South China Sea Strategies for other nations (Not China)

joshuatree

Captain
If Itu Aba (or Taiping island) was included in that list

The lawyers brought their arguments to Foreign Secretary Albert del Rosario and President Aquino. Mr. Aquino ultimately decided that the Itu Aba discussion be included in the memorial.


I still don't see how it will affect the courts determination and judgement.

“If Itu Aba were to be seen as capable of generating a 200 nautical mile EEZ and continental shelf, the whole area which is subject of the case requires a [maritime boundary] delimitation before anything could be decided, and that will take the case out of the jurisdiction of the tribunal,” said Batongbacal.
 

Blackstone

Brigadier
Flouting international laws is always an option. For a State pushing to take leadership in the monetary system like AIIB which fundamentally is underpinned by rule based and transparency then that is probably a good demonstration of what that leadership may potentially be.
That sounds nice, but totally unrealistic. Can you name one great power since Brenton Woods that doesn't flout international laws? And if you can not, why do you expect China tp operate differently? Come to think of it, where's your outrage against other big and small powers that ignore international laws?
 

advill

Junior Member
Agreed, when countries become great powers, there always the temptation to disregard & flout rules & laws, like in the past. The major culprits were Nazi Germany, the former USSR , & former Imperial Japan. They all lost badly. However, Germany, Japan have changed and are now democratic countries, while Russia is semi-democratic. A best solution now would be for countries to negotiate wisely without being antagonistic to each other; and compromise or get an impartial arbiter like the UN. Aim for an amiable/acceptable solution to the satisfaction of parties (big or small) concerned - give and take attitudes.
 

Blackstone

Brigadier
Agreed, when countries become great powers, there always the temptation to disregard & flout rules & laws, like in the past. The major culprits were Nazi Germany, the former USSR , & former Imperial Japan. They all lost badly. However, Germany, Japan have changed and are now democratic countries, while Russia is semi-democratic.
Not surprisingly, you resorted to a straw man fallacy, but the problem with linking China with Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan is you put America in the same light, because it regularly ignoring international laws it don't like. It's the perk of being a great power, and China want some of that too.

>>> Removed caustic remarks directed at another SD member. Blackstone, you are receiving a warning for this. <<<<<
 
Last edited by a moderator:

joshuatree

Captain
The Philippines submission is not about delimitation and so the quote you mentioned is irrelevant.

I've also quoted the Philippines deciding to add Taiping into their case because it would hurt them more to ignore it.

The Philippines submission doesn't specifically ask for delimitation but the dots have been connected. It asks as part of its case to classify a list of features as merely rocks. Taiping is on that list and it's going to be a tall order to convince an objective court that it isn't an island with its own EEZ. From there, the court has no jurisdiction on delimitation of overlapping EEZs which is the reason China has decided not to attend as permitted by the rules over delimitation and sovereignty issues. With a court deciding Taiping has an EEZ, the rest of the case will be moot as the areas China has been operating fall within the scope of Taiping's EEZ. Then it's back to square one for the Philippines minus a few years involved in this process. That's the relevancy.
 

Brumby

Major
That sounds nice, but totally unrealistic. Can you name one great power since Brenton Woods that doesn't flout international laws? And if you can not, why do you expect China tp operate differently? Come to think of it, where's your outrage against other big and small powers that ignore international laws?

I already said that flouting rules is always an option but it also comes at a cost. The discussion isn't about history and so I am not sure what is frankly your contention.
 

Brumby

Major
I've also quoted the Philippines deciding to add Taiping into their case because it would hurt them more to ignore it.
Point noted. I agree it would be disingenuous on the Philippines to intentionally ignore Taiping island. Might as well confront the issue head on.

The Philippines submission doesn't specifically ask for delimitation but the dots have been connected. It asks as part of its case to classify a list of features as merely rocks. Taiping is on that list and it's going to be a tall order to convince an objective court that it isn't an island with its own EEZ.
That is the Philippines' problem to deal with. I haven't seen the actual legal argument so it is hard to fathom what is the game plan.

From there, the court has no jurisdiction on delimitation of overlapping EEZs which is the reason China has decided not to attend as permitted by the rules over delimitation and sovereignty issues.
I think this point is so often quoted that it is automatically assumed to be the whole truth. Whilst it is true that UNCLOS doesn't decide it does set out the mechanism for resolution and that States are expected to resolve it expeditiously,in good faith and in accordance with the provisions. What happens if those conditions are not met is actually untested legal territory. The Philippines in my view is conducting lawfare and the pathway is not necessarily clear but it is premature to assume it will be a waste of time.

With a court deciding Taiping has an EEZ, the rest of the case will be moot as the areas China has been operating fall within the scope of Taiping's EEZ. Then it's back to square one for the Philippines minus a few years involved in this process. That's the relevancy.
Even if Taiping island is determined to have an EEZ, the outcome is simply the presence of overlapping claims. There are countless examples of this around the world where it can be resolved reasonably and equitably. As is, China is already making blanket claims across vast expanse and so the determination itself effectively doesn't retrograde the Philippines' situation.
 
Top