Posted By Alicia P.Q. Wittmeyer 
Thursday, February 21, 2013 - 11:05 AM 
Share
When the government of the Philippines announced last month it was taking China to court over territorial claims in the South China Sea, it was seen by some as a surprising but savvy move -- a first step toward establishing some sort of law and order in East Asia's waters, which, up until now have been a sort of aquatic Wild West, with nations planting flags on rocks, roping off shoals, and building up tiny reefs to stake their claims.
The hearing was to determine the validity of China's claims to a wide swath of ocean that encompasses waters near the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia and Brunei, among other countries. Manila even generated some buzz by hiring D.C. lawyer Paul Reichler to argue its case, a man who's made his name as a "giant-slayer" in the world of international law for his often-successful track record of suing the U.S. Russia, and Britain on behalf of countries like Nicaragua, Georgia and Mauritius.
Then, on Tuesday, China made clear it had no plans to participate in any international court arbitration. Though the hearing will go on without China's participation, the decision, some may think, doesn't bode well for hopes that China might abide by a ruling that doesn't go its way.
Still, Reichler, who was hired by the Philippines last year, thinks the rising power could come around.
"They're very smart people," he said in an interview last week. "And I think they might come to understand that in the long run their best interests are served by being a responsible member of the international community."
Reichler's faith in the power of international law to wrangle even the largest of powers comes from his success suing the United States. He took America to The Hague on behalf of the Sandinista government of Nicaragua in the 1980s, over U.S. support of the Contras, and won -- an effort that earned him the ire of figures like John McCain. As a result of the victory - and the international pressure that accompanied it -- he says, Congress cut off funding for Contra support.
"It's a very high cost to prestige to be branded as an international wrongdoer and then not comply," he said.
The decision not to take part in the arbitration is "unfortunate," Reichler said in an email (China has long said it doesn't want to its territorial conflicts "internationalized"). "They had an opportunity to demonstrate their commitment to the international legal order, to show respect for its procedures, and to agree to be bound by its rules. Had they seized this chance, they would have proven that they are not only a great power, but a responsible one."
But the pressure on Beijing to comply with an unfavorable ruling - even if it doesn't participate - will still be there, Reichler said.
"To me, China has always denounced imperialism, denounced unilateralism, has denounced violations of the U.N. Charter," he said. "This is an opportunity for China to really show its true colors."
Welcome to Foreign Policy's new commenting system! The good news is that it's now easier than ever to comment and share your insights with friends. Here's how it works: You can now sign in by creating a LiveFyre account (which will replace the ForeignPolicy.com accounts from now on), or using a Twitter or Facebook account, and carry on a conversation with your fellow commenters in the section below. You do not have to sign in using a social network if you choose to remain anonymous – simply use a LiveFyre account to continue commenting. For more information, click here.
Conversation on FP.com
DeanJackson
The article reads, "Reichler said in an email (China has long said it doesn't want to its territorial conflicts "internationalized"'
Interesting, because after the fraudulent collapse of the Chinese Communist government by the end of the decade (a major disinformation operation under the "Long-Range Policy", the "new" more subtle strategy all Communist nations signed onto in 1960 to defeat the West with. The last major disinformation operation under the LRP was the "collapse" of the USSR), Mexico will "internationalize" the battle against the spreading "drug wars" there. Guess who Mexico requests to "assist" in this "internationalization"? You got it..."democratic" China!
What will the United States do then? Well, one contingency will be to mount a series of false flag operations on our southern borders and blame them on the "drug cartels", and use those bombings as an excuse to invade Mexico. The American administration of the time will say something akin to, "If Mexico can't control its violence from spreading into the United States proper, then Mexico is a failed state (corruption and the sort) and requires American intervention.
Of course, Communist strategists in Moscow/Beijing already know of this American response and are prepared to checkmate the response by keeping America's land, air and Naval forces busy in isolated areas of the world. Where? The Korean Peninsula; the Balkans (again); massive sectarian eruptions in Iraq; in Afghanistan the Afghan Army will turn on NATO forces (the British know all about that from their 19th Century interventions there); assorted uprisings in strategic mineral rich Africa; etc.
Assessment: China will partake in the international court proceedings, thereby setting the example and giving precedence to the concept of "internationalizing" national conflicts, which will come in handy when their ally, Mexico, "internationalizes" the "drug wars".
LeoButler
Oh, gosh! please wake up! China is already the centre of East Asia. The most hilarious thing is, in fact, the Philippines is challenging the ROC's claim after WWII, rather than the CCP's claim. I would be fuzzy how Philippines to deal with the Taiping Island in South China Sea, which under the control of Taiwan. If CCP push the issue to Taiwan, how Taiwan could react this?
And, does the UNCLOS can solve the sovereignty dispute? I don't think so.
hxy300
I wish the Philipine government stay healthy financially and Mr Reichler physically until the contract between the two expires.
pedro bundol
hxy300 It would be funny if there is no truth in that. Just like sharks in the water China senses the vulnerability of the US under Obama. It would not hack US companies and governmental offices if it fears this country. They would not do so under a stronger leader than the one we have now.
bridgebuilder78
He doesn't think he can win. He says he thinks he can win because he's getting paid a handsome sum.
Barrister98
As a lawyer who is both an international dispute resolution specialist and an analyst for a geopolitical risk consultancy, this really caught my eye.
1. The "Asia pivot" is entirely misplaced, with even our allies criticizing our strategy of attempting to "contain" China. Why? Because the South/East China Sea issue IS A LEGAL ISSUE THAT INTERNATIONAL TRIBUNALS WORK WITH ALL THE TIME. But the militarization of US foreign policy has precluded us from seeing that.
2. The disputes are governed by UNCLOS. And the fact that the US has not ratified UNCLOS does not matter because there is no U.S. territory in dispute.
3. China will not want to look like a rogue state - it wants people to think it plays by the rules, even if it does not. This will settle the immediate issue.
China Lee
UNCLOS has two serious problems.
1. The United States has refused to ratify UNCLOS (ie. UN Convention on the Law of the Sea). Therefore, UNCLOS is not international law.
2. China has arguably the world's second-strongest navy. China has publicly proclaimed in 2006 that it does not recognize UNCLOS jurisdiction over China's maritime boundaries.
In conclusion, the world's two most powerful maritime nations do not recognize UNCLOS authority over maritime law or boundaries. Hence, UNCLOS is not international law and it is only mere guidelines recognized by weak countries.
Colin Minich
China Lee Some decent points here, however the claim about the second-strongest navy is laughable. It has just one carrier not even fit for combat ops where the Russian navy easily has one readily available for such thing (Admiral Kuznetsov) that has the ability to launch combat aircraft. While China has a LARGER navy it does not have a more powerful one than the Russians whose submarine technologies are second to none. This also doesn't even factor in the more advanced technologies the South Korean/Japanese navies have, enjoying the strategic alliance with the US Navy.
BUT...I also emphasize for as much as the Chinese like talks and international law, it strikes me as odd that regardless of the position of the US outside its own waters, China also spits on the UNCLOS for all it talks about.
The US though is there for its allies which if anything goes to show China's disastrous attempt at pan-Asian soft power.
pedro bundol
Colin Minich China Lee It is naivete that Obama is willing to jeopardize US relations with China over an insignificant country like the Philippines. The Philippines evicted the US from its military bases,. The US owes a lot of money to China. And still think of borrowing again. Also China must be looking at the US and Israel relations. In spite of Obama`s promises, what he is doing is opposite of what he is saying. Three and most of all, China realizes that America is on the waning days. So please grow up or read more before spouting.
Colin Minich
pedro bundol Colin Minich China Lee You're so cute when you try to act pretentious. Case you hadn't noticed we've been doing joint drills with them along with Thailand and Vietnam, but there we go with that reading thing you're so unfamiliar with. Go away. You're really nothing but a bitter ideologue.
pedro bundol
Colin Minich China Lee Right as if China is frightened because we are doing joint oil drills with Thailand and Vietnam. But it is okay just continue with the nonsense you are prattling. Do not let me disturb you.
Colin Minich
"Then, on Tuesday, China made clear it had no plans to participate in any international court arbitration."
Because China knows by the UNCLOS drawings that it's 100% in the wrong here. I mean has anyone seen China's actual water territorial claims with half of it based on "ownership of the past?"
Utterly laughable.
pedro bundol
Colin Minich The laugh is on us. China does not give a hoot about treaties and such unless it is to its advantage. Please read more.
Colin Minich
pedro bundol No need. Anything you recommend I'm sure would be better off as toilet paper since it's some conservative "my way or the high way" old fart mentality.
pedro bundol
Colin Minich I think it is about time you relieve yourself to the nearest rest {word}. Your manner of speech betrays your need at the moment. Go on.
No comments:
Post a Comment