Though time ran out before all could be said, scholars from many nations who convened in Hanoi on 27-28 November had a penetrating discussion of possibilities for cooperation in the East Sea.

International experts at the seminar in Hanoi on November 27-28.

China’s claim to 80 percent of East Sea unacceptable

East Sea security, development workshop closes

International symposium discusses East Sea issues

The seminar was not just an ‘academic exercise,’ reported Hoang Viet, a lecturer at the National University in HCMC who covered the meeting for Tuoi Tre. Negotiations that in the past eased tensions in the area Vietnam calls the ‘East Sea,’ and others call the ‘South China Sea,’ started from seminars like this one. The Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the East Sea (2002) was often mentioned in the weekend of discussion and debate.

The presentations were well-researched, and the discussions ebullient and interesting. A leading topic was the notorious “U-shaped line” or ‘ox’s tongue’ that appears on maps China has advanced to illustrate its claim to most of the East Sea.

In his presentation, Chinese scholar Ji Quoxing mentioned this line and called the seas inside it the “historical territorial waters” of China. China has, he claimed “an historical connection” to the islands and rocks within that area.

Vietnam’s Dr. Tran Cong Truc, former chief of the Government’s Border Commission, argued in his presentation that Vietnam has sufficient historical and legal evidence to prove its sovereignty over the Hoang Sa and Truong Sa (Paracel and Spratly) archipelagoes in the East Sea. China, he said, has hardly any legal evidence, only its strength.

Haji M. Djalam, an Indonesian scholar, recalled that at a seminar in 1994 about the East Sea, he had questioned Chinese scholars about the legal status of this U-shaped line but he had not received an answer from them.

Professor Li Jinning (China) said that many people misunderstand the U-shaped line. The Chinese government only claims sovereignty over the islands and rocks inside this line, he said. Even now, Chinese scholars have reached a consensus about the legal status of the line itself.

Professor Yann Hue cityi Song, a Taiwanese scholar famous for his research on the U-shaped line, declared that it has no legal status. Instead, it reflects the political will of Chinese leaders in their ambition to make their nation a superpower.

Prof. Ramses Amer (Sweden) also said that the U-shaped line doesn’t have any legal status in the international law. The line is completely unstable; there’s no way to confirm it precisely. Some versions of the Chinese map show eleven dashes, and others nine – it can’t be accepted as the demarcation of a sea border.

A scholar from the Philippines said that China’s claim that each island of the Truong Sa Archipelago defines an exclusive economic zone of 200 nautical miles is unacceptable. Because all of these islands are too small to sustain human life, they can’t be called islands according to Article 121 of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea.

Professor Voronin (Russia) said that it is unscientific to assert a claim based on the discovery of some archaeological items on some of the islands in the East Sea. By analogy, he said, if one digs up some of Napoleon’s cannons in the Kremlin palace in Moscow, could it be asserted that the Kremlin belongs to France? Of course not!

The scholars reached a consensus on some points. Firstly, that the importance of the East Sea to the security and development of the region is great that conflicts in the East Sea should not happen. Secondly, that the most feasible solution for solving disputes is cooperation among concerned countries in specific areas, from exploiting sea resources to combating pirates and dealing with marine pollution.

Participants agreed that scientific seminars in the nations of the region can build trust among the contending parties.

All but the Chinese scholars dismissed China’s U-shaped line as totally lacking in legal status.

VietNamNet/Tuoi Tre