This was a long anticipated but still powerful ruling. The only surprise was maybe Itu Aba (太平島) being ruled to not be an island.
The court was particularly clear on rejecting the nine-dash line and China's claims of historic waters.
As much as China will say it ignores this ruling, it absolutely puts pressure on China and constricts the language it will be able to use when discussing disputes in the South China Sea. China has particularly relied on claims of historic waters, which will diplomatically make for some extremely awkward press statements for China now.
This may force China into some face-saving agreements, so that it continues to appear strong at home where it has made this into an issue of nationalism, but internationally may try to consolidate what it does hold.
Another likely option is China may try to create a ADIZ over the South China Sea like it did in the East China Sea (and use its somewhat perverted interpretation of when an ADIZ applies), with the idea that if its interests in the sea have been denied, it can try to control the air.
I expect freedom of navigation transits may increase now and with greater certainty, both from the US and from other countries including Japan and Australia, now that we know what features are entitled to a 12-mile territorial sea and which ones are not (due to being submerged at high tide).
I'm optimistic after some initial saber rattling that this may actually lead to a reduction in tensions in the South China Sea, but that is mostly up to China now at this point.
"Itu Aba is not an island" was indeed a surprise, and I think it is a mistake. In particular, it was not part of the case.
The court brought the issue in because it was necessary to rule on Philippines' claim that Mischief Reef is within its EEZ, because if Itu Aba is an island EEZ generated by it needs to be considered. I think this was a bad idea and an underhanded tactic.
Well, there is a precedent Nicaragua v. United States where the United States just blatantly ignores the international court's ruling against it, and vetoes any attempt of enforcement by the Security Council. China is also a permanent member, so they will do just the same.
Yep, the one council in the UN that really matters and China can veto any resolution regarding this issue anytime they want. Possession is as they say 9/10 of the law and I doubt any country can wrestle away the islands that China has already developed.
Filipino here - I still applaud our government's efforts in pushing this issue through. This was raised by my country in the ASEAN summits and China through various political and diplomatic channels were able to stop those resolutions.
The huge benefit to this ruling is precedent and credibility. Laying down a trail of rulings against China around the globe, that will facilitate cohesive economic sanctions against them if they attempt to enforce their bogus claims to the waters. One country attempting to sanction China would fail, and China would and could easily retaliate. If most of the developed world signs on to sanctions for their attempts to annex territory ala Russia with Ukraine (except this is dramatically larger), then it will stick. An easy example would be to throw China back out of the WTO, dump their currency / refuse to promote it any higher as a reserve, actually enforce consequences on their dumping practices and other economic misdeeds, and so on.
That's a problem. We don't usually intervene directly against other nuclear armed nations. It's all done through proxies. Who is going to be our proxy navy?
I am no geopolitical expert, but the Chinese seemed to be playing with fire. At which point a war will erupt in the South China Sea, especially when those nations won't take it anymore?
The chinese are getting better at soft power. This is really about oil and natural resources in the South China Sea. A direct confrontation wouldn't be acceptable and it would be costly. If anything I believe they'll put financial and political incentives and convince them to sell the islands.
Which nations? Vietnam, who lost two conflicts with China already, when China was even poorer and weaker than it is now? Or the Philippines, who can barely keep their own state together as it is? Maybe Malaysia, a country constantly rocked by internal dissent because of huge economic inequality? Singapore?
The only nation who might decide they "won't take it anymore" is the United States; but post-Iraq, the US will struggle to justify any significant intervention abroad for another generation, let alone against a nuclear superpower. No, on the military side China is laughing all the way to the naval base on artificial reef.
The question is, what exactly do they think to gain from this aggressive expansionist activity? Hopefully it's just strategic military positioning for the long run. If it's anything they think they can directly leverage (like imposing controls or tariffs on ships going through the area), then they risk a backlash on their commercial interests.
There are probably competing forces inside PRC hierarchies competing over this particular policy. It might well be that sanity will eventually prevail. Launching WW3 over a bunch of rocks just to stick it to your boss, seems a bit too much even for the average military nutcase.
...China, which has displayed a willingness to negotiate in many such situations. In just over 60 years, China has gone from 23 land disputes down to just six. In the majority of its settlements, China accepted less than one-half of the territory it originally claimed. [1]
What's concerning about this is on the end of the slide, there is a text which says:
"The Tribunal in the Hague ruled on Tuesday, July 12, that China's claim was illegal. But it has no power to enforce the decision."
Some questions:
1. If that's the case, then what good would the Hague ruling be if it is not going to be enforced?
2. Who should be enforcing the said ruling in this case?
No one enforces international law except the individual nations themselves.
This is different from a national or (in the U.S.) state government, which is typically embued with police and military powers to enforce the national laws.
The state of Virginia has state police and a state court system that will arrest and put people into state prison if they violate a state law. The U.S. has federal police and a federal court system that will put people into federal prison for breaking federal law.
The U.N. does not have a global police or military force. It can be thought of more as a venue for developing a shared understanding of the world, than a government that creates and enforces its own laws.
In this case, this ruling essentially says that most of the world does not agree with China about its territorial claims. This will lend moral authority to the actions of other nations like the Philippines, U.S., Australia, Japan, when they transit and operate in the South China Sea.
China's economy isn't expanding faster than the West's. It was.
China's economy is hardly growing at all, and is no longer growing organically. They require extremely vast amounts of new debt to continue growing at just a few percent per year. That's a scenario they can't maintain going forward.
The US economy by itself is expanding as much as China in dollar GDP terms, and is doing so without taking on the kind of debt that China is. Per dollar of debt taken on, the US is getting two to three times as much GDP growth as what China is. China's economy is growing at 2% to 3% currently; with the US economy ~65% larger it can grow quite a bit slower and still outpace China.
$18 trillion * 2% = $360 billion
$11 trillion * 3% = $330 billion
China is unlikely to ever be the extremely fast growth economy it previously was. All the easy economic growth is long since over. And this is without discussing the inevitability that China will run into regular recessions like all other economies do once their growth slows down to normal levels (and ignoring that China is also likely to face far harsher consequences with economic slowdowns given their system of government; which keeps the Chinese leaders up at night). For example they've been in an industrial recession for at least a year now, and their service sector has barely shown any growth. There's no reason to believe their manufacturing will kick back into boom mode ever again, especially with other Asian competitors eroding that base. Their service economy was supposed to take over, and so far it's doing nothing but flailing.
The Tribunal agreed with the Philippines position on almost every question with the exception of 2 features: Gaven Reef (North) and McKennan Reef. Both of those features were found to be high-tide elevations.
The Tribunal also ruled Chinese activity in the region was illegal, found China to be violating its obligations under UNCLOS and failing to protect the natural habitats (including willful destruction of the coral and endangered species). China's harassment of Philippine ships was also ruled illegal. The nine-dash line was ruled invalid. China's claims of "historic waters" was found to be groundless. Mischief Reef, Second Thomas Shoal, and Reed Bank were found to “form part of the exclusive economic zone and continental shelf of the Philippines.”
Really, this was about as complete a victory for the Philippines (and refutation of everything China claims and is doing) as possible.
[+] [-] dak1|9 years ago|reply
The court was particularly clear on rejecting the nine-dash line and China's claims of historic waters.
As much as China will say it ignores this ruling, it absolutely puts pressure on China and constricts the language it will be able to use when discussing disputes in the South China Sea. China has particularly relied on claims of historic waters, which will diplomatically make for some extremely awkward press statements for China now.
This may force China into some face-saving agreements, so that it continues to appear strong at home where it has made this into an issue of nationalism, but internationally may try to consolidate what it does hold.
Another likely option is China may try to create a ADIZ over the South China Sea like it did in the East China Sea (and use its somewhat perverted interpretation of when an ADIZ applies), with the idea that if its interests in the sea have been denied, it can try to control the air.
I expect freedom of navigation transits may increase now and with greater certainty, both from the US and from other countries including Japan and Australia, now that we know what features are entitled to a 12-mile territorial sea and which ones are not (due to being submerged at high tide).
I'm optimistic after some initial saber rattling that this may actually lead to a reduction in tensions in the South China Sea, but that is mostly up to China now at this point.
[+] [-] fatman13gg|9 years ago|reply
http://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy-defence/article/198...
[+] [-] sanxiyn|9 years ago|reply
The court brought the issue in because it was necessary to rule on Philippines' claim that Mischief Reef is within its EEZ, because if Itu Aba is an island EEZ generated by it needs to be considered. I think this was a bad idea and an underhanded tactic.
[+] [-] netheril96|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] wh0car3s|9 years ago|reply
Filipino here - I still applaud our government's efforts in pushing this issue through. This was raised by my country in the ASEAN summits and China through various political and diplomatic channels were able to stop those resolutions.
[+] [-] msravi|9 years ago|reply
1. http://www.gearthblog.com/blog/archives/2006/07/huge_scale_m...
[+] [-] stefap2|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] douche|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] adventured|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ourmandave|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] netheril96|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] kiba|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] yardie|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] toyg|9 years ago|reply
The only nation who might decide they "won't take it anymore" is the United States; but post-Iraq, the US will struggle to justify any significant intervention abroad for another generation, let alone against a nuclear superpower. No, on the military side China is laughing all the way to the naval base on artificial reef.
The question is, what exactly do they think to gain from this aggressive expansionist activity? Hopefully it's just strategic military positioning for the long run. If it's anything they think they can directly leverage (like imposing controls or tariffs on ships going through the area), then they risk a backlash on their commercial interests.
There are probably competing forces inside PRC hierarchies competing over this particular policy. It might well be that sanity will eventually prevail. Launching WW3 over a bunch of rocks just to stick it to your boss, seems a bit too much even for the average military nutcase.
[+] [-] jiyinyiyong|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] chj|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] joristers|9 years ago|reply
1. http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/20...
[+] [-] aab0|9 years ago|reply
If those original claims are as overgrown as the nine-dash line, that looks like a huge success for China.
[+] [-] AngeloAnolin|9 years ago|reply
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12078612
What's concerning about this is on the end of the slide, there is a text which says:
"The Tribunal in the Hague ruled on Tuesday, July 12, that China's claim was illegal. But it has no power to enforce the decision."
Some questions: 1. If that's the case, then what good would the Hague ruling be if it is not going to be enforced? 2. Who should be enforcing the said ruling in this case?
[+] [-] snowwrestler|9 years ago|reply
This is different from a national or (in the U.S.) state government, which is typically embued with police and military powers to enforce the national laws.
The state of Virginia has state police and a state court system that will arrest and put people into state prison if they violate a state law. The U.S. has federal police and a federal court system that will put people into federal prison for breaking federal law.
The U.N. does not have a global police or military force. It can be thought of more as a venue for developing a shared understanding of the world, than a government that creates and enforces its own laws.
In this case, this ruling essentially says that most of the world does not agree with China about its territorial claims. This will lend moral authority to the actions of other nations like the Philippines, U.S., Australia, Japan, when they transit and operate in the South China Sea.
[+] [-] kakashi19|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] AngeloAnolin|9 years ago|reply
[+] [-] chvid|9 years ago|reply
A tiny piece in the massive chess game that is China's rising military dominance and the west's declining ditto.
This will play out over decades and is at its heart driven by a Chinese economy that expands faster the west's.
[+] [-] adventured|9 years ago|reply
China's economy is hardly growing at all, and is no longer growing organically. They require extremely vast amounts of new debt to continue growing at just a few percent per year. That's a scenario they can't maintain going forward.
The US economy by itself is expanding as much as China in dollar GDP terms, and is doing so without taking on the kind of debt that China is. Per dollar of debt taken on, the US is getting two to three times as much GDP growth as what China is. China's economy is growing at 2% to 3% currently; with the US economy ~65% larger it can grow quite a bit slower and still outpace China.
$18 trillion * 2% = $360 billion
$11 trillion * 3% = $330 billion
China is unlikely to ever be the extremely fast growth economy it previously was. All the easy economic growth is long since over. And this is without discussing the inevitability that China will run into regular recessions like all other economies do once their growth slows down to normal levels (and ignoring that China is also likely to face far harsher consequences with economic slowdowns given their system of government; which keeps the Chinese leaders up at night). For example they've been in an industrial recession for at least a year now, and their service sector has barely shown any growth. There's no reason to believe their manufacturing will kick back into boom mode ever again, especially with other Asian competitors eroding that base. Their service economy was supposed to take over, and so far it's doing nothing but flailing.
[+] [-] legulere|9 years ago|reply
The whole thing about the Spratley islands began with Vietname and the Philippines occupying islands there: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spratly_Islands#Geographic_and...
[+] [-] dak1|9 years ago|reply
The Tribunal also ruled Chinese activity in the region was illegal, found China to be violating its obligations under UNCLOS and failing to protect the natural habitats (including willful destruction of the coral and endangered species). China's harassment of Philippine ships was also ruled illegal. The nine-dash line was ruled invalid. China's claims of "historic waters" was found to be groundless. Mischief Reef, Second Thomas Shoal, and Reed Bank were found to “form part of the exclusive economic zone and continental shelf of the Philippines.”
Really, this was about as complete a victory for the Philippines (and refutation of everything China claims and is doing) as possible.