Viet Nam Human Rights
»
Analysis-Comment
»
home
»
China falls into panic as the ruling’s coming (Part II and End)
China falls into panic as the ruling’s coming (Part II and End)
5/7/16
China’s dilemma in
the case
The Permanent Court of Arbitration under the United
Nations is expected to issue a decision on Manila's case against Beijing's
nine-dash line claim over the South China Sea soon. China claims almost all of
the energy-rich South China Sea, through which more than $5 trillion of
maritime trade passes each year. Brunei, Malaysia, the Philippines, Taiwan and
Vietnam have overlapping claims.
The Philippines is contesting China's claim to an area
shown on its maps as a nine-dash line stretching deep into the maritime heart
of Southeast Asia, covering hundreds of disputed islands and reefs and
encompassing a vital global trade route. The consensus among officials and
analysts is that the ruling will go largely against Beijing.
Even though the Court’s ruling would be little more than
symbolic, and even though there would be no way to enforce the Court’s ruling
against China, and even though China has already said that it will ignore any
ruling, and even though China has bitterly complained about and even threatened
the Philippines for even going to the Court in the first place, it is clear
that Chinese officials are close to a state of panic over a possible ruling
against them.
China, which observers say is clearly worried, has
meanwhile ramped up its public relations campaign ahead of release of the the
tribunal's award. Despite pressure from Washington and elsewhere, China appears
determined to avoid granting any hint of legitimacy to a process that might
challenge its claim to ownership of virtually the entire South China Sea,
including its islands, reefs, fish stocks and potentially rich reserves of oil
and gas.
China’s cognitive dissonance is an extremely dangerous
situation. China’s population apparently widely believes that China’s South
China Sea claims are “indisputable.” This is already clearly wrong, and will be
publicly proven wrong if, as expected, the Court rules against
China. China has put forward “ironclad proof” in the form of evidence
that’s at best delusional and at worst fabricated. And China’s rejection of
UNCLOS is, in my opinion, not going to be widely supported, especially after
China itself has cited UNCLOS when convenient.
There is no chance at all that Chinese officials will
admit that they’ve been wrong, or that its population will change its opinions.
China is already heavily militarizing the South China Sea, and is already
attacking Vietnam’s and Philippines’ ship with its military. China will react
to its cognitive dissonance by doubling down. At best, this will mean a great
deal vitriolic anger on the part of Chinese officials. Eventually, it would
mean an irreversible military action that will spiral into full-scale war.
The collateral cost, analysts say: harm to global efforts
to resolve similar territorial disputes through legal means. By its actions,
China is demonstrating that countries can reject such measures whenever they
conflict with their interests. Even government-backed scholars such as Wu say
that the case is a no-win situation for China.
"Whatever the result, this is a definite loss for
China since we've been forced to assume a passive role," Wu said.
Regardless of China's arguments denying the panel's
legality, it "will damage China's reputation and image," said Yun
Sun, an expert on Chinese foreign policy at the U.S. Stimson Center think tank.
Philippine ambassador to Washington Jose Cuisia predicted
a diplomatic standoff if China ignores a negative decision.
"We will be pointing out that China is not following
the rule of law," he said. "I don't think they want to be pictured as
a rogue nation. So they will probably sit down with us and say, 'OK, can we
settle this in a diplomatic manner?'"
Whatever the outcome, China's refusal to cooperate with
the tribunal could harm efforts to promote international arbitration that have
already been hamstrung by the occasional refusal of the United States and
others to recognize the International Court of Justice and other institutions.
China's noncompliance is also damaging to UNCLOS itself,
since it could discourage compliance with other features of the convention,
particularly its establishment of 200-nautical mile (370-kilometer) exclusive
economic zones, said James Kraska, a professor of oceans law and policy at the
U.S. Naval War College.
"The
only way developing states have a stake in the system," Kraska said,
"is if it is governed by the rule of law in which the law binds the strong
states as well as the weak."./.
Popular Posts
-
Religion is a part of the spiritual life in society, this phenomenon of the superstructure has been strongly changed with economic - social... -
Vietnam has just done well for the second cycle of Universal Periodical Review (UPR) in Geneva, Switzerland. So, what’s the UPR? an... -
Thai people in Shutdown Bangkok protests Not until this crisis, we have realized the ne... -
Representatives from foreign countries congratulate Viet Nam on its election to the Human Rights Council for the first time on November ... -
A street flowers vendor in Hanoi Another new spring has come to Vietnam, bring... -
If nothing changes, there will be a preferential credit program with hundreds of thousands billion of capital for agriculture and r... -
Recently, several anti-governmental individuals have established series of illegal groups and organizations in the name of civil soci... -
Radio Free Asia (RFA) is a private, nonprofit international broadcasting agency of the United States government that broadcasts and...
All comments [ 7 ]
It is generally expected that the PCA will largely rule in favor of Manila. Most likely, Beijing will simply ignore the legal decision, as reiterated during this year’s Shangri-La Dialogue.
Yes, China perhaps even may accelerate its ongoing militarization of the SCS to create further facts on the ground to include the eventual establishment of an air defense identification zone once they have the full means to enforce it.
In the case of China, refusal to comply may have great reputational costs for a rising power seeking to become a world power.
Alternatively, Beijing may ignore the PCA’s ruling and just bide its time, at least until after the G-20 Summit slated to be held in Hangzhou, China this September.
It's so worrying that China’s land reclamation and militarization of the various geographic features have given it the capability and capacity to monitor and control much of the South China Sea.
Hence, while China occupies a position of regional advantage and strength, it must take care not to risk its advances by needless acts of aggression.
Confronted with this, China will still opt to ignore the final arbitration decision despite incurring great reputational costs as a benevolent rising power respectful of international law.
Your comments