An expert in the South China Sea issue on an exclusive interview at the European Sting

Mrs Mrs Yan Yan, Deputy Director of the Research Center of Oceans Law and Policy in the National Institute for the South China Sea Studies (NISCSS)

Mrs Yan Yan, Deputy Director of the Research Center of Oceans Law and Policy in the National Institute for the South China Sea Studies (NISCSS)

Last Wednesday the European Sting took an interview in Brussels from an expert on the South China Sea. Our interviewee this time was Mrs Yan Yan, Deputy Director of the Research Center of Oceans Law and Policy in the National Institute for the South China Sea Studies (NISCSS) and a PhD candidate in the University of Hong Kong on public international law. The stimulating interview is presented below. The Sting’s questions are signalled as ES and Mrs Yan’s answers as YY.

ES: The Global Times, a Beijing-based newspaper, at the end of their editorial last week they posed the question: “Will U.S. Restrain ‘Provocative’ South China Sea Actions?”. The question was made post the conclusion of the eighth China-US Strategic & Economic Dialogue (S&ED) in Beijing, which took place last week as well. Thus, I would like to address the same question to you if I may: “Will U.S. restrain provocative south China sea actions”? and if yes, how do you think that can be accomplished? 

YY: With China and the US, on the one hand there is the competition there of the naval power. But I also see that the two countries are trying to reach a delicate balance in the region. In the Strategic and Economic dialogue (…), there are many ways to exchange views in a dialogue. In the year 2014, the two countries, made an agreement for the first time on two very important major concrete measures, the first one is the limitation on military activity and the second one is the rule of behaviour on encounters within the sea and air. And then in 2015, the two countries, the military departments, so the navy and the air force added to the negotiation and dialogue and reached two annexes of the rule of behaviour. And also the two countries conducted a joint military exercise together  in 2014. Also the two countries signed a multi-lateral agreement on encounters in the sea, which was conducted by 21 navy agencies in the world, where both China and the US are part to it.

I see that China and the US have doubts and suspicion to each other, but I also see that the two states are trying to understand each other, trying to avoid miscalculation and incidents, both at sea and in the air. I don’t think there will be a big incident or war between the two countries, because we enjoy the same interests in terms of safeguarding the peace of the South China Sea. It is the most important meaning of communication, it has the world’s largest exports going through.

ES: According to a recent interview that a former Filipino diplomat gave to CCTV and was published last week, Manila plays a significant role in intensifying tensions in the South China sea. Would you agree with that allegation?

YY: I think she means the arbitration initiative by the Philippines in 2013 to Arbitrational Tribunal. Honestly speaking, I think the arbitration’s move has some negative impact on the South China Sea issue. Especially the bilateral relationship between China and the Philippines. My first point is that China and the Philippines concluded several bilateral agreements on how to resolve a dispute. And then China feels that the Philippines is a betrayer of its own words by bringing China to court, so yes, that is the feeling. And then some of the ASEAN states believe, some of the ASEAN States like Viet Nam that stand by the Philippines, that it is their right to go to court, but maybe other nations of the ASEAN’s, they think that it is better to stay on the negotiation table with China like Cambodia and Laos (…). The arbitration splits the ASEAN (…) In this sense, I think she is correct.

ES: Chinese Ambassador to Britain Liu Xiaoming last week urged the Philippines to return to a negotiated solution and some countries from outside the region to “stop playing with fire.” How do you read on this one? Would you ever anticipate the possibility of a future hot episode evolving over the South China Sea issue?

YY: I do see the different anticipation of this arbitration. For China, we definitively think that the bilateral negotiation is the best way to solve this problem. Especially in maritime disputes. Actually, two weeks ago, I went to France and that the foreign minister of France is concerned over South China Sea and he is also worried that all the countries are saying bye bye international law, and international law is the way out of South China Sea etc. I am aware that many countries that have very powerful navy, they want to urge the legal evolution of the South China Sea issue. For international law scholars, there are different way of resolving a dispute. There are international dispute settlements like under the Art. 33 of the UN Charter,(…), there are a lot of ways to solve problems and they are all part of international law.

I do feel that when some government leaders say that international law is the way out, I do want to say that China thinks the same way too. And international law does not mean only UNCLOS. UNCLOS is an important treaty on the governments of the ocean, that is true. However, it is only one treaty in international law. International law can come from several sources ( e.g.treaties and conventions, international customs (…)  Negotiation is one way of international law resolution of a dispute. (…) I do feel that China is very much interested in the peaceful resolution of this South China Sea issue and also China hasn’t made unreasonable claims under international law- nothing ambiguous, well not to me.

ES: In the next weeks the whole world awaits the ruling by the Permanent Court of Arbitration over the arbitral proceedings that Philippines initiated against China back in 2013.At the same time we all know that China rejects the jurisdiction of the court. Do you think that China’s strategy on the matter is likely to change post the upcoming announcement of the ruling? What are the possible scenarios that could evolve for China in the coming months?

YY: China on many occasions stressed that it is not accepting the award regarding the missing tribunal’s jurisdiction in this case. People are awaiting the final award, the final award will come out end of the month/ early July. To me, it won’t affect China’s position on the South China Sea, because China very clearly stated that the tribunal has no jurisdiction. So therefore the award will not be legally binding, because it is not convincing. The first reason is that under the Art. 288, the tribunal can only have jurisdiction over the application/implementation of the UNCLOS. Well, the dispute between China and the Philippines, it is a territorial dispute which is out of the control of the tribunal. Secondly, some of the submissions of the Philippines, on the islands reefs in South China Sea, they want the tribunal to make a decision on specifics which are a problem of maritime limitations. Which had been excluded by China in the 2006 declaration, provided by the UNCLOS. So therefore I don’t think it will have much effect on China’s future activities in the South China Sea. Because, we believe, the results, no matter what it is legally wrong. And also China wanted the Philippines to come back to the negotiation table and we are open to bilateral talks, even after the award is out.

But another point, what I wanted to say is about the new president of the Philippines, Duterte, I think there will is and there be a difference when he takes office. He will take office June 30th. There will be something I am very looking forward to. It is whatever the award comes out before he takes office or after (…). If it doesn’t come out before June 30th, and the new president took office, actually, he can vanish the procedure.

ES: If the Arbitration Tribunal’s ruling is unfavorable to China, analysts fear that this could open the Pandora’s box in the South China Sea region, with other neighbour countries starting to challenge China in similar territorial disputes. Would you see that as a possible threat to China? If so, what would China do to tackle this?

YY: There is indeed the possibility that Vietnam will follow the Philippines going to the arbitrational tribunal against China. But whether this will happen, depends on how China and Vietnam handle the negotiations between each other. I personally don’t think it will happen in a very short time, because the two countries are still negotiating and exchanging views on the issue and are talking about a joint development in the area. I think the negotiation can finish. Besides Vietnam, I don’t think Malaysia and Brunei will go to court against China, because the relationship with them is even better.

Advertising

Advertising

Advertising

Advertising

Advertising

Advertising

Advertising

Advertising

Advertising

Advertising

Advertising

Advertising

Advertising

Advertising

Advertising

Advertising

Featured Stings

Commissioner sings “Volar-e” but the European driver no “Cantar-e”

Parliament votes reform for better European Co2 market but critics want it sooner than later

The Commission unsuccessfully pretends to want curbing of tax evasion

Ecofin: ‘The Friday battle’ for the banking union

Climate change will never be combatted by EU alone while some G20 countries keep procrastinating

The ECB again takes care of the bankers not the people

Summer pause gives time to rethink Eurozone’s problems

Vulnerable young people must not be blamed & stigmatised for violent radicalisation

‘Free state aid’ for imprudent banks

Draghi’s ‘quasi’ announcement of a new era of more and cheaper money

“Hasta la vista” Google says to Spain and now Europe is next?

Apparently the EU Digital Single Market passes necessarily from China’s Digital Silk Road

Commission and ECB prepare new financial mega-tool in support of SMEs

Diana in Vietnam

VW emissions scandal: EU unable to protect its consumers against large multinationals

EU seeks foreign support on 5G from Mobile World Congress 2015 as the “digital gold rush” begins

Camino de Santiago – a global community on our doorstep

Greek citizens to pay the price again but Tsipras risks losing next elections

European banking stress tests 2014: A more adverse approach for a shorter banking sector

It is me

Will Europe be able to deal with the migration crisis alone if Turkey quits the pact?

EU-India summit: Will the EU manage to sign a free trade agreement with India before Britain?

Europe united in not supporting a US attack on Syria

EU prepares a banking union amidst financial ruins

ECB readies itself for extraordinary monetary measures defying Germany

Eurozone banks are unable to support real economy’s dawning growth

EU agricultural production no more a self-sufficiency anchor

It ain’t over until Google says it’s over

The MH17 tragedy to put a tombstone on Ukrainian civil war

Impacting society with digital ingenuity – World Summit Award proclaiming the top 8 worldwide

Greece at the mercy of ECB while sailing through uncharted waters

Chinese economy to raise speed and help the world grow

Public opinion misled by the Commission on air transport safety

Menu for change: why we have to go towards a Common Food Policy

Poverty and social exclusion skyrocket with austerity

London to say hello or goodbye to Brussels this week

My unlimited China

The Eurogroup has set Cyprus on fire

China is now heavily endorsing its big investment flow in the Central Eastern European (CEE) countries

Eurostat: Real unemployment double than the official rate

Germany objects to EU Commission’s plan for a Eurozone bank deposits insurance scheme but Berlin could go along

EU out to conquer African Union summit

European Commission: Does Apple, Starbucks and Fiat really pay their taxes?

EU Commission – US hasten talks to avoid NGO reactions on free trade agreement

Lithuania needs to get rid of the victim mentality

EU imposes provisional anti-dumping tariffs on Chinese solar panels

The Sting’s Values

WEF Davos 2016 LIVE: “European unity and cooperation is being called on question”, Vice President Joe Biden criticizes from Davos

The European Commission cuts roaming charges. But “it’s not enough”…

What lessons to draw from the destruction of Syria

Bugged Europe accepts US demands and blocks Morales plane

MWC 2016 Live: Industrial world prepares to reap digital benefits

Bayer-Monsanto merger: the story of the rise of the “endless company”

Athens searches frantically for a new compromise between politics and economic reality

European Court of Justice to Google: It is #righttobeforgotten but not #righttoberemembered

MWC 2016: IoT experts fret over fragmentation

IMF to teach Germany a Greek lesson

A Sting Exclusive: “Junior Enterprises themselves carry out projects focusing on the environment”, JADE President Daniela Runchi highlights from Brussels

European Youth Forum welcomes adoption of Sustainable Development Goals and calls on European countries to not ignore them!

How to test if Kiev’s ‘Maidan’ was an authentic revolt or a well-planned operation

More Stings?

Comments

  1. “To me, it won’t affect China’s position on the South China Sea, because China very clearly stated that the tribunal has no jurisdiction.” This girl is dumb. When china signed the UNCLOS it gave its consent to arbitration, and UNCLOS says jurisdiction is determined by the court itself as agreed upon by china. What the hell is she talking about no jurisdiction. Yan yan I think you need to go study more.

  2. Kassandra says:

    It seems like you are very interested in this topic, but you seem to miss some basics. I propose you to read this article: https://europeansting.com/2016/05/24/some-prevailing-arguments-and-perceptions-over-the-south-china-sea-issue-are-simply-wrong/
    The article makes clear that UNCLOS only applies to maritime disputes (open sea), not, as here indicated, to territorial soverignity.
    Also, bilateral negotiations between the Philippines and China were already in process, when the Philippines initiated arbitration unilaterally. The UNCLOS itself, states that in such cases, the arbitration court has no jurisdiction over the dispute.

  3. Bilateral negotiation is good if and only if there’s no pre-conditioned from greedy China. What kind of
    negotaiation is that forcing the Phils to swallow that China has indisputable sovereignity in South China Sea? then what do we need to negotiate

Speak your Mind Here

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s