Keputusan Tuntutan Ke Atas Laut China Selatan, Filipina Kalahkan China

• • Selepas 81 Tahun, Azan Buat Pertama Kali Berkumandang Di Hagia Sophia!
• • Polis Bunuh 2 Warga Kulit Hitam: Rakyat Marah, Obama Kesal
• • Keindahan Syria Jadi Kenangan : 20 Gambar Sebelum Dan Selepas Perang
• • Sebuah Kubur Jadi Tumpuan Kerana Kedudukannya Di Tengah-tengah Jalan Raya
• • Pelancong Sepanyol Diusir Dari Myanmar Kerana Tatu
• • Wanita Tua Tercekik Daging, Tidak Menyangka Diselamatkan Oleh Dr. Henry Heimlich!
• • 'Festival Jinjing Anjing' Kaum Miao, Tanda Penghargaan Sumbangan Anjing!
• • Makhluk Gergasi & Berbulu Putih Ditemui Di Pantai Cagdainao, Filipina

Quote Voyagers 12-7-2016 07:51 PM

Beijing’s claims to South China Sea rejected by international tribunal

BEIJING — An international tribunal ruled Tuesday that there is no legal basis for China to claim historic rights to the South China Sea, in a major blow to Beijing.

The Permanent Court of Arbitration in the Hague also ruled that China had violated the Philippines' sovereign rights by constructing artificial islands there, and caused “permanent irreparable harm to the coral reef ecosystem.”

China has repeatedly made it clear it will not accept, recognize nor implement the ruling on the South China Sea, the hotly contested waterway that contains some of the world’s busiest shipping routes.

In a statement, the Foreign Ministry “solemnly declares that the award is null and void and has no binding force,” and said “China's territorial sovereignty and maritime rights and interests in the South China Sea shall under no circumstances be affected by those awards.”

But the verdict, which came in strongly in favor of the Philippines and against China, will nevertheless undermine Beijing’s claim to sovereignty within what it calls the “nine-dash line,” which it draws around most of the South China Sea.

In a statement, the Philippines’ secretary of foreign affairs Perfecto Yasay welcomed the ruling, calling it a “milestone,” but also urged “restraint and sobriety” among all concerned.

“The verdict is the best-case scenario that few thought possible,” said Richard Javad Heydarian, an assistant professor of political science at Manila’s De La Salle University.

“It is a clean sweep for the Philippines, with the tribunal rejecting China's nine-dashed line and historical rights claim as well as censuring its aggressive activities in the area and, among others, the ecological damage caused by its reclamation activity.”

At the International Crisis Group, senior China analyst Yanmei Xie called the verdict “as unfavorable to China as it can be.”

“It significantly limits the area maritime rights China can legally claim and declares many of Chinese activities illegal,” she said.

In Washington, Bonnie Glaser, senior adviser for Asia at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said the Philippines had won “a major victory,” with judges ruling in its favor on almost every point. “China's reaction is likely to be extremely tough. Fasten your seat belts,” she said.

n China, Chen Xiangmiao, an assistant research fellow at National Institute for South China Sea Studies, said the decision, especially on the nine-dash line, “totally surprised me.”

“The nine-dash line is the foundation of China's claim to sovereignty activities in South China Sea, which has been smashed by the ruling,” he said. “Without this foundation, China has less territory to claim in South China Sea. However, it’s hard to say how much the ruling will restrain China given the reaction from the Chinese government.”

The Philippines took China to the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) in the Hague in January 2013 after the Chinese navy seized control of Scarborough Shoal, a largely submerged chain of reefs and rocks set amid rich fishing grounds off the main Philippine island of Luzon.

The ruling could inflame regional tensions, and lead to more friction between China and the United States.

The United States has been leading international calls for China to respect the tribunal’s decision, and the issue has become a key test of its ability to maintain its leading role in Asian security in the face of China’s rising power.

Beijing refused to participate in the arbitration process, and instead launched a global propaganda campaign to make its case. Foreign Minister Wang Yi was quoted as telling his counterpart John Kerry last week the process was a “farce,” while his ministry says one would have to be delusional to think China will bow to diplomatic pressure to accept the ruling.

Some $5 trillion in commerce, roughly one-third of global trade, flows through the waters of the South China Sea every year, while its fisheries account for 12 percent of the global catch and significant oil and gas reserves are thought to exist under the sea floor. The waters are some of the most fiercely disputed in the world, with claims to various parts staked by Brunei, China, Malaysia, the Philippines, Vietnam and Taiwan.

China’s nine-dash line, a version of which first appeared on its maps in 1947, encompasses the vast majority of the South China Sea, and Beijing uses it to claim sovereignty over almost all the islands, reefs and rocks in the sea.

Beijing says its sovereignty claims date back hundreds of years and are “indisputable.” In the past two years it has undertaken a massive land reclamation process in the sea, turning seven reefs and rocks into nascent military outposts, with several airstrips and radar installations under construction.

But the tribunal backed the Philippines’ submission that none of those features are islands — as defined by the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).

Only natural (rather than artificially constructed) islands that can sustain human habitation qualify for both 12 nautical miles of territorial waters and 200-nautical mile Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs) under UNCLOS.

In other words, the ruling drastically undermines China’s claim to the waters surrounding the island bases it is in the process of building.

The Tribunal found that “certain sea areas are within the exclusive economic zone of the Philippines, because those areas are not overlapped by any possible entitlement of China.” It went on to say that China had violated the Philippines' sovereign rights by interfering with its fishing and petroleum exploration, building artificial islands and failing to prevent Chinese fishermen from fishing there.

It also ruled that Chinese authorities were aware that Chinese fishermen had “harvested endangered sea turtles, coral and giant clams on a substantial scale” in the South China Sea and had not fulfilled Beijing’s obligation under the Law of the Sea to prevent such activities.

China says the tribunal lacked the jurisdiction to rule on Manila’s various submissions, and says it has abused its powers.

In Washington last week, former senior official Dai Bingguo derided the ruling as “nothing more than a scrap of paper,” a refrain echoed by state media here. China also argues that the Philippines had previously agreed to resolve the dispute bilaterally.

But its legal case is undermined by a key provision in UNCLOS, which states that the tribunal alone can decide if it has the jurisdiction to rule on issues before it. In October last year, the tribunal decided it indeed had jurisdiction to rule on several key issues brought by Manila. The tribunal’s decision is legally binding, but it lacks any mechanism to enforce its rulings.

In rejecting the decision, Beijing is certainly not alone. No permanent member of the U.N. Security Council has ever complied with a ruling by the PCA on the Law of the Sea, wrote Graham Allison, director of the Harvard Kennedy School's Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs. “In fact, none of the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council have ever accepted any international court's ruling when (in their view) it infringed on their sovereignty or national security interests,” Allison wrote in The Diplomat.

The United States has never ratified UNCLOS, and rejected a 1986 verdict at the International Court of Justice ordering it to pay reparations to Nicaragua for mining its harbors, he noted.

Nevertheless, the case is an important indication of China's willingness to submit itself to international law as its clout grows, and a sign of what kind of global power it wants to become.

“This is a breathtaking indictment of China's position in the South China Sea,” said David Welch, CIGI Chair of Global Security at the Balsillie School of International Affairs, in Waterloo, Ontario. “It will be very difficult for Beijing to pretend that the tribunal's finding does not matter legally, politically, or practically. How China reacts over the next days and weeks will essentially determine its international standing for decades.”

Despite its efforts to dismiss and discredit the process, Beijing is far from indifferent about the result, analysts said.

What happens next will depend on how it and the other key players — the Philippines and the United States, as well as Vietnam — react.

The United States has already conducted several “freedom of navigation” exercises in the South China Sea, sending warships within 12 nautical miles of islands, reefs and rocks controlled by China and other claimants. It is also rebuilding military ties with the Philippines. China cites this as evidence that President Obama’s actions — not its island-building – are responsible for militarizing the region.

Last week, the U.S. Navy said it had also sent destroyers to patrol close to some of the islands and reefs held by China, although those ships stayed just outside the 12-nautical-mile zone. Washington might decide to step up its patrols after the ruling.

China, meanwhile, could attempt to reinforce its de facto control by declaring an Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) over the South China Sea, under which any incoming aircraft would be required to declare their presence to Chinese authorities. Another option might be to build a new military base on Scarborough Shoal.

“It must be made clear that China needs to exercise restraint and resist taking further actions that would exacerbate tensions,” said Paul Haenle, director of the Carnegie-Tsinghua Center in Beijing.

“But it is also important that the Philippines, the U.S. and others are level and restrained in their responses as well. There is no need for triumphalism or gloating that could provoke greater nationalist sentiment in China.”

Indeed, there are good reasons for all sides to react cautiously.

China hosts a summit of the Group of 20 major economies in September, and is unlikely to want the meeting to take place amid an intense dispute over the South China Sea.

It is also likely to want time to gauge the reaction from Manila, where newly elected President Rodrigo Duterte has sent mixed signals over the issue.

Early in his presidential campaign, Duterte, a long-time mayor with limited foreign policy experience, implied he might be willing to soften his stance on China in return for Chinese infrastructure spending. Later, in a play to nationalist sentiment, he promised to ride a Jetski to Scarborough Shoal to plant the Philippine flag.

Since his inauguration, he has struck a more cautious tone. His challenge will be to appear strong at home to satisfy national pride, without further angering Beijing

Gu Jinglu, Xu Yangjingjing and Xu Jing in Beijing and Michael Goe Delizo in Manila contributed to this report.

Quote mbhcsf 12-7-2016 08:00 PM

interesting  la maritime affairs ni...so ...apa reaksi China ....dah arbitration ( The Hague ) siding the Philippines...

Quote spankee_fili 12-7-2016 08:05 PM

memang logiknya china susah nak menang..
takut kawasan china makin luas maka kuasa makin besar..

Quote system_failure 12-7-2016 08:16 PM

aku suka ternantikan apa tindakan yg akan dibuat oleh jibby the pinky lips and the terkepit legs itew...

konfem boleh dibuat stock utk digelak rather than utk dikenang pd generasi mendatang..

Quote si-buta 12-7-2016 08:39 PM

Dah kalah ...dapat aircraft carrier amerika plak lagi

Quote OmJualGas 12-7-2016 08:43 PM

Ini bererti perangggg...

Quote cmf_almondpecan 12-7-2016 09:21 PM

Edited by cmf_almondpecan at 12-7-2016 09:23 PM

Keputusan ni mmg telah dijangka berasaskan undang2 laut antarabangsa. Penghakiman penuh ada 501 muka dan saya blm habis menelaah sepenuhnya.

Tp secara ringkasnya, tribunal memutuskan bahawa apa2 hak dari segi sejarah yg dimiliki oleh China di LCS, jika ada, telah dihapuskan oleh rejim zon eksklusif ekonomi yg terkandung dlm UNCLOS. Tiada bukti bahawa China telah menguasai kawasan yg dituntutnya dalam garisan sembilan titik sepanjang tempoh yg lama itu. Oleh itu, China tiada asas dlm undang2 utk menuntut kawasan dlm garisan itu berasaskan tuntutan dari segi sejarah. Dari point ini, bagi saya, Filipina perlu menggugurkan tuntutan ke atas Sabah yg juga berasakan historical rights sekiranya ia hendak menegakkan keputusan tribunal ini.

Tribunal juga memutuskan bahawa kesemua features di Kepulauan Spratly tidak memenuhi ciri2 pulau. Ini kerana tiada dari features itu yg boleh menampung habitasi oleh manusia dan boleh menjana aktiviti ekonomi spt yg diperlukn oleh undang2. oleh itu, Tribunal mendapati bahawa tiada feature yg dituntut oleh China di Spratly boleh menjana EEZ sejauh 200 batu nautika. Selain itu, terumbu2 yg ditambak sebesar manapun tetap tidak dianggap pulau kerana bukan terjadi secara semula jadi. Perkara ini sememangnya telah diketahui umum dan tidak memihak kpd keadaan Layang-layang yg asalnya terumbu tetapi telah ditambak. Perkara ini penting kerana terumbu hanya boleh menjana paling2 12 batu nautika tetapi sebuah pulau di sisi undang2 boleh menjana sehingga 200nm di sekeliling (tertakluk kpd sempadan perairan negara lain).

China juga didapati telah melanggar undang2 dgn mengganggu gugat aktiviti Filipina di kawasan yg dituntut termasuk kegiatan petroleum, perikanan dsb. Selain itu, China juga gagal menahan rakyatnya sendiri dpd menjalankan aktiviti secara haram di kawasan tersebut.

Kegiatan menambak terumbu2 oleh China secara berleluasa dan ekstensif di kawasan tersebut telah menyebabkan kerosakan yg teruk kpd terumbu karang dan alam sekitar marin. Kerajaan China juga dikatakan tahu bahawa rakyatnya mengambil hasil laut yg diancam kepupusan spt penyu dan giant clams.

Selain itu, China juga didapati telah memburukkan keadaan perselisihan akibat tuntutan ini. China telah bertindak agresif dgn menjalankan aktiviti ketenteraan di kawasan tuntutan dan bertelingkah dgn pihak berkuasa Filipina. Tindakan China membina pulau2 tiruan dan menambak secara besar2an serta memusnahkan keadaan semulajadi terumbu2 di EEZ Filipina didapati bercanggah dgn obligasi sesebuah entiti bergelar negara.

Dalam keseluruhan proses oleh tribunal ini sejak tahun 2013 lg, China menolak mentah2 semua aspek tribunal dan arbitration tersebut. China tidak mengiktiraf sebarang aspek arbitration ini dan telah berikrar tidak akan mematuhinya atau mengendahkannya. Kebanyakan pemerhati berpendapat China tidaklah sampai akan berperang, lebih2 lg kerajaan baru Filipina nampaknya cenderung ke arah berbaik2 dgn China kerana ingin mendapat manfaat dpd pelaburan China spt yg dinikmati oleh jiran2nya. Namun begitu, keputusan tribunal ini telah menjelaskan secara kukuh beberapa isu yg sebelum ini menjadi pertikaian. Oleh itu, selepas ini, sebarang keputusan yg diambil oleh mana2 pihak bolehlah bergantung kpd keputusan ini.

Quote Esmiria 12-7-2016 09:39 PM

OmJualGas replied at 12-7-2016 08:43 PM
Ini bererti perangggg...

mna yg blom.kawen tu,cpt2 kawen.Takut x nyempat.

Quote cmf_almondpecan 12-7-2016 09:42 PM

Dalam peta ini ada kesilapan iaitu frasa "disputed islands" yg bertanda bintik2 kuning. Frasa yg betul ialah "disputed features". Ini kerana sebelum keputusan tribunal ini, salah satu pertikaian utama ialah berkenaan status features tersebut sama ada terumbu atau pulau, sama ada low tide elevation (LTE), rock dsb. Ini kerana hanya sebuah feature yg diiktiraf sebagai pulau dari segi undang2 antarabangsa boleh menjana zon eksklusif ekonomi (EEZ) sehingga 200 batu nautika.

Tribunal memutuskan bahawa semua features dalam gugusan Kepulauan Spratly bukan pulau. Perkara ini agak baru kerana selama ini rata2 pengkaji menganggap feature terbesar dlm kawalan Taiwan bernama Itu Aba adalah sebuah pulau. Tp setelah dihantar penyelidik yg menggerudi tanah di sana dan mendapati bahawa Itu Aba tiada sumber air tawar sendiri dan terpaksa bergantung kpd desalination plants utk air minuman, ini secara tidak langsung menunjukkan bahawa dgn sendirinya pulau itu tidak boleh menampung kehidupan manusia secara semulajadi. Perkara ini mmg ada impak kpd tuntutan Malaysia kerana beberapa byk pulau yg dituntut oleh kita dan turut dituntut oleh negara lain spt Layang2, Mantanani, Peninjau dsb juga turut mempunyai pertikaian dr segi status terutamanya Layang2.

Quote dauswq 12-7-2016 09:49 PM

cmf_almondpecan replied at 12-7-2016 09:21 PM
Keputusan ni mmg telah dijangka berasaskan undang2 laut antarabangsa. Penghakiman penuh ada 501 muka ...

Dari point ini, bagi saya, Filipina perlu menggugurkan tuntutan ke atas Sabah yg juga berasakan historical rights sekiranya ia hendak menegakkan keputusan tribunal ini.

spot on pecan!

Quote dauswq 12-7-2016 10:00 PM

cmf_almondpecan replied at 12-7-2016 09:42 PM
Dalam peta ini ada kesilapan iaitu frasa "disputed islands" yg bertanda bintik2 kuning. Frasa yg bet ...

risau lak ape jadi dgn pulau layang-layang yg ditambak

jap nak pastikan , kptsn ni bukan bermakna pinoy tuntut kedaulatan ke atas kawasan tu ?
ini cuma menidakkan china untuk buat sesuka hati dan klem sbg haknya bukan?
maknenye kawasan ini atas perkongsian sama?

Quote cmf_almondpecan 12-7-2016 10:04 PM

mbhcsf replied at 12-7-2016 08:00 PM
interesting  la maritime affairs ni...so ...apa reaksi China ....dah arbitration ( The Hague ) sidin ...

Antara lainnya, China tolak keputusan tribunal spt dijangka. Alasannya, tribunal is illegally constituted and abuses international law. Ini kerana China telah menolak kes Filipina, tidak turut serta dlm prosiding dan tidak dpt melantik ahli tribunal. Filipina dpt melantik sbb ia menyertai prosiding. China juga kata dia adalah mangsa dlm kes ini.

Quote cmf_almondpecan 12-7-2016 10:22 PM

dauswq replied at 12-7-2016 10:00 PM
risau lak ape jadi dgn pulau layang-layang yg ditambak

jap nak pastikan , kptsn ni bukan berma ...

Layang2 ditambak takde masalah cuma kemungkinan besar tak diiktiraf sbg pulau yg boleh jana 200nm of EEZ.

Pasal keputusan tribunal, kalau kita nak tau apa yg keputusan tu cover, kena tgk apa permohonan pempetisyen pada mulanya. Dlm kes ini, Filipina kemukakan permohonan yg spesifik. Ada 15 permohonan oleh Filipina semua sekali. Ada yg memohon supaya tindakan China diisytihar melanggar undang2 antarabangsa, ada yg memohon supaya beberapa features diisytihar terletak dlm EEZ Filipina (Mischief Reef dan Second Thomas Shoal), ada yg memohon supaya beberapa features lain terutama yg ditambak oleh China diisytiharkan bukan pulau semulajadi dan tidak menjana EEZ.

Dlm permohonan ni, terkandung byk persoalan2 yg byk negara dan penyelidik tertanya sejak sekian lama tp takde satu keputusan seperti ini utk menjadi reference point yg authoritative sbb tak pernah ada peluang spt dlm tribunal ini. Jadi, keputusan ni address semua permohonan ini dan menjawab byk persoalan.

Quote pyropura 12-7-2016 10:43 PM

... bab masuk tribunal internasional ni indon sangat takut, sebab mereka sulalu kantoi  sebab bodoh ... @XxNotTruexX @keraton @jf_pratama @hailon-97  @mepu15  

Quote noraidil_06 12-7-2016 11:08 PM

cmf_almondpecan replied at 12-7-2016 09:21 PM
Keputusan ni mmg telah dijangka berasaskan undang2 laut antarabangsa. Penghakiman penuh ada 501 muka ...

U tulis ni? Interesting

Quote saladin780 12-7-2016 11:13 PM

Padan muka China tamak

Quote cmf_almondpecan 12-7-2016 11:16 PM

noraidil_06 replied at 12-7-2016 11:08 PM
U tulis ni? Interesting

Sekadar mengulas

Quote PongKang 12-7-2016 11:37 PM

kalo bole depan pintu umah pun dorg nk claim itu tanah dorg punye

Quote system_failure 13-7-2016 02:17 AM

cmf_almondpecan replied at 12-7-2016 09:21 PM
Keputusan ni mmg telah dijangka berasaskan undang2 laut antarabangsa. Penghakiman penuh ada 501 muka ...

well said..

Lihat semua komen(37)