BEWARE OF THE DEFIANT DRAGON
READ BEFORE YOU PROCEED:
D2G wears no responsibility of the views published here by the respective Author. This Editorial is used here for Study Purpose. Students are advised to learn the word-meaning, The Art of Writing Skills and understand the crux of this Editorial.
MEANINGS are given in BOLD and ITALIC
The People’s Republic of China is not the hereditary ((of a title, office, or right) conferred by or based on inheritance) overlord of the South China Sea. That is the decision of the Permanent Court of Arbitration (the use of an arbitrator to settle a dispute) based in The Hague on who among the half dozen littoral (relating to or situated on the shore of the sea or a lake) states has the right to the disputed Spratly and Paracel Islands and the surrounding waters.
Many of these “islands” are no more than rocks that emerge at low tide but ownership means a great increase in the Exclusive Economic Zone and sole access to all the wealth it is believed to possess.
Moreover, the South China Sea is one of the world’s great maritime highways and an important choke point on account of its relative smallness and narrow ingress and egress lanes. So whoever controls it has strategic leverage (the exertion of force by means of a lever) in the region. China’s insistence (the fact or quality of insisting that something is the case or should be done) on its claims becomes clear against this backdrop, as does its marshalling of history and discovery since the Second Century. The court found no real evidence that China ever “historically exercised exclusive control over the waters or their resources”.
It also ruled Chinese terra forming in the Spratlys illegal as those areas “form part of the Exclusive Economic Zone and continental shelf of the Philippines”. That is a setback for Beijing and vindication (to justify, prove, or reinforce an idea) for the other claimants Taiwan, Vietnam, Philippines, Brunei and Malaysia.
China’s reaction has been belligerent (hostile and aggressive). It rejected the verdict outright, repudiating (refuse to accept; reject) its own acceptance of binding arbitration under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) which it helped negotiate. This is typical “if-I-can’t-win-I-won’t play” great power behaviour but also means the ruling can’t be enforced as China has a veto in the UN Security Council.
Indeed, Beijing may even speed up its illegal activities lest (with the intention of preventing (something undesirable); to avoid the risk of) the US take a direct hand quickly. In fact, it is at it right now. At this point it is hard to predict what happens next but it is worth remembering that Chinese intransigence (a stubborn refusal to change your views ) on its claims is legendary, as India has found to its own cost.
#################
