(Judges at an arbitration tribunal in The Hague on Tuesday rejected China’s claims to economic rights across large swathes of the South China Sea.)
The South China Sea conundrum, which the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague is to decide on, has a bloody history. Dozens of lives were lost in skirmishes and the issue has not only remained unresolved for the last seven decades, but has shown signs of escalation with the involvement of the US.
On 12 July, the tribunal will decide on the Philippine government’s case that China’s claims over the strategic South China Sea are illegal under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).
To put things into perspective, over $5 trillion in ship-borne trade passes every year through the energy-rich, strategic waters of the South China Sea.
The South China Sea Chaos in One Gif
.gif?auto=format%2Ccompress&fmt=webp&width=720)
China’s historical claim over nine-tenths of the South China Sea is based on a the ambiguous “nine-dash line” (marked in red on the map above) drawn after Japan’s defeat in WWII.
South China Sea disputes span across various islands and shoals:
- Spratly Islands - Claimed by China, Taiwan, Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei, and the Philippines
- Paracel Islands - Occupied by China, also claimed by Vietnam and Taiwan
- Pratas Islands - Occupied by Taiwan, also claimed by China.
- Scarborough Shoal - Claimed by China, Philippines, Taiwan.
The struggle for these islands (most barely big enough to be inhabited) has resulted in deaths on at least two occasions:
- 1974 - China seized the Paracels from Vietnam, killing more than 40
- 1988 - China and Vietnam clashed in the Spratlys. Vietnam lost over 60 men
What Is This Specific Dispute About?
In 2013, following China’s move to control the Scarborough Shoal close to the Philippines, the latter initiated a case in the international tribunal, thus avoiding a military confrontation like the one between China and Vietnam in 1974 and 1988.
China’s expansive claims over the South China Sea has compelled Vietnam, Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand, and Japan – nations at odds with China over territorial issues – to send in teams of observers to The Hague.
The most serious trouble in recent decades has flared between Vietnam and China, and there have also been stand-offs between the Philippines and China:
- Since 2012 - China and the Philippines engaged in a lengthy maritime stand-off, accusing each other of intrusions in the Scarborough Shoal.
- July 2012 - China created Sansha city, an administrative body with its headquarters in the Paracels, which it says oversees Chinese territory in the South China Sea.
- January 2013 - Philippines takes China to a UN tribunal under the auspices of UNCLOS to challenge its claims.
- May 2014 - Multiple collisions between Vietnamese and Chinese ships.
- April 2015 - Satellite images showed China building an airstrip on reclaimed land in the Spratlys.
- October 2015 - US stepped in, sailed a guided-missile destroyer within 12-nautical miles of the artificial islands.
China’s Bold Island-Building Plans
To legitimise its territorial claims, China embarked on a massive island-building spree between 2014 and 2016, turning uninhabitable specks on the map into potentially formidable military bases with the infrastructure for airstrips, ports and radar facilities.
China is not the only nation that came up with this idea, but is by far the most aggressive one in terms of scale.
China is using dredgers – ships with machines that suck the sand from ocean floor and transport it via huge pipes to the spot where they want to build the foundation of a base. Environmental damage be damned.
Dialling Up the Military and Propaganda Heat
There’s a bit of a hiccup, though. China has refused to acknowledge the tribunal’s jurisdiction in the matter and will ignore its ruling.
We do not know, we don’t care, in fact, when this arbitration decision will be made, because no matter what kind of decision this tribunal is going to make, we think it is totally wrong.China’s ambassador to the UK, Liu Xiaoming, to Reuters
On 7 July, China’s foreign minister Wang Yi told US Secretary of State John Kerry that the United States should stick to its promises not to take sides in the dispute.
Dialling up the heat even further, China is holding military drills around the disputed Paracel Islands from 5-11 July ahead of the 12 July verdict. Meanwhile, the USS Ronald Reagan and its escort ships have also been patrolling the South China Sea since the first week of July.
China insists that such territorial disputes should be handled through bilateral discussions, not international arbitration, and claims the backing of more than 40 countries. The actual number is eight, claims US-based think tank CSIS.
The Chinese administration has deployed its full diplomatic force to engage world public opinion as well, sometimes with the help of advertorials.
Sample this.
Interestingly, the US has not ratified this convention but is still asking China and the rest of the world to abide by the tribunal’s decision.
What’s Next? Sabre-Rattling, Diplomacy or Status Quo?
The tribunal will only decide who gets the right of access to the water around the islands and not the sovereignty of the islands in the South China Sea.
The outcome will have serious consequences on both Chinese and American reputations, depending on how the two behave.
If the tribunal rules in favour of China:
This is the unlikeliest option according to various experts, and China has already refused to acknowledge the decision no matter what the outcome is.
If the tribunal rules against China:
The verdict is not enforceable, so there definitely won’t be a United Nations military intervention seeking forceful removal of the Chinese.
People are saying if China doesn’t abide by the ruling then it undermines its own position that it is committed to maintaining a rules-based order.Ian Storey, Singapore’s Institute of South East Asian Studies senior fellow to CNN
US officials fear that Chinese could turn aggressive, deploy additional forces, ramp up construction on islands and restrict air traffic movement (air identification defence zone). In which case, the US is likely to beef up the presence of the aircraft carrier group (mentioned above) it already has in the vicinity.
This could lead to a scenario that both nations would rather avoid.
There could be another way out, as suggested by global security expert David A Welch.
Beijing may think that rival claimants may be willing to yield on symbols in return for material gains. A strong indication that this may be so is that Beijing has regularly held out the prospect of “joint development” of natural resources in the South China Sea. Conceivably, Beijing may think that rival claimants would be willing to acknowledge China’s sovereignty over disputed islands in return for access to fishing grounds and the prospect of oil and gas riches.
Whatever the outcome of the tribunal on 12 July, the world is watching with bated breath. The ruling itself, as well as China’s reaction, might set a precedent of sorts for other nations at odds with the Asian giant over territorial issues – over a dozen, including India.
(At The Quint, we are answerable only to our audience. Play an active role in shaping our journalism by becoming a member. Because the truth is worth it.)