Maomay, Patricia Desiree Ann M.

1-C PSYCH
LTS04 Mr. Esteves

The West Philippine Sea that is now called South China Sea, is a territory of the
Philippines. But the Chinese government is claiming it as their own. China’s claims
in the West Philippines Sea comprised of two parts. These are: (1) territorial
sovereignty claims to the land features of South China Sea, and (2) maritime rights
and interests claims in South China Sea. This started in January 22, 2013 when
the Philippine inaugurate an international arbitration against the People’s Republic
of China regarding their territorial and maritime dispute in the West Philippine Sea
– or what they called South China Sea.

As territorial sovereignty claims to the land features is concerned, China claims

sovereignty over South China Sea Islands. Which includes Pratas Islands, Paracel
Island, Macclesfield Bank and Scarborough Shoal, and the Spratlys Islands.
China’s maritime rights and interests claims in the South China Sea consists of
three parts. First, their claim to internal waters, territorial sea and contiguous zone.
As a matter of policy, China has only declared baselines for the territorial sea
surrounding Hainan and the Paracel Islands. But based on China’s proclamations
(since 1956) and conduct in the South China Sea, China does not consider the
waters beyond 12 nautical miles of the various South China Sea Islands to form
part of its territorial sea or internal waters. Second, their claim to an exclusive
economic zone (EEZ) and a continental shelf (CS). China claims sovereign rights
and jurisdiction over the relevant waters within the “nine-dash line” in general terms
that are in the line with the maritime zones anticipated by the Law of the Sea
Convention. Lastly, their claim based on the concept of “historic rights” in the South
China Sea. In the country’s view, these are private rights that vest in the Chinese
state and fall squarely within the “other rules of international law” that are
preserved by the Law of the Sea Convention. But as a vested right, it is worth
nothing that China’s “historic rights” claim and the “nine-dash line” are by no means
synonymous. To the contrary, every important Chinese diplomatic communication
in the wake of the Philippines v. China arbitration award reiterates China's claim to
'historic rights' in the South China Sea. By contrast, none mention the 'nine-dash
line' in any context whatsoever.

As the discussion goes, there are two aspects to China's disputes in the South
China Sea. There are different sorts of territorial sovereignty claims in the South
China Sea: (a) territorial sovereignty claims on geographical features, and (b)
maritime rights and interests claims in the South China Sea. It is almost a decade
but China is still claiming that West Philippine Sea is their territory. But based on
the evidences, China clearly has no right to claim West Philippine Sea. China's
'historic rights' claim, highlighted in the United States' view by the "Nine-Dashed
Line," has no legal basis in international law, especially insofar as it purports to be
an exclusive claim to fisheries and oil and gas resources beyond the 200 nautical
mile exclusive economic zone (EEZ) from China's coast in the South China Sea.
Also, China's operations in the waters of Scarborough Shoal (off the Philippines),
Vanguard Bank (off Vietnam), Luconia Shoal (off Malaysia), and Natuna Islands
(off Indonesia) are a violation of the Philippines', Vietnam's, Malaysians', and
Indonesians' maritime rights. That’s why China has no lawful basis to claim
territorial rights or maritime entitlements in the West Philippine Sea.