劉曉明大使在倫敦國際戰略研究所的演講

China is a Staunch Force for Peace and Stability in the South China Sea
中國是維護南海和平穩定的中堅力量

– Speech by H.E. Ambassador Liu Xiaoming at the International Institute for Strategic Studies
——劉曉明大使在倫敦國際戰略研究所的演講

International Institute for Strategic Studies, 20 May 2016
2016年5月20日，倫敦國際戰略研究所

Mr. Nigel Inkster,Ladies and Gentlemen:
尊敬的奈傑爾·因克斯特主任，女士們，先生們：

Thank you very much, Nigel, for that kind introduction.
奈傑爾主任，非常感謝您熱情洋溢的介紹。

It is truly a delight to be back again at the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) after three years. Back then, I was invited by Dr. John Chipman to deliver a speech about China’s Diplomacy in the New Era. Today, my speech is also about China’s diplomacy, but I will focus on one issue – the South China Sea.
很高興時隔三年之後再次應邀來到倫敦國際戰略研究所。三年前，我應齊普曼所長的邀請在這裏就“新時期的中國外交”發表過一次演講。今天，我要講的主題還是中國外交，不過這次集中談一個問題，這就是南海問題。

Recently, the South China Sea issue has attracted much attention and media coverage. However, the articles and reporting show that the truth and facts behind the issue remain unclear to most people. Misunderstandings still I have chosen to speak about this issue at IISS, a prestigious institution that focuses on international security. I will expound on China’s position and policy, and then take questions from you. In this way, I hope our interaction today will help you gain a more comprehensive and accurate understanding of the issue.
南海問題的熱度最近幾個月來不斷升溫，很多人在關注南海問題，很多媒體也在炒作南海問題，但對於南海問題的真實情況人們卻往往不甚清楚，有時甚至存在誤解。因此我特意選倫敦國際戰略研究所這樣一個研究國際政治和安全問題的知名智庫，來闡述中國對南海問題的立場和政策,並回答大家的提問。希望通過今天的交流，各位對南海問題能有一個比較全面和準確的瞭解。

In order to be objective, impartial and rational on the issue of the South China Sea, one must get to the root of the issue and put it in perspective. So I would like to begin with the history of China and the South China Sea.
首先，我還是要從中國與南海的歷史淵源說起。我們要想客觀、公正、理性的看待南海問題，就要追本溯源，從源頭上弄清事情的本來面貌。

The islands and reefs in the South China Sea have been Chinese territory since ancient times. I emphasise ‘ancient times’ to highlight the historical facts that put the South China Sea firmly on the map of China. To elaborate on this, let me share with you four “Firsts”.
南海諸島自古以來就是中國領土，之所以強調“自古以來”，因爲南海諸島屬於中國這一歷史事實源遠流長，可以用四個“最早”來概括：

China was the first to discover the islands in the South China of the countries attempt to claim some of the islands on grounds of “prior possession”. They try to get away with their illegal occupation by referring to Nansha Islands as “Terra Nullius”. In fact, as early as 200 BC, during China’s Han Dynasty, the Chinese had large-scale and frequent sea-faring and fishing activities in the South China Sea. There is clear evidence that the South China Sea was already used by China as an important shipping route since ancient times. It follows that, because of frequent shipping, the Chinese became the first to discover the islands in the South China yn Samuels is known for his studies on the South China Sea. He wrote a book in the 1980s called ‘Contest for the South China Sea’. In this book he wrote:“Along the way, both literarily and figuratively, the South China Sea and its islands helped shape the geographical cognita of the Chinese world order.”
一是最早發現：一些國家宣稱南海島礁是“無主地”，企圖以所謂“先佔原則”據爲已有。事實上，早在公元前2世紀的漢代，中國就已經有了大規模、頻繁的遠洋航海及漁業捕撈活動，南海自古就是中國重要的海上航路，當時的中國人頻繁航行於南海地區，最早發現了南海諸島。著名南海問題學者馬文·塞繆爾斯在上世紀80年代的著作《南海爭端》中明確提出：“是南海和南海上的島礁幫助中國人在地理上形成了對世界秩序的認識。”
Second, China was the first to name the islands in the South China y, Nansha of the South China Sea is called the Spratly Islands in the west. This name comes from a British sea captain called Richard Spratly who thought it was he who had “discovered” and “named” the islands in 1843. But actually the Chinese had started to name the Nansha Islands about 2,000 years before he various kinds of Chinese historical records dating back to over 2000 years, the South China Sea is known as “Zhang Hai”, or “rising sea”, and the islands, reefs, shoals and sands as “Qi Tou”, or “rugged peaks”. In historical documents of later dynasties after the Han Dynasty, ancient names referring to today’s Xisha Islands, Nansha Islands and individual islands in the archipelagoes are clearly recorded.A popular sailing guide called “Geng Lu Bu” was compiled by Chinese fishermen. This was during the Ming and Qing Dynasties between the 14th and 20th century. In this book, names of dozens of islands of the South China Sea, including those in Nansha, are recorded. Many of these names have been widely adopted and used by international sailors until this day.
二是最早命名：現在西方人多用SPRATLY羣島稱呼中國的南沙羣島，這緣於1843年英國船長RICHARD SPRATLY 所謂“發現”並“命名”了南沙羣島。而事實是，兩千多年前，中國人就已經開始認識南海，並在各種歷史文獻中將這片海域稱爲“漲海”，把海中的島、礁、灘、沙稱爲“崎頭”。後來歷朝歷代均出現了專指西沙、南沙羣島及其具體島嶼的古地名。明清時期形成的航海指南《更路簿》，更是詳細記載了包括南沙羣島在內的南海諸島數十處地名，不少沿用至今並被各國航海家廣泛承認和採用。

Third, China was the first to exercise administrative jurisdiction in the South China since China’s Tang Dynasty, about 1,200 years ago, successive Chinese governments have exercised jurisdiction over the South China Sea. This included islands and the waters around them. China’s sovereignty was established through administrative establishment, naval patrol, resources development and the 10th century, during China’s Song Dynasty, local chronicles explicitly recorded that the islands in the South China Sea were under the administrative jurisdiction of Qiongzhou, which is today’s Hainan 1279, China’s famous astronomer Guo Shoujing was recorded traveling to the South China Sea and building observatorial facilities. The Governments of the Ming and Qing dynasties both placed the South China Sea under the supervision of naval patrols.
三是最早實施行政管轄：自1200多年前的唐代開始，中國曆代政府就不斷通過行政設治、水師巡視、資源開發管理等方式對南海諸島進行有效管轄。到公元10世紀的宋代，地方誌明確記載南海諸島屬瓊州也就是現在的中國海南省管轄。公元1279年，元代著名天文學家郭守敬曾到南海開展測量活動並建立天文觀測據點。明清兩代也均將南海納入水師巡防範圍。

Fourth, China is also the first country to develop the islands in the South China centuries, the Chinese have been engaged in fishing, planting and other activities on the islands and in the nearby waters. The remains of this continuous habitation can be seen through archaeological evidence found on many islands. The fact that only Chinese lived on the Nansha islands is recorded clearly in the book called The China Sea Pilot published by the British Navy in 1868.
四是最早開發利用：中國人民長期以來一直在南海諸島及海域從事捕撈、種植和其他生產活動，許多島礁上都曾留下中國漁民生產生活的遺蹟。英國海軍部測繪局1868年編制的《中國海指南》一書中就明確記錄了南沙羣島僅有中國人生產、生活的事實。

The aforementioned four “Firsts” are based on substantial and concrete historical evidence. They testify to the fact that the islands of the South China Sea have long been Chinese territory under successive, peaceful and effective l the 1970s, it was widely recognised by the international community that islands in the South China Sea belonged to China. Let me give you two examples:
以上四個“最早”均有充分史實作爲支撐，這說明中國在歷史上早已將南海諸島併入中國版圖並持續和平有效行使管轄。事實上，直到20世紀70年代之前，南海諸島屬於中國是國際社會普遍認知。舉兩個典型的例子：
· In 1883, Germany sent military vessels to Xisha and Nansha for surveys. The Government of Guangdong Province protested to the Germans, citing Chinese sovereignty. Germany had to stop the survey and withdrew their team.
1883年，德國曾派軍艦到西沙、南沙羣島附近進行測量，清朝廣東地方政府以主權爲依據提出抗議，德國被迫停止測量活動並撤走；

· In 1958, the Chinese government issued a declaration on territorial waters applicable to all Chinese territory including Xisha, Nansha and other islands in the South China Sea. Vietnam’s then prime minister, Phạm Văn Đồng, sent to Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai a diplomatic note which explicitly recognizes that Xisha and Nansha belonged to China.
1958年，中國政府發表關於領海的聲明，並宣佈聲明中的規定適用於包括西沙、南沙等南海諸島在內的所有中國領土，時任越南政府總理范文同就此專門照會時任中國國務院總理周恩來，明確承認西沙和南沙羣島屬於中國。

I could give you more examples like these if we had more time.
類似這樣的例子還有很多。

History speaks for itself as to who owns those islands in the South China Sea. Then how did the disputes arise?
既然南海諸島屬於中國是無可爭辯的歷史事實，那麼南海爭端又是怎樣產生的？

Since the 1970s, some countries have tried to lay claim on the natural resources in the South China Sea. It was then that some nations began to make territorial claims. Vietnam and Philippines sent troops and illegally occupied some of the islands. That is how the disputes started. Up till today, Vietnam has occupied 29 islands, Philippines eight and Malaysia five.
從上世紀70年代開始，一些南海周邊國家由於覬覦南海的豐富自然資源，開始對中國南沙島礁提出領土要求。越南、菲律賓等國先後派兵非法侵佔了南沙部分島礁，南海問題就此產生。迄今爲止，越南共侵佔29個島礁，菲律賓共侵佔8個島礁，馬來西亞共侵佔5個島礁。

In 1982, the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) was concluded after 9 years of hard negotiations. With this development of the maritime legal system in the 1980s, countries around the South China Sea gradually made further claims. These were based on UNCLOS agreements that include the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), continental shelf and other maritime rights and interests. Such overlapping claims in some cases gave rise to disputes of maritime delimitation. This has caused further complications to the issue of the South China Sea.
進入80年代以來，聯合國海洋法公約經過9年的談判於1982年簽署。隨着現代海洋法制度的發展，各國又逐步提出了專屬經濟區和大陸架等海洋權益主張，這些主張覆蓋的範圍有部分重疊，從而又產生了海域劃界的問題，這就使得問題進一步複雜化。

It is clear that there are two disputes at the centre of the South China Sea issue:
由此可見，南海爭端的根源：
· One is the territorial dispute caused by illegal occupation of Chinese territory.
一是一些國家非法侵佔中國南沙羣島部分島礁而產生的領土爭議；
· The other is the dispute over maritime delimitation caused by overlapping claims of maritime jurisdiction.
二是一些國家提出的海洋管轄權主張重疊而產生的海域劃界爭議。
These two disputes are intertwined and have made the issue highly complex. However, one thing is clear: whichever angle one chooses to look at the issue, China has never been the troublemaker. Quite the opposite, China has been a victim.
這兩方面原因相互交織，使南海問題異常複雜。但無論從哪方面原因看，中國都不是挑起事端的一方，恰恰相反，中國是南海爭端的受害方。Then, what is China’s position and policy?
那麼，中國對南海問題的立場和政策是什麼？
For a long time, China has exercised a high-level of self-restraint and forbearance on this issue. We have always approached the disputes in a constructive and responsible manner. If China had not maintained self-restraint, the South China Sea would not have been what it is today.I would like to summarize China’s position as five “commitments”.
面對一些國家的侵權挑釁行爲，中國始終保持克制和忍讓，以建設性態度負責任地處理南海爭端。事實上，如果不是中方長期保持克制態度，南海地區的局勢早已不是今天的樣子。中方在南海問題上的態度和立場，主要體現在五個“堅持”上：
First, China maintains a strong commitment to peace and stability in the South China years, China has been a staunch force safeguarding and maintaining regional peace and stability. Building friendship and partnership with neighbours has always been a top priority in China’s policy towards neighbouring Chinese people are a peace loving nation. Moreover, China’s development needs a peaceful environment. In the past three decades, peace and stability has enabled China to industrialise at a speed and scale that is uNPRecedented in human history. This advance by China can be largely attributed to the peaceful and stable environment in its neighborhood and beyond. So, China would be the last to wish to see instability in the South China Sea. It means that China would be the first to oppose conflicts in the South China Sea.
一是堅持維護南海的和平穩定。中國是地區和平穩定的堅定捍衛者和維護者，始終奉行“與鄰爲善、以鄰爲伴”的周邊外交政策。這既是因爲中國人民血液中流淌着的愛好和平的基因，也是中國自身利益和發展的現實需要。三十年來，中國在和平穩定的環境中實現了人類歷史上從未有過的高速度、大規模工業化。中國的發展得益於和平穩定的國際和周邊環境，中國當然不希望南海生亂，也決不允許南海生亂。
Second, China maintains a strong commitment to solving disputes peacefully through friendly consultations and ultimate resolution of territorial disputes, regardless of its mechanisms or process, has to be agreed between parties directly involved. The dialogue must be based on negotiations on an equal footing if such a resolution is to be fundamental and lasting. Negotiations and consultations are the most effective way of disputes resolution. This is because they can, to the greatest extent, reflect the principle of sovereign equality and the will and wishes of the parties e the People’s Republic of China was founded in 1949, we have signed boundary treaties with 12 of our 14 neighbours on land. These treaties involved over 20,000 kilometers of boundary. Most of the neighbors are medium-sized or small nations, but none of them has ever complained about the approach of China in the negotiations. These are examples of how China has resolved disputes through face-to-face negations with other countries directly involved in the South China Sea disputes do not need to be an exception. Experience shows that only negotiation and consultation could help the parties concerned to constantly build mutual trust, manage problems, narrow differences and advance cooperation. Negotiation and consultation are the most realistic and effective approach to the South China Sea issue.
二是堅持當事國通過友好談判協商和平解決爭議。世界上領土問題的最終解決，無論經過哪些機制和過程，最後都要由當事方通過平等談判達成協議，才能獲得根本、長久的解決。談判協商最能體現國家主權平等原則，最能體現當事方的意願，是最行之有效的解決爭端方式。新中國成立以來，中國與14個陸地鄰國中的12個簽訂了邊界條約，劃定和勘定的邊界長度達2萬餘公里。這些鄰國中絕大多數都是中小國家，從來沒有哪一國說過中國在談判中以大欺小，以強凌弱。這些都是中國與當事國通過直接談判協商解決問題的範例，解決南海問題同樣也不例外。實踐證明，有關各方只有通過談判協商，才能不斷增進互信、管控危機、縮小分歧、促進合作。處理南海問題，必須堅持談判協商這一現實有效途徑。
Third, China maintains a strong commitment to rule-based dispute a and ASEAN countries signed the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea in 2002 and are now working closely on the making of the “Code of Conduct in the South China Sea”, or COC for short. Since the start of the COC consultation, there has already been much a and ASEAN countries have worked actively to set up the “Senior Officials’ Hotline Platform” in response to maritime emergencies, and the “Point-to-Point Hotline Communication” on search and rescue. All sides have also agreed to establish “Preventive Measures to Manage Risks at Sea”, which will serve as the interim measure prior to the final conclusion of the COC. What happened over the years has testified to the effectiveness of rule-based dispute management.
三是堅持通過規則機制管控分歧。中國和東盟國家2002年簽署《南海各方行爲宣言》，2013年啓動“南海行爲準則”磋商。“準則”磋商啓動以來，已經取得了積極進展。中國與東盟國家還積極推動建立“海上緊急事態外交熱線”和“海上聯合搜救熱線”。各方同意積極探討制訂“海上風險管控預防性措施”，從而在“準則”最終達成前有效管控海上局勢，防止不測事件發生。事實證明，地區國家間通過規則機制管控分歧的努力是有效的。
Fourth, China maintains a strong commitment to the freedom of navigation and a is the biggest littoral state in the South China Sea. The vast majority of China’s energy supply and trade pass through the South China Sea. This means China cares more than any other nation about freedom of navigation and over-flight in the South China ntly ‘freedom of navigation’ has become a hot subject. Some people talk about “protecting the freedom of navigation” creates a dangerous misunderstanding as it implies that the safety and security of ships passing through the region were under immediate threat. The reality is that more than 100,000 vessels pass through the South China Sea every year. None of them has ever run into any problem with freedom of there was real threat to maritime traffic in the South China Sea then this would immediately result in a jump in shipping insurance rates. This has not happened. The Reuters news agency reported in January that there are no signs of commercial shipping being affected in the South China Sea. The report went on to say that the South China Sea area was not listed as a high risk area by the industry’s influential Lloyd’s Joint War Committee. This means insurers do not charge additional premiums for vessels operating in the ness people, particularly insurers, are the most responsive to risks. Yet they haven’t sensed any threat to freedom of navigation in the South China Sea. This makes me wonder what kind of “freedom of navigation” some people are feeling so eager to protect.
四是堅持維護南海航行和飛越自由。中國作爲南海最大的沿岸國，每年有大量的能源和海上貨物貿易運輸經過南海，沒有哪個國家比中國更關心南海地區的航行和飛越自由。近一段時間，航行自由成了熱門話題，一些人大談所謂保護航行自由，彷彿在該地區的航行安全遇到什麼問題。但事實是，每年有十萬多艘船隻經過南海地區，從未聽說有哪艘船隻抱怨過航行自由受到過任何影響。如果南海存在威脅海上航行的風險，通常會導致航運保費瞬間上漲。但是這樣的情況並沒有發生。據今年初英國路透社報道，沒有跡象顯示南海地區商業航運受到了任何影響。報道還稱，英國知名保險機構“勞合社聯合戰爭險委員會”（Lloyd's Joint War Committee）並未將南海列入高風險地區，保險公司也不會向通過該地區的船隻多收保費。常識告訴我們，商人特別是保險商們對風險的嗅覺是最靈敏的，連他們都沒有察覺出南海航行自由受到了威脅，我不知道一些人所聲稱要“保護”的是什麼樣的航行自由？
The fact is, “freedom of navigation” has recently been used as an excuse by the United States to flex its military muscles in the South China Sea. The United States sends military jets and warships on close-in reconnaissance in the nearby waters and air space of China’s islands and reefs. Such dangerous actions have increased tension and posed a threat to China’s sovereignty and example, just ten days ago, the USS William P. Lawrence, a guided missile destroyer, illegally sailed into the waters near China’s Nansha islands. The ship manoevered without Chinese government’s permission in sovereign waters of ons such as this, I am afraid, can not be regarded as protection of “freedom of navigation”. They are a manifestation of superior military power and the assertion of maritime dominance. These actions have posed the biggest threat to the real freedom of navigation and the peace and stability in the South China those who claim that they care about freedom of navigation and over-flight, I hope they will act in strict accordance with the international law and respect the sovereignty and security of coastal state.
近來，個別國家打着“行使航行和飛越自由”的旗號，不斷在南海炫耀武力，派遣軍用艦機抵近中國南沙羣島有關島礁鄰近海空域進行挑釁，製造緊張局勢，威脅中國主權和安全。就在10天前，美國“勞倫斯”號驅逐艦未經中國政府許可，非法進入中國南沙羣島有關島礁鄰近海域。這些行爲所要維護的恐怕不是航行自由，而是憑藉力量優勢行使海上霸權的“橫行自由”，這纔是南海地區和平穩定以及真正航行自由的最大威脅。我要奉勸這些國家，如果他們真的關心航行和飛越自由，就應遵守國際法，尊重沿岸國主權、安全和相關權益。
The actions of the United States should be judged at all times by its approach to international law. If the United States had a serious commitment to maritime law then it would have signed the UNCLOS. China has signed UNCLOS along with most other member ect for international law and peaceful dialogue on disputes is crucial for the stability and peace in the South China tary provocation and intimidation in the name of “freedom of navigation” is highly dangerous. Such actions directly undermine regional peace and stability.
看美國的行爲，要看其對待國際法的態度。如果美國嚴肅致力於國際海洋法，那麼早就應該簽署包括中國在內的廣大國際社會均已簽署的聯合國海洋法公約。尊重國際法，和平談判解決爭端，對於維護南海和平穩定至關重要。借航行自由之名，行軍事挑釁和威脅之實，是極其危險的行爲，它直接擾亂地區的和平穩定。
Turning to my next commitment h, China maintains strong commitment to win-win a values friendly and cooperative relationship with its neighbours. We have taken the initiative to call on all parties involved to “shelf differences and engage in joint development” in the South China Sea. This provides a useful approach to the resolution of the issue. And it is an approach that takes into consideration the interest of all parties concerned. To put this into practice, China has engaged in a series of cooperation initiatives with relevant 2005, oil companies from China, Vietnam and the Philippines signed the “Agreement for Joint Marine Seismic Undertaking in Certain Areas in the South China Sea”. This was an effort for joint development of oil and gas resources in the South China 2011, China announced the establishment of China-ASEAN Maritime Cooperation Fund with a total of three billion RMB yuan, or more than 300 million pounds. This was set up to fund maritime cooperation years ago, China put forward the initiative of the 21st century Maritime Silk Road. This demonstrated the mutual benefits which the ASEAN countries can enjoy by becoming regional hubs of development. These measures and initiatives are evidence of China’s efforts and good faith in seeking further and deeper maritime cooperation with its neighbours.
五是堅持通過合作實現互利共贏。中國一貫致力於發展與周邊各國的友好合作關係，主動提出了“擱置爭議、共同開發”，這爲解決南海爭議提供了有益思路，也充分考慮到各方的實際利益。根據這一思路，中國與有關各方相繼開展了一系列合作。例如：中、菲、越三國石油公司於2005年簽署《在南海協議區三方聯合海洋地震工作協議》，推動共同開發南海地區的油氣資源；2011年，中國宣佈設立總額30億元人民幣的中國-東盟海上合作基金，支持海上務實合作項目；近兩年，中國又提出以東盟國家爲樞紐建設21世紀海上絲綢之路戰略構想，進一步深化海上務實合作。這些倡議和措施充分展示了中方開展合作的努力和誠意，受到周邊國家的普遍歡迎。
The aforesaid five “Commitments” constitute China’s position on the South China Sea. They demonstrate China’s sincerity:· For resolving the issues.· For securing the regional peace and stability.· And for promoting the common development in China’s neighborhood.
從上述五個“堅持”可以看出，中國是在真心實意地尋找南海問題的解決辦法，從而促進南海地區的和平穩定和周邊國家的共同發展。
Recently, a number of hot issues have cropped up with regard to the South China Sea. In turn I will share with you my views.
剛纔我向大家介紹了中國與南海的淵源以及中國對南海問題的基本政策，現在我想就當前幾個南海熱點問題談一些看法。

The first one is about the “arbitration” reference to the Arbitral Tribunal was unilaterally initiated by the Philippines. Many media reports are creating misunderstanding by not explaining clearly this circumstance of the ‘arbitration’.A crucial point is that the Tribunal is not a permanent arbitration body nor is it a court of any arbitration to work it requires the proactive participation and agreement of both sides. Another critical point is that China rejected to participate in the arbitration. From the very start of the reference from the Philippines for the arbitration China made it clear this was not an acceptable way to resolve the dispute.
第一個問題是菲律賓仲裁案。菲律賓單方面提起南海仲裁一事最近鬧得沸沸揚揚。我想首先說一說接受菲律賓仲裁請求的仲裁庭。一些媒體報道對該仲裁庭的性質缺乏清晰的認識。其中最關鍵的一點在於，該仲裁庭只是一個非常設的仲裁機構，與真正意義上的“法庭”有着本質區別。此外，就仲裁機制而言，只有當爭議雙方自願達成一致，仲裁程序才能啓動。但中國自始至終都已明確表達了不參與、不接受的立場。

Some media and politicians are now ramping up this topic of arbitration. They are erroneously making these claims:· If China does not accept the ruling of the arbitration panel it will be breaking international law.· It would be seen as “violating the international law” and “undermining the rule-based international system” is completely a’s rejection of the arbitration and non-participation in the arbitral process is an act of exercising its legitimate rights empowered by the international contrast, it is the Philippines who is challenging the legal and moral bottom line of the international community because the arbitration is totally unreasonable, unfair and illegal.
一些媒體和政客伺機炒作，稱中國必須接受仲裁，否則就是“不遵守國際法”，就是“破壞基於規則的國際體系”，這種說法是完全錯誤的。中國拒絕接受和參與仲裁，是在行使國際法賦予的合法權利。與此相反，菲律賓方面的做法則是在挑戰國際社會的法律和道德底線，既不合情，也不合理，更不合法。

My second point about the arbitration is that it is is not reasonable because the Philippines went against its commitment to China and other ASEAN countries. Let me briefly summarise the logic of this point. China and the Philippines reached a number of bilateral agreements long ago on resolving disputes through bilateral negotiations. In the Declaration of Conduct reached between China and Philippines and other ASEAN countries, it is clearly stipulated that “the parties concerned undertake to resolve their territorial and jurisdictional disputes by peaceful means.”In 2011, the Philippines issued a joint statement with China to reaffirm its commitment to negotiations and consultations. However, a year later, it suddenly went back on its clear written commitment. Without notifying China, or even asking for consent from China, the Philippines initiated the arbitration against China unilaterally. “Pacta sunt servanda” is a basic rule in international relations. This is the bottom line of morality that every country must strictly observe. To put it simply, the Philippines has reneged on its words and deeds.
說它不合情，是因爲菲律賓破壞了它對中國和其他東盟國家作出的莊嚴承諾。中菲兩國早在一系列雙邊文件中就通過雙邊談判解決爭端達成協議。包括菲律賓在內的東盟各國和中國所共同簽訂的《南海各方行爲宣言》中也明確規定，要通過當事國和平談判解決爭議。菲律賓在2011年還與中國發表共同聲明，承諾堅持通過談判協商解決問題，一年後就突然變卦，在事先未告知中方，更未徵得中方同意的情況下單方面提起仲裁。國際關係中有一條成文的規則：“約定必須遵守”，這是每個國家自立於國際社會所必須嚴守的道德底線。中國有一個成語：“出爾反爾”，用來形容菲律賓的所作所爲再合適不過。

Another point is that the arbitration is is unfair because the islands in the arbitration case are the sovereignty property of China since ancient times. What the Philippines is doing is robbing its neighbour and asking the court to rule in its favour over the ownership of the booty. No one in the world should find this in Britain, there is always an emphasis on a “rule-based international system”. But if rules can be abused, as they are in the Philippine arbitration, what should we expect from such rules and order?
說它不合理，是因爲菲律賓拿到仲裁庭上要求裁決的島礁都是我前面所說中國自古以來的固有領土。這就好比鄰居搶走了你家的東西，然後就堂而皇之地要求法院把東西判給他。敢問世間哪有這樣的道理？英國個別政客總是在強調“基於規則的國際秩序”，請問如果每個國家都如此行事，何談規則？何談國際秩序？

The arbitration is illegal for three apparent reasons:First, UNCLOS stipulates that States Parties have the right to settle a dispute by any peaceful means of their own choice. The aforementioned arbitration was unilaterally forced ahead by the Philippines, who did not seek consent from China. This violates China’s legitimate right under the international nd, UNCLOS also states:“If the States Parties have agreed to seek settlement of the dispute by a peaceful means of their own choice, the (arbitration) procedures apply only where no settlement has been reached by recourse to such means and the agreement between the parties does not exclude any further procedure.”China has always been open to bilateral means and clearly bilateral means between China and the Philippines has not been exhausted.
說它不合法，原因更明顯。一則，《聯合國海洋法公約》明文規定：締約國享有自主選擇爭端解決方式的權利。菲律賓未經中國同意單方面強行仲裁，侵犯了中國的這一合法權利。二則，《公約》規定：締約國如果已協議自行選擇和平方法解決爭端，則只有在這種方法未得到解決以及爭端各方之間的協議並不排除其他程序的情況下，才適用第三方爭端解決程序。而中方對雙邊談判的態度在任何時候都是開放的，中菲之間還遠未窮盡雙邊手段。三則，《公約》還規定，如果締約國之間對本公約的解釋或適用發生爭端，應迅速就以談判或其他和平方法解決爭端一事交換意見。而菲律賓從未就此與中國進行過任何協商。中菲兩國同爲《公約》締約國，但菲律賓單方面提起仲裁的做法明顯違背了上述《公約》規定，是明目張膽的違法行爲。