The PRC’s claim to “historic rights in the South China Sea” is plainly inconsistent with international law to the extent it exceeds the PRC’s possible maritime entitlements provided for in the international law of the sea, as reflected in the Convention. The PRC’s historic rights claim has been protested by the United States and many other States and was rejected by the tribunal in The South China Sea Arbitration. The overall effect of these maritime claims is that the PRC unlawfully claims sovereignty or some form of exclusive jurisdiction over most of the South China Sea. These claims, especially considering their expansive geographic and substantive scope, gravely undermine the rule of law in the oceans and numerous universally recognized provisions of international law reflected in the Convention.
tirsdag 27. september 2022
U.S. Government: China and the South China Sea
In the years since the Department of State published Limits in the Seas No. 143 in 2014 and the arbitral tribunal issued its decision in The South China Sea Arbitration in 2016, the PRC has advanced a new articulation of its maritime claims in the South China Sea. These expansive maritime claims are plainly inconsistent with international law as reflected in the Convention.
The PRC’s claim to “historic rights in the South China Sea” is plainly inconsistent with international law to the extent it exceeds the PRC’s possible maritime entitlements provided for in the international law of the sea, as reflected in the Convention. The PRC’s historic rights claim has been protested by the United States and many other States and was rejected by the tribunal in The South China Sea Arbitration. The overall effect of these maritime claims is that the PRC unlawfully claims sovereignty or some form of exclusive jurisdiction over most of the South China Sea. These claims, especially considering their expansive geographic and substantive scope, gravely undermine the rule of law in the oceans and numerous universally recognized provisions of international law reflected in the Convention.
The PRC’s claim to “historic rights in the South China Sea” is plainly inconsistent with international law to the extent it exceeds the PRC’s possible maritime entitlements provided for in the international law of the sea, as reflected in the Convention. The PRC’s historic rights claim has been protested by the United States and many other States and was rejected by the tribunal in The South China Sea Arbitration. The overall effect of these maritime claims is that the PRC unlawfully claims sovereignty or some form of exclusive jurisdiction over most of the South China Sea. These claims, especially considering their expansive geographic and substantive scope, gravely undermine the rule of law in the oceans and numerous universally recognized provisions of international law reflected in the Convention.
