South China Sea: Beijing and Washington at Loggerheads. Wang Yi confirmes 2016 arbitration "illegal" as US responds it "will not be intimidated" and reiterates support for allies

A sharp verbal escalation recently marked the annual East Asia cooperation ministerial meetings in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. There, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi harshly warned the United States, Japan, and the Philippines over the South China Sea arbitration. Washington's response was swift, with the commander of the U.S. Pacific Fleet declaring they "will not be intimidated."

Wang Yi used the occasion to reiterate Beijing's unyielding stance on the ruling from the so-called "South China Sea Arbitration Case," labeling it "illegal from its inception" and a "political manipulation." Wang stated, "China has never accepted it." The minister emphasized that the arbitration was unilaterally initiated by the Philippines without prior consultation and violated the principle of party consent, which is fundamental to arbitration.

The Context of the South China Sea Arbitration: A Controversial Verdict

At the heart of the disagreement lies the July 12, 2016, ruling by the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague. This court was established under Annex VII of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), at the Philippines' initiative. Manila had challenged the legality of China's extensive territorial claims in the South China Sea, including the "nine-dash line" Beijing uses to assert sovereignty over nearly the entire basin.

The arbitration ruling largely favored the Philippines on key points, declaring that China had no legal basis for its historical claims to resources within the "nine-dash line." Furthermore, the tribunal ruled that none of the islands, rocks, or underwater features claimed by China within the Spratly Islands archipelago could generate an exclusive economic zone (EEZ) of 200 nautical miles. It also criticized China's artificial island building activities, deeming them harmful to the marine environment and in violation of Beijing's UNCLOS obligations.

However, China has consistently refused to acknowledge the ruling's validity, arguing that the tribunal lacked jurisdiction over the matter and that the dispute was sovereign in nature, falling outside the scope of UNCLOS arbitration. This "non-acceptance, non-participation, and non-recognition" stance has been Beijing's red line from the outset, creating a persistent legal and diplomatic stalemate that continues to fuel regional tensions.

In a direct warning to extra-regional actors whom Beijing accuses of seeking to destabilize the situation, Wang Yi issued a significant challenge: "If this standard is followed, the global ocean order will be rewritten. Even the islands and reefs of some countries like the United States and Japan will lose the possibility of claiming maritime rights and interests. Are you willing to give up your claims?" This was a clear attempt to put Washington and Tokyo, historically critical of China's claims, on the defensive.

The American Response: "We will not be intimidated"

The retort was swift. Less than 24 hours after Wang Yi's remarks, the commander of the U.S. Pacific Fleet, Stephen Koehler, issued a resolute statement. Koehler affirmed that the United States is committed to helping its allies defend "freedom of navigation and the rule of law in the Indo-Pacific region" and that Southeast Asian countries "are not afraid." Koehler added, "The U.S. Pacific Fleet stands ready to work with you anytime." This message was interpreted as an explicit encouragement to the Philippines to maintain its stance, with the promise of American military support.

Freedom of Navigation Versus Provocation: Divergent Views

The issue of "freedom of navigation" is a central point of contention. While the United States and its allies invoke it to justify their operations in the South China Sea, Beijing vehemently rejects accusations of obstructing maritime transit. The Chinese Foreign Ministry has repeatedly stressed that "there have never been any problems with freedom of navigation and overflight in the South China Sea" for normal vessels. China, however, distinguishes between commercial navigation and what it considers military "provocations." A ministry source stated, "If normal vessels pass through the relevant waters of the South China Sea, there will never be any problems, but this does not mean that some countries can send warships and military aircraft to interfere in the South China Sea for provocation, or even directly violate China's territorial waters." In such cases, Beijing has warned it "will certainly take all necessary measures."

Wang Yi concluded his statement by reaffirming that the so-called "arbitration case" should be "swept away by history," accusing some countries of merely seeking to create chaos in the South China Sea. The verbal escalation between these powers suggests that regional tensions are likely to remain high, with potentially global implications for maritime security and stability.

Do you think this verbal sparring foreshadows further militarization of the region?