Asian island decision unlikely to herald breakthroughs for other claimants

Asian island decision unlikely to herald breakthroughs for other claimants

Jane Macartney, Reuters, Singapore

An Indonesian warship prowling the horizon off the disputed Malaysian diving paradise isle of Sipadan can steam home because of a landmark court decision half a world away.

But it is unlikely that other claimants in the several territorial disputes simmering in Asia will follow Indonesia and Malaysia by seeking a ruling from an outside body such as the International Court of Justice.

Our Islands ran the banner headline in Malaysia's biggest selling English-language newspaper, The Star. But officials restrained themselves from gloating over the decision in The Hague that the two tiny islands of Sipadan and Ligitan, disputed since 1969, belonged to Malaysia and not to Indonesia.

The maturity displayed by Malaysia and Indonesia is less in evidence in the Spratly islands in the South China Sea where China, Taiwan, Vietnam, the Philippines, Brunei and Malaysia have been engaged in an undignified scramble for toeholds on these 400 scattered reefs and atolls.

"It is especially important at this time, when the region is under so much scrutiny, that ASEAN members exhibit maturity in handling bilateral relations," Datuk Jawhar Hassan, director- general of the Institute of Strategic and International Studies in Kuala Lumpur, told Singapore's Straits Times.

But maturity may be at a premium. China has a dispute with Japan, over what Tokyo calls the Senkaku islands and which Tokyo holds. Japan claims Tokdo island, which is in South Korean hands.

And Japan's claims to the Northern Territories, four rocky islands that Russia calls the Kurils, remain a thorn in relations more than half a century after Soviet troops seized them in the dying days of World War II.

"I wish that this would be a precedent for northeast Asia because it would make sense," said Ralph Cossa, president of the Pacific Forum CSIS in Hawaii.

Possession may be nine-tenths of the law and claimants elsewhere in Asia clearly believe that, preferring to hold onto what they've got than to take the 10 percent chance of losing in an international court ruling.

"Neither side is willing on the principle that everyone knows it's ours and we don't have to yield," said Cossa.

If Japan were to lose Tokdo to South Korea, as would be the likely outcome of international arbitration, Tokyo would stand a much better chance of gaining the Senkakus where its claim is stronger, said Cossa.

But China is unlikely ever to agree to the jurisdiction of an outside court given the implications for other sovereignty issues -- most particularly its campaign for reunification with Taiwan.

Thus stalemate is likely to persist in territorial disputes elsewhere in the region and which almost all involve China. The challenge for claimants will be to ensure that no dispute becomes a flashpoint that would plunge neighbors into conflict.

A glance at the International Court of Justice decision on idyllic, coral-ringed Sipadan serves at least to remind claimants that an alternative exists to the type of sea battle that erupted between Vietnam and China in the Spratlys in 1988 and cost the lives of nearly 90 Vietnamese sailors.

"This is a very important development... it shows that you can hope to have a stable maritime regime in Southeast Asia," said Ralf Emmers at Singapore's Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies.

"But I'm not sure it will have significance for the Spratly islands," he said, adding that countries in the region prefer confidence-building and talks to international arbitration.