Spotlight: U.S. and arbitration tribunal's assertive stance on South China Sea questioned

The United States and an arbitration tribunal are trying to assert themselves into the South China Sea dispute, an action many experts say is unjustified and reeks of colonial-era interventionism.

The United States, which had officially said that it won't take sides in South China Sea disputes, has been giving support to the Philippines while sending warships and warplanes to the region to crank up pressure on China.

The relationship between the United States and the Philippines is well-known, with the latter once being almost a U.S. colony and being considered one of the regional spots of U.S. influence, former Egyptian ambassador to China Mahmoud Allam told Xinhua.

The bond strengthened after 2012 when the Obama administration introduced the "pivot to Asia" foreign policy, placing a fulcrum on the island country, and consequently emboldening Manila to challenge China's sovereignty in the South China Sea.

"Regrettably, such regional disputes represent an opportunity for outside parties to interfere, and this is the part the United States is awaiting to support its influence in the region by backing certain parties at the expense of others," Allam said.

Nasser Abdel-Aal, an Asia expert and professor of China studies at Cairo-based Ain Shams University, described the U.S. interference in the region as "provocative," arguing that it is not in favor of the region's stability.

"The United States seeks to preserve a footstep in each spot in the world, as it does in the Middle East region," the professor told Xinhua.

Washington's meddling may risk creating a new Cold War situation, warned Mahbubur Rahman, a former chief of army staff of Bangladesh.

"For regional peace, America should not poke its nose into regional affairs," he said.

Also accused of crossing the line is the temporary arbitration tribunal set up under the framework of the Permanent Court of Arbitration, which awarded itself jurisdiction over the dispute between China and the Philippines despite China's strong opposition.

Helmut Tuerk, president of International Seabed Authority and former judge of International Tribunal on the Law of Sea (ITLOS), said that compared with the International Court of Justice and ITLOS, arbitration tribunals consist of fewer people and lack representativeness and authority.

In addition, many countries across the world are in favor of bilateral talks between China and the Philippines.

Different minor opinions would lead to fragmentation of international judicial decision, which is against the purpose and integrity of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and the trend of international law, Tuerk said.

"The tribunal should think twice before issuing a ruling which might enjoy little support," said Tom Zwart, a professor of law at Utrecht University in the Netherlands.

Given the geopolitical importance of the region, the issue should be decided at the political level and not by a judicial panel, he said. Endi