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

Featured Stings

The vehicles of our future

Greece did it again

The EU cuts roaming charges further while the UK weighs Brexit impact

Zhua Zhou: Choosing The Future

The EU pretends not knowing what happens in the Western Balkans

Trump’s Russophiles under investigation, Europe remains ‘en garde’

Virtual Doctor: a core part of modern healthcare?

Three countries losing ground and one new prime minister

After Brexit and Grexit, Brussels to deal with Poloust

8000 young people in the EP in Strasbourg: “a breath of fresh air for EU democracy”

Commission challenges Council over EU 2014 budget

The strong version of the EU banking union gains momentum

The EU Commission implicates major banks in cartel cases, threatens with devastating fines

Young? You should work out the entrepreneurial heart before the mind

EU deserves the title of the Syrian affair merchandiser

Zuckerberg, a paella, and the mighty EU questionnaires that would stop Whatsapp acquisition by Facebook?

Ukraine takes EU money and runs to sign with Russia

European Young Innovators Forum @ European Business Summit 2014: Europe for StartUps, vision 2020

COP21 Breaking News_03 December: Unprecedented Global Alliance for Buildings and Construction to Combat Climate Change

So different, so close – for two twinning cities

UK’s Cameron takes the field to speed up TTIP talks. Will “rocket boosters” work?

Global Citizen – Volunteer Internships

Margrethe Vestager, European Commissioner for Competition, in Brussels - Berlaymont, last week. (Copyright European Union, 2017 / Source: EC - Audiovisual Service / Photo: Lukasz Kobus)

Amazon, Luxembourg and Ireland hit by EU’s latest turn of the screw over competition

The importance of collaboration in the digital economy

EU-Russia relations: the beginning of a warmer winter?

What is the IMF telling Eurozone about fiscal and banking unification?

Opening – Parliament expresses support for victims of Fuego volcano in Guatemala

Can privatisation be the panacea for the lack of growth in Europe?

Industrial price dive may lead to point of no return

De Gucht: More gaffes with the talks on the EU-US free trade agreement

It’s EU vs. Google for real: the time is now, the case is open

Berlin cannot dictate anymore the terms for the enactment of the European Banking Union

Bank resolutions set to remain a national affair

The EU finally seizes the opportunity to support the sharing economy?

How young entrepreneurs should be supported: what assistance should governments provide?

How the gig economy can transform farms in the developing world

Berlin repels proposal for cheaper euro

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

EU’s unsparing question to UK: now what kind of future relations do you want?

Out with the old: Young People transforming Humanitarian Action

This is the state of the world’s health, in numbers

Germany and France only care about keeping their borrowing cheap

Trump reshapes the Middle East at the expenses of Europe

Irish Presidency: Not a euro more for EU budgets

EU: Turkey to shelter Syrian refugees and turn other immigrants back in return of €3 billion

The importance of pre-departure training for a better understanding of global health issues

Berlin wants to break South’s politico-economic standing

European Business Summit 2014 Launch Event: “Energising Industrial Growth”

Industrial producer prices on free fall and stagnant output

MEPs call on EU countries to end precarious employment practices

G20 to Germany: Abandon miser policies

On our way to China

The representatives of the regions and the cities know better what the EU needs on migration, trade, poverty and taxation

Ahead of State of the Union the European Youth Forum highlights lack of action on youth employment

The US may be “open” to reviving TTIP, while the EU designs the future of trade with China

Healthcare for refugees: a necessary symbiosis of medicine and politics

Global Citizen-Volunteer Internships

Bankruptcy or referendum: which one is going to be first?

How close is Eurozone to a new recession which may trigger formidable developments?

European Development Days 2013

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 )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )

w

Connecting to %s