The South China Sea Arbitration Decision and a Plan for Peaceful Resolution of the Disputes

T. Schoenbaum
{"title":"The South China Sea Arbitration Decision and a Plan for Peaceful Resolution of the Disputes","authors":"T. Schoenbaum","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2931150","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"After the Philippines contested Chinese claims and actions in the South China Sea, a five-man panel of the Permanent Court of Arbitration in 2016 handed down a judgment that is surely the most important set of jurisprudential rulings in the modern history of the international law of the sea. The tribunal's judgment provides convincing interpretations of many UNCLOS articles that are important, not only in the context of the South China Sea, but generally in other maritime areas as well. The tribunal's judgment enhances freedom of navigation in ocean areas and provides guidelines for enforcing international law to protect the marine environment. \nBut the tribunal's judgment is unlikely to have much effect with regard to settlement of the South China Sea disputes. Although China technically is bound by the judgments of the tribunal, China did not participate in the proceeding and will never expressly affirm the rulings' correctness. The paper puts forth a three-point plan to allow China to save face in this controversy. It is hoped that taking these steps the tribunal's important rulings may be accepted for what they are—the basis for a settlement of the South China Sea controversy.","PeriodicalId":106511,"journal":{"name":"AARN: Peace & Reconciliation (Sub-Topic)","volume":"5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AARN: Peace & Reconciliation (Sub-Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2931150","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

After the Philippines contested Chinese claims and actions in the South China Sea, a five-man panel of the Permanent Court of Arbitration in 2016 handed down a judgment that is surely the most important set of jurisprudential rulings in the modern history of the international law of the sea. The tribunal's judgment provides convincing interpretations of many UNCLOS articles that are important, not only in the context of the South China Sea, but generally in other maritime areas as well. The tribunal's judgment enhances freedom of navigation in ocean areas and provides guidelines for enforcing international law to protect the marine environment. But the tribunal's judgment is unlikely to have much effect with regard to settlement of the South China Sea disputes. Although China technically is bound by the judgments of the tribunal, China did not participate in the proceeding and will never expressly affirm the rulings' correctness. The paper puts forth a three-point plan to allow China to save face in this controversy. It is hoped that taking these steps the tribunal's important rulings may be accepted for what they are—the basis for a settlement of the South China Sea controversy.
《南海仲裁案裁决》与和平解决争议方案
在菲律宾对中国在南中国海的主张和行动提出质疑后,常设仲裁法院(Permanent Court of Arbitration)的一个五人小组于2016年做出了一项判决,这无疑是现代国际海洋法历史上最重要的一套法理裁决。仲裁庭的判决对《联合国海洋法公约》的许多重要条款提供了令人信服的解释,这些条款不仅在南中国海的背景下重要,而且在其他海域也普遍重要。仲裁庭的裁决加强了海洋地区的航行自由,并为执行保护海洋环境的国际法提供了指导方针。但仲裁庭的裁决不太可能对解决南海争端产生太大影响。虽然中国在技术上受仲裁庭裁决的约束,但中国没有参与仲裁程序,也不会明确肯定裁决的正确性。文章提出了一个三点计划,让中国在这场争议中挽回面子。希望通过这些步骤,仲裁庭的重要裁决能够被接受,因为它们是解决南中国海争议的基础。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信