COMMENTARY

The Hague tribunal:

ramifications of ruling
http://globalnation.inquirer.net/141632/the-hague-tribunal-ramifications-of-ruling

Last weeks ruling of the Permanent Court of Arbitration on the South China Sea
dispute has two distinct but related ramifications.

The first deals with the rights to the resources of the South China Sea among the
coastal states, and the second impacts on the power projections of the worlds naval
powers.

The ruling nullifies Chinas nine-dash line as a claim to any maritime zone in the
South China Sea.

The ruling also denies any maritime zone beyond the 22.2-kilometer (12-nautical-
mile) territorial sea to rocks and islands in the Spratlys and Panatag Shoal
(internationally known as Scarborough Shoal).

Thus, China can claim a 370-km (200-nm) exclusive economic zone (EEZ) only from
its coastlines in the mainland and Hainan, its southernmost island.

The outer limits of Chinas 370-km EEZ measured from its coastlines do not reach the
Spratlys or Panatag Shoal.

Huge area

There is a huge areathe high seas constituting some 25 percent of the South China
Seathat separates Chinas EEZ from the Spratlys and Panatag Shoal.

The high seas beyond any national jurisdiction are part of the global commons and
belong to all mankind.

The other coastal statesMalaysia, Brunei, Indonesia and Vietnamhave their own
370-km EEZs unencumbered by any Chinese claim from the nine-dash line.

Free from Chinese claim

For the Philippines, the ruling means its entire EEZ in the South China Sea is free
from any Chinese claim except for the 22.2-km territorial seas of three high-tide rocks
controlled by ChinaMabini Reef (Johnson South Reef) and McKennan Reef
COMMENTARY

The Hague tribunal:

ramifications of ruling
http://globalnation.inquirer.net/141632/the-hague-tribunal-ramifications-of-ruling
(Hughes Reef) in the Spratlys, and Panatag Shoal off Zambales province on the
western coast of Luzon.

The Philippine EEZ in the South China Sea has an area of 381,000 square kilometers.
Deducting the 4,650 sq km total territorial seas of Mabini Reef, McKennan Reef and
Panatag Shoal, the Philippines has an EEZ of 376,350 sq km in the South China Sea
free from any Chinese claim.

This maritime area is larger than the total land area of the Philippines of 300,000 sq
km. All the living and nonliving resources in this maritime areathe fish, oil, gas and
other mineralsbelong exclusively to the Philippines.

Enforcing the ruling

How can the Philippines enforce its exclusive right to the resources in its EEZ?

If China National Offshore Oil Co. (CNOOC) installs a gas platform on Recto Bank
(Reed Bank), which is entirely within the Philippine EEZ, and extracts the gas there,
the Philippines can sue CNOOC in Canada where CNOOC has assets.

The Philippines can show the ruling to the court in Canada, which ratified the United
Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (Unclos), that the gas on Recto Bank
belongs to the Philippines and CNOOC pilfered it.

The Philippines can ask the Canadian court to seize CNOOCs assets to compensate
the Philippines for the pilfered gas.

The Philippines can also ask the International Seabed Authority (ISA), a creation of
Unclos, to suspend the exploration permits it issued to China.

The ISA has issued 27 permits to explore the seabed outside any national jurisdiction,
and four permits have gone to China, the highest number for any state.

Unclos is a package dealany United Nations member that ratifies Unclos must
accept all its provisions.

If China refuses to comply with the ruling of the Permanent Court of Arbitration, the
Philippines can ask the ISA to suspend the exploration permits of China because
COMMENTARY

The Hague tribunal:

ramifications of ruling
http://globalnation.inquirer.net/141632/the-hague-tribunal-ramifications-of-ruling
China is accepting only beneficial provisions of Unclos and rejecting its burdensome
provisions.

The Philippines must be creative in finding legal means of enforcing the ruling, and
not be timid in exploring the frontiers of international law.

To paraphrase Sun Tzu, you must defeat the enemy in the courtroom if you cannot
defeat the enemy on the battlefield.

Novel ruling

The historic ruling itself is novel on at least two points.

First, the ruling separates sovereignty from maritime entitlement, and maritime
entitlement from sea boundary delimitation.

This allowed the Philippines to frame the arbitration as a maritime issue, not a
territorial issue.

It also allowed the Philippines to navigate around Chinas reservation from

compulsory arbitration on sea boundary delimitation.

Second, the ruling for the first time defines an island that generates a 370-km EEZ as
one that can sustain a stable community of people using the resources of the island
itself in its natural condition, with no supplies from outside.

Under this definition, islands in the Paracels and Pratas may not qualify as islands
capable of human habitation, entitling them only to a 22.2-km territorial sea, just like
all islands in the Spratlys.

Geopolitics

The tribunals ruling has also profound ramifications on the geopolitics of the region,
and even the world.

The ruling affirms the presence of high seas in the center of the South China Sea, and
the presence of EEZs of coastal states around the high seas.
COMMENTARY

The Hague tribunal:

ramifications of ruling
http://globalnation.inquirer.net/141632/the-hague-tribunal-ramifications-of-ruling
In the high seas, there is freedom of navigation and overflight for merchant and
military vessels and aircraft.

In the EEZs, there is also the same freedom of navigation and overflight.

China, however, together with a handful of other states, asserts that there is no
freedom of navigation and overflight in the EEZ for military vessels and aircraft.

Role of world powers

The worlds naval powers, led by the United States, have declared that they will sail
and fly in the high seas and EEZs of the South China Sea to assert freedom of
navigation and overflight for their military vessels and aircraft.

China cannot prevent the worlds naval powers from conducting such freedom of
navigation and overflight operations.

These naval operations will in effect enforce the part of the ruling that acknowledges
the existence of high seas and EEZs in the South China Sea.

It is in the national interest of the worlds naval powers to assert such freedom of
navigation and overflight.

If Chinas positionthat there is no such freedom in the EEZbecomes international

law, then the expensive warships of the worlds naval powers will be bottled up in
their coastal waters.

Minority position

Indeed, China, now fast becoming another world naval power, may in the next five to
seven years abandon its minority position and adopt the prevailing view that there is
freedom of navigation and overflight in the EEZ for military vessels and aircraft.

The ruling goes a long way in clarifying the rights and obligations not only of coastal
states in the South China Sea, but also of the rights and obligations of naval powers
outside the region.
COMMENTARY

The Hague tribunal:

ramifications of ruling
http://globalnation.inquirer.net/141632/the-hague-tribunal-ramifications-of-ruling
The ruling puts an end to excessive maritime claims from rocks or tiny islands
incapable of human habitation.

It is hoped that over time all states within and outside the region will see the wisdom
of respecting the ruling as essential to maintaining peace, security and stability in the
seas of our planet.

Read more: http://globalnation.inquirer.net/141632/the-hague-

tribunal-ramifications-of-ruling#ixzz4F1suM5uC
Follow us: @inquirerdotnet on Twitter | inquirerdotnet on Facebook