On the applicability of law to island disputes etc.
What i am saying in my post is that as a body of international law, UNCLOS, for all intents and purposes, is not meant to strengthen ones argument on a land feature. as some in the dispute has openly stated (reign in china with UNCLOS court system etc) or as implied in the media. no where in UNCLOS state or implied so.
China is not claiming the whole body of water in SCS. it's 9-dash claim is only claiming land features, which UNCLOS does not apply.
Every time UNCLOS is brought up to discuss SCS issues I (quietly) scream at the TV or the newspaper or the Computer monitor because it is completely irrelevant. It pains me to see that US diplomats are bringing this up as it has anything to do with it.
The body of laws that pertaining to these territorial disputes are the body of laws that apply to every other territorial disputes, for example, ongoing ones between US and Canada.
What's the normal way people settle these disputes? Bilateral negotiations.
why Bilateral? because a multi-lateral international conferences that deals with very technical details of nature of border disputes does not have a good track record of keeping a lasting peace...
why? may be because these multilateral ones are liable to influence by geopolitical machination by political powers?
===
btw. china has settled ALL of its land border disputes with its neighbors with exception of India. between China and Vietnam they even amicably settled their ocean boundary in the gulf of tonkins, despite having a war only 35 years earlier. Those who says bilateral territorial negotiations with china are doomed to failure are simply ill informed and prejudiced as the evidence shows other wise.