I won't comment on the ruling but like to point out The Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague has nothing to do with the UN and not a court. I'm very disappointed with a reputable magazine like the Economist making such a mistake.
Very true, a simple, factual mistake.
But it is not just the Economist, many other media outlets in UK made the same mistake. I think they just copy each other.
The PCA is the default forum for UNCLOS. The "UN" in UNCLOS stands for United Nations.
PCA is right. China has been against the international law and she wouldn't stop it at all. As she does anything for money and power, she also have killed more than 20 millions of her people but also killed so many animals like elephants for their ivories and cut too many trees even in permanent frost regions in Siberia. The environment never recovers for centuries though. She is not only against the international law but also international morals and collapses environments for the children in the future on the planet, too.
However the justice delivered by PCA wouldn't have any influence on China because she is opposite to "rule by law" historically. In the country, only a dictator like Xi and his families and relatives become the law. Everything including a so called contract, history and those who are criminals change in one day. Because changing the law are normal for them and it depends on the dictator's moods and mind. For the purpose of keeping and showing off his power, Xi will continue invading the islands, the sea and countries surrounding his country. That's the China and it is their normal way historically. The standards are very different.
Westerners might think that China is a great country with old history where Turandot had once lived. However it was only in opera and the real China isn't romantic at all. Such people should perish the illusion made by an Italian and unveil the real her.
If China becomes the world's standard, the government would not be reliable and noone care constitution or contract. Just money and power are important to survive. The number of those kidnapped will increase. That's Commies. I don't know which way the world choose. But I warn you her strategy. Actually she aims at Hawaii in 100 years. Sounds very ridiculous for people with western standards but she means it and now successfully invaded the South China Sea. I really wish the world peace and want someone to stop her.
That's not only two options mentioned in the the special article "courting trouble" for China: it can act as a regime supporting the globe rules, but at the same time act as a great-power status. Why they are contradict? China can do a lot that the US can not do--being great but also act under rules.
Still, America has yet to ratify UNCLOS, because it doesn't expect a state China is in now, and what in its mind is freely going through any other part of the sea it want without any restrictions, without any shame it probably get. "America has not ratified UNCLOS, but observes it in practice" Are you mean" one who does not have to obey rules but force others to adhere to them" a good and praiseworthy things?!
Commie China can act under rules? Thanks for the laughs.
Dude, the PCA just held that the Chinese dictatorship violated the rules of UNCLOS. Get it, genius? Emperor Xi's dictatorship is the law breaking thug.
As for the US and UNCLOS, so what? The dictatorship is the thug stealing the SCS, not the US. The dictatorship is the one with the legally bogus Nine Dash Line. That's the Chinese gangsters' cover story for oil motivated theft.
dude, you don't seem to know or appreciate the truth, fact etc. of this episode.
.
that ain't surprising to readers at large though. whining 'dictatorship', 'thug', 'gangsters' repeatedly so much do show the level of your understanding or education on this.
I believe it is essential that you--as journalist for such an esteemed publication--let your readers be aware of the nature of the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA), which has nothing to do with the International Court of Justice (ICJ).
The International Court of Justice is the primary judicial branch of the United Nations (UN), composed of fifteen judges elected to nine-year terms by the UN General Assembly and the UN Security Council.
The Permanent Court of Arbitration, by contrast, is neither a court nor a UN agency, but rather a tribunal that resolves conflicts between member states, international organizations, or private parties if they agree to arbitration. The arbitrators that hear cases are officially called "Members" of the Court.
The main difference between a court proceeding and an arbitration is that a court proceeding can proceed without an opposing party, while arbitration should stop without an opposing party. Yet both organizations: ICJ and PCA reside at Hague, Netherlands.
Since the PCA is not a UN-backed agency, its income relies on the arbitration services it provides to its clients, unlike the judges from the International court of Justice, who are paid by the UN. In this case, the Philippines Government paid $30 million to the PCA for this arbitration without an opposing party, China, which has never agreed to participate in such arbitration.
Please note the statement issued at ICJ's official website on the ruling of the Arbitration by PCA on July, 12, 2016:
http://www.icj-cij.org/homepage/index.php
The International Court of Justice (ICJ) wishes to draw the attention of the media and the public to the fact that the Award in the South China Sea Arbitration (The Republic of the Philippines v. The People’s Republic of China) was issued by an Arbitral Tribunal acting with the secretarial assistance of the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA). The ICJ, which is a totally distinct institution, has had no involvement in the above mentioned case.
I simply believe that media should provide accurate and sufficient context when reporting developments.
I believe you should read the applicable law, sparky.
UNCLOS provides that the PCA is the default international forum if the parties can't agree on a forum. The punks from the Chinese dictatorship threw a tantrum and refused to participate in any forum. Why? Because they're thugs with no respect for the rule of law. And they know the legally baseless Nine Dash Line crap is a meritless cover story for oil motivated theft.
By the way, do you know what the "UN" in UNCLOS stands for?
'The punks from the Chinese dictatorship'----that's how you address a party of this discussion?
your post is unfortunately doing a disservice to your alleged claim, and in a way you are advocating that myvoice2420 is correct and right in his/her post. pity, pity you.
The author's statements that USA always respects the international law is a gross misrepresentation of facts and as anyone with an iota of knowledge on international law knows, wholly inaccurate. For example, in The Republic of Nicaragua v. The United States of America, a public international law case decided by the International Court of Justice, the ICJ ruled in favor of Nicaragua against the US and awarded reparations to Nicaragua, but US chose not to be bounded by rule of international law and respect the courts verdict. Similarly, in the case concerning the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations (Paraguay v. United States of America) US has chosen to ignore the court's decision. Therefore, its highly regrettable that such an acclaimed publication like the Economist, which is reputed for its 'intelligence' and 'research' paddling this kind of misinformation.
The author did not make such a statement otherwise you would have posters jumping on it with much fanfare already.
Look, this verdict, if applied to a small country, especially a non-democratic country, would have already provided enough pretext for military actions. But that's not the case here. As long as China does not implode and split into little pieces, there is little chance this verdict will stand, IMHO.
..
...jap MAKES A MOCKERY of JUSTICE
The PCA judge who selected the 4 of the 5 judges is a jap judge who is a well known RIGHT-WING NUT
This jap judge SHUNJI YANAI swears that the HOLOCAUST never happened
This jap also claimed the NANJING MASSACRE never happened
IN VIEW OF THIS TERRIBLE miscarriage of justice......this mockery of justice.........China will fight tooth and nail against the attack of the EVIL forces
..
...
"Chinese Pirates Have A Powerful Patron:
China and Indonesia are unofficially, but very visibly, at war with each other over illegal fishing.
China has been stealing fish (poaching) from offshore areas where the fishing rights belong to other countries. This poaching has been going on with increasing frequency since the 1990s.
But now many of the victims have done the math and noted that the most frequent offenders are Chinese ships. These are either Chinese owned fishing ships or ships from other countries that register themselves as Chinese to gain a measure of immunity from being stopped or punished by the nations being plundered. But some nations are not just complaining, they are fighting back.
In the case of Indonesia the fighting back consists of shooting at poachers and, since 2014, destroying (via explosives or burning) over 170 ships used by guilty poachers.
Indonesia calculates that this poaching costs Indonesia over $2 billion a year and that China’s worldwide poaching operation brings in over $20 billion a year.
Since China does not officially admit it is organizing and controlling this, and the Indonesians are using large warships with orders to fire on any poacher caught and refusing to surrender, the Chinese are taking most of the losses off Indonesia.
For a while China sent warships to accompany flotillas (often ten or more ocean going fishing ships) and protect the poachers if caught and keep the police or coast guard boats busy while the poachers escaped.
But Indonesia responded by sending out warships (corvettes and frigates) with orders to fire on any foreign warships caught with the poachers. China stopped sending warships but the poachers kept on coming and Indonesia keeps capturing and prosecuting the crews.
The poacher ships are often destroyed as media events, with local news being allowed to capture and broadcast videos of the fires and explosions."
Full details: https://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htmurph/articles/20160717.aspx
What price the 'sovereignty' of other nations? Surely the sauce for the goose is also the sauce for the gander?
china is no saint, why should it be? neither is indonesia, usa or others.
but you may be better off if you could back up your statement with facts which are devoid in your post.
the arbitral tribunal dont have jurisdiction over sovereigty issue.
How do Tribunal outlaw or deliver big blow to China claim in the SCS?
Why should China 9 dash line been compatible with UNCLOS?
China 9 dash line and UNCLOS are two different sets of law.
Geneva Convention and USA law - great contradiction.
Only USA court can hear the cases.
USA is a signatory to the Geneva Convention.
Only China court can hear the cases if there are any breach of UNCLOS.
Because China ratify the treaty - Domestic law of China.
Tribunal dont have jurisdiction in China.
Only you get one thing wrong, PRC's 9-dashed line is not in any law, not even in PRC's law. Better get your facts straight.
Yes, the tribunal itself says it doesn't have jurisdiction over sovereignty.
But it can decide whether that little land is entitled to EEZ or not.
Let's be real here, the greater prize everyone is after is the surrounding water and the underlying resources.
Please edit third sentence last paragraph.
The situation is not as bad as some agitated readers imaged. Both China and Philippines have made great effort NOT to escalate the territorial conflict. From decades ago Chinese government has agreed to share some of the privilege of extracting fossil fuel resources in SCS with stakeholder countries but with sovereignty non-negotiable. And current Filipino president Duterte has been long observed trying to seek more economical cooperation with China and intentionally downplaying the tribunal ruling result.
However, the real danger resides in how US reacts in the coming years. China will no doubt continue on island building and US airforce will keep hanging around those islands in name of freedom of navigation. International politics are really interesting especially when involved two equally potent superpower like US and China.
"From decades ago Chinese government has agreed to share some of the privilege of extracting fossil fuel resources in SCS with stakeholder countries but with sovereignty non-negotiable."
What CRAP. Got any proof for that idiocy? Got any reliable links? Or are you just parroting the dictatorship's bs?
Sovereignty non-negotiable?!?
Memo to "Mike Shaw": the Chinese dictatorship doesn't have sovereignty over the SCS. The PCA held that the Nine Dash Line is without legal merit. NONE. ZERO.
Try to keep up with the news.
Sovereignty? What a joke. Sorry, Mikey, nothing for the dictatorship to negotiate on that subject.
Nice try.
Why China reject PCA and its decisions? Because Chinese see the thing is not as a judgment, even Chinese don't understand what is history in international law, under UNCLOS 1982. What Chinese think and action all are based on extreme nationalist emotion.
it seem to me that you dont understand that it is a private org - Arbitration.
It have no power of enforcement.
The arbitral tribunal was not approved by both parties.
Private org cant issue legal binding decision on a sovereign nation.
China ratify the UNCLOS in 1996.
Do you understand the meaning of ratification?
They pass the Act of Parliament.
Their ratification dont contain such provision - arbitration
They apply exemption to it.
Oh! My God!
Please carefully study about what you say. Exactly you never have read UNCLOS and PCA papers. Exactly China government has cram its people to be the stupids.
PCA is a private organization? Hahaha!
Your people once said that PCA is a commercial company, and now you ...! Please read carefully PCA award dated July, 12.2016 or at least PCA press release in the same date, from which you can understand why PCA has rights to work in this case.
This is reason why in international politics drawing a red should be rarely done..and getting a court verdict without the other party participating is not a good idea. Unless, of course, you can use force to enforce the verdict. As has been observed by scholars of international politics every single one of the permanent members of the UN security councils has defied international law without any long lasting adverse effect.
Drawing a red line removes the strategic ambiguity and leaves diplomacy little chance. It corners your opponent as well as yourself.
Which is exactly what China did by saying its sovereignty over the sea is indisputable. China drew the red line, made of nine dashes.
it dont have power of enforcement. Why?
it is a private org.
It is not a official tribunal for UNCLOS.
For instance,
Can a Private Prosecutor bring Criminal charge against any individual in UK?
Only Crown Prosecutor enjoy such power in the criminal prosecution.
China rejects an international court of arbitration in 2016, offering no compromise. Instead China clings to its claims to the South China Sea based on ancient documents that have no power to legally bind and in no way reflect present international reality.
Anyone that looks at a map of China's claims can immediately see how unrealistic they are.
If China would do the rational thing by acknowledging the freedom of the sea and work for joint exploitation of the resources of the region, it would get more benefits faster, reduce international friction and gain influence, which will eventually accrue to the very position China seeks but without conflict.
Instead China seeks pre-emptive strategic advantage by seizing what it wants, attempting intimidation and denial of the freedom of the sea. If China persists it will only alienate the world and reduce the many benefits it has achieved.
Everyone knows China has the most to lose by conflict, but China can still accidently slip into conflict if it is not wise.
The last thing the US wants is conflict, it has a history of supporting China, it never invaded China as some imperialistic powers have done. China can never hope to prevail with its unobtainable goals. But the freedom of the seas will not be compromised.
As someone that reveres Chinese culture and admires the Chinese people, and I hope in some small measure understand them, I ask that China let past injuries heal. China is great, don't rock the boat or we will all get wet.
The conflict over SCS exist between China and other claimants had never about the issue Freedom of navigation till USA intervene in the conflict aggressively.
USA is the most outspoken player in SCS than 5 real claimants to SCS.
USA take no sides on sovereignty of SCS but they always ask Asean to confront China .
China claim in SCS are as valid as USA Cessation of Mexican Treaty and Purchase treaty of Alaska.
So your suggestion is to let the world watch while China takes what it wants, trampling the rights of smaller nations? Living back in the stoneage are we?
The tribunal is thoroughly unlawful, as it is launched unilaterally by Philippines, without the participation of China. Also, the so-called judges, who were called together by Philippines with enormous sums of money, expectedly voice the interests of the latter. And the most decisive fact is that the UN itself has asserted officially that the Tribunal has no connection whatsoever with it. Given all this, the arbitration is totally meaningless and illegal, making the claim that China failed to conform with the UNCLOS ill-founded.
It's totally lawful. China refused to participate because China knew China does not have legal right!
When will a thief ever admit a court ruling is lawful?
The US should ally up with all of SE Asia and place permanent nuke bases in the region. That will keep China as part of the global system
The article title "An UN-Appointed Tribunal..." is misleading, as the UN has openly confirmed no-connection with the Tribunal whatsoever, even though it occupies the same office building. It's a private and commercial tribunal hired by Philippines with full financial support from the US (with over US$30M fees paid), and the arbitral tribunal was assembled by Mr. Yanai, a famous Japanese right-winger who spares every effort in changing the status-quo of the post-world war II world order (after which Japan became an "abnormal country" strictly under US control) . It's purely a political show and manipulation under the cover of international law and justice wholly master-minded by the US and Japanese--both of them would profit enormously economically and politically from creating the tensions/conflicts between China and its neighbors.
By the way, how an arbitration can carry on without the agreement for appointing arbitral tribunal and participation in the process from the other party directly involved?!
"as the UN has openly confirmed no-connection with the Tribunal whatsoever"
Oh really? Got a reliable link or are you just spreading propaganda? Put up or shut up. Let's have a link.
BTW, do you know what the "UN" in UNCLOS stands for?
Take a guess.
One of the arguments for some people to urge China to adhere to the PCA rulings is that by failing to do do would damage China's reputation.
I wish this argument stands, I really do. But this is a false argument.
Why?
Because, by looking at the comments in this forum, and by my observations in forums like this, I do not see how China can lose more reputation at all. The country has been demonized to such an extend that any additional demonization is just icing on the top.
There goes that argument.
According to Pew Research, global opinions on China and US are comparable.http://www.pewglobal.org/2014/07/14/chapter-2-chinas-image/
But you are right, China cares less about what some countries think.
it is a Private org - Arbitration.
They are not the official sanctioned UNCLOS arbitration.
Their ruling is illegitimate.
After spending coffee break on the web trying to find documents from PRC or ROC claiming legal status for the nine dashed line in SCS water, I came up dry (pun intended). Looks like the only country claiming that the nine dashed line had legal status before the PCA ruling struck it down is the Philippines.
Totally false, liar. Only the idiots/thugs in Beijing are claiming the Nine Dash Line has validity. Everyone else knows its just an excuse for the dictatorship's theft.
You liar.
Coffee break? Sure.
Put the crack pipe down, liar.
The court has no direct link to the UN.And it is certainly not UN appointed.
What do the letters UN in UNCLOS stand for ?
I see the Propaganda Army is trying its level best to discredit the PCA ruling.
The nine-dashed line originated as an follow-up of Japanese defeat in WWII. Territorial disputes exist in many places, but a case like this where an outside power is so deeply involved is rare.
China has sufficient determination and experience to cope with US's hostile policy. The two countries have clashed in hot or cold manners in Korea, Vietnam, as well as Beijing (the Tiananmen incident where US clearly tried to topple the Chinese govt) and every time it is the US to be the loser.
Now things have changed dramatically, China is already the largest exporter of many industrial products including nuclear technology (to UK just recently), military drone (the largest one in the world to the surprise of many, search "CH drone Iraq" on youtube), and civilian drone, and the list goes on. Recently, China has launched world's first quantum space satellite (finding "China’s quantum space pioneer: We need to explore the unknown" on Nature.com), leaving the rest of the world behind.In addition, China has just made world's fastest supercomputer (Sunway TaihuLight) with Made-in-China chips.
Anyway, all I am trying to say is that if the US wants to play with China, we will be happy to cope with. As for Philippine, Vietnam etc, you guys better to improve your education and skill and make some thing as simple as a market-viable bicycle first.
China is also defending UNCLOS from being abused and misused. Many countries signed on to UNCLOS owing to the assurance afforded by Article 298 on matters relating sovereignty and maritime boundary delimitation. The Philippines’ arbitral tribunal is now threatening to render Article 298 meaningless that could cause an exodus from UNCLOS.
The Philippines’ arbitral tribunal cannot invoke any power or authority under Article 288(4) or any other Article under UNCLOS unless it is an Annex VII UNCLOS arbitral tribunal. For the reason as pointed out in my post below, the Philippines’ arbitral tribunal has failed to be constituted as an Annex VII UNCLOS arbitral tribunal.
It's under Article 9 of Annex VII under UNCLOS, genius
https://pca-cpa.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/175/2016/07/PH-CN-20160712-...
"If one of the parties to the dispute does not appear before the arbitral tribunal or fails to defend its case, the other party may request the tribunal to continue the proceedings and to make its award. Absence of a party or failure of a party to defend its case shall not
constitute a bar to the proceedings. Before making its award, the arbitral tribunal must satisfy itself not only that it has jurisdiction over the dispute but also that the claim is well founded in fact and law."
This is an excellent article, the sort of thing that makes me continue subscribing to The Economist. It is on subjects like the rule of law and factual matters related thereto that TE shines. Unfortunately TE has a tendency to excuse detours around the rule of law when its economic ideology/religion is threatened, for example in Latin American countries when short-cuts are taken to oust democratically elected left-of-centre leaders. Then too often it's OK, even desirable.