Search

The article explores allegations over China's economic aggression in its territorial disputes with the Philippines and Vietnam over South China Sea as of January 2017. Topics include an panel's ruling in favor of the Philippines against China over territorial disputes, China's protests of the ruling, and countries' concern that China will manipulate its economic power to advance its political and strategic interests. Also discussed are the factors that would affect China's foreign policy, China's alleged sanctions against the Philippines after the Scarborough Shoal incident, and China's dispute with Vietnam over HD-981 oil rig deployment in 2014.

A reprint of the document "China Adheres to the Position of Settling Through Negotiation the Relevant Disputes Between China and the Philippines in the South China Sea," which appeared on the official Website of the Foreign Ministry of China on July 13, 2016, is presented. Topics discussed include the territorial sovereignty of China over Nanhai Zhudao, the dispute between China and the Philippines over maritime delimitation, and China's policy on the South China Sea issue.

The South China Sea dispute between the Philippines and China can be viewed as a mixed dispute that involves both territorial and maritime issues. In this regard, an issue arises concerning whether an Annex VII Arbitral Tribunal under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea can adjudicate a mixed dispute. The Philippines/China arbitral award of 29 October 2015, along with the 2015 Mauritius/United Kingdom arbitration, sheds some light on this issue. Furthermore, with regard to Article 281 of the Convention, the Tribunal in the Philippines/China arbitration adopted an interpretation that is different from the interpretation adopted by the Annex VII Arbitral Tribunal in the 2000 Southern Bluefin Tuna arbitration. The Philippines/China arbitral award provides important insight into the interpretation of Article 281. In addition, the Tribunal's treatment of China's informal communications merits particular attention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The multilateral territorial dispute over the South China Sea has intensified in recent years. In response, some observers endorse the apparent turn to " lawfare" on display in the ongoing Philippines v. China arbitration, conducted under Annex VII of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). Yet the limited subject matter of this arbitration means that it can contribute only modestly to any ultimate resolution between claimants. Indeed, the Chinese side has argued against tribunal jurisdiction precisely on the basis of the primacy of questions over territorial sovereignty--which are barred from UNCLOS proceedings--to the determination of all other legal issues being contested between the parties. This Article assesses the merits of these and other major objections to the UNCLOS arbitration and proposes a supplemental legal mechanism: an international Commission of Inquiry (COI) by involved states, addressing French, Japanese, and other extra-regional states' now inactive claims regarding the sovereign status of the region' s various island territories through the end of World War II hostilities in 1945. Such a COI would acknowledge, as the UNCLOS arbitration does not, the centrality of the legal issue of territorial sovereignty to the dispute. Yet by limiting its findings to the islands' contested status during the period of European and Japanese colonialism in Asia, rather than determining current ownership, a COI could nonetheless avoid exacerbating tensions or alienating claimants. Most importantly, such an approach could serve to establish a narrowed, but still ample, range of possible legal claims and outcomes for further adjudication. Claims based on "discovery" and " conquest" could at least potentially be ruled out, leaving only " cession" -based arguments (the implications of which are considerably less divisive, as they are premised on mutual recognition between equal states). A COI would also be based upon and contribute to a regional " epistemic community" of juridical expertise, furthering transnational civil society ties between claimant states. Finally, the positivistic discourse based on the principle of legal equality pursued by a COI as here proposed could, potentially, more generally dissuade unilateral behavior by individual states, while promoting mutual recognition and cooperative arrangements among regional actors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The U-shaped line in the South China Sea has been recently challenged in the international community and this challenge reached its climax when the Philippines presented China with a Notification and Statement of Claim under Article 287 and Annex VII of the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Lawof the Sea (LOSConvention) on 22 January 2013. In its Statement of Claim, the Philippines requests the Annex VII Arbitral Tribunal to adjudge and declare that China's maritime claims based on the U-shaped line are contrary to the LOS Convention and invalid. Against this background, this article will analyze the issues concerning the related submissions of the Philippines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

For many contemporary historians, the 1689 Treaty of Nerchinsk was not only the first diplomatic treaty between China and a European power, but also an example of a peaceful boundary settlement, which ended the protracted conflict between the two expanding empires. Yet despite modern emphasis on territorial demarcation, clarity of border signs hardly dominated this seventeenth century conflict in the Far East. In fact, careful examination of the published Russian archival record of Muscovite-Qing diplomatic correspondence reveals that competition for tributary allegiances of indigenous and settler populations proved to be a much greater source of tension between the two empires. Ultimately, the mercurial loyalties of local Tungus and Mongol tribes as well the cross-nation desertions of Cossacks, military commanders and Ming loyalists drove both Qing and Muscovite officials to stabilize their shared frontiers through negotiation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]