19 - 11 - 2017 | 13:53
  • Increase font size
  • Default font size
  • Decrease font size
Home Publications Vietnamese Publications Haiyang 981: From Water Cannons to Court?

Haiyang 981: From Water Cannons to Court?

E-mail Print PDF

A dangerous clash has flared up between Vietnam and China over the latter’s deployment of an oil rig near the disputed Paracels. One option for Vietnam is to submit the dispute to the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea’s (UNCLOS) compulsory dispute settlement procedure.

alt

The salient geographical details are that the rig, Haiyang 981, is deployed about 130 nautical miles from Vietnam’s undisputed continental coast and Ly Son Island, 180 nautical miles from China’s undisputed Hainan Island. It is 17 nautical miles from disputed Triton Island, which is a rock that does not qualify for an exclusive economic zone (EEZ) or any entitlement beyond 12 nautical miles, and 103 nautical miles from disputed Woody Island, which might be entitled to an EEZ of up to 200 nautical miles.

Since China has made a declaration under Article 298 of UNCLOS to be exempted from the convention’s compulsory dispute settlement procedure for several categories of disputes, including those relating to maritime delimitation, this procedure cannot be applied to determine whether Haiyang 981 is deployed within the EEZ generated by 1) Vietnam’s undisputed continental coast (which would mean the location of deployment belongs to Vietnam outright), 2) China’s Hainan Island (which would mean the location belongs to China outright), or 3) the disputed Paracels such as Woody Island (which would mean the location is contested).

While UNCLOS arbitrators would not have jurisdiction to choose among these three possibilities, they would likely recognize that a legal dispute exists. The presence of nearby coasts and the long-standing conflicting claims over the both the Paracels and the EEZ in this area are sufficient to constitute a legal dispute: the oil rig is located in an area of overlapping, potentially valid EEZ claims. This is true regardless of questions of sovereignty, allocation, or EEZ entitlements regarding the Paracels.

The recognition by the arbitrators that the oil rig is in a disputed area is inherently neutral and would not by itself disadvantage either side, but it would have important implications.

It is true that China’s declaration under Article 298 means that the arbitrators would not have the jurisdiction to interpret or apply Article 74, on the delimitation of and cooperation in disputed EEZs, to rule against it. However, its long-standing policy of unilateral actions and non-negotiation for the disputed EEZ could be ruled as a violation of Article 279, which stipulates that:

States Parties shall settle any dispute between them concerning the interpretation or application of this Convention by peaceful means in accordance with Article 2, paragraph 3, of the Charter of the United Nations and, to this end, shall seek a solution by the means indicated in Article 33, paragraph 1, of the Charter.

That would be an important legal victory for Vietnam. Up until now China has maintained that there are no disputes over the Paracels or the EEZ in this area, and thus it has no legal obligation to resolve anything with Vietnam, and can act unilaterally. If the arbitrators rule against this regarding the EEZ, it will create enormous legal and diplomatic pressure on China to refrain from unilateral actions and to come to the negotiation table. This is the only way to reduce and prevent future tensions between China and Vietnam in this area.

Vietnam might have reservations about taking this confrontation to court. First, it might be concerned about the backlash from China. Second, due to the expansiveness of China’s maritime claims, as symbolized by the nine-dashed line, Vietnam has traditionally been wary about accepting that these claims constitute a legal dispute.

Regarding the first reservation, seeking to resolve disputes using international law is better than engaging in a confrontation that involves using force.

Regarding the second reservation, in this particular case China has not tried to use the nine-dashed line as justification for the location of Haiyang 981. Furthermore, this location is close enough to China’s Hainan Island and the disputed Paracels that Vietnam would not be giving away much in accepting that a legal dispute exists there.

Overcoming these reservations and submitting the confrontation over the deployment of Haiyang 981 to UNCLOS’s compulsory dispute resolution mechanism will result in the arbitrators recognizing that China had deployed this oil rig in a disputed area. This will may open a way to defuse the current tensions as well as put a legal obligation and diplomatic pressure on China to come to the negotiation table, which will help to prevent future provocations. In addition, pending the legal process, Vietnam can seek interim measures to block Haiyang 981’s operations.

The author would like to thank Greg Poling for his comments in drafting the piece.

Dr. Huy Duong is an analyst on the disputes in the South China Sea Sea. This article was originally published on cogitASIA.

 


Newer news items:
Older news items:

Add comment


Security code
Refresh

China's 2017 fishing ban a threat to maritime rule-based order

China's 2017 fishing ban a threat to maritime rule-based order

China's 2017 fishing moratorium constitutes a severe violation of UNCLOS, which accords all the countries sovereign rights and jurisdiction over their Exclusive Economic Zones. 

Read more...

Law of the Sea Ruling Reveals Dangerous Chinese Nationalism

Law of the Sea Ruling Reveals Dangerous Chinese Nationalism

The recent ruling by a United Nation Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) Arbitration Tribunal of the on a case brought by the Philippines against China has been welcomed by many governments that are concerned about rising tensions in the South China Sea. However, within China it has provoked outpourings of defiance.

Read more...

A fair and effective code of conduct for the South China Sea

A fair and effective code of conduct for the South China Sea

Some people could blame on the DOC's weaknesses when they look at current picture of the South China Sea which is painted with distrust and tensions. The region is in need of having an effective documnent, so-called COC. Yet, what are elements that should be included?

Read more...

US analysis of China’s nine-dash line is correct

US analysis of China’s nine-dash line is correct

Historic fishing activities by the peoples around the South China Sea in what was at that time international waters cannot give China the right to fish in other countries’ EEZs today.

Read more...

South China Sea Disputes: Facts or Fiction?

South China Sea Disputes: Facts or Fiction?

If a country cites international law to justify its position while avoiding having that position tested in court, such use of international law is just rhetoric, and does not deserve support from scholars.

Read more...

Chinese Offshore Oil Company Fuels South China Sea Tension

Chinese Offshore Oil Company Fuels South China Sea Tension

CNOOC is using Western technology to further Chinese territorial claims.

Read more...

South China Sea disputes: Chinese historical evidence found wanting

South China Sea disputes: Chinese historical evidence found wanting

“Historical evidences” of some Chinese scholars are vague, erroneous or blatantly false, relying as they do on uncorroborated evidence, faulty logic, misquotes, misinterpretations and outright inventions.

Read more...

One confrontation, three legal questions

One confrontation, three legal questions

“Is Vietnam or China legally right in this confrontation?”: According to UNCLOS as has been interpreted by the Permanent Court of Arbitration, the answer is definitely Vietnam, regardless of the answers to the first two questions.

Read more...

New ten-dashed line map revealed China’s ambition

New ten-dashed line map revealed China’s ambition

Deliberately and desperately applying irrelevant concepts and provisions of UNCLOS will not create the legal basis for the nine dashed line claim.

Read more...

South China Sea: Rightness is mightness, not vice versa

South China Sea: Rightness is mightness, not vice versa

The oil-rig incident is a reminder to China that mightiness does not bring rightness, it is the other way around.

Read more...

Exposing China’s Artificial Islands Plan in the Spratly’s

Exposing China’s Artificial Islands Plan in the Spratly’s

Rather than dismissing the concerns of its neighbors as part of a political conspiracy, China should come to understand how its own actions contribute to the perception of a Chinese threat, as evident in its plan to construct artificial islands in the Spratly Archipelago.

Read more...

New tensions in the South China Sea

New tensions in the South China Sea

China is not conducting the activities of oil rig within its right and its illegal aggressive action is affecting stability and peaceful environment in the whole region.

Read more...

South China Sea & China's Grand Chessboard

South China Sea & China's Grand Chessboard

China has thrown a ball in to the U.S. court, and it is up to the U.S. to respond firmly.

Read more...

The Paracels: Forty Years On

The Paracels: Forty Years On

China’s act of locating its oil rig in contested waters in the Paracels is more than a dispute over sovereignty. It is also a dispute about international law of the sea.

Read more...

The Paracels: Does China have ‘undisputed sovereignty’?

The Paracels: Does China have ‘undisputed sovereignty’?

China should admit that sovereignty over the Paracels is disputed and withdraw its oil rig from its current location because any drilling that causes permanent change to the seabed in the disputed water is not allowed under international law.

Read more...

The danger of convoluting everything into sovereignty disputes

The danger of convoluting everything into sovereignty disputes

Much of the tensions in the South China Sea could be resolved by applying UNCLOS’s dispute settlement procedure to matters relating to maritime delimitation and cooperation in disputed areas.

Read more...

Sovereignty over Paracels: Article Lets Off Beijing Lightly

Sovereignty over Paracels: Article Lets Off Beijing Lightly

Bateman states that "a negotiated maritime boundary in this area would likely place the rig within China’s EEZ even if reduced weight was given to China’s claimed insular features". A careful analysis suggests just the opposite.

Read more...

Dark cloud caused by China’s oil rig may have a silver lining

Dark cloud caused by China’s oil rig may have a silver lining

A legally binding end to China’s nebulous and maritime claims in these areas would bring enormous clarity, stability and security to at least two thirds of the area that is currently covered by China’s ominous U-shaped line, and could also have positive effects on the Paracels area.

Read more...

Haiyang 981: From Water Cannons to Court?

Haiyang 981: From Water Cannons to Court?

A dangerous clash has flared up between Vietnam and China over the latter’s deployment of an oil rig near the disputed Paracels. One option for Vietnam is to submit the dispute to the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea’s (UNCLOS) compulsory dispute settlement procedure.

Read more...

Reassurance needed, unlikely over the Nine-Dash Line

Reassurance needed, unlikely over the Nine-Dash Line

What would reassure neighbouring nations is for China to bring their claims into the realm of international law and reasonableness. China should be prepared to negotiate in good faith the limits of the disputed area.

Read more...
More:

Language

South China Sea Studies

Joomla Slide Menu by DART Creations

Special Publication

 

Search

Login Form

Subscribe form

Top Photo Galleries

Web Links

VIETNAM MOFA SPOKESPERSON

 

NATIONAL BOUNDARIES