Spotlight: Busting myths of South China Sea arbitration

The tribunal handling the South China Sea arbitration case unilaterally initiated by the former Philippine government issued its final award on Tuesday, but as the panel has no jurisdiction, its decision is naturally null and void.

In a press release accompanying the 479-page award, the five-member tribunal offered a summary of its decisions, which sweepingly side with the claims filed by the administration of former Philippine President Benigno S. Aquino III.

China has refused to participate in the proceedings, reiterating that the tribunal has no jurisdiction over the case, which is in essence related to territorial sovereignty and maritime delimitation.

"The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China solemnly declares that the award is null and void and has no binding force. China neither accepts nor recognizes it," the ministry said in a statement shortly after the publication of the award.

It should be the ultimate goal of any international institution to help resolve conflicts, maintain peace and limit armaments. These were also the founding principles of the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) when it was established over a hundred years ago.

However, the arbitral tribunal the PCA organized over the South China Sea issue seems to have intensified the disputes between Beijing and Manila, putting regional peace at risk while spurring military buildup. Questions have been raised over the legitimacy of the arbitration.

STALLED TALKS

Before the arbitration was filed, China and the Philippines, along with other countries involved, had engaged in constructive talks over disputes in the South China Sea for years.

Those talks yielded a declaration that regulates the conduct of involved parties in the waterway so as to ensure regional peace. The parties also fostered a "dual track" approach of maintaining peace while holding talks on disputes.

However, it became difficult to hold talks ever since the administration of former Philippine President Benigno S. Aquino III initiated the arbitration in 2013. Dialogues were disrupted after the tribunal claimed jurisdiction two years later.

Since talks stalled, tensions have mounted. U.S. warships and planes have frequented the South China Sea under the pretext of safeguarding "freedom of navigation and overflight."

Meanwhile, Washington and Manila held a slew of joint military drills near the waters of the South China Sea. The scale of their war games kept increasing while the weapons used by their servicemen became increasingly sophisticated.

In April, thousands of U.S., Philippine and Australian troops attended an 11-day exercise in the South China Sea region, which deployed the High Mobility Artillery Rocket System, capable of firing waves of rockets and missiles from a long range with great accuracy.

The high-profile U.S. military presence only cast a pall on the otherwise peaceful South China Sea, through which more than 100,000 ships pass annually without incidents.

"LAWFARE"

The U.S. intervention won't end with military muscle-flexing. Observers said that the arbitration is part of the "lawfare" that the United States has waged against China, by manipulating lawsuits and legal systems to tarnish China's claims and rights.

Although the arbitration was initiated by the Aquino III administration in 2013, U.S. support and abetment were crucial to its being carried forward. The 3,000-page documents that the Philippines handed over to the tribunal were compiled with the help of U.S. legal experts who also participated in the process of deliberations.

The U.S. support, analysts said, is also a key factor that encouraged the tribunal to accept and then claim jurisdiction over the flawed case.

In 2010, then U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton declared that Washington has national interests in the South China Sea, amid the U.S.strategic shift to the Asia-Pacific region.

The United States and the Philippines issued a joint statement to back the arbitration in 2014. Later that year, U.S. President Barack Obama, during a visit to Manila, voiced his support for the arbitration.

QUESTIONABLE JURISDICTION

Outwardly, Manila's request was to determine the nature of features "under Chinese control" in the South China Sea. But its real agenda was to confuse the maritime rights assigned to different features, e.g. islands, low-tide elevations or submerged banks, with China's sovereignty over the Nansha Islands and its waters.

By dwelling on the nature of the features, the Philippines has attempted to limit China's maritime rights and interests to individual features, denying China's historic rights over the Nansha Islands as a whole.

Hence, the Philippines' requests are essentially about territorial sovereignty and maritime delimitation. Territorial issues are subject to general international law rather than the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), under which the tribunal operates.

In addition, China excluded disputes concerning maritime delimitation, historic bays or titles from UNCLOS dispute settlement procedures in 2006, according to the UNCLOS stipulation.

HISTORICAL FACTS

Before the colonization of Southeast Asia by Western powers, the South China Sea had been a peaceful and prosperous hub for trade and cultural exchanges for over a thousand years.

In AD 671, the Chinese monk Yi Jing set sail across the South China Sea to study Buddhism in India and came back 25 years later. During his journey, Yi visited 30 ancient countries in the South China Sea region, during which he shared Chinese culture and technology with his hosts.

Yi was among more than 60 Chinese monks who traveled through the South China Sea to India during that period. Their writings and travel logs are evidence that proves China's active role in promoting peace and prosperity in the waters.

In various Chinese dynasties, offices on sea affairs were set up, along with the launch of coast patrols to ensure safe passage in the waterway. For about a hundred years, China had worked with the state of Malacca to combat piracy in the South China Sea, until Malacca was colonized by Portugal in 1611.

MEDIA MISINFORMATION

China's rights over the South China Sea are backed by numerous historical records. However, some Western media have either turned a blind eye to the facts or twisted them to make up their own version of the "truth."

In Tanmen, a fishing village in southern China, a retired fisherman told BBC that he once had an ancient book with navigation directions to the South China Sea. But he threw it away as it was no longer readable after being used for hundreds of years.

Upon hearing this, the BBC reporter started to question the existence of the book, suggesting the old fisherman, who had trusted him with his family story, was lying. He went on to accuse Chinese media, which had first reported on the book, of having made up the story to bolster China's claims.

Had the reporter bothered to visit the Hainan Provincial Museum, he would have seen those ancient navigation guides on public display.

In fact, generations of fishermen living in a number of harbors in Hainan have relied on such ancient guides to navigate in the South China Sea. At least 12 versions of them can be found in museums or fishing villages.

NEGOTIATION THE ONLY WAY

Any ultimate resolution of territorial issues must be based on the will of the states involved. History, national interests and people's feelings of each side need to be acknowledged and taken into consideration before any reconciliation and agreement can be achieved.

A rushed decision by a third party often leads to more disputes and conflicts. In Southeast Asia alone, problematic demarcations by colonists left Malaysia, Thailand, Indonesia and Cambodia with long-standing land disputes among them and even separatist violence.

The South China Sea issue involves waters of 3.5 million square kilometers and several parties in the region. Its magnitude and complexity far exceed the capacity of any tribunal.

In addition, China has made it clear that the arbitration is illegal, null and void, and that the country does not accept it or participate in it.

Without China's acknowledgement and support, the "award" of the arbitration is practically infeasible, or "just a piece of paper," as described by former Chinese State Councilor Dai Bingguo.

"China will never give up our lawful rights. Chinese people do not believe in fallacy nor are we afraid of evil forces," Chinese President Xi Jinping said on July 1, commemorating the 95th founding anniversary of the Communist Party of China.

"Chinese people do not make trouble, but we are not cowards when involved in trouble," Xi said.

The newly-elected Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte has on multiple occasions shown willingness to resume talks with the Chinese side, a good starting point for reconciliation and mutual understanding between the two countries.

Hopefully, this "piece of paper" can serve as a lesson to remind all parties involved that there is no shortcut to resolving the South China Sea issue, and that the final solution to it can only be found at the negotiation table. Endi