The Philippines in its fight in claiming the

South China Sea

The South China Sea is a marginal sea which forms part the Pacific Ocean,
encompassing an area from the Karimata and Malacca Straits to the Strait of
Taiwan of around 3,500,000 square kilometers. It carries millions of trade
and is at the same time the world’s shipping passes through it. The South
China Sea contains over 250 small islands, atolls, cays, shoals, reefs,
and sandbars, most of which have no indigenous people, many of which are
naturally under water at high tide, and some of which are permanently
submerged. It is an archipelago, number in the hundreds. The sea and its
mostly uninhabited islands are subject to competing claims of sovereignty
by several countries.
The International Hydrographic Organization (IHO) Limits of Oceans and
Seas, 3rd edition (1953), defines the location which is in South China Sea,
West of the Philippines, East of Vietnam and Malay Peninsula and North of
the Bangka Belitung Islands and Borneo.
The South China Sea’s strategic location entice many claims from its
neighboring countries. Both People's Republic of China (PRC) and
the Republic of China (ROC, commonly known as Taiwan) claim almost the
entire body as their own, demarcating their claims within what is known as
the nine-dotted line, the claims of the different neighboring countries are
overlapping. However, the Philippines and the People’s Republic of China
has stood their ground and pursued each of their claims.

The Philippines has stood its ground for years despite being threatened in
facing developed countries. It bases its claims on geographical proximities
to the Spratly Island. Recalling the month of May 1956, the dispute first
escalated after Tomas Cloma, a Filipino, together with his followers settled
on the islands and declared the territory as "Freedomland", now known
as Kalayaan for himself and later requested to make the territory a
protectorate of the Philippines. He even stole China’s national flag from the
Taiping Island. He apologized officially for his act and surrendered the flag
he stole to China's embassy in Manila on July 1956.
In 1968, during the time of former President Ferdinand Marcos, Philippine
troops were sent to the Islands. It was in 1970s that other countries who later
purported territorial claims over the disputed island has began to invade
and occupy the island. However, in 1978, the Spartlys Island was placed
under the jurisdiction of the province of Palawan.

The People's Republic of China (PRC) basis its claims to the Paracel and
Spratly Islands because they were seen as integral parts of the Ming dynasty.
China took control of the largest island - Taiping Island - in the group since
1946.
China justifies its unlawful actions by invoking a historic claim of the waters
west of the Philippines. The claim, demarcated by what China calls a nine-
dash line, is based on a historic map first published in 1947. In actuality, the
nine-dash line is a vague, disjointed delineation which experts say was
conjured without rhyme or reason. It encompasses practically the entire
West Philippine sea including the Spratlys, Scarborough Shoal, and the
Paracel islands.

Interestingly, China has never made an official claim for the territory before
the International Tribunal for the Laws of the Sea (ITLOS), as most claimants
must do. Instead, it simply grabbed the territories from the sovereign nations
who have pending claims over parts of seas. The claimants include the
Philippines, Vietnam, Taiwan, Malaysia and Brunei.

China is a signatory to the 1994 United Nation’s convention of the Laws of

the Seas. As such, the emerging superpower, along with 120 nations, have
agreed that waters and islands within 200 nautical miles from the shores of
a particular nation forms part of its domain or Exclusive Economic Zone
(EEZ). Areas not belonging to any nation’s EEZ is regarded as “International
Waters” and as such, are governed by United Nations Maritime Laws.

Allegedly, there are three reasons why China has never backed away from
its claims on said Island; the obvious reason is for its natural resources.
Beneath the disputed area is an estimated 11 billion barrels of oil, 190 trillion
feet of natural gas, and 10% of the world’s fishing resources, second reason
is to further expand its territory using the “continuous annex strategy.” See,
the more islands China claims as its own, the more it can invoke ITLOS laws
to further annex another 200 kilometers of EEZ, and West Philippine Sea is
where one-third of world trade valued at $5 trillion passes through. It is the
channel by which 2.2 billion consumers can be accessed. To control the West
Philippine Sea is to control global trade.

However, despite the untainted claims of China over the Island, Philippines
contended that the "nine-dotted line" claim by China is invalid because it
violates the UNCLOS agreements about exclusive economic
zones and territorial seas. It says that because most of the features in
the South China Sea, such as most of the Spratly Islands, cannot sustain life,
they cannot be given their own continental shelf as defined in the
convention.

It was only until 2013 January that the Philippines had escalated and
pursued its claim over the island by formally initiating an arbitration
proceedings against China's claim on the territories within the "Nine-Dash
Line" that includes the Spratly Islands, which it said is unlawful under
the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). On July
12, 2016, the arbitral tribunal backed the Philippines, saying that there was
no evidence that China had historically exercised exclusive control over the
waters or resources, hence there was "no legal basis for China to claim
historic rights" over the nine-dash line.[47][48] The tribunal also criticized
China's land reclamation projects and its construction of artificial islands in
the Spratly Islands, saying that it had caused "severe harm to the coral reef
environment".[49] It also characterized Taiping Island and other features of
the Spratly Islands as "rocks" under UNCLOS, and therefore are not entitled
to a 200 nautical mile exclusive economic zone.[50] China however rejected
the ruling, calling it "ill-founded".[51] Taiwan, which currently administers
Taiping Island, the largest of the Spratly Islands, also rejected the ruling.

It was known as the South China Sea Arbitration, an arbitration case

brought by the Republic of the Philippines against the People's Republic of
China under Annex VII to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the
Sea(UNCLOS) concerning certain issues in the South China Sea including
the legality of China's Nine-dash line.
The Philippines contended that the "nine-dotted line" claim by China is
invalid because it violates the UNCLOS agreements about exclusive
economic zones and territorial seas. It says that because most of the features
in the South China Sea, such as most of the Spratly Islands, cannot sustain
life, they cannot be given their own continental shelf as defined in the
convention.
China refused to participate in the arbitration, stating that several treaties
with the Philippines stipulate that bilateral negotiations be used to resolve
border disputes. It also accuses the Philippines of violating the voluntary
Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea, made in 2002
between ASEAN and China, which also stipulated bilateral negotiations as
the means of resolving border and other disputes. China issued a position
paper in December 2014 arguing the dispute was not subject to arbitration
because it was ultimately a matter of sovereignty, not exploitation rights. Its
refusal will not prevent the PCA tribunal from proceeding with the
case. After the award ruling, the PRC issued a statement rejecting it as 'null'
and having decided not to abide by the arbitral tribunal's decision, said it
will "ignore the ruling".

China justifies its unlawful actions by invoking a historic claim of the waters
west of the Philippines. The claim, demarcated by what China calls a nine-
dash line, is based on a historic map first published in 1947. In actuality, the
nine-dash line is a vague, disjointed delineation which experts say was
conjured without rhyme or reason. It encompasses practically the entire
West Philippine sea including the Spratlys, Scarborough Shoal, and the
Paracel islands.

The widely-anticipated decision of an arbitration body, formed under the

aegis of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), to exercise
jurisdiction on the Philippines’ arbitration case against China represents a
major victory for those who seek a semblance of rule of law in the West
Philippine Sea.
On 7 July 2015, case hearings began with the Philippines asking the tribunal
to invalidate China's claims. The hearings were also attended by observers
from Indonesia, Japan, Malaysia, Thailand and Vietnam.[6] The case has
been compared to Nicaragua v. United States due to similarities of the parties
involved such as that a developing country is challenging a permanent
member of the United Nations Security Council in an arbitral tribunal.
On 29 October 2015, the arbitration tribunal ruled that it had the power to
hear the case. It agreed to take up seven of the 15 submissions made by
Manila, in particular whether Scarborough Shoal and low-tide areas like
Mischief Reef can be considered islands. It set aside seven more pointed
claims mainly accusing Beijing of acting unlawfully to be considered at the
next hearing on the case's merits. It also told Manila to narrow down the
scope of its final request that the judges order that "China shall desist from
further unlawful claims and activities.
The arbitral tribunal scheduled the hearing on merits of the case from 24 to
30 November 2015.
On 29 October 2015, the abritration published the award by the tribunal on
Jurisdiction and Admissibility [41] for the case. The tribunal found that it has
jurisdiction to consider the following seven Philippines' Submissions. (Each
number is the Philippines' Submissions number.) The tribunal reserved
consideration of its jurisdiction to rule on Nos. 1, 2, 5, 8, 9, 12, and 14.
Accordingly the award are as follows;

 No.3 Philippines'position that Scarborough Shoal is a rock under Article

121(3).
 No.4 Philippines' position that Mischief Reef, Second Thomas Shoal, and
Subi Reef are low tide elevations that do not generate entitlement to
maritime zones.
 No.6 Whether Gaven Reef and McKennan Reef (including Hughes Reef)
are low-tide elevations "that do not generate any maritime entitlements
of their own".
 No.7 Whether Johnson Reef, Cuarteron Reef, and Fiery Cross Reef do or
do not generate an entitlement to an exclusive economic zone or
continental shelf.
 No.10 "premised on [the] fact that China has unlawfully prevented
Philippine fishermen from carrying out traditional fishing activities
within the territorial sea of Scarborough Shoal."
 No.11 "China's failure to protect and preserve the marine environment at
these two shoals [Scarborough Shoal and Second Thomas Shoal]."
 No.13 Philippines’ protest against China's "purported law enforcement
activities as violating the Convention on the International Regulations for
the Prevention of Collisions at Sea and also violating UNCLOS".
The tribunal stated in the award that there are continuing disputes in all of
the 15 submissions from the Philippines,[41] but for submissions such as
No.3, No.4, No.6 and No.7, no known claims from the Philippines prior to
the initiation of this arbitration exist, and that China was not aware of (nor
had previously opposed) such claims prior to the initiation of arbitration.
The Chinese Society of International Law (CSIL) has stated that the tribunal
was trying to hide its incapability to prove that maritime entitlements of the
nine features constitute the essence of the disputes.[4]
For Submissions No.8 to No.14, the tribunal held the view that the
lawfulness of China's maritime activities in the South China Sea is not related
to sovereignty. CSIL has asserted that the disagreements do concern
territorial sovereignty, and constitute no dispute with respect to the claims
advanced by the Philippines.
Regarding the "Nine-Dash Line" and China's claim in the maritime areas of
the South China Sea[43]

 The [UNCLOS] Convention defines the scope of maritime entitlements in

the South China Sea, which may not extend beyond the limits imposed
therein.[44]
 China's claims to historic rights, or other sovereign rights or jurisdiction,
with respect to the maritime areas of the South China Sea encompassed
by the relevant part of the 'nine-dash line' are contrary to the Convention
and without lawful effect to the extent that they exceed the geographic
and substantive limits of China's maritime entitlements under the
Convention. The Convention superseded any historic rights or other
sovereign rights or jurisdiction in excess of the limits imposed therein

In 2016, the tribunal ruled in the Philippine’s favor saying that China’s nine-
dash line is invalid. It further ruled that China has no legal claim over
Philippine EEZ and that it had behaved unlawfully.
For countries like the Philippines, Taiwan, Vietnam and Brunei — not only
do we stand to lose our rights to the resources of the West Philippine Sea,
we also lose our right to free navigation within our own waters. Worse, we
bear the risk of increased territory grabs by China, even in our mainland.
China is testing how far it can go. It has recently threatened to declare an Air
Identification Zone over the waters wherein all aircrafts flying over the
airspace must first obtain Chinese permission. Clearly, its plan to control all
movements within the West Philippine Sea is well in motion.
How is the Philippine government preparing for this? Government officials
insists that there is a strategic reason why Malacañang plays footsies with
China, why it soft-pedals on our sovereign claims and why it has allowed
the Chinese to have their way over our shoals and islets. On the other hand,
it relies on the 1951 Mutual Defense Treaty between the Philippines and the
United States in case an all out invasion breaks out. We have also fortified
our air force with Brazilian-made A29 fighter jets and Korean-made FA-
50PH fighter jets to enable us to mount a credible defense.

As it stands, the Philippines is not prepared for war. I don’t think any of the
other ASEAN nations are prepared for it either. I think we should all be
doing more to arrest China’s diabolical intentions.

While China violates the awarding of the arbitration, the Philippine has
shown integrity of standing its ground regarding its claims, however, it
seemed that even when the Philippines has always shown this integrity it is
not what the current President is showing. The main question that should be
asked on this issue is, are we all really on the same page of the book? Or are
we fighting a lost fight?