International laws-backed claim to Spratlys is strongest | Inquirer Opinion

International laws-backed claim to Spratlys is strongest

/ 09:56 PM June 10, 2011

To put in proper perspective the People’s Republic of China’s ambitious claim to the South China Sea, which is more than 678,000 square nautical miles, the Philippines, Brunei, Malaysia, Vietnam and Taiwan should petition the United Nations to change the name “South China Sea” and rename it “Spratlys Sea.”

This is imperative so that China’s arrogance and abusive power-politics strategy be corrected not only by the claimant countries but also by the entire world.

The name South China Sea gives the Chinese a sense that they can proclaim it as their own, when the truth is PROC’s geographical location is hundreds of kilometers away from the Spratlys. The Philippines’ Palawan Island makes our country the nearest among all six claimant countries to the Spratlys, a fact that, together with the rule on the exclusive 200-mile economic zone, favors our claim under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (Unclos).

Besides history, the legal bases and arguments within the context of international laws and the rules of Unclos, geographical location or the nearest claimant country to the Spratlys, as graphically shown by the world maps, is the strongest evidence as to who really owns it.
—BERT CAOILE,
245 Narrow St.,
Bisig Kabataan,
Sangandaan, Caloocan City

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.
Your subscription has been successful.

Subscribe to our daily newsletter

By providing an email address. I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy.

TAGS: conflict, Foreign Affairs and International Relations, International Laws, laws, spratlys, United Nations

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.
Your subscription has been successful.

Subscribe to our newsletter!

By providing an email address. I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy.

© Copyright 1997-2024 INQUIRER.net | All Rights Reserved

This is an information message

We use cookies to enhance your experience. By continuing, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more here.