On November 8, Philippine President Ferdinand Romualdez Marcos signed two new maritime laws—the “Philippine Maritime Zones Act” and the “Philippine Archipelagic Sea Lanes Act.” These laws, presented as implementations of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and the 2016 South China Sea Arbitration ruling, have ignited tensions in the region.
China’s Foreign Affairs Ministry swiftly condemned the move, stating that the new laws infringe upon China’s territorial sovereignty and maritime rights in the South China Sea. In an official statement, the ministry reaffirmed that China’s claims are supported by both historical context and international law.
China’s Firm Response
In response to the legislation, China made stern representations to the Philippine ambassador, urging the Philippines to halt any unilateral actions that could complicate or escalate the situation. The ministry’s statement implied that persistent undermining of China’s legitimate rights would be met with firm countermeasures.
Controversial Legislation
The “Philippine Maritime Zones Act” reportedly includes Huangyan Dao and parts of the Nansha Qundao islands—which China claims as its own—within the Philippine maritime zone. China asserts that this action violates its sovereignty and disregards previous international treaties defining the Philippines’ territorial scope, such as the 1898 Treaty of Paris and the 1900 Treaty of Washington.
The “Philippine Archipelagic Sea Lanes Act” establishes designated sea lanes for foreign aircraft and ships, granting the Philippines authority to regulate passage through these channels. According to the act, foreign vessels that violate UNCLOS or infringe upon Philippine sovereignty may be denied passage, with enforcement handled by the Philippine Coast Guard. China views this as an attempt to monitor and restrict navigation under the guise of adhering to international law.
Disputes Over International Law
China criticizes the “Philippine Archipelagic Sea Lanes Act” for selectively interpreting Article 53 of UNCLOS. The article allows archipelagic states to designate sea lanes for continuous and expeditious passage but also states that all ships enjoy the right of archipelagic sea lanes passage through normal routes used for international navigation. China contends that the Philippines is overstepping its authority by using domestic law to impose regulations not binding under international law.
Regional Implications
Analysts suggest that these laws reflect the Philippines’ broader strategy to solidify its territorial and maritime claims in the South China Sea. By enacting legislation based on the contested 2016 arbitration ruling—which China deems illegitimate—the Philippines may be seeking to strengthen its position in ongoing territorial disputes.
The situation raises concerns about increased tensions and the potential for escalation in a region critical to global trade and security. Observers are watching closely to see how both nations navigate this complex issue and whether diplomatic solutions can be reached to maintain stability in the South China Sea.
Reference(s):
cgtn.com
