Illustration: Liu Rui/GT

Editor's Note:

China rejected the final award of the Hague Arbitration Tribunal Tuesday in the case brought against it by the Philippines as "null and void" with no binding force. How will South China Sea tensions influence regional order? How will the China-US relationship develop after the tribunal's award? The Global Times has collected three opinions on these issues.

International order in East Asia still stable

The international order consists of three elements - values, norms and institutional arrangements. International values work as a criterion to judge whether international systems are maintaining order. Take the South China Sea. From US perspective, Beijing is challenging the Washington-established order in the region. However, for China, it is the US that is trying to change the international order by deploying 60 percent of its naval vessels to the Pacific region. Different definitions of the international order contribute to different views on the challenges international systems are facing.

Norms are needed to instruct players' behavior and encourage them to seek peaceful solutions to disputes. Norms have not been established in some certain international fields. For instance, the China-US cyber conflicts are due partly to an absence of norms in cyber security.

International order is different from region to region. In East Asia, China's rise is a concern for many countries. Although frequently perplexed by tensions, East Asia has witnessed no war since 1991. Europe, on the other hand, has a totally different order from East Asia. There has been little tension in Europe, but the region has seen occasional wars, for instance, those in Kosovo and Ukraine.

The maintenance of international order means seeking peaceful solutions, instead of wars, to address international disputes. Given the divergences in values, norms and institutional arrangements, different regions need to establish different security patterns. It is unrealistic to turn to the same pattern to address different challenges. For instance, it would be tough for the US to establish another NATO in Asia. Even if a multilateral military alliance can be formed in Asia, it will not play the same role as NATO.

It is not necessary to be too concerned about the South China Sea issue. Admittedly, certain disputes, for instance, the South China Sea and North Korean nuclear issues, will fuel tensions in the region. However, East Asia is a peaceful place as a whole.

A direct war between China and the US is very unlikely. The two nations have the ability to prevent wars and put conflicts under control. If a transparent mechanism can be built between the two powers, the current tensions will be prevented from escalating into wars.

The article is an excerpt of a speech by Yan Xuetong, director of the Institute of Modern International Relations, Tsinghua University. The speech was published in pit.ifeng.com.

Illegal judgment should be ignored

The tribunal's final award is illegal. To begin with, the Philippines has broken its diplomatic promises and cheated on its treaty obligations. Manila is perfidious as it ignored the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea before unilaterally initiating the arbitration to the tribunal.

In addition, the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) has no jurisdiction over disputes concerning sovereignty. The initiative by the Philippines constitutes an abuse of UNCLOS, and thus the award is illegal.

In fact, according to other articles of the UNCLOS, the tribunal has no jurisdiction over the Philippines' case. By only referring to articles favorable to Manila, the judges are unfair and have breached the principle of neutrality.

Soon after the final award was announced, the Chinese side released two statements regarding the award and China's sovereignty and maritime rights. The statements have reiterated China's stance, refuted the tribunal's claims, and further explained China's legal rights regarding the South China Sea.

As China does not accept or participate in the arbitration, it has put forward its own requests over the South China Sea issue. The development of the disputes will not be determined by The Hague, but hinges on the implementation of the claims by each side.

Foreign Minister Wang Yi pointed out that "the arbitration and the bad-faith dramatization and political manipulation that ensued have put the South China Sea issue to a dangerous situation, with growing tension and confrontation. It is detrimental to peace and stability in the region … Now the farce is over. It is time that things come back to normal."

China still welcomes negotiations with the Philippines if the latter takes the overall situation into account, considers the South China Sea issue seriously, and cooperates with China on the waters. However, if Manila insists on the tribunal's award, it will not be greeted by diplomatic talks.

The award is just a piece of paper. The development of South China Sea disputes hinges on the operations by concerning parties on relevant waters, rather than a useless paper from the tribunal. Conflicts will be highly likely if the Philippines, backed up by the tribunal's award, acts of its own will on the South China Sea.

The article was compiled from China National Radio's interview with Ye Hailin, director at National Institute of International Strategy, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences.

Dispute sign of China's historic rise

The award of the South China Sea case was as expected. But it is still a big challenge for China. The dispute is not a haphazard incident, but an anticipated result of geopolitical vicissitudes. It is an unavoidable confrontation between the US, an established power, and China, a rising power.

China intends to stay out of the Thucydides' Trap by rising peacefully, but its intention doesn't mean it will be understood by the outside world. China should keep in mind that during the process of peaceful rise, there will be small clashes as long as there won't be wars between major powers.

The award will make little impact on China. Even though the arbitral tribunal denied China's "nine-dash line" and its historic claim to the South China Sea, no one can enforce the award. The US can't be the enforcer because it hasn't ratified the UNCLOS.

The arbitration is not purely about international law; it is a politically driven issue. Political issues can only be resolved in political ways, not by laws. China should make a basic judgment over the current circumstance: The US and China are not enemies, but competitors. Therefore, cooperation and disputes co-exist in the Sino-US relationship.

Competition is reflected in the geopolitical conflicts between China and the US, such as the South China Sea and East China Sea disputes. However, none of these individual disputes are focal points of the rival relationship. The crux of the complicated Sino-US ties is the divergence between two different ways of development.

Neither side will withdraw from the South China Sea dispute: The US won't do it because it would mark the decline of its global influence, and China won't do it because it is an issue concerning sovereignty and territorial integrity. The third option will be both sides taking one step back after trading blows for several rounds.

China and the US won't go to war despite the escalating tensions in the South China Sea, and the development of the dispute has different meanings for China and the US. China's rise will start from the dispute, but the US will decline as a result.

The article was compiled from IPP-Review's interview with Zheng Yongnian, director of the East Asian Institute, National University of Singapore.

Read more in Special Coverage: