The geopoliticalization of the South China Sea by the US has further complicated the security situation in the region and placed more hurdles in the peaceful settlement of disputes. The new president of the Philippines has made remarks concerning possible resumption of dialogue and negotiation on the Nansha Islands issue, a very welcome development.

In the past 20 years, the Philippines reached and signed at least six statements and agreements with China on peaceful settlement of the South China Sea disputes through negotiations. The current unilateral arbitration – deemed illegal by China and at least 60 other countries – is a ploy to legalize its illegitimate seizure of Chinese territory and deny China’s sovereign claims and maritime rights.

A former top Chinese diplomat argues against framing the South China Sea issue as a strategic issue and interpreting China’s behavior based on the “western theories” of international relations and history, adding assertions that China wants to make the South China Sea an Asian Caribbean Sea and impose the Monroe Doctrine to exclude the US from Asia are baseless.

Relying on certain clauses of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) of 1982, to which both the Philippines and China are parties, the Phi

In an article entitled The South China Sea Arbitration (The Philippines v. China): Assessment of the Award on Jurisdiction and Admissibility recently published

Taking advantage of the gap between the common-sense understanding shared by a small group of legal experts and the general public’s misunderstanding of international law, the U.S. is labeling China’s non-recognition of any award as non-compliance with international law. China must make the public — and scholars — appreciate the difference between general rules and exceptional rules.

Both the U.S. and China must bear responsibility for the ratcheting up of tension in the SCS and East China Sea. Washington clings to “freedom of navigation” as its principal reason for challenging Chinese claims even though unencumbered passage has not denied U.S. or any other country’s ships. Beijing should be consistent in recognizing that a legitimate dispute exists, just as it demands that Japan acknowledge a sovereignty dispute over the Diaoyutai/Senkaku islands.

On 10 June 2016, the Chinese Society of International Law (CSIL) released a paper entitled The Tribunal’s Award in the “South China Sea Arbitration” Initiated by the Philippines Is Null and Void.

Whereas aircraft carriers have long provided the U.S. naval primacy as floating islands, China is creating its own artificial islands, complete with deep channels, harbors, berthing areas and airfields, all manned by thousands of troops, to counter that primacy. The consequences of a military clash could easily be disastrous and must be avoided. The politics of keeping the overall U.S.-China relationship on track is a particular challenge in the U.S. during a presidential election year, when candidates are posturing to an unexpectedly populist electorate.

The arbitration tribunal has put its own authority in question by redefining the case against China put before it by the Philippines. All nations should be concerned about what would become of China’s maritime entitlements in the South China Sea if we let UNCLOS serve as the sole exclusionary source of such entitlements.