politics

Japan urges China, Philippines to abide by international tribunal ruling

31 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2016 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

31 Comments
Login to comment

Based on the rule, it need both side to agree to go into court fist. IN this case only Philippines went, so that is already not in the sense of correctness. The second is that the Judge is Japanese, so conflict of interest. To make it more convincing, at least the judge needs to be replaced with someone from another country.

-11 ( +13 / -24 )

Here we go again, another Tibet, 30 years of cold shoulders until the mories fade.

5 ( +13 / -8 )

This will never stop until china has attacked some country over it....and then, that will only be the beginning.

2 ( +13 / -11 )

China has said to it does not accept and does not recognize the illegal ruling.

1 ( +12 / -11 )

Memories

-2 ( +5 / -7 )

Both (and other) countries signed-onto the treaty. China chose not to participate in the hearings (except, perhaps, by sending the guy in the pic above with that awesome sign which likely doesn't carry much legal weight) likely as they know they are wrong and have crossed their arms and stamped their feet - outing - to no avail. Building-up artificial islands does not 'count' (Mischief Reef - so aptly named!) and destroying some reef systems in the process. Bottom line: China loses. Suck it up, buttercup.

6 ( +18 / -12 )

"pouting", not "outing" (above).

0 ( +8 / -8 )

So what? and latter on realty shall let the world know who's boss of south china sea!

1 ( +10 / -9 )

@Cliffy

None of the judges were Japanese. The 5 were from Ghana, Poland, France, Germany and the Netherlands.

China is a signatory to UNCLOS which sets out the dispute resolution process. It's irrelevant whether they want to participate considering that they have already agreed to be bound by the process when they signed up. That's why the case went ahead without them. It's unlike territorial disputes at the ICJ where both countries need to agree to participate.

Mind you, China's official position is well known and every argument they have ever made was thoroghly considered by the tribunal but (obviously) rejected. It wasn't as one sided as it might first appear

10 ( +19 / -9 )

China has refused to participate in the arbitration. Who's job is it now to enforce the ruling?

-1 ( +6 / -7 )

The next step would be sanctions, likely by other signatories to UNCLOS.

-4 ( +7 / -11 )

Yeah, good luck with that!

6 ( +7 / -1 )

Right. It's simply a piece of paper - an idea of justice, of what should be. No enforcement is implied or forthcoming. Ideas do have power, though. China will react by expressing itself more forcefully in the region, and the Philippines and Vietnam will find more of a cause to push back.

The question for China now is whether it wants to continue its strategy of being more feared than liked. The former has not been working so well. As China ages, they might want to step back and consider a bit of negotiation so as to up the latter. I see no hints that this will happen. Perhaps they will have to punch themselves in the face a few times before they come to terms with reality - and that will not be fun for anyone.

7 ( +8 / -1 )

Courts are useless without police. International police would be more in danger as all countries have the right to bear arms, including tanks and battleships.

-9 ( +2 / -11 )

As I read in western papers, the ruling was about whether the island are island or only rocks. As they are rocks the 200mile zone is not applicable. Territorial disputes can not be settled by the court. By the way, Hawaii was also illegally acquired by the US in 1898 makes the hole story very interesting.

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

It seems that China has already invaded the whole South China Sea. I don't think that China obeys the International tribunal ruling now? China is a militarism country.

-2 ( +7 / -9 )

Nice. Well, there are some options in the table now:

1- China can comply with International Law and Vacate The South China Sea

2- The U.S. Navy and our Allies can continue "Freedom of Navigation" Transits and ignore warnings from Communist China who is in violation of International Law and has No Sovereign Right to issue Threats.

3- Setup Naval and Air Blockades, Defense Zones and start the process of forcing Communist China to comply with Internatioonal Law and or Vacate The Sourh China Sea.

Look, Communist China had several opportunities to settle these disputes diplomatically between the countries involved and they dismissed every single opportunity that was handed to them. Taking this South China Sea issue to an International Court was the only choice Communist China left our Asian Neighbors. China violated Economic Zones around the Spratly Islands, crated artificial islands and placed missiles on them as a Direct Threat to Peace, Stability, Freedom, and Democracy.

-2 ( +8 / -10 )

I assume I got the thumps down for using "Who's". Yeah, I know it's actually "Whose". I do my best editing after hitting Submit.

-6 ( +1 / -7 )

So the US now will have to back up little Japan even more than they have been while the Japanese can continue to hate us Monday through Thursday but Love us when Chinese ships sail into these disputed waters on the weekend.

2 ( +8 / -6 )

Is america sign up for unclos? No? Then I'm sure they should be quiet and let the concerned parties come to terms.

4 ( +7 / -3 )

Look, Communist China had several opportunities to settle these disputes diplomatically between the countries involved and they dismissed every single opportunity that was handed to them.

That's kind of untrue, since China wanted bilateral talks in regards to the SCS disputes with the Philippines during the Aquino administration, but Aquino refused and hid behind you-know-who, and decided to go more international. However now that Duterte is in charge, who has a more conciliatory approach to China, he wants the bilateral talks to resume. It's quite the practical approach, considering China already said they won't follow a ruling against them weeks ago (mind you, none of this is legally binding). I wouldn't even be surprised if they just left the UNCLOS and be like the US.

3 ( +6 / -3 )

China can follow the example of the USA . Just ignore it and walk away. Google the Republic of Nicaragua v. the United States of America.

4 ( +7 / -3 )

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-36772813

Charade? ◾There were no rulings on sovereignty over land territory or delimiting any national boundaries.

Meanwhile , in the spirit of fairness the ICJ should also make a ruling on Okinotorishima atoll soon so as not to appear as targeting China only.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

Japan needs to have a strong military to be able to handle such situations that are happening all around us! You cannot be a pacifist country if your aggressive neighbors want to acquire nuclear weapons or build artificial islands, terrorist killing Japanese citizens! Our security or lack of it, will come at Japan's expense and cost! While America is an Ocean away always in a safe position!

-10 ( +1 / -11 )

Well, here's the next thing to think about:

Who's going to step up to the plate and enforce the ruling?

If the international community does nothing then who's next?

The Senkakkus?

China says they historically own The Senkakku Islands.

How about The South Pacific Islands?

Or the entire Western Pacific?

The Moon, Mars and Beyond?

Are we going to watch the erosion of Democracy for Communism?

4 ( +6 / -2 )

Totally agree with you. >Based on the rule, it need both side to agree to go into court fist. IN this case only Philippines went, so that is already not in the sense of correctness. The second is that the Judge is Japanese, so conflict of interes<

-7 ( +0 / -7 )

China is quickly becoming a joke civilization, they're not even abiding by the UNCLOS treaty they themselves signed. This should be a good precedent for all counterparties to China breaking off any contract obligations at any time they have at their convenience.

Although this is not surprising from China as ancient Chinese tradition usually dictates immoral and uncivilized breaking of treaties and law, so they don't know any better

6 ( +6 / -0 )

China thinks they are the center of the universe and own everything anyways. So stupid is as stupid does. Smack-down is in order.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

In the pursuit of more and more profits (regardless of quality I might add) western and Asian companies have helped create this monster called China.

To those businesses and people in general I say : Take your business away from China, stop funding China, stop buying their junk, don't invest there, spend a few extra bucks and keep people at home employed.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

The ruling is absurdly biased and influenced by US. Even Taiwan, an ally of US outright rejected the ruling.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

These judges can't even distinguish a small matter like differentiating an island and a reef!

How can we take their judgement seriously in these very complex sovereignty and historical issues ?

Taiping island aka Itu Aba is the biggest island in the area and the only one with a fresh water well!

There are coconut trees as well as vegetable garden and chicken and goats yet these judges call it ...a...rock !

Even Ichabod knows the difference between an island and a rock!

China should concentrate on this grave or bias mistake and move to nullify the ruling!

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites