CHINA

Intro: The ruling was made by the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague, following a case which was brought by the Philippines

OVER THE PAST FEW YEARS China has displayed an often aggressive stance over its vast territorial grab in the South China Sea. This has terrified its neighbours and set it on a collision course with the United States, long seen as the guarantor of peace in East Asia. In the last few days an international tribunal has demolished China’s vaguely defined claims to most of the South China Sea. How Beijing now reacts to this ruling is of the utmost geopolitical importance. If, in its anger, China flouts and ignores the verdict and continues its creeping annexation, it will be perceived as elevating brute force over international law as the arbiter of disputes among states. Continued bullying by China of its neighbours greatly raises the risk of a local clash and which could escalate into a war with America. The stakes couldn’t be higher.

The ruling was made by the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague, following a case which was brought by the Philippines. The verdict is firm, clear and everything which China did not want to hear. The judges decreed that the UN Convention on the Law of the Seas (UNCLOS) should solely determine how the waters of the South China Sea are divided among countries, and rejected China’s ill-explained ‘nine-dash line’ which implies the sea belongs to China. They ruled that none of the Spratly Islands in the south of the sea, claimed (and occupied) by several countries including China, can be defined as islands that can sustain human life. In practice, this means that no country can assert an Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) extending up to 200 nautical miles around them.

Map depicting the disputed islands in the South China Sea

While the court had no power to decide who owns which bits of land in the South China Sea, the judges said that by building on rocks visible only at low tide (and thus not entitled under UNCLOS to any sovereign waters), China had encroached illegally into the Philippines’ EEZ. The court also determined that China had violated UNCLOS by blocking Philippine fishing boats and oil-exploration vessels, and cited that Chinese ships had acted dangerously and unlawfully in doing so. Moreover, China’s island-building had caused ‘severe harm’ to the habitats of endangered species, and Chinese officials had turned a blind eye to such practices.

For China, this is undoubtedly a humiliation. Its leaders have been quick to denounce the proceedings as illegal. Its massive recent live-firing exercises in the South China Sea implies it may be planning a tough response. This might involve the imposition of an ‘Air Defence Identification Zone’ of the kind it has already declared over the East China Sea. Or it might mean that China starts building on the Scarborough Shoal, which it wrested from the Philippines in 2012 after a stand-off involving patrol vessels. That would be hugely provocative. Although the U.S. is deeply reluctant to risk a conflict, President Barack Obama is believed in March to have warned his Chinese counterpart, Xi Jinping, that any move on Scarborough Shoal would be seen as threatening American interests (the Philippines is a U.S. ally). Any attempt by China to call its bluff in a sea that carries $5.3 trillion in annual trade would be reckless and irresponsible.

There is a better way. China could climb down, and, in effect, quietly recognise the court’s ruling. That would mean ceasing its island-building, letting other countries fish where UNCLOS allows and putting a stop to poaching by its own fishermen. It should have good reason: its prestige and prosperity largely depends on a rules-based order. It certainly would be in China’s own interests to secure peace in its region by sitting down with the Philippines, Vietnam and other South-East Asian neighbours and trying to resolve differences.