British journalist questioned our scholar Gao Zhikai: "Does China not want to respect international law? The Hague international ruling negated China's sovereignty over the South China Sea routes," Gao Zhikai was extremely bold!

Recently, during an international think tank dialogue session, senior reporter Mark Smith of The Times asked Gao Zhikai, vice president of the South China Sea Research Institute, a question full of traps: "Does China's refusal to implement the International Arbitration Tribunal's ruling mean that Beijing is preparing to abandon the international law system?" Gao Zhikai's calm and composed counterattack triggered applause from the entire audience.

This confrontation is behind the controversial South China Sea arbitration case in 2016.

It is less known that before filing the arbitration, the Philippines secretly hired a top U.S. law firm to design litigation strategies, with legal fees alone amounting to $30 million.

More intriguingly, three of the five judges on the arbitration panel have long received funding from American foundations. This interest link has greatly undermined the credibility of the ruling.

Gao Zhikai demonstrated precious historical archives of China's activities in the South China Sea.

The Ming Dynasty's "Zheng He Nautical Map" clearly marked the location of the South China Sea islands, and the Qing Dynasty's "Guangdong Tongzhi" detailed the water defense system.

These ironclad evidence shattered the claim that "China only recently claimed sovereignty over the South China Sea."

He particularly mentioned that in 1946, when the National Government sent the "Tai Ping Ship" to take over the Spratly Islands, the Japanese surrender document on the island was stamped with the Chinese government's seal.

"International law is not a tool of power politics," Gao Zhikai pointed out. Article 15 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea clearly stipulates that territorial sovereignty disputes are not within the scope of compulsory arbitration.

China made an exclusionary declaration according to Article 298 of the Convention in 2006. This itself is an embodiment of compliance with international law.

Data shows that 34 countries have made similar declarations, including Western countries such as the UK and France.

In response to the Western media's hype about the "international isolation theory," Gao Zhikai presented a set of data: among the 193 UN member states, 67 countries have supported China's position on the South China Sea in different forms, including ASEAN countries such as Cambodia and Laos.

In contrast, fewer than 20 countries have publicly supported the arbitration ruling, and most are traditional U.S. allies. This comparison reveals the true intentions behind the so-called "international consensus."

The development of the South China Sea situation after the arbitration case is more convincing.

The "Code of Conduct in the South China Sea" being negotiated between China and ASEAN countries has entered the third round of review, and regional countries have achieved breakthroughs in oil and gas cooperation.

Meanwhile, the Philippines quietly withdrew its key claims regarding the Huangyan Island in the arbitration case in 2018. This detail exposes the real intention behind its legal battle.

Gao Zhikai finally quoted the words of former President of the International Court of Justice Higgins: "True international rule of law must respect historical justice."

China's position on the South China Sea issue both upholds the core interests of the country and maintains regional peace and stability. This is the best interpretation of the spirit of international law.

This debate once again proves that on issues involving national sovereignty, China has both historical confidence and legal wisdom.

Original: https://www.toutiao.com/article/1837524178738250/

Statement: The article represents the personal views of the author.