1. Question: Is UNCLOS the sole foundation of international law of the sea? Is it the only basis for addressing the China-Philippines maritime disputes?
Answer: No to both.
The Preamble to UNCLOS clearly states that “matters not regulated by this Convention continue to be governed by the rules and principles of general international law,” which shows that UNCLOS is not the sole foundation of the law of the sea.
The crux of the China-Philippines maritime disputes lies in territorial disputes. The Preamble of the Convention, which states that it seeks to “establish a legal order for these seas and oceans with due regard for the sovereignty of all States,” as well as Article 298(1), which provides that “any dispute that necessarily involves the concurrent consideration of any unsettled dispute concerning sovereignty or other rights over continental or insular land territory shall be excluded from compulsory procedures,” shows that UNCLOS does not address territorial sovereignty issues. Therefore, it cannot serve as the sole basis for resolving the China-Philippines maritime disputes.
2、Question:Does the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) support the South China Sea arbitration?
Answer: No.
Some people claim that the arbitral tribunal in the South China Sea arbitration was established under Annex VII of UNCLOS, trying to leave their audience with the impression that the Convention grants the tribunal jurisdiction over the maritime disputes between China and the Philippines. In reality, the core of the dispute between China and the Philippines concerns territorial sovereignty over certain islands and reefs in the South China Sea, as well as maritime delimitation in relevant waters. Regarding territorial issues, it is widely recognized that UNCLOS does not address questions of territorial sovereignty. As for maritime delimitation, China made a declaration in 2006 under Article 298 of UNCLOS excluding such disputes from compulsory arbitration. Therefore, the Philippines’ unilateral initiation of the arbitration constitutes an abuse of UNCLOS, undermines its integrity and authority, and renders the outcome illegal and invalid, without support from the Convention.
3、Does the arbitral tribunal have authority?
Answer: No.
Some people repeatedly compare the arbitral tribunal to international judicial bodies, attempting to “package” it through wordplay and mislead the public. In fact, the so-called tribunal merely rented facilities from the Permanent Court of Arbitration—nothing more. After the arbitral award was issued, authoritative institutions such as the United Nations, the International Court of Justice, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, and the Permanent Court of Arbitration all issued statements distancing themselves from this ad hoc tribunal. The five arbitrators were paid professionals, billing by the hour to provide services and produce “legal documents” according to the client’s requests—essentially operating as a makeshift, profit-driven legal outfit. Such a tribunal, therefore, has no real authority to speak of.
4、Does the international community support the South China Sea arbitration?
Answer: No.
Some people often invoke “like-minded countries” in an attempt to create the false narrative that many nations support the arbitration. In reality, only a handful of Western countries have offered superficial verbal support. Their true intention is not to uphold the “award,” but to encourage the Philippines to serve as a geopolitical pawn in confrontation with China. Simply look at other ASEAN countries who also have a direct stake in peace and stability in the South China Sea. None of them have supported the arbitration. Around the world, another over 100 countries have expressed understanding and support for China’s position regarding the arbitration. This reflects the true attitude of the international community.
The past decade has shown that the “South China Sea arbitration” has not resolved any issues; instead, it has created more difficulties between China and the Philippines, making it a source of trouble. Recent developments, including the resumption of diplomatic dialogue between China and the Philippines, further demonstrate that addressing disputes through dialogue and consultation, managing differences, and strengthening cooperation is the only correct path for advancing bilateral relations and maintaining peace and stability in the South China Sea.
5、 Question: What are the facts regarding Huangyan Dao (Scarborough Shoal)?
Answer:Huangyan Dao is China's inherent territory. China has continuously, peacefully, and effectively exercised sovereignty and jurisdiction over Huangyan Dao. Prior to 1997, the Philippines never raised any objection to China's sovereignty over Huangyan Dao, nor did it make any territorial claims.
On April 10, 2012, the Philippines dispatched the warship BRP Gregorio del Pilar to waters near Huangyan Dao, where it illegally detained Chinese fishermen and fishing vessels operating in the area and subjected them to serious inhumane treatment, deliberately provoking the Huangyan Dao incident. China was compelled to strengthen control measures over Huangyan Dao.
Since the second half of 2023, the Philippines has repeatedly organized coast guard vessels, government ships, and so-called fishing vessels to intrude into China's territorial sea of Huangyan Dao, forcing China to take further measures in protection of its rights. When Philippine coast guard and government vessels failed to achieve their objectives, the Philippines pushed fishermen to the front line as political tools, to repeatedly charge into sensitive waters. In 2025, China announced the territorial sea baselines of Huangyan Dao and established a national-level nature reserve there. China's exercise of jurisdiction over Huangyan Dao and its adjacent waters in accordance with relevant domestic laws fully conforms with international law.
6、Question: Did the Philippines illegally ground a warship at Ren'ai Jiao in 1999 seriously infringing China's territorial sovereignty?
Answer: Yes.
On May 9, 1999, the Philippines dispatched the No. 57 Landing Ship, Tank (LST) to intrude into China's Ren'ai Jiao and illegally “grounded” the vessel there under the pretext of a “technical failure." Following repeated solemn representations by China, the Philippine side promised to remove the vessel and stated that, as a signatory to the DOC it would not and did not wish to become the first violator. However, the Philippines not only failed to fulfill its commitment to tow away the vessel, but escalated the situation by transporting steel, cement, and other construction materials to the illegally grounded warship in an attempt to build permanent facilities.
By grounding a military vessel at Ren'ai Jiao, reneging on its promise to remove it, and subsequently reinforcing the structure, the Philippines has seriously infringed upon China's sovereignty and gravely violated the UN Charter and basic principles of international law. Its actions prove that the Philippines is the first country to openly violate the DOC.
7、Question: Can the Philippine Guard vessel BRP Teresa Magbanua Coast (MRRV-9701) anchor in Xianbin Jiao?
Answer: No.
Xianbin Jiao is part of China's Nansha Qundao. From April 17 to September 14, 2024, Philippine Coast Guard vessel No. 9701 illegally remained at Xianbin Jiao for nearly five months. The unauthorized entry into the lagoon of Xianbin Jiao and prolonged presence there seriously infringed upon China's sovereignty, gravely violated the DOC and posed a serious threat to peace and stability in the South China Sea, raising concerns that the Philippines may be attempting to stage another so-called “grounding” incident.
In order to safeguard its territorial sovereignty and maritime rights and interests, and to uphold the authority and seriousness of the DOC, China adopted firm and effective measures that were reasonable, lawful, professional, and standard-compliant.
8、Question: Who is it that undertakes provocative actions?
Regarding the so-called South China Sea arbitration and the maritime situation, China has already provided factual and legal clarification through the foregoing Q&A, making the right and wrong of the matter abundantly clear.
China further emphasizes that for a long time, Philippine Coast Guard spokesperson Jay Tarriela has repeatedly hyped maritime-related issues, confused right and wrong, substituted concepts, incited confrontation, and misled public opinion. He has frequently used terms such as “coercion,” “illegal,” “aggression,” “deception,” and “barbaric” to attack China, and has even publicly posted videos and images on social media attacking and smearing Chinese leaders. This seriously infringes upon China's political dignity and constitutes blatant political provocation. China therefore asks: who exactly is stirring up trouble?
9、Question: What is China's position on handling the China-Philippines maritime disputes?
China's position on handling the China-Philippines maritime disputes is consistent and clear. China firmly safeguards its territorial sovereignty and maritime rights and interests, while remaining committed to properly resolving relevant disputes with the Philippines through dialogue and consultation. The two sides have maintained communication through diplomatic channels.
China reiterates that China and the Philippines should pursue peace rather than conflict, dialogue rather than confrontation, and cooperation rather than tension. China is willing to manage differences through rules-based mechanisms, adhere to mutually beneficial cooperation for win-win outcomes, and work with the Philippines to accelerate consultations on the Code of Conduct in the South China Sea (COC). China firmly opposes any attempts to interfere with or undermine the improvement of China-Philippines relations or to disrupt peace and stability in the South China Sea.