Home Viet Nam Human Rights » Analysis-Comment » home » The US officially denied the China’s “nine-dash line”

The US officially denied the China’s “nine-dash line”

12/12/15


The 26-page paper was published on December 12 by the US State Department’s Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs published. The paper has shown the inconsistency of the China’s controversial 9-dash line claim over the South China Sea with international law.
The study was released ahead of a December 15 deadline for China to respond to the Philippines’ historic arbitration case on the disputed sea before an international tribunal. The US study also came just two days before China released its own position paper detailing its objection to the case.
In 2009, China sent its 9-dash line map to the United Nations, illegally claiming the territory in the East Sea. In the map, China claimed about 2 millions sq. km of the sea and 13 sq. km of the land in the East Sea, including Paracel and Sparly islands and Scaborough shoal.
The State Department’s paper showed that the 9-dash line is too close to the shore of the countries that is bordering the East Sea. In the map, the first dash is only 50 nautical miles away from Vietnam’s shore and 36 nautical miles away from the Vietnam’s Ly Son island, the 3rd, 4th and 5th lines are respectively away from Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines 75, 24 and 35 nautical miles.
The paper also pointed out a lot of inappropriate things in the China’s map. The lines in the 2009 map is closer to the shore of neighboring countries than the 1947 map’s ones. The paper demonstrated the 2nd line is 45 nautical miles closer than the closest line in the 1947 map.
The US State Department said China failed to clarify its controversial 9-dash line claim over the South China Sea in a way consistent with international law. The paper showed that all of the China’s laws, statements and official activities are different from their nature and demand. The US State Department issued three different explanations for what China is showing.
The first explanation, the 9-dash line is the area which China claims its territory over the islands and surrounding waters that recognized under the provisions of the UN Convention on the Law Sea (UNCLOS). If the 9-dash line means so, all islands and sea areas inside the line must be consistent with the provisions of UNCLOS on the territorial sea, contiguous zone, exclusive economic zone and continental shelf which established basing on the coast and geographic structures as the definition of “island” in the Article 121 of the convention.
However, according to the US State Department, there are still disputes at the islands and surrounding waters in the East Sea. On the other hand, even if China has sovereignty over the islands in the East Sea, the border of the surrounding seas which established under the Article 121 of the convention must be assigned by the associated countries.
The second explanation, the 9-dash line is the China national border. The US State Department stated that the dashes which China issued all have no legal basis consistent with international law. In the UNCLOS, the maritime boundaries are established by assignment of associated countries and therefore, one country cannot unilaterally establish maritime boundaries with other nations.
In addition, a unilateral maritime boundary is inappropriate with the practice among countries and international law. Because the maritime boundary is measured by the opposite coast, long and consecutive, not based on the too-small and isolated islands in the East Sea.
Also, the 2nd, 3rd and 8th lines in the illegal 2009 map of the China are not only close to other countries’ coast but also beyond the 200 nautical miles from any geographic structures that China claims.
The final explanation, the 9-dash line is the boundary of the so-called “historical sea demand” of the China. According to the paper, if the 9-dash line shows the China’s demand for what so-called the “historical water” or “historical right”, the demand is not within the "demand history" is under Sections 10 and 15 of UNCLOS.
As to the third interpretation, the paper said the line failed each element of a legal test: No open, notorious, and effective exercise of authority over the East Sea; No continuous exercise of authority in the East Sea; No acquiescence by foreign states in China’s exercise of authority in the East Sea.
With the analysis of the 26 page report, the US State Department concluded that the claim of China on 9-dotted line is illegal and inconsistent with international law of the sea. /.
Chia sẻ bài viết ^^
Other post

All comments [ 14 ]


Voice of people 12/12/15 22:17

China's 9-dash line is vague, and most interpretations of the claim are inconsistent with international law

For A Peace World 12/12/15 22:19

In the East Sea, coastal countries enjoy rights to exclusive economic zones and continental shelves in accordance with the law on the sea, which does not allow claims by one country based on historical factors to supercede the rights of others.

yobro yobro 12/12/15 22:21

Beijing is a party to Unclos but has rejected the tribunal’s jurisdiction over its dispute with the Philippines.

Me Too! 12/12/15 22:23

China is acting as the only power in the region regardless of the international law and neighbors' interests

Socialist Society 12/12/15 22:26

The paper is a must-read for anyone interested in maritime security,

Vietnam Love 12/12/15 22:28

the unlawfulness of China’s claim is unacceptable

John Smith 12/12/15 22:29

China’s recent aggressive acts in the East Sea has pushed escalation of tensions in the area and sparked concern that the area is becoming a flashpoint with global consequences

Red Star 12/12/15 22:31

Eeach country bordering the East Sea has the sovereign rights over its exclusive economic zone of 200 nautical miles and continental shelf of at least 200 nautical miles

LawrenceSamuels 12/12/15 22:32

What makes this issue particularly difficult is that China hasn't specified its maritime claims.

Gentle Moon 12/12/15 22:34

China is making these claims outside of international law

Elizabeth Green 15/12/15 06:35

there hasn't been any country that accept the China’s “nine-dash line”

Unknown 15/12/15 06:37

It has been seen illegal and unreasonable “tongue line”

Evans David 15/12/15 06:39

everyone know that China intents to monopolize the East Sea

Unknown 15/12/15 06:42

countries are seeking the ways to prevent China's intention that threaten to the stability and peace of the region

Your comments