WPS

The South China Sea disputes involve both island and maritime claims among several sovereign
stateswithin the region, namely Brunei, the People's Republic of China (PRC), Republic of
China (Taiwan), Malaysia, Indonesia, the Philippines, and Vietnam. An estimated US$5 trillion
worth of global trade passes through the South China Sea annually[1] and many non-claimant
states want the South China Sea to remain international waters. To promote this, several
states, including the United States, conduct "freedom of navigation" operations.[2]
The disputes include the islands, reefs, banks, and other features of the South China Sea,
including the Spratly Islands, Paracel Islands, and various boundaries in the Gulf of Tonkin.
There are further disputes, including the waters near the Indonesian Natuna Islands, which
many do not regard as part of the South China Sea.[3] Claimant states are interested in retaining
or acquiring the rights to fishing areas, the exploration and potential exploitation of crude
oil and natural gas in the seabed of various parts of the South China Sea, and the strategic
control of important shipping lanes.
In July 2016, an arbitration tribunal constituted under Annex VII of the United Nations
Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) ruled against the PRC's maritime claims
in Philippines v. China.[4] The People's Republic of China and the Republic of China (Taiwan)
stated that they did not recognise the tribunal and insisted that the matter should be resolved
through bilateral negotiations with other claimants.[5] However, the tribunal did not rule on the
ownership of the islands or delimit maritime boundaries.[6][7]

Contents

 1Disputes
 2South China Sea
o 2.12011 agreement
o 2.2Chinese objection to Indian naval presence and oil exploration
o 2.3Chinese policy on the South China Sea
o 2.4Oil development
o 2.5Incidents involving fishermen
 3Security summits
 4Non-claimant views
o 4.1Independent analysis
o 4.2Japan
o 4.3Cambodia
o 4.4East Timor
o 4.5Indonesia
o 4.6Laos
o 4.7Singapore
o 4.8Thailand
 o 4.9United States
 5See also
 6References
o 6.1Citations
o 6.2Sources
 7Further reading
 8External links

Disputes[edit]

Summary of disputes

Area of
dispute Brunei China Indonesia Malaysia Philippines Taiwan Vietnam

The nine-dash
✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔
line

Vietnamese
✔ ✔ ✔
coast

Sea area north

✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔
of Borneo

South China
✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔
Sea islands

Sea area north

of the Natuna ✔ ✔ ✔
Islands

Sea area west ✔ ✔ ✔

of Palawan
and Luzon

Sabah area ✔ ✔ ✔

Luzon Strait ✔ ✔ ✔

The disputes involve both maritime boundaries and islands.[8] There are several disputes, each
of which involves a different collection of countries:

1. The nine-dash line area claimed by the Republic of China, later the People's Republic of

China (PRC), which covers most of the South China Sea and overlaps the exclusive
economic zone claims of Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Taiwan, and
Vietnam.
2. Maritime boundary along the Vietnamese coast between the PRC, Taiwan, and Vietnam.
3. Maritime boundary north of Borneo between the PRC, Malaysia, Brunei, Philippines, and
Taiwan.
4. Islands, reefs, banks and shoals in the South China Sea, including the Paracel Islands,
the Pratas Islands, Macclesfield Bank, Scarborough Shoal and the Spratly
Islands between the PRC, Taiwan, and Vietnam, and parts of the area also contested by
Malaysia and the Philippines.
5. Maritime boundary in the waters north of the Natuna Islands between the PRC,
Indonesia and Taiwan[9]
6. Maritime boundary off the coast of Palawan and Luzon between the PRC, the
Philippines, and Taiwan.
7. Maritime boundary, land territory, and the islands of Sabah, including Ambalat,
between Indonesia, Malaysia, and the Philippines.
8. Maritime boundary and islands in the Luzon Strait between the PRC, the Philippines, and
Taiwan.

South China Sea[edit]

Further information: Timeline of the South China Sea dispute
South-east facing aerial view of PRC-settled Woody Island. The island is also claimed by Taiwan
and Vietnam.
Chinese claims in the South China sea are delineated in part by the nine-dash line. It was
originally an "eleven-dashed-line," first indicated by the Kuomintang government of the
Republic of China in 1947, for its claims to the South China Sea. When the Communist Party of
China took over mainland China and formed the People's Republic of China in 1949, the line
was adopted and revised to nine dashes/dots, as endorsed by Zhou Enlai.[10]The legacy of the
nine-dash line is viewed by some PRC government officials, and by the PRC military, as
providing historical support for their claims to the South China Sea.[11]
In the 1970s, the Philippines, Malaysia and other countries[specify] began referring to the Spratly
Islands as included in their own territory.[citation needed] On 11 June 1978, President Ferdinand
Marcos of the Philippines issued Presidential decree No. 1596, declaring the north-western part
of the Spratly Islands (referred to therein as the Kalayaan Island Group) as Philippine territory.
[12]

The once abundant fishing opportunities within the region are another motivation for claims. In
2012, the South China Sea was believed to have accounted for 12% of world fishing catches
worth $21.8 billion.[13] There have been many clashes in the Philippines with foreign fishing
vessels (including those of the PRC) in disputed areas. According to some commentators, the
PRC believes that the value in fishing and oil from the sea has risen to a trillion dollars.[14]
The area is also one of the busiest shipping routes in the world. In the 1980s, at least 270
merchant ships used the route[clarification needed]each day. Currently,[timeframe?] more than half the
tonnage of the world's crude oil transported by sea passes through the South China Sea,[citation
needed]
 a figure rising steadily with the growth of the PRC consumption of oil.[citation needed] This traffic
is three times greater than that passing through the Suez Canal and five times more than
the Panama Canal.[citation needed]

Fiery Cross Reef being transformed by the PRC in May 2015

Since 1996, Vietnam and the Philippines, and to a lesser degree Malaysia and Brunei, have
asserted claims within the area covered by the Chinese (PRC & ROC) nine-dotted line.[15]
Since 1974, when PRC troops confronted and expelled Vietnamese troops, most of the Paracel
Islands have been occupied by the PRC, and all have been under PRC control.[citation needed]
Similarly, although there have been a small number of notable changes in influence or
occupation, the occupation and/or control of most parts of the Spratly Islands has not changed
significantly since the mid 1990s - see List of maritime features in the Spratly Islands for details.
Vietnamese troops control the greatest number of islands, reefs, etc. (approx 29.) Eight islands
are controlled by the Philippines, five by Malaysia, one by Taiwan, and all of those mentioned
have various degrees of "control" over other features. Although the Paracels are completely
under PRC control, the PRC has control of only five "rocks" naturally above water at high tide.[17]
[16]
 The significance of this situation has changed dramatically since 2014 whence the PRC
embarked on a program of land reclamation - see Great wall of sandand List of maritime
features in the Spratly Islands for details.
In 2012 the Indian Ambassador to Vietnam, while expressing concern over rising tension in the
area, said that 50 per cent of its trade passes through the area and called for peaceful
resolution of the disputes in accordance with international law.[18]
On 17 March 2016, in accordance with Memorandum Circular No. 94 s. 2016, President
Aquino of the Philippines created the National Task Force for the West Philippine Sea, to secure
the State's sovereignty and national territory and preserve marine wealth in its waters and
exclusive economic zone, reserving use and enjoyment of the West Philippine Sea exclusively
for Filipino citizens.[19]
2011 agreement[edit]
On 20 July 2011, the PRC, Brunei, Malaysia, the Philippines and Vietnam agreed to a set of
preliminary guidelines which would help resolve the dispute.[which?][20] The agreement was
described by the PRC's assistant foreign minister, Liu Zhenmin, as "an important milestone
document for cooperation among China and ASEAN countries".[20] Some of the early drafts
acknowledged aspects such as "marine environmental protection, scientific research, safety of
navigation and communication, search and rescue and combating transnational crime",
although the issue of oil and natural gas drilling remains unresolved.
Chinese objection to Indian naval presence and oil exploration[edit]
On 22 July 2011, the INS Airavat, an Indian amphibious assault vessel on a friendly visit to
Vietnam, was reportedly contacted 45 nautical miles from the Vietnamese coast in the disputed
South China Sea by a party identifying itself as the PLA Navy and stating that the ship was
entering PRC waters.[21][22] A spokesperson for the Indian Navy explained that as no ship or
aircraft was visible, the INS Airavat proceeded on her onward journey as scheduled. The Indian
Navy further clarified that "[t]here was no confrontation involving the INS Airavat. India
supports freedom of navigation in international waters, including in the South China Sea, and
the right of passage in accordance with accepted principles of international law. These
principles should be respected by all."[21]
In September 2011, shortly after the PRC and Vietnam signed an agreement seeking to contain
a dispute over the South China Sea, India's state-run explorer, Oil and Natural Gas Corporation
(ONGC) said that its overseas investment arm, ONGC Videsh Limited, had signed a three-year
agreement with PetroVietnam for developing long-term co-operation in the oil sector, and that
it had accepted Vietnam's offer of exploration in certain specified blocks in the South China Sea.
[23]
 In response, PRC Foreign Ministry spokesperson Jiang Yu, without referring to India by name,
stated:
"China enjoys indisputable sovereignty over the South China Sea and the island. China's stand is
based on historical facts and international law. China's sovereign rights and positions are
formed in the course of history and this position has been held by Chinese Government for
long. On the basis of this China is ready to engage in peaceful negotiations and friendly
consultations to peacefully solve the disputes over territorial sovereignty and maritime rights so
as to positively contribute to peace and tranquillity in the South China Sea area. We hope that
the relevant countries respect China's position and refrain from taking unilateral action to
complicate and expand the issue. We hope they will respect and support countries in the region
to solve the bilateral disputes through bilateral channels. As for oil and gas exploration
activities, our consistent position is that we are opposed to any country engaging in oil and gas
exploration and development activities in waters under China's jurisdiction. We hope the
foreign countries do not get involved in South China Sea dispute."[24][25]
An Indian foreign ministry spokesman responded, "The Chinese had concerns, but we are going
by what the Vietnamese authorities have told us and [we] have conveyed this to the
Chinese."[24] The Indo-Vietnamese deal was also denounced by the Chinese state-run
newspaper Global Times.[23][25]
Chinese policy on the South China Sea[edit]
In Spring 2010, PRC officials reportedly communicated to US officials that the South China Sea
was "an area of 'core interest' that is as non-negotiable" and on par with Taiwan and Tibet on
the national agenda. However, Beijing appears to have backed away from that assertion in
2011.[26][27][28]
In October 2011, the PRC's Global Times newspaper, published by the Communist
Party People's Daily group, editorialised on South China Sea territorial disputes under the
banner "Don't take peaceful approach for granted". The article referenced recent [when?] incidents
involving the Philippines and South Korea detaining PRC fishing boats in the region. "If these
countries don't want to change their ways with China, they will need to prepare for the sounds
of cannons. We need to be ready for that, as it may be the only way for the disputes in the sea
to be resolved."[29] Responding to questions about whether this reflected official policy,
a Chinese Foreign Ministry spokeswoman stated the country's commitment "to resolving
the maritime dispute through peaceful means."[30]
In July 2014, Professor Alan Dupont of the University of New South Wales was reported as
saying that the Chinese government appeared to be directing its fishing fleet into disputed
waters as a matter of policy.[31]
Oil development[edit]
The area is said to be rich in oil and natural gas deposits; however, the estimates are highly
varied. The Ministry of Geological Resources and Mining of the People's Republic of
China estimated that the South China Sea may contain 17.7 billion tons of crude oil,[32] whereas
the oil rich country of Kuwait has 13 billion tons. In the years following the announcement by
the PRC ministry, the claims regarding the South China Sea islands intensified. However, other
sources claim that the proven reserves of oil in the South China Sea may only be 7.5 billion
barrels, or about 1.1 billion tons.[33] According to the US Energy Information Administration
(EIA)'s profile of the South China Sea region, a US Geological Survey estimate puts the region's
discovered and undiscovered oil reserves at 11 billion barrels, as opposed to a PRC figure of
125 billion barrels.[34] The same EIA report also points to the wide variety of natural gas
resource estimations, ranging from 190 trillion cubic feet to 500 trillion cubic feet, likely located
in the contested Reed Bank".[34]
The South China Sea is dubbed by the PRC as the "second Persian Sea." [35] The state-owned
China Offshore Exploration Corp. planned to spend 200 billion RMB (US$30 billion) in the next
20 years to exploit oil in the region, with the estimated production of 25 million metric tons of
crude oil and natural gas per annum, at a depth of 2000 meters within the next five years.[36]
The Philippines began exploring the areas west of Palawan for oil in 1970. Exploration in the
area began in Reed Bank/Tablemount.[37] In 1976, gas was discovered following the drilling of a
well.[38] However, the PRC's complaints halted the exploration.[citation needed] On 27 March 1984, the
first Philippine oil company discovered an oil field off Palawan, which is an island province
bordering the South China Sea and the Sulu Sea.[39] These oil fields supply 15% of annual oil
consumption in the Philippines.[citation needed]
Vietnam and Japan reached an agreement early in 1978 on the development of oil in the South
China Sea.[citation needed] By 2012 Vietnam had concluded some 60 oil and gas exploration and
production contracts with various foreign companies.[40] In 1986, the "White Tiger" oil field in
the South China Sea came into operation, producing over 2,000 tons of crude oil per year,
followed by "The Bear" and "Dragon" oil fields.[41] Offshore exploration activities in 2011
increased Vietnam's proven oil reserves to be the third largest in the Asia-Pacific region.
[42]
 However, the country is a net importer of oil products.[43] In 2009 petroleum accounted for
14 percent of Vietnamese government income, down from 24 percent in 2004.[44]
China's first independently designed and constructed oil drilling platform in the South China Sea
is the Ocean Oil 981 ( 海 洋 石 油 981). The major shareholders are J.P. Morgan Chase &
Co. (19%), Commonwealth Bank of Australia (14%), T. Rowe Price Associates, Inc. and affiliates
(6%), and BlackRock, Inc. (5%).[45] It began operation on 9 May 2012 in the South China Sea, 320
kilometres (200 mi) southeast of Hong Kong, at a depth of 1,500 m and employing 160 people.
[46]
 On 2 May 2014 the platform was moved near to the Paracel Islands,[47] a
move Vietnam stated violated their territorial claims.[48] Chinese officials said it was legal,
stating the area lies in waters surrounding the Paracel Islands which China occupies and
militarily controls.[49]
Incidents involving fishermen[edit]
Prior to the dispute around the sea areas involved, fishermen from involved countries tended
to enter each other's controlled islands and Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZ) leading to conflicts
with the authorities that controlled the areas as they were unaware of the exact borders. As
well, due to the depletion of the fishing resources in their maritime areas they were forced to
fish in the neighbouring countries' areas.[50][51][52]
A Taiwanese fisherman was machine gunned to death by the coast guard of the Philippines in
May 2013.[53][54]
In the spring of 2014, China and Vietnam clashed again over China's Haiyang Shiyou oil rig in
Vietnam's EEZ. The incident left seventeen Vietnamese injured and damaged both China's and
Vietnam's ships.[55]
Although Indonesia is not part of claims in the South China Sea dispute, after Joko
Widodo became President of the country in 2014, he instituted a policy in 2015 that, if any
foreign fishermen were caught illegally fishing in Indonesian waters, their vessels would be
destroyed. The president wanted to make maritime resources, especially fisheries, a key
component of his administration's economic policy.[56][57] Since the policy's initiation, fishing
vessels drawing from many neighbouring countries were destroyed by Indonesian authorities.
On 21 May 2015, around 41 fishing vessels from China, Vietnam, Thailand and the Philippines
were destroyed.[58] On 19 March 2016, the China Coast Guard prevented the detention of
Chinese fishermen by Indonesian authorities after Chinese fishermen were caught fishing near
the waters around Natuna, leading to a protest by Indonesian authorities; the Chinese
ambassador was subsequently summonsed as China had considered the areas to be "Chinese
traditional fishing grounds".[59][60] Further Indonesian campaigns against foreign fishermen
resulted in the destruction of 23 fishing boats from Malaysia and Vietnam on 5 April 2016.[61]
Until late 2016, most fishing vessels blown up by Indonesian authorities were Vietnamese
fishing vessels.[62][63] Although Indonesian authorities increased their patrols to detect foreign
fishing vessels, the areas in the South China Sea had already become known for Indonesian
pirates, with frequent attacks on Malaysian, Singaporean and Vietnamese vessels as well as
leading to hijacking such as the MT Orkim Harmony and MT Zafirah hijacking incidents. The
continuing war against foreign fishermen by Indonesia led to protests by Vietnam in late 2016,
when a Vietnamese fisherman was killed after being shot by Indonesian authorities. [51][52] Beside
that, Filipino pirates of Moro Pirates from the Sulu Seaalso reaching South China Sea when a
Vietnamese fisherman was killed by Filipino pirates in late 2015.[64]

Security summits[edit]
The Shangri-La Dialogue serves as the "Track One" exchange forum on security issues
surrounding the Asia-Pacific region. The South China Sea territorial disputes has dominated
proceedings at the conference in recent years.[65][66][67] The Council for Security Cooperation in
the Asia Pacific is the "Track Two" forum for dialogue on security issues.[68][69]
In February 2016, U.S. President Barack Obama initiated the US-ASEAN Summit
at Sunnylands in Rancho Mirage, California for closer engagement with the Association of
Southeast Asian Nations. Territorial disputes in the South China Sea were a major topic, but its
joint statement, the "Sunnylands Declaration", did not name the South China Sea, instead
calling for "respect of each nation's sovereignty and for international law". Analysts believe it
indicates divisions within the group on how to respond to China's maritime strategy.[70][71]

Non-claimant views[edit]
Independent analysis[edit]
The vast majority of international legal experts have concluded that China's claims based on
historical claims are invalid.[72] Many ambiguities also arise from the notion of historical claims
as a basis for claiming sovereignty; China's position is essentially ambiguous.[73][72][74]
The position of China on its maritime claims based on UNCLOS and history has been ambiguous,
particularly with the nine dash line map.[75][73] For example, in its notes verbales in 2011, the first
phrase stated that China has undisputed sovereignty over the islands and the adjacent waters,
suggesting China is claiming sovereignty over its territorial waters, a position consistent with
UNCLOS.[75] However, the second phrase in its notes verbales stated that China enjoys sovereign
rights and jurisdiction over the relevant waters along with the seabed and subsoil contained in
this region, suggesting that China is claiming sovereignty over all of the maritime space
(includes all the geographic features and the waters within the nine dash line).[75] The third
phrase indicates support for basing their claims on historical basis as well.[75] Recently in
its notes verbales in 2011, China has explicitly stated that it claims the territorial waters and all
of the islands in which each island has its own exclusive economic zone and continental shelf.
[73]
 A major problem with this claim is that it fails to distinguish between geographic features
considered as "islands" or "rocks" under UNCLOS.[73]
Japanese scholar Taoka Shunji criticised Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe for trying to falsely
portray China as a threat to Japan and that China was invading neighbours such as the
Philippines. He pointed out that the Spratly Islands were not part of the Philippines when the
US acquired the Philippines from Spain in the Treaty of Paris in 1898 and that Japanese-ruled
Taiwan itself had annexed the Spratly Islands in 1938 in a move that was never challenged by
the US-ruled Philippines, which never asserted that it was their territory. He also pointed out
that other countries did not need to do full land reclamation since they already controlled
islands and that the reason China engaged in extensive land reclamation is because they
needed it to build airfields since China only has control over reefs.[76]
Japan[edit]
Japan has used "normative power" via strategic foreign aid to certain claimants in the dispute
such as the Philippines and Vietnam in order to assert its presence in the region as promoting
the "rule of law at sea." [77]
Cambodia[edit]
Cambodia has backed China over the dispute in ASEAN meetings, preventing consensus over
unified ASEAN action.[78] Anti-Vietnamese sentiment due to Vietnam's conquest of previously
Cambodian lands, giving the Vietnamese a privileged status and encouragement of Vietnamese
settlers in Cambodia during French colonial rule, and the occupation of Cambodia after the
ouster of the Khmer Rouge has led to anti-Vietnamese feelings against ethnic Vietnamese in
Cambodia and against Vietnam, and in turn has led to pro-China sentiment among the
Cambodian government and the Cambodian opposition, including in the South China Sea.[79]
East Timor[edit]
The sweeping maritime claims of gas and oil rich territory maintained and disputed by Australia
against the tiny country of East Timor and flouting of international law have been compared to
the situation in the South China Sea, causing the East Timorese government to deprecate
China's claims and stance.[80]
Indonesia[edit]
See also: China–Indonesia relations
Since early in the South China Sea dispute, Indonesia has repeatedly asserted its position as a
non-claimant state in the South China Sea dispute,[81] and often positioned itself as an "honest
broker".[82] However, parts of China's unilaterally claimed nine-dash line overlap
Indonesia's exclusive economic zone near the Natuna islands. Although China has
acknowledged Indonesia's sovereignty over the Natuna islands,[83] the PRC has argued that the
waters around the Natuna islands are Chinese "traditional fishing grounds". Indonesia quickly
dismissed China's claim, asserting that China's nine-dash line claim over parts of the Natuna
islands has no legal basis.[84] In November 2015, Indonesia's security chief Luhut Panjaitan said
Indonesia could take China before an international court.[85] Indonesia filed a comment with
the Permanent Court of Arbitration regarding China's claim in the case of Philippines v. China.
Chinese fishing vessels – often escorted by Chinese coastguard ships – have repeatedly been
reported to have breached Indonesian waters near the Natuna islands. On 19 March 2016, for
example, Indonesian authorities tried to capture a Chinese trawler accused of illegal fishing in
Indonesian waters, and arrested the Chinese crew. They were prevented from towing the boat
to harbour by a Chinese coast guard vessel which reportedly "rammed" the trawler in
Indonesian waters. "To prevent anything else occurring, the Indonesian authorities let go of the
Chinese boat and then left toward Natuna, still with eight fishermen and the captain on board,"
said Arrmanatha Nasir, a spokesman for Indonesia's Foreign Ministry. Indonesia still has the
Chinese crew in custody.[86] On March 21, 2016, minister for fisheries and maritime affairs Susi
Pudjiastuti summoned the Chinese ambassador, Xie Feng, and discussed this matter.
[86]
 Indonesia insists that they have the right to prosecute the Chinese trawler crew, despite
Beijing's demand to release their eight fishermen. Arif Havas Oegroseno, the government
official of maritime security, said that the Chinese claim of "traditional fishing grounds" was not
recognised under the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. This incident
prompted security minister Luhut Pandjaitan to deploy more troops and patrol boats, and to
strengthen the Ranai naval base in the area.[87]
Following the clashes, on 23 June 2016, Indonesian President Joko Widodo visited the Natuna
islands on a warship to demonstrate Indonesia's authority. He led a high-level delegation, which
included the Commander of the Indonesian National Armed Forces (TNI) and state ministers.
Security Minister Luhut Panjaitan said it was meant to send a "clear message" that Indonesia
was "very serious in its effort to protect its sovereignty".[88]
Following the Permanent Court of Arbitration ruling on 12 July 2016, Indonesia called on all
parties involved in the territorial dispute to exercise self-restraint and to respect applicable
international laws.[89]
Indonesia challenged the Chinese nine-dash historical claim by arguing that if the historical
claims can be used on presenting the territorial naval claims, Indonesia might also use its
historical claims on the South China Sea by referring to the ancient influence of
the Srivijaya and Majapahit empires.[90]
Laos[edit]
Laos has supported China by refusing to accept the Permanent Court of Arbitration ruling on
China's sovereignty claims in the South China Sea.[91]
Singapore[edit]
Singapore has reiterated that it is not a claimant state in the South China Sea dispute and has
offered to play a neutral role in being a constructive conduit for dialogue among the claimant
states. However, Singapore hopes that China will obey international laws.[92]
Thailand[edit]
In ASEAN, Thailand is neutral and is open to hearing both sides and will not push to consensus.
[not in citation given][93]

United States[edit]
See also: China–United States relations and East Asian foreign policy of the Barack Obama
administration
The United States and China are currently in disagreement over the South China Sea. [94] This
disagreement is exacerbated by the fact that the US is not a member of the United Nations
Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).[95] Nevertheless, the US has stood by its
manoeuvres, claiming that "peaceful surveillance activities and other military activities without
permission in a country's Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ),"[96] is allowed under the convention.
Additionally, a South China Sea free to access is in the US's economic and geopolitical interests.
[97]
 In relation to the dispute, Hillary Clinton, then United States Secretary of State, voiced her
support for fair access by reiterating that freedom of navigation and respect for international
law is a matter of national interest to the United States.[98] Her comments were countered by
China's Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi as "in effect an attack on China," who warned the United
States against making the South China Sea an international issue or multilateral issue.[99]
Clinton testified in support of congressional approval of the Law of the Sea Convention, which
would strengthen U.S. ability to support countries that oppose Chinese claims to certain islands
in the area.[100] On 29 May 2012, a spokesman for the Chinese Foreign Ministry expressed
concern over this development, stating that "non-claimant Association of South East Asian
Nations countries and countries outside the region have adopted a position of not getting
involved into territorial disputes."[101] In July 2012, the United States Senate passed resolution
524, initially sponsored by Senator John Kerry, stating (among other things) the United States'
strong support for the 2002 declaration of conduct of parties in the South China Sea, reaffirms
the United States' commitment to assist the nations of Southeast Asia to remain strong and
independent, and supports enhanced operations by the United States armed forces in
the Western Pacific.[102]
In 2014, the United States responded to China's claims over the fishing grounds of other nations
by saying that "China has not offered any explanation or basis under international law for these
extensive maritime claims."[103] USN CNO Jonathan Greenert then pledged American support to
the Philippines in its territorial conflicts with the PRC.[104] The Chinese Foreign Ministry asked
the United States to maintain a neutral position on the issue.[105] In 2014 and 2015, the United
States continued freedom of navigation operations, including in the South China Sea.
[106]
 Sources closer to the Pentagon have also said that the US administration is planning to
deploy some more naval assets within 12 nautical miles of the Spratly Islands. In response to
this announcement, Beijing issued a strict warning and said that she would not allow any
country to violate China's territorial waters in the name of "Freedom of Navigation".[107] In May
2015, U.S. Secretary of Defense Ash Carter warned China to halt its rapid island-building.[108] On
27 October 2015, the US destroyer USS Lassen navigated within 12 nautical miles of reclaimed
land in the Subi Reef as the first in a series of "Freedom of Navigation Operations".[109] This is
the first time since 2012 that the US has directly challenged China's claims of the island's
territorial limit.[110] On 8–9 November 2015, two US B-52 strategic bombers flew near artificial
Chinese-built islands in the area of the Spratly Islands and were contacted by Chinese ground
controllers but continued their mission undeterred.[111]
The United States itself has not signed UNCLOS, but has accepted all but Part XI as customary
international law.[112]
In response to Rex Tillerson's comments on blocking access to man-made islands in the South
China Sea, the Communist Party-controlled Global Times warned of a "large-scale war"
between the U.S. and China, saying: "Unless Washington plans to wage a large-scale war in the
South China Sea, any other approaches to prevent Chinese access to the islands will be
foolish."[113][114]

See also[edit]

 East China Sea EEZ disputes

 First island chain
 Great wall of sand
 Philippines v. China
 Scarborough Shoal standoff
 Spratly Islands dispute

References