History of China's Nine-Dash Line
time.com
time.com
Being a "rock" here doesn't mean it's not an island; it simply means the maritime feature concerned -- should it be an island, an islet, a reef or whatever -- is not entitled to the full rights (i.e. having an exclusive economic zone and a continental shelf) of a full-fledged island. The concept of "rock" here is not a geological one but a legal one.
Most of the problems come from areas which have many small islands off a continental coastline. An island in the coastal zone extends ownership. In the South China Sea, there are many islands which are in the coastal zone of more than one country. Hence the problem.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Convention_on_t...
What creative about this new arbitration ruling is that it redefines the concept of island, so many islands are now classified as rocks, in order for them to fall into the jurisdiction of the Law of the Sea. However, I don't think this works, as a law about seas cannot unilaterally defines what constitutes lands.
China thinks that it is powerful enough that it can ignore all the laws or re-define them. What they want to say is "I dare any country to cross my paths".
The problem with China is rooted with its expansionism which has brainwashed the majority of its own people. If one cares to trace the history of China back to 2500 yrs ago until the modern days, you can see how China border keeps expanding by eating up its smaller neighboring countries and assimilating them. In this expansionism policy, anywhere a Chinese person touches anytime in the history, in China government's view, that is where China border is. To go along to brainwash its people with this policy, its current and past governments have oppressed their own people and used all of the internal resources, ignoring how unhappy and depressed their citizens are, to support this policy.
Yeah, China, you are powerful now but no countries look at you with respects. I think China only stops when it finishes conquering the entire world.
Second - is the US willing to risk war with nuclear armed China over that?
If the both answers are No - then this is neither self evident or absurdity.
Might makes right. And China probably has enough of it.
Nuclear powers have plenty of conflicting interests, and they exercise many forms of power to influence the outcome.
There is no reason a conflict like this must inevitably escalate to nuclear threats.
China is actively trying to influence the situation with soft power as well. The Chinese ambassador in The Netherlands paid for a full page advert in a national newspaper to publish a letter condemning the 'illegitimate' court that ruled on this dispute with The Philippines. The fact that he couldn't get his letter published normally (and for free) in the op/ed sections of any Dutch newspaper is telling though.
I suspect they are going for an absurd claim in order to 'graciously' come to a compromise of about half of that (certainly including the Paracel Islands) after a while, but the situation is certainly unique. They are more than likely strengthened in their confidence by the lack of consequences of the Crimean annexation by Russia (although the economic sanctions hurt Russia quite bad).
China is on an upswing trajectory and their people know it from increases in real income for vast majority of the population. It was the strongest country in the world for centuries, and they'll regain that title again, eventually.
Russia lost too much brainpower in the past 25 years. Too many Russians and Russian Jews emigrated to US to use their PhDs to make money on Wall St. They're not coming back, and it will take another 25 years to grow a new generation of minds to lead Russia. Yes, Chinese students go to foreign universities but in general China doesn't have a brain drain problem, and thats why they'll win.
I hope things don't deteriorate into massive bloodshed and revolt when the music stops and the economy backslides, but that's what has tended to happen in the past, and Chinese history is more cyclical than most...
Top-down approach doesn't always work, but did wonders for them for the past 30 years. Meanwhile members of the British working class have voted for Brexit to protect their interests (good for them), and US might follow soon with Trump. How confident were they in things getting better compared with the Chinese?
Oh really? China has a disastrous brain drain problem.
http://www.economist.com/news/special-report/21701651-chinas...
But given China's island and airstrip buildup in the Spratly Islands, they're determined to project power into this region. The question will come, will anyone other than an international court that lacks the ability for enforcement check them on their maneuvers?
As the parent comment says, if no one is willing to risk nuclear war over a few reefs and fisheries (and the uncertain, vague promise of hydrocarbon extraction), then the status quo will stand, and China is intent on nudging the status quo its way.
Prescriptively, China has no historical reason to the territory enclosed by the nine-dash line. None of the preceding Chinese governments and dynasties ever held de jure or de facto sovereignty over that area. There's just no precedent for the claim.
Descriptively, if China wants the territory badly enough, it has a good chance of taking and keeping it, albeit at the cost of alienating the crap out of everyone else for at least a generation, if not more.
Realpolitik does not prescribe, but only describes.
So if push comes to shove, the US will be right there. I also believe that other countries such as France, etc... has backed the ruling and are in full support of the 5 other countries
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nine-dash_line#/media/File:9_d...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States#/media/File:USA_...