South China Sea Lawfare 2016

Page 167

yet to be determined.

Existence of the Dispute All relevant stakeholders have acknowledged that a dispute exists in the South China Sea. Agreement on that basic fact is a crucial first step on the road towards constructive negotiations and dispute settlement. Although claimants disagree on the means of resolving the dispute, assert that their sovereignty is indisputable, and do not necessarily recognize others’ claims, it is significant that none have chosen to deny the existence of the dispute itself. Beijing, perhaps to the benefit of all involved parties, is clear in its acknowledgement that disputes exist in the region. It also acknowledges that these disputes relate to sovereignty over sea features and maritime territory, legal rights that states are entitled to given sovereignty over such features, and the interpretation of international maritime law. This is in contrast to territorial disputes elsewhere in the world, in which one party has refused to recognize the existence of any dispute. Far from resolving the dispute, such an approach prevents meaningful cooperation on the issue and increases mutual distrust, which may even spill over and negatively impact relations on other issues. In contrast, all of the claimants and major stakeholders have acknowledged the existence of the South China Sea maritime territorial disputes in many different fora over the years. As such, negotiations, however tense, can be held on relevant issues.

Although claimants disagree on the means of resolving the dispute, assert that their sovereignty is indisputable, and do not necessarily recognize others’ claims, it is significant that none have chosen to deny the existence of the dispute itself.

Rule of International Law Claimants and stakeholders have also achieved an implicit consensus regarding the importance of the rule of international law. This includes both China and Taiwan, who have opposed the Philippines’ arbitration case; Malaysia, who has pushed for dispute settlement through ASEAN mechanisms; and Vietnam, who has expressed its anxiety that its interests might be affected by the Tribunal’s decisions but has nevertheless reserved the right to intervene; and Indonesia, who has raised the possibility of it initiating its own arbitral proceedings should its claims be affected. Despite agreement on the importance of international law and arbitration, there remains wariness about committing to legally binding agreements and

South China Sea Lawfare • 161


Issuu converts static files into: digital portfolios, online yearbooks, online catalogs, digital photo albums and more. Sign up and create your flipbook.