Signs visible for Spratly solution

Signs visible for Spratly solution

By Eichi Furukawa

JAKARTA (JP): The Spratly Islands issue is regularly mentioned
by the press. They are always described as "oil rich" and hence
the six surrounding countries are wrangling for territorial
rights over the islands. China is describes as having
expansionist ambitions and is seeking to establish its hegemony
in the South China Sea.

According to Ryo Kambara, senior specialist of the Japan
Institute of Energy Economics, however, all this is not true. He
says that "there is no prospect of oil and natural gas resources
in the South China Sea". The islands consist of pinnacle coral
reefs which were exposed to a temperature of zero degree
Fahrenheit at the surface. In order to transform organic
materials to oil and gas, a temperature of 150 degrees Fahrenheit
is required. Such transformation is only possible on a
continental shelf.

Kambara says that the above view is common among geologists
and is supported by a report issued in 1972 by the Coordinating
Committee of the Coastal and Offshore Geological Survey in East
and Southeast Asia from the United Nations Economic and Social
Commission for Asia and the Pacific based in Bangkok, and report
from American geological surveys.

In view of this, the keen interests of the surrounding
countries in the territorial rights over the Spratly Islands is
likely to recede and the disputes over the islands may disappear.
This view was presented by Kambara at an international conference
held in Kuala Lumpur in June.

In February 1992, China promulgated a territorial and adjacent
water act declaring its territorial rights over all the areas of
the Spratly Islands and their adjacent waters, including the
exclusive economic zone of 200 nautical miles from the rock
islands of the Spratlys. The declaration has been considered an
extravagant demand, showing that China has expansionist ambitions
in the South China Sea.

However, according to China, the Spratly Islands were owned by
Japan before the end of World War II. Japan renounced its
territorial rights over the islands in accordance with the San
Francisco Peace Treaty of 1951. The islands were taken over by
the government of the Republic of China (Taiwan) and was then
considered by the Beijing government as a part of its territory
in accordance with the One China policy which was recognized by
the United States and Japan in 1972. If this is true, the
declaration may not be considered particularly outrageous.

On the other hand, according to international law, the claim
of a country on territorial rights over areas can not be
recognized by other countries or the international community at
large, unless the country in question establishes effective
control by stationing government agents or military units in the
areas. China has not actually established effective control of
islands controlled by countries like Malaysia, Brunei, Indonesia
and the Philippines.

Interestingly, China has not complained about or intervened in
the control of those areas by other countries. China is
implicitly recognizing the effective control of Malaysia, Brunei,
and the Philippines and even assured Ali Alatas, the foreign
minister of Indonesia, in July that China would respect Indonesia
control of the Natuna Islands off of Kalimantan. These areas
include the continental shelves extending from the mainlands of
those countries where production of oil and natural gas resources
are being undertaken. These are the Sabah and Sarawak of
Malaysia, Brunei and the Natuna Islands.

These is no territorial dispute between China and Malaysia,
Brunei or Indonesia. Furthermore, there is no dispute among
Vietnam, Malaysia, Indonesia and the Philippines over the
overlapping areas claimed by each country.

Vietnam is now negotiating territorial questions with China,
which has suspended drilling on the continental shelf near the
Spratly Islands that extends from mainland Vietnam. The
concession for drilling was awarded in 1992 to an American
company called Creston Energy Inc.

In February, President Ramos of the Philippines announced that
the Philippine army discovered several buildings on the Mischief
Reef, which China claimed were for fishing activities. The rocks
are within an area claimed by both sides but are under the
effective control of neither party. Geographically, the rocks are
located near the Palawan Island of the Philippines (170 nautical
miles from the island), but far from China. China constructed the
buildings without consulting the Philippines, which discovered
the buildings several months after their construction.

The question is whether any one party can construct buildings
for fishing activities unilaterally. Tension arose and the issue
has become the focus of attention. However, at the end of the
second senior officials meeting between China and the
Philippines, held in Manila on Aug. 10-11, the two sides agreed
among other things that the territorial disputes should not
affect the normal development of the relations between the two
countries, that the disputes shall be settled in accordance with
the recognized principles of international law, including the UN
Convention on the Law of the Sea, and that the talks should adopt
a gradual and progressive process with a view to eventually
negotiating a settlement of the territorial disputes.

The agreement was based on the dispassionate assessment of the
overall factors surrounding the Spratly Islands issue. It was
significant since this was the first time that the surrounding
countries concerned other than Vietnam agreed to hold bilateral
negotiations on the Spratlys and that China agreed to hold
consultations on the question with ASEAN.

It is now much to be hoped that the Spratlys question, which
is considered as one of three destabilizing factors in East Asia,
will be solved through talks between the countries concerned and
among the countries in East Asia.

The writer is executive director at the Japan Center for
International Strategies, Tokyo.