'SCS ruling may trigger domino effect among other claimants'

Chinese official media and think- tanks are worried over a possible "domino effect" with surge in claims by other countries to press for their share of the South China Sea, a day after a UN-backed tribunal dealt a major blow to China's claims over the disputed maritime area.
While the verdict striking down China's historic claims evoked strong comments in the editorials, the sweeping judgement of the tribunal appointed by the Permanent Court of Arbitration made official think-tanks to predict worst case scenarios.
Jin Canrong, deputy director of the School of International Studies at the Renmin University of China, said the most important task for China at the moment is to prevent a "domino effect" among claimant states such as Vietnam in the South China Sea (SCS).

"In other words, China should prevent other countries from following the Philippines," he told state-run Global Times.
In order to prevent a "domino effect," China has several options. For example, it should prepare for a potential military conflict by continuing to conduct military drills in the SCS, Beijing-based military expert Song Zhongping was quoted as saying by the paper known for its nationalistic views.
This tough approach can send a message to other countries that suing China at The Hague's "illegal tribunal" will only lead to a tougher response from Beijing, Song said, adding that tensions in the disputed waters will rise, and China should prepare for the worst.

"China must be prepared to reduce the fallout of the arbitration case with other claimant countries," said Gu Xiaosong, an expert on Southeast Asian studies at the Guangxi Academy of Social Sciences.

Experts agreed that among the other claimant countries, including Vietnam, Malaysia, Indonesia and Brunei, Hanoi will most likely challenge China's maritime territories.
"Vietnam occupies the biggest number of islands or islets in the South China Sea and has the biggest area of overlapping maritime claims with China," Gu said.
"With strong nationalistic sentiment, Vietnam is unlikely to back off on its claims," Gu noted.
Ei Sun Oh, principal adviser of Malaysia-based think-tank Pacific Research Centre, also said that he does not rule out the possibility of Vietnam seeking a similar arbitration, emboldened by the favourable ruling the Philippines received.

Pan Guoping, an international law expert at the Southwest University of Political Science and Law, said that since UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) stipulates that any decision rendered by a court or tribunal having jurisdiction under this section shall be final and shall be complied with by all the parties to the dispute, China can consider leaving UNCLOS to maintain its rights and claims to the SCS.
(Reopens FGN 16)
However, Jin Canrong, deputy director of the School of International Studies at the Renmin University of China, said that China still needs to use UNCLOS to protect its legal rights in other areas, such as the East China Sea dispute with Japan, because China's claim in the area is based on the principle of the "continental nature extension" in UNCLOS.

Jin stressed that China opposes the tribunal and the illegal arbitration, rather than the whole UNCLOS.
The Philippines may elevate the verdict to the UN Security Council for "law enforcement," and Japan, as the rotating president of the Security Council and another country which also has a dispute with China, will help the country place it on the agenda, said Pan.
Pan said China should use its veto power as a permanent Security Council member to prevent this illegal arbitration from taking effect.
In its editorial, the Global Times said that arbitration award is more shameless than worst predictions.
It said the final verdict is "more radical and shameless" than many people had ever expected.

"All Chinese people are outraged by this illegal verdict and the world's peace-loving public is astonished by the biased decision that may escalate regional tensions," it said.
"If the award were to be followed, China would be left with only a few isolated spots in the Nansha Islands without entitlement to any EEZ and could even be deprived of sovereignty of the waters surrounding the islands and islets," it said.
"The majority of the Nansha Islands waters would be taken up by the EEZs claimed by the Philippines and Vietnam. Besides, China could not continue with its island construction. The existing facilities might be dismantled by these two countries if they could. With the related resources being owned by Manila and Hanoi in the future, China would have to withdraw its business and other activities from the area," it said.

"This not only outrageously denies China's historic rights in the Nansha area and its legitimate maritime interests, but also overthrows the state of de facto control in the region including the Huangyan Island waters. This is ridiculous," it said.
Terming the verdict as "outrageously one-sided", China Daily said, "while preparing itself for the possibly endless 'lawfare', Beijing certainly should, and has to, ready itself for worst-case scenarios, including potential military collisions".
"The test now for Beijing is whether it can realise the pragmatic provisional arrangements it proposed. That entails proposing attractive options, and a positive response from other claimants," it added.