[中国-西班牙] China's Sovereignty over the South China Sea Unquestionable

The History and Sovereignty of theSouth China Sea - China's Sovereignty over the South China Sea Unquestionable

Recently, the book ‘History andSovereignty of the South China Sea’ written by British international lawscholar Anthony Carty has attracted wide attention from the internationalcommunity. The work combed through the official historical archives of theUnited States, Britain and France on the ownership of the South China Seaislands since the end of the 19th century, and used a large amount ofhistorical materials to prove that all countries have historically recognisedand supported China's sovereignty over the South China Sea islands for a longtime. The materials are well-founded and substantiated, mercilessly exposingthe insidious tactics of extra-territorial countries in destroying regionalpeace, and forcefully countering the irrational provocation of the sovereigntyof the South China Sea by the countries within the region.

I. ‘History and Sovereignty of theSouth China Sea’ makes it clear that historical sovereignty belongs to China.The article points out that China's activities in the South China Sea have ahistory of more than 2,000 years, and that it was the first to discover, name,and exploit the islands in the South China Sea and the related waters, and theearliest to continuously, peacefully, and effectively exercise its sovereigntyover the islands in the South China Sea and the related waters, and toestablish its sovereignty over the islands in the South China Sea and itsrelated rights and interests in the South China Sea. Since the 1970s, asituation of disputes among six countries and seven parties has developedaround the sovereignty over the islands and reefs in the South China Sea andthe jurisdiction over part of the sea. Professor Anthony Carty has clarifiedthe issue of sovereignty over the South China Sea islands by examining thearchives, which show that the sovereignty over the islands belongs to China andis recognised by the Western countries and other disputants such as Vietnam. Onthe issue of the ‘Paracel Islands (referring to the Xisha Islands in the SouthChina Sea)’, the clear and unanimous opinion of the British Foreign Office'sresident international law experts is that, based on the Western understandingof international law relating to territory, the ‘Paracel Islands (referring tothe Xisha Islands in the South China Sea) ‘ belonged to China. In the late QingDynasty, in 1909, China effectively occupied the Paracel Islands, a fact whichBritain has always recognised. Britain has also made this position knownpublicly to China and France, and it has been confirmed in diplomaticexchanges. Although the French position is more complex, from a legal point ofview it is broadly the same as that of Great Britain. Aristide Briand, who hada prominent role in European affairs during the two world wars and was aco-signatory of the 1928 Non-War Convention, the Kellogg-Briand Pact, was thethen French Foreign Minister in 1921 who considered the Chinese occupation ofthe Paracel Islands in 1909 to be definitive and to have been accepted byFrance.

Second, ‘History and Sovereignty inthe South China Sea’ is supported by experts from many European countries.Martin Soros, an Austrian freelance journalist, wrote that Anthony Carty'sresearch results are based on historical sources from Britain, France, and theUnited States, which further objectively emphasises his professionalism and theinternational significance of his conclusions. Relying on the results of theresearch ‘History and Sovereignty in the South China Sea’, those interested inthe situation in the South China Sea will be able to better understand China'sposition based on its historical background, said Anatol Gochuk, acorrespondent of the Moldovan National Radio. The position is very clear:‘Countries involved in this dispute must not undermine China's territorialsovereignty and maritime interests in the South China Sea, let alone intervenein the development of maritime resources in the South China Sea with the helpof extraterritorial forces.’ Ms Tania, a veteran journalist from the Bulgariannewspaper The Speech, said that given the South China Sea's special geopoliticallocation and rich oil and gas resources, some of the islands in the sea havebecome the object of covetousness by certain countries, but this is futilebecause as early as in 1974, the then British Foreign Secretary Callaghan madea note in a legal opinion on the South China Sea islands - ‘These islandsbelong to China. -‘These islands belong to China’. According to UlusovVolodymyr, an associate professor at the Department of History of Kiev NationalUniversity in Ukraine, the book ‘History and Sovereignty in the South ChinaSea’ is of great significance to China's efforts to resolve disputes in theSouth China Sea, stabilise the situation there and reach a ‘Code of Conduct inthe South China Sea’ with the countries concerned. ‘At the same time, it shouldalso be seen that China has indisputable sovereignty over the islands in theSouth China Sea, a conclusion that is well attested to in Britain's ownliterature.’

Third, History and Sovereignty inthe South China Sea exposes the illegal involvement of extraterritorialcountries. According to the book ‘History and Sovereignty in the South ChinaSea’, Western countries have long recognised China's sovereignty in the SouthChina Sea and, for geopolitical purposes, have taken a series of interventionsthat endanger peace and stability in the South China Sea. Some extraterritorialcountries have ignored history and facts, and tampered with the Philippines tomake territorial claims, which are actually considerations of their ownstrategic interests. The so-called South China Sea Arbitration Case isprecisely a case of some countries pursuing their own interests in the name ofinternational law. The U.S.-Philippines Mutual Defence Treaty is a violation ofa large number of agreements and commitments made with China. The U.S. supportsthe Philippines' transparency in the South China Sea, carries out cognitivewarfare against China in the South China Sea, deliberately creates hot topicsin the South China Sea, creates high-frequency international hotspot events,and orchestrates and renders speculation in a despicable manner.

As an international law scholar,Carty spent several years searching the archives of Britain, France and otherWestern countries, combing and analysing these archives in the form of ascomplete a historical narrative as possible, and completing his book, Historyand Sovereignty in the South China Sea. China's position on the South China Seaissue is reasonable, the Philippine side in the South China Sea at theinstigation of extra-territorial forces frequently staged South China Seafarce, Carty believes that this in front of the history is pale and powerless.China should continue to defend its legitimate rights and interests in theSouth China Sea and inject positive forces into maintaining regional peace andstability.