Why the South China Sea ruling seemed to have evaporated?

Patrick Law

 
         If you are wondering why the high profiled arbitration case the Philippines (at the time, under the administration of the inept, naïve and ignorant Aquino III) brought to the Permanent Court of Arbitration of Hague, hereunder refer to as the PCA, seemed to have vanished from the western media, then you should continue reading.
 
         The laughable part is, a group of equally inept and ignorant arbitrators (maybe they are greedy) actually accepted to rule on a case that’s obviously way over their dumb heads; they should know better that (1) there is nothing for them to mediate, let alone to arbitrate; there were no negotiations took place between the parties involved and (2) the Hague Court have no jurisdiction over territorial disputes and (3) they obviously failed to read the PCA’s ruling history (all competent arbitrators should read prior cases, thoroughly); if they did, they should know that not a single world power has ever complied to their rulings. There is an old Chinese saying: There is a brave man when the reward is high, but these group of inept arbitrators probably misinterpreted it, hence imprudently took on the case.
 
         Give me an example where any of the great powers i.e. the 5 permanent members of the UN Security Council EVER complied with any rulings of the PCA. Don’t bother searching, because there are none. The following three cases where the rulings were all in favour of the weak, but all three great powers rejected the rulings: Netherland vs. Russia; Philippines vs. UK; Nicaragua vs. US. Interested in knowing more? Just Google it.
 
         In the current international political arena, the strong will do what they can, and the weak will suffer what they must. This is basically the “might is right” model that has been followed by the most powerful countries in the world since the Monroe Doctrine was implemented in the mid 1800’s. China, on the other hand, has been greatly influenced by Confucianism for more than 2500 years, believing in the exact opposite, i.e. “right is might”. Confucius stated that in his ideal society, where the spirit of “right is might” would be enjoyed by all. This is the China’s vision, China’s long-range goal. Unfortunately, there are people who misinterpreted it and unnecessarily felt threatened. The task is monumental, the roads are long and full of uncertainties, however, Xi Jinping seemed to have taken the first step. Xi has promoted his idea of that since we all live on this planet and share the same fate, let’s work together for the benefits for all. Can’t you sense the essence of Confucius’ spirit of 2500 years ago is everywhere in his ideals?
 
        When China decided to follow other world powers’ footsteps to ignore the PCA’s ruling, western media jumped on the opportunity to criticize China for not obeying the international laws, how hypocritical! If CNN, BBC or similar channels are the source of your main news diet, you probably unknowingly echoed their criticism. This is the western’s style: do as we say, but don’t you dare do as we do. Deep inside, no body was surprised at the Chinese response. The world powers only recognize the PCA’s rulings when it is in their interest to do so.
 
         How credible is PCA then? And how much does the 501-paged reports worth? We know it’s been reported that it costs the Philippines (maybe paid for by the US for obvious reasons) 30,000,000 US dollars, but it is actually worth less than a piece of used toilet paper!
 
        Some facts and history to consider: first the facts.

The Tai Ping Island, the biggest island in the Spratlys, has an airport, a hospital; it also has fresh water and vegetation and even
animal farms to support a staff of well over a hundred men, permanently stationed on the island since 1945. For a consideration of the 30 million, the PCA audaciously declared this island a “rock”, whereas it shamelessly dared to rule a 9 square meter Japanese rocks in the Pacific an island, thereby Japan can enjoy the 200 nm of EEZ. Just wondering how much Japan paid for such a ruling. How credible is PCA? And how worthy are their rulings? Consciously deep inside, everyone should already have
the right answer.
 
          Now the history, we all know that China was the only country in ancient times that possessed the technological know-hows and had the resources to explore the seas. China invented compass during Han Dynasty, and by Yuan and Song Dynasties, China was the world leader in ship building and seafaring. Sufficient documentation supported the early expeditions to many of these SCS islands and far beyond, and as a result of the findings of these explorations, thousands upon thousands of Chinese fishermen were able to earn a living around these waters for centuries. In the early Ming Dynasty (1403-1433), China’s navy was larger than the rest of the worlds’ combined. By comparison, the ship, Santa Maria (60 feet in length) that got credit for the “discovery” of America (more than half a century later in 1492) by Christopher Columbus, could be stored inside the hulk of Admiral Zheng’s flag ship with ample room to spare. The “Bao Chuan” has 4 decks, 9 masts and more than 400 feet in length!
 
          However, let’s for the moment, put these ancient, historical capabilities and claims aside, and just concentrate on the more recent events. During WWII, most of these islands were occupied by the Japanese Imperial Navy to facilitate the transportation of the raw materials it robbed from those conquered countries throughout south east Asia, but upon its defeat in 1945, and in accordance with the stipulations of Potsdam and Cairo Declarations and the Japanese Instrument of Unconditional Surrender; all territories Japan acquired by force are to return to their rightful owners. China lawfully and rightfully claimed these islands, there were no other claimants at this time. However, China being so poor after a long and bloody war against the Japanese for 14 years, it not only did not have any Navy to speak of, but also did not even have any sea worthy vessel to travel the distance to mark the boundaries on these islands. In November 1945, these 4 US Navy vessels brought Chinese officials to erect the boundary stones (all of them were later donated to China, and China named 4 of these islands in memory of these charity vessels, Chinese names are in brackets):
(1) USS Decker
(2) USS LST-1056
(3) USS Embattle
(4) USS LST-716
Please do pay special attention to the date (November 1945), it is of vital importance.
 
         After the US defeated Spain in a war in 1898, the Philippines became a US colony until their declaration of independence on July 4, 1946, at that time, the US expressly reminded the Philippines that the Spratlys and the Paracels were NOT part of the Philippines, simply because after its defeat, Spain ceded Philippines to the US in the Treaty of Paris (1898), these were not part of the Philippines. If any of these islands DID belong to the Philippines prior to this independence date, do you think the US Navy would bring Chinese official to their (The United States of America’s) own territories to erect China’s boundary stones?
 
        The current US government’s officially stated stance regarding south China sea disputes is that they are neutral, i.e. would not take sides in any territorial disputes (only God and the US government would know if this statement is sincerely true). Regardless of what they are saying, however, their actions in 1945 already spoke the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, which is: they knew that China was the only legitimate claimant to the Spratlys and the Paracels, and that there were no other claimants, no objections from Vietnam, the Philippines or Malaya (Malaysia’s former name), no disputes.
 
         As for why suddenly, these countries started to make claims
to (even occupied) some of these SCS islands? Why the crystal-clear waters of SCS became muddy? Why the seemingly tranquil SCS became full of tensions? I’ll cover these complex topics in my next article: “Why Deng Xiao-ping’s far sighted South China Sea strategy failed?” 
 
         Stay tuned.