The 'South China Sea arbitral award' is not international law

Fourteen countries accused China of violating international law on the 10th anniversary of the so-called South China Sea arbitral award.

Interestingly, only one of those 14 countries is located in the region. Even other claimant states in the South China Sea did not support the statement. Why? The simple truth is that the award itself is not international law. An insightful report offers an academic perspective on the issue.

Here are the key takeaways:

• International law is much broader than UNCLOS. Yet the tribunal relied solely on UNCLOS to rule on issues beyond its proper scope.

• The tribunal was constituted without China's participation, and none of its five arbitrators came from Asia, even though the dispute was rooted in the region.

• China's position is that international adjudication must be based on state consent and that a tribunal cannot create jurisdiction for itself by separating maritime questions from the underlying disputes over territory and sovereignty.

The United States repeatedly demands that China comply with UNCLOS, even though Washington itself has never ratified the convention.

If the United States wants to lecture other countries about compliance, perhaps it should ratify the convention first. Otherwise, its position looks less like a principled defense of international law and more like selective enforcement, hypocrisy, and double standards.