Foreign Ministry reaffirmed Beijing’s commitment to a settlement via two-way negotiations, rather than an arbitration unilaterally sought by Manila against China in 2013.
Ties between Beijing and Manila were sunk after the initiation of the arbitration. From the very start of the arbitral process, China has refused to accept or participate.
In the wake of recent comments made by various Chinese officials about the arbitration, the statement said “the door of China-Philippines bilateral negotiation is always open”.
Observers and the media have increasingly called on Philippine President-elect Rodrigo Duterte and his expected administration to quit the arbitration and return to the table for two-way negotiations.
The arbitral case is still pending. Some media and observers said the expected ruling by the arbitral tribunal would be made in a few weeks.
China will remain committed to settling through negotiation the relevant disputes “on the basis of respecting historical facts and in accordance with international law,” the ministry wrote.
In the past weeks, Washington has publicly pressed Beijing to accept the ruling.
That also included a call from US Defence Secretary Ash Carter on Saturday at the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore.
Wu Shicun, president of the National Institute for South China Sea Studies, said although it remained to be seen if the incoming Philippine administration would quit the arbitration and return to the table for talks, “it is apparent that the arbitration – from its very beginning – has led to increasing, not decreasing, number of problems between Beijing and Manila”.
“Other regional countries will come to the conclusion that embarking on such an arbitration will obtain no benefit, not to mention resolving any of the existing disputes,” Wu said.
Jia Duqiang, a researcher of South-East Asian studies at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, said as the arbitration process came to a critical moment, all parties knew clearly that “no good will serve any party if the big picture is damaged”.
He also said the incoming administration was re-evaluating its policies towards China. — China Daily / Asia News Network
China pushes back against US pressure
SINGAPORE: China rebuffed US pressure to curb its activity in the South China Sea today, restating its sovereignty over most of the disputed territory and saying it "has no fear of trouble".
On the last day of Asia's biggest security summit, Admiral Sun Jianguo said China will not be bullied, including over a pending international court ruling over its claims in the vital trade route.
"We do not make trouble, but we have no fear of trouble," Sun told the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore, where more than 600 security, military and government delegates had gathered over three days.
"China will not bear the consequences, nor will it allow any infringement on its sovereignty and security interest, or stay indifferent to some countries creating chaos in the South China Sea."
The waterway has become a flashpoint between the United States, which increased its focus on the Asia-Pacific under President Barack Obama's "pivot", and China, which is projecting ever greater economic, political and military power in the region.
The two have traded accusations of militarising the waterway as Beijing undertakes large-scale land reclamation and construction on disputed features while Washington has increased its patrols and exercises.
On Saturday, top US officials including defence secretary Ash Carter warned China of the risk of isolating itself internationally and pledged to remain the main guarantor of Asian security for decades.
Despite repeated notes of concern from countries such as Japan, India, Vietnam and South Korea, Sun rejected the prospect of isolation, saying that many of the Asian countries at the gathering were "warmer" and "friendlier" to China than a year ago.
China had 17 bilateral meetings this year, compared with 13 in 2015.
"We were not isolated in the past, we are not isolated now and we will not be isolated in the future," Sun said.
"Actually I am worried that some people and countries are still looking at China with the Cold War mentality and prejudice. They may build a wall in their minds and end up isolating themselves."
During a visit to Mongolia today, US secretary of state John Kerry urged Beijing not to establish an air defence identification zone (Adiz) over the South China Sea.
Kerry, who will visit China next, said an Adiz would be "a provocative and destabilising act", which would question Beijing's commitment to diplomatically manage the dispute.
The South China Sea is expected to feature prominently at annual high-level China-US talks starting in Beijing on Monday, also attended by US Treasury Secretary Jack Lew.
US concerns about Chinese trade policy and the difficulty foreign businesses say they face operating in China will add to what will likely be difficult discussions. — Reuters
Law strongly supports the positions of the Chinese Government. China has indisputable sovereignty over the SouthChina Sea Islands and the adjacent waters. The core of the disputes between China and the Philippines in the SouthChina Sea is issues of territorial sovereignty resulting from the Philippines...
any ruling by the tribunal. The origin of the SouthChina Sea disputes is not China's territorial ambition but instead, the illegal seizure and occupation of Chinese territory by other countries, Zhu said. “These historical rights are not superseded by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea...
China, ASEAN nations vow to effectively implement DOC on SouthChina Sea. HANOI, June 9 (Xinhua) -- Senior officials from China and the ASEAN nations vowed on Thursday to fully and effectively implement the Declaration on Conducts of the Parties in the SouthChina Sea (DOC). An aerial photo taken on Sept....
For more insights into the South China Sea issue, we have
as our studio guest Jia Xiudong, a Senior Research Fellow from the China
Institute of International Studies. Q1. China insists the Philippines
unilateral arbitration is illegal. So how much do you think the
arbitration can help solve the maritime dispute?
China believes that there are political motivations behind
the arbitration by the Philippines, as it is an open denial of China's
sovereignty. It brings uncertainty to how China would solve disputes
with other countries.
“Who is the real saboteur of international law?” the editorial outlined the history and legal basis involved in the issue.
More countries voice support for China's stance
