Geoff Dyer in Washington
A UN tribunal is likely to rule soon on a controversial case brought by the Philippines which questions some of China’s claims in the South China Sea. Here are things to watch out for in the much-anticipated ruling.
Why is the case important?
This is a rare occasion when a highly technical decision by an obscure UN body based in the Netherlands could be of enormous geopolitical significance. It has both the potential to clarify several issues that are at the heart of the fierce territorial disputes in the South China Sea, but also to provoke increased tensions between China and the US.
What is the background?
In 2013, the Philippines brought its case to the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea at The Hague. It submitted 15 different items where it says China’s claims and activity in the South China Sea are contrary to international law.
China has refused to take part in the case and has challenged the court’s authority, but last year, the tribunal said it had jurisdiction on at least seven of the claims and was still making up its mind on the other eight. Many experts expect the court to rule against China on a number of the cases.
What are the legal implications?
It is important to emphasise that the tribunal in The Hague is not adjudicating on the competing sovereignty claims in the South China Sea, only on the maritime rights that are attached to those claims.
One of the main planks of the Philippines’ case is to question the legal validity of China’s “Nine-Dash Line” — the dotted boundary on a map that claims as much as 90 per cent of the South China Sea. Experts say the court could declare the Nine-Dash Line as effectively illegal or could question it in ways that would oblige China to clarify the legal basis of the line — something China has been reluctant to do.
Other aspects of the case are more esoteric. The court will decide whether several land features — some of which China has already turned into man-made islands — are to be treated as “low-tide elevations”, which enjoy no territorial waters, “rocks”, which have a 12 mile territorial sea or “islands” which enjoy a 200-mile exclusive economic zone. Many experts believe the court will say that some of China’s man-made islands have no legal claim on the surrounding waters.
What does that mean in practice?
The UN tribunal has no powers of enforcement. It cannot oblige China to do anything and Beijing will not withdraw from any of its new artificial islands. But if the ruling favours the Philippines, China risks more reputational damage and regional isolation if it ignores the court and continues to pursue its claims. The Obama administration is already framing the ruling as a test of whether China respects international law.
How will China respond?
As well as rejecting the tribunal’s authority, China has been trying to rally international support for its view that the tribunal ruling is illegitimate. Beijing claims it already has 60 supporters, however the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a Washington think-tank, says that only eight governments have declared their backing in public — including landlocked nations such as Lesotho and Afghanistan. If the ruling goes against it, China could seek ways to punish the Philippines, perhaps by informally limiting tourists or imports.
What about the US?
The biggest risk is that China lashes out at a negative ruling and decides to escalate its military ambitions in the South China Sea, either by declaring control over the airspace in the region or by seeking to build an artificial island on Scarborough Shoal — another land feature also claimed by the Philippines.
In anticipation of a more aggressive Chinese reaction, the US has sent significant military assets to the region, including a visit by an aircraft carrier to the South China Sea and fighter jets to the Philippines. The message to Beijing has been that any move on Scarborough Shoal will be met with a substantial US response. However, these military preparations underline the potential for the South China Sea to generate much sharper competition between the US and China.
