Legal Basis over Historical Fictions

The Ongoing Philippines-China Arbitration

According to the article of E-International Relations Students, "The Spratly Islands are located in the so-called South China Sea and consist of a number of small islands, reefs, atolls, and rocks. The Spratly Islands are claimed in whole or part by China, Taiwan, Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia and Brunei." (Lin Alexandra Mortensgaard, The Spratly Islands Dispute- A Discourse Analysis, 2015). However, this blog will focus more on the ongoing Philippines-China arbitration.

The two countries fighting over their own rights in the disputed sea had presented their different arguments and perspectives on why they should win over the disputed sea. While, China bases its claims on historical evidence of Chinese presence on some of the islands and claim that they were the first to “name, map, study, use and patrol the South China Sea and the islands therein and refers to the islands in ancient Chinese history books.” (Xavier Furtado, International Law and the Dispute over the Spratly Islands: Whither UNCLOS, 1999)

.

On the other hand, the Philippines bases its claims on international law particularly United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). Wherein, the Philippines invoke UNCLOS’ concept of a 200 nautical mile Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) and the disputed sea is clearly manifested in the territory of the Philippines. Hence, China has clearly violated the EEZ rule. Furthermore, the Philippines contend the China’s nine-dashed-line claims wherein, it discerns on notion of historical rights. Thus, the Philippines contest that we have to highly scrutinize internationally-accepted legal principles.

We have been presenting legal rights and evidences; however, China keeps on arguing their historical fiction. The Philippines have had a firm legal battle to defend its claim over the portion of the West Philippine Sea. Considering, the claim under prevailing international legal administration, the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) particularly the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). We cannot really reckon our arguments on hearsays or historical fiction but we should always albeit through the language of law, especially, when it comes to territorial disputes.

Therefore, the Philippines have the right to assert its claim to the disputed sea, under legal regimes and not just a mere historical fiction. I believe that if we use only historical arguments without any legal basis to determine territorial possession, anyone or any country having territorial disputes will have chaos in claiming it because each of us can give a historical arguments. So these countries will be left blank without knowing who really has the right over the disputed territory, but with the help of legal principles, we can further argue and prove our rights.