South China Sea Strategies for other nations (Not China)

Brumby said:

At face value that appears to be the reading of the text but proofing it may well become impossible because the natural features are now under concrete. The issues now before the tribunal is instructive as it has been asked to make a determination of the eight islands currently occupied by China whether it is island or rock.

Click to expand...

There exists reports on conditions of those features prior to reclamation as well as what another state (Philippines) has classified as rocks using UNCLOS definitions.

Brumby said:

As the United States has not recognized Chinese title to the features, it is not obligated to observe requirements of a theoretical territorial sea and may treat the feature as terra nullius. More importantly, even assuming that one or another state may have lawful title to a feature, other states are not obligated to confer upon that nation the right to unilaterally adopt and enforce measures that interfere with navigation, until lawful title is resolved. In fact, observing any nation’s rules pertaining to features under dispute legitimizes that country’s claim and takes sides which the US has consistently said it will not do.

Click to expand...

That would mean the US has to be conducting their actions equitably on all the claimants in the SCS. Otherwise, it would be selectively choosing what to observe and undermines the principle that States need to follow international law. The rules I listed are stemming from international agreements, not what the Chinese have specifically said. Of course, one can say the Chinese are taking advantage of the rules provided in international agreements but that is true of all the other claimants as well.

Brumby said:

Whilst I agree that the tribunal will not be addressing the issue of sovereignty, the Philippines has specifically asked the tribunal to address whether the eight islands currently occupied by China are rocks or islands and consequently their entitlements. This goes a long way in establishing the limits of the claim regardless of who has final ownership.

In regards to whether China has violated any law it is dependent on whether the 12 nm limit is placed on all the reclaimed islands since some do not meet the standard before the reclamation.

Click to expand...

Well, at this point, the Chinese have been intentionally vague because it serves their purpose. But that also means lumping all features into one assumption in a discussion is just that, an assumption.

joshuatree said:

That would mean the US has to be conducting their actions equitably on all the claimants in the SCS. Otherwise, it would be selectively choosing what to observe and undermines the principle that States need to follow international law. The rules I listed are stemming from international agreements, not what the Chinese have specifically said. Of course, one can say the Chinese are taking advantage of the rules provided in international agreements but that is true of all the other claimants as well.

Click to expand...

I do not know in practice how the US determines its FONOP. I am only basing my view on the nature and purpose of the FON and its objectives and project from it how its actions are likely to be formulated. For example, I came across an issue in the past in which Australia introduced some requirements within its EEZ that the US considered being outside the UNCLOS provisions. The US through its FONOP basically challenged that initiative through that program by conducting a FON. It is not case of spreading such actions equitably with other claimants through the FON. If the other claimants are making unlawful restrictions to FON, then it will be challenged just as the US did with Australia. In other words, if there are no unlawful restrictions then there is nothing to challenge.

joshuatree said:

Well, at this point, the Chinese have been intentionally vague because it serves their purpose. But that also means lumping all features into one assumption in a discussion is just that, an assumption.

Click to expand...

We will have an answer soon. I suspect the likely choice of the FON will be against Subi or Mischief or maybe both.

Good comments & analyses by various commentators. The actual situation/tests regarding FON etc. would likely take place in the near future. Regardless of the rhetoric, very unlikely there will be "clashes" in the South China Sea - nations in their right minds would not "snip their noses to spite their faces". I stand corrected.

U.S. destroyer to pass islands in South China Sea within 24 hours

Washington (CNN)The U.S. Navy plans to send a destroyer within 12 miles of China's man-made islands in the South China Sea within the next 24 hours, a U.S. defense official confirmed to CNN.

The official said the mission now has the approval of President Barack Obama.

News of the ship's plan was

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

.

The ship could make the pass as soon as Monday night, barring any unforeseen circumstances, a U.S. military source told CNN. There will be air cover as well as reconnaissance in the air, flying in international airspace, the source said.

The aircraft will watch the ship and be there, if needed, to record and deal with any problems. The Chinese have not been informed, the source said, adding that no trouble is expected.

Click to expand...

Brumby said:

U.S. destroyer to pass islands in South China Sea within 24 hours

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

The fact that the timing is being announced,in the open like this, further punctuates my points earlier.

MY guess is that both sides know where, exactly how close, and will both indicate that there interests were served in how they react.

Game on. We will know how this turns out within the next 36 hours at the latest.

U.S. Navy Ship Nears 12-Mile Limit Around Man Made Chinese Islands

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The USS Lassen, a guided-missile destroyer, is nearing a 12-nautical-mile limit around artificial islands built by China in the South China Sea, and will be in the area for several hours, a U.S. defense official said on Monday.The Navy patrol marks the start of a series of challenges to China's territorial claims in one of the world's busiest sea lanes.The vessel began the journey early on Tuesday local time near Subi and Mischief reefs in the Spratly archipelago, features that were formerly submerged at high tide before China began a massive dredging project to turn them into islands in 2014.

Beijing Condems US Naval Patrols in South China Sea

article said:

China's foreign minister Wang Yi has warned the United States not to create trouble after it was reported the US Navy had started freedom of navigation operations in the South China Sea.

A senior US defence official briefed journalists that the destroyer USS Lassen had sailed through the 12-nautical mile zones of two islands in the disputed Spratly chain early on Tuesday morning.

Click to expand...

Pretty much exactly as I predicted.

I believe the two were Subi and Mischief reefs.

According to CNN breaking news, the FON has concluded. No mention of incidence or otherwise.

Washington (CNN)[Breaking news update, posted at 10:35 p.m. ET]

The U.S. Navy sent a destroyer within 12 miles of one of China's man-made islands in a contested area of the South China Sea on Tuesday, a U.S. defense official told CNN. The operation has since concluded, the official said.

Click to expand...

Jeff Head said:

Beijing Condems US Naval Patrols in South China Sea

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Pretty much exactly as I predicted.

I believe the two were Subi and Mischief reefs.

Click to expand...

Good for all if nothing else happens, but do you really think that's the end of it?