iTs making a whole lot of more sense why there so much turmoil going on in these waters......Maritime Boundary Disputes in the South China Sea International Legal Issues
Abstract
Energy security has become one of the world’s foremost concerns and a potent source of international conflict. While potentially rich oil and gas resources lie within national maritime zones, they are inaccessible for exploitation so long as the hundreds of overlapping offshore boundary claims remain in dispute. This paper examines the long standing maritime boundary disputes in the South China Sea in respect of the Spratly Islands, the Paracels, the Ambalat offshore area, the Straits of Johore and Singapore, the Gulf of Thailand, Scarborough Shoal and the Malampaya and Camago Gas Fields. It is observed that ‘Track 2’ diplomacy, once thought likely to provide a solution, has not been successful. Rather, the international rules established by the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and subsequently developed by international tribunals, most particularly by the International Court of Justice (ICJ), provide relatively clear principles upon which questions of territorial sovereignty and the delimitation of the continental shelf and Exclusive Economic Zones can be resolved. The recent decision of the ICJ in the Black Sea (Romania v Ukraine) case of 2008 is examined and the legal principles identified. It is argued that, if international law, for political and strategic reasons, is not acceptable to States in the South China Sea, it is time to look again at the benefits of ‘sovereign neutral’ joint development, either on a bilateral basis or multilaterally. Efforts by States in the Asian region over the last few years to work collaboratively on issues of mutual concern such as the marine environment, terrorism, piracy, drug trafficking and refugees may have fostered regional confidence to resolve the more intractable issue of maritime boundaries. The need for secure access to energy resources may speed this process.
Keywords: energy security, South China Sea, 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, International Court of Justice, Black Sea (Romania v. Ukraine), joint development......
Abstract
Energy security has become one of the world’s foremost concerns and a potent source of international conflict. While potentially rich oil and gas resources lie within national maritime zones, they are inaccessible for exploitation so long as the hundreds of overlapping offshore boundary claims remain in dispute. This paper examines the long standing maritime boundary disputes in the South China Sea in respect of the Spratly Islands, the Paracels, the Ambalat offshore area, the Straits of Johore and Singapore, the Gulf of Thailand, Scarborough Shoal and the Malampaya and Camago Gas Fields. It is observed that ‘Track 2’ diplomacy, once thought likely to provide a solution, has not been successful. Rather, the international rules established by the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and subsequently developed by international tribunals, most particularly by the International Court of Justice (ICJ), provide relatively clear principles upon which questions of territorial sovereignty and the delimitation of the continental shelf and Exclusive Economic Zones can be resolved. The recent decision of the ICJ in the Black Sea (Romania v Ukraine) case of 2008 is examined and the legal principles identified. It is argued that, if international law, for political and strategic reasons, is not acceptable to States in the South China Sea, it is time to look again at the benefits of ‘sovereign neutral’ joint development, either on a bilateral basis or multilaterally. Efforts by States in the Asian region over the last few years to work collaboratively on issues of mutual concern such as the marine environment, terrorism, piracy, drug trafficking and refugees may have fostered regional confidence to resolve the more intractable issue of maritime boundaries. The need for secure access to energy resources may speed this process.
Keywords: energy security, South China Sea, 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, International Court of Justice, Black Sea (Romania v. Ukraine), joint development......
The British Royal Family' s own links to this supposed bloodline and history is damning enough in its own right, as it turns out to be a lineage dating back to Cain, and not Christ at all – passing through the Merovingian Kings of France and into Scotland, where it became known as the House of Stuart, from which Princess Diana hails and becomes a more legitimate trace to this bloodline of the Holy Grail, which is why, as it is believed, she was selected by the British Royal Family for the most infamous of arranged marriages. Could it be that this bloodline – the secret behind all ancient secret societies – is currently being made public and purposefully released into the mainstream pop culture through such films as “Maleficent” as a way of laying the foundation for further “secrets” to come?
IF YOU FLY THIS FLAG LETS BE HONEST YOU ARE FLYING A *WAR FLAG* UNDER ADMIRALITY LAW OF THE SEAS AND YOU ARE WELCOMING THE ENEMY INTO YOUR HOME...PLEASE PROVE ME WRONG BY YOUR RESEARCH......THIS IS SOMETHING THEY WOULD NEVER DARE TEACH US IN HS HISTORY CLASS EH??????