BEIJING, July 13 (Xinhua) -- A decade after the so-called "South China Sea arbitration award" was issued, one thing remains clear: those countries who have nothing to do with the South China Sea still refuse to give up on meddling regional affairs.
The latest joint statement issued by the Philippines and a group of other countries, many of which don't have a single inch of coastline in the South China Sea, once again reveals their malicious intention as they seek to recycle an illegal and invalid award that has long served as a pretext for geopolitical maneuvering in the South China Sea.
The "arbitration" case was never a genuine effort to resolve disputes. From its inception, the "arbitration" violates fundamental principles of international law, including state consent and pacta sunt servanda, contravenes the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea itself, and, still more importantly, runs counter to the basic facts of the South China Sea.
China's position on the "South China Sea arbitration" has been clear, consistent and firm. The so-called "award" is nothing but a worthless piece of paper that is illegal, null and void, and has no binding force. China does not accept or recognize the "award," and opposes and does not accept any claim or action based on it. China's territorial sovereignty and maritime rights and interests in the South China Sea shall not be affected by the "award" under any circumstances.
The past decade offers a clear verdict. The "arbitration" has not narrowed differences between China and the Philippines. Instead, it has been repeatedly invoked by the Philippines to justify its expanding territorial and maritime claims, provocative moves at sea and attempts to internationalize bilateral disputes.
More troublingly, it has provided certain external forces with a convenient pretext to wade into the South China Sea, turning regional issues into geopolitical leverage.
The irony is that while some countries claim to champion the "arbitration" as a universal legal standard, few appear willing to apply its reasoning to themselves. If the "award" were to be taken as a standard, many countries' islands and reefs would be denied the basis for claiming maritime rights and interests. Have those countries supporting the "award" voluntarily waived the maritime rights and interests deriving from their relevant islands and reefs?
Their silence on this question exposes a clear-cut double standard: international law is embraced when it serves geopolitical interests and thrown aside when it does not.
More detached from reality is the claim that the South China Sea requires external forces to safeguard stability. The facts suggest otherwise.
The South China Sea remains one of the world's busiest and safest sea lanes. Freedom of navigation and overflight has never been impeded. Global commerce continues to flow through the waters without disruption.
While China remains steadfast in maintaining peace and stability in the South China Sea, the real threat against regional tranquility comes from the persistent expansion of military presence by the United States and other external countries in the South China Sea. Through coercive posturing and provocative actions, these external forces are fueling tensions.
Manila's bid to revive the discredited South China Sea "arbitration award" with external backing is doomed to fail. The fact that not a single ASEAN member state -- barring Manila itself -- lent its name to the joint statement speaks volumes.
If this initiative truly served regional interests, as its proponents claim, why has the rest of ASEAN collectively refused to endorse it?
That stark contrast reveals where the region's priorities truly lie -- in dialogue, stability and cooperation, not in an invalid document that should be swept into the dustbin of history a decade ago.
China has always been committed to resolving the South China Sea issue through dialogue and negotiations.
In 2002, China and ASEAN countries signed the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea, jointly committing to resolving "territorial and jurisdictional disputes by peaceful means, through friendly consultations and negotiations by sovereign states directly concerned."
In recent years, China and ASEAN countries have actively promoted negotiations on the Code of Conduct for the South China Sea. Tensions escalated only after the Philippines backtracked on its commitments in the declaration and a series of bilateral agreements with China.
By repeatedly inviting external interferers, the Philippines has complicated efforts to manage differences through dialogue and tried to undermine the hard-won atmosphere of trust that China and ASEAN countries have worked hard to build.
History and regional consensus have already delivered a final verdict on this so-called illegal award once and for all. Any further manipulation will only invite ridicule. ■
