Off the wire
• Myanmar military chief voices support for constitution amendment if stable  • Chinese, French PMs discuss promotion of bilateral ties, cooperation  • Belt and Road Initiative strengthens HK's position as offshore RMB trading hub: financial chief  • Feature: From village boy to a Kung Fu enthusiast  • Foreign investment in Myanmar's power sector reaches 19.6 bln USD as of April  • S.Korea's military probes suspected DPRK hacking on defense suppliers  • Belgium to send 6 fighter jets to Syria to fight IS  • Indian stocks plunge on poor macros  • EU pledges to support Myanmar's development sectors  • Liverpool grants posthumous honor to 96 fans killed in 1989 Hillsborough tragedy  
You are here: 　 Home

Interview: Solving disputes more important than arbitrary rulings on South China Sea issue: scholar

Xinhua, May 13, 2016 Adjust font size:

China's refusal to join or accept any adjudication from the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) is lawful and solving maritime disputes in the South China Sea is more important than the ruling itself, said a scholar from Thailand's top university.

The ruling that will probably be announced soon is not that important, while solving the maritime disputes in the South China Sea in a proper way is of great significance, Yang Baoyun, professor of ASEAN Studies at Thammasat University, told Xinhua recently.

According to the professor, the proper way is the "dual-track" approach, which means disputes should be resolved peacefully through negotiation between parties directly concerned, and China and ASEAN countries should work together to maintain peace and stability in the South China Sea.

China and ASEAN members identified the approach for dealing with the South China Sea issue in late 2014, and China has advocated it as a practical and feasible way to solve the South China Sea issue.

Regarding the lawsuit lodged by Manila against China over maritime disputes in the South China Sea, under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), to which both Manila and Beijing are signatories, Yang explained that China's position had previously been made clear.

He said China has made exclusion declarations in 2006, which states that the Chinese do not accept any of the compulsory dispute settlement procedures regarding maritime delimitation and such like, and thus the arbitration court has no jurisdiction over the dispute.

The court, however, ruled last year that it has the jurisdiction over the case.

Yang said the case has become very complicated as some other countries have tried to meddle in the matter.

Antony Blinken, U.S. Deputy Secretary of State, said last month that China, as a party of the UNCLOS, cannot reject its provisions, including "the binding nature of any arbitration decision."

Yang said to this point, however, that it is rather "unreasonable" for the U.S. to lecture China about the UNCLOS, which the U.S. has not ratified. Endit