South China Sea Arbitration: Difference between revisions

The Republic of the Philippines v. The People’s Republic of China
The Republic of the Philippines v. The People’s Republic of China
	Logo of the UNCLOS Logo of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS)
Court	An arbitral tribunal constituted under Annex VII to the 1982 United Nations Convention on Law of the Sea
Full case name	An Arbitration before an arbitral tribunal constituted under Annex VII to the 1982 United Nations Convention on Law of the Sea between the Republic of the Philippines and the People's Republic of China
Decided	July 12, 2016
Court membership
Judges sitting	Presiding Arbitrator:; Thomas A. Mensah; Members:; Jean-Pierre Cot; Rüdiger Wolfrum; Alfred H. Soons; Stanislaw Pawlak

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 14:16, 26 July 2016

Philippines v. China (also known as The South China Sea Arbitration) was an arbitration case brought by the Republic of the Philippines under the arbitration provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS)^[2]^[3]^[4] against the People's Republic of China concerning certain issues in the South China Sea^[5] including the legality of China's "nine-dotted line" claim over the South China Sea under the UNCLOS. On 19 February 2013, China officially refused to participate in the arbitration because, according to China, its 2006 declaration under article 298^[6] covers the disputes brought by the Philippines and that this case concerns sovereignty, thus it deems the arbitral tribunal formed for the case has no jurisdiction over the issue.^[7] On 7 December 2014, a position paper was published by China to elaborate its position.^[5]^[8] On 29 October 2015, the arbitral tribunal ruled that it has jurisdiction over the case,^[9] taking up seven of the 15 submissions made by the Philippines.^[10]

On 12 July 2016, the tribunal ruled in favor of the Philippines against China over territorial disputes in the South China Sea;^[11]^[12] in its major ruling, the tribunal ruled that China has "no historical rights" based on the "nine-dash line" map.^[11]^[12] China has rejected the ruling, as have Taiwan.^[13]^[14]

The United Nations holds no position on the case, and the International Court of Justice has had no involvement.

Background

The dispute has been affected by the fact that, after Japan renounced all claims to the Spratly Islands and other conquered islands and territories in the Treaty of San Francisco and Treaty of Peace with the Republic of China (Taiwan) signed on September 8, 1951, it did not indicate successor states^[15] since China was not invited to the treaty talks held in San Francisco. In reaction to that, on 15 August, the Chinese government issued the Declaration on the Draft Peace Treaty with Japan by the US and the UK and on the San Francisco Conference by the then Foreign Minister Zhou Enlai, reitirating China's sovereignty over the archipelagos in the South China Sea, including the Spratly Islands, and protesting about the absence of any provisions in the draft on who shall take over the South China Sea islands following Japan's renouncement of all rights, title and claim to them. It reiterated that "the Chinese government of the day had taken over those islands" and that the PRC's rightful sovereignty "shall remain intact".^[16]

On 28 April 1952, the United States presided over the signing of the Treaty of Peace between Japan and the Republic of China. Article 2 of the document provided that "It is recognized that under Article 2 of the Treaty of Peace which Japan signed at the city of San Francisco on 8 September 1951 (hereinafter referred to as the San Francisco Treaty), Japan has renounced all right, title, and claim to Taiwan (Formosa) and Penghu (the Pescadores) as well as the Spratly Islands and the Paracel Islands."^[16]

The Philippines bases its claim on its geographical proximity to the Spratly Islands,^[17] even though its claim bears no weight on sovereignty ownership because sovereignty of islands is established by legal relations rather than geographical proximity.^[18]^[19]

In May 1956, the dispute escalated after Filipino national Tomas Cloma and his followers settled on the islands and declared the territory as "Freedomland", now known as Kalayaan for himself and later requested to make the territory a protectorate of the Philippines.^[20] Tomas Cloma even stole China (ROC)'s national flag from the Taiping Island. In July 1956, he apologized officially for his act and he surrendered the flag he stole to China's embassy in Manila. On Oct 2nd 1956, he wrote a letter and ensured he would not make further training voyages or landings in the territorial waters of China (ROC).^[21]

Philippine troops were sent to three of the islands in 1968,^[20] when the Philippines were under President Ferdinand Marcos. In the 1970s, some countries began to invade and occupy islands and reefs in the Spratlys.^[22]^[23] The Spratlys were placed under the jurisdiction of the province of Palawan in 1978.^[20]

The People's Republic of China (PRC) claims it is entitled to the Paracel and Spratly Islands because they were seen as integral parts of the Ming dynasty.^[17] China and Taiwan have these same territorial claims.^[17] The Republic of China (Taiwan) took control of the largest island - Taiping Island - in the group since 1946.^[20]

Vietnam states that the islands have belonged to it since the 17th century, using historical documents of ownership as evidence.^[17] Hanoi began to occupy the westernmost islands during this period.^[17]

In the early 1970s, Malaysia joined the dispute by claiming the islands nearest to it.^[24]

Brunei also extended its exclusive economic zone, claiming Louisa Reef.^[24]

Optional exceptions to applicability of compulsory procedure

Article 298 of Section 3 of Part XV of the Convention provides optional exceptions to applicability of compulsory procedures provided in Section 2. China made declaration in accordance with the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea in 2006 not to accept any of the procedures provided for in section 2 of Part XV of the Convention. Many countries including the United Kingdom, Australia, Italy, France, Canada, and Spain made similar declarations to reject any of the procedures provided for in sections 2 of Part XV of the Convention with respect to the different categories of disputes.^[25]^[26]

Participants

The arbitration involved the Philippines and China.^[27]

Philippine stance

The Philippines contended that the "nine-dotted line" claim by China is invalid because it violates the UNCLOS agreements about exclusive economic zones and territorial seas.^[28] It says that because most of the features in the South China Sea, such as most of the Spratly Islands, cannot sustain life, they cannot be given their own continental shelf as defined in the convention.^[29]

Chinese stance

China refused to participate in the arbitration, stating that several treaties with the Philippines stipulate that bilateral negotiations be used to resolve border disputes. It also accuses the Philippines of violating the voluntary Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea, made in 2002 between ASEAN and China, which also stipulated bilateral negotiations as the means of resolving border and other disputes.^[30]^[31]^[32] China issued a position paper in December 2014 arguing the dispute was not subject to arbitration because it was ultimately a matter of sovereignty, not exploitation rights.^[33] Its refusal will not prevent the PCA tribunal from proceeding with the case.^[34] After the award ruling, the PRC issued a statement rejecting it as 'null' and having decided not to abide by the arbitral tribunal's decision, said it will "ignore the ruling".^[35]

Claimants of the South China Sea

Taiwanese stance

The arbitral tribunal has not invited Taiwan to join the arbitration, and no opinion of Taiwan has been sought.^[36] The Philippines claimed that Taiping Island is a rock. In response,^[37] President Ma Ying-jeou of Taiwan rejected the Philippines' claim as "patently false".^[38] Taiwan invited the Philippines and five arbitrators to visit Taiping Island; the Philippines rejected the invitation, and there was no response from the PCA tribunal.^[39]

Vietnamese stance

On December 11, 2014, Vietnam filed a statement to the tribunal which put forward three points: 1) Vietnam supports the filing of this case by the Philippines, 2) it rejects China's "nine-dashed line", and 3) it asks the PCA tribunal to take note of Vietnam's claims on certain islands such as the Paracels.^[40]

Other stances

Brunei sent its own claim through a preliminary submission.^[41] In May 2009, Malaysia and Vietnam, as well as Vietnam alone, filed claims to the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea with regard to the islands ^{[clarification needed]}. This was in relation to extending their claimed continental shelves and Exclusive Economic Zones. The People's Republic of China rejected the claims since those violate the "nine-dotted line". The Philippines challenged the Malaysian claim stating that the claims overlap with the North Borneo dispute.^[42]

Indonesia made a comment on China's claim by saying that the features are rocks and cannot sustain life, effectively calling the Chinese claim invalid. The Philippines echoed Indonesia's claims, further stating that the islands belong to them through geographic proximity.^[42]^[43]

Arbitration

Hearings

On July 7, 2015, case hearings began with the Philippines asking the tribunal to invalidate China's claims. The hearings were also attended by observers from Indonesia, Japan, Malaysia, Thailand and Vietnam.^[9] The case has been compared to Nicaragua v. United States due to similarities of the parties involved such as that a developing country is challenging a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council in an arbitral tribunal.^[44]

On 29 October 2015, the PCA tribunal ruled that it had the power to hear the case. It agreed to take up seven of the 15 submissions made by Manila, in particular whether Scarborough Shoal and low-tide areas like Mischief Reef can be considered islands. It set aside seven more pointed claims mainly accusing Beijing of acting unlawfully to be considered at the next hearing on the case's merits. It also told Manila to narrow down the scope of its final request that the judges order that "China shall desist from further unlawful claims and activities."^[10]

The arbitral tribunal scheduled the hearing on merits of the case from 24 to 30 November 2015.^[45]

Award on Jurisdiction and Admissibility

On 29 October 2015, the PCA published the award by the tribunal on Jurisdiction and Admissibility^[46] for the case. The tribunal found that it has jurisdiction to consider the following seven Philippines’ Submissions. The number is the Philippines’ Submissions number. The tribunal reserved consideration of its jurisdiction to rule on No. 1, 2, 5, 8, 9, 12, and 14.

No.3 Philippines’ position that Scarborough Shoal is a rock under Article 121(3).
No.4 Philippines’ position that Mischief Reef, Second Thomas Shoal, and Subi Reef are low tide elevations that do not generate entitlement to maritime zones.
No.6 Whether Gaven Reef and McKennan Reef (including Hughes Reef) are low-tide elevations “that do not generate any maritime entitlements of their own".
No.7 Whether Johnson Reef, Cuarteron Reef, and Fiery Cross Reef do or do not generate an entitlement to an exclusive economic zone or continental shelf.
No.10 "premised on [the] fact that China has unlawfully prevented Philippine fishermen from carrying out traditional fishing activities within the territorial sea of Scarborough Shoal."
No.11 “China’s failure to protect and preserve the marine environment at these two shoals [Scarborough Shoal and Second Thomas Shoal].”
No.13 Philippines’ protest against China’s “purported law enforcement activities as violating the Convention on the International Regulations for the Prevention of Collisions at Sea and also violating UNCLOS”.

The tribunal stated in the award that there are disputes in all of the 15 submissions from the Philippines,^[46] but for submissions such as No.3, No.4, No.6 and No.7, no known claims from the Philippines prior to the initiation of arbitration exist, and China was not aware or opposed such claims prior to the initiation of arbitration. Chinese Society of International Law (CSIL) states that the tribunal was trying to hide its incapability to prove that maritime entitlements of the nine features constitute the disputes.^[5]

For Submission No.8 to No.14, the tribunal held the view that lawfulness of China's activities in the South China Sea is not related to sovereignty. CSIL has asserted that disagreements concern territorial sovereignty, and constitute no dispute with respect to the claims advanced by the Philippines.^[5]

Award

On July 12, 2016, the Permanent Court of Arbitration published an arbitration award by the tribunal which it states is final and binding as set out in the Convention.^[35]^[47] Conclusions expressed in the award included the following:

Regarding the "Nine-Dash Line" and China's claim in the maritime areas of the South China Sea^[48]

The [UNCLOS] Convention defines the scope of maritime entitlements in the South China Sea, which may not extend beyond the limits imposed therein.^[49]
China’s claims to historic rights, or other sovereign rights or jurisdiction, with respect to the maritime areas of the South China Sea encompassed by the relevant part of the ‘nine-dash line’ are contrary to the Convention and without lawful effect to the extent that they exceed the geographic and substantive limits of China’s maritime entitlements under the Convention. The Convention superseded any historic rights or other sovereign rights or jurisdiction in excess of the limits imposed therein.^[50]

Regarding the status of features as above/below water at high tide (Submissions no. 4 and 6)

High-tide features: (a) Scarborough Shoal, (b) Cuarteron Reef, (c) Fiery Cross Reef, (d) Johnson Reef, (e) McKennan Reef, and (f) Gaven Reef (North).^[51]
Low-tide elevations: (a) Hughes Reef, (b) Gaven Reef (South), (c) Subi Reef, (d) Mischief Reef, (e) Second Thomas Shoal.^[52]
Hughes Reef lies within 12 nautical miles of the high-tide features on McKennan Reef and Sin Cowe Island, Gaven Reef (South) lies within 12 nautical miles of the high-tide features at Gaven Reef (North) and Namyit Island, and that Subi Reef lies within 12 nautical miles of the high-tide feature of Sandy Cay on the reefs to the west of Thitu.^[53]

Regarding the status of features as rocks/islands (Submissions no. 3, 5, and 7)

Scarborough Shoal contains, within the meaning of Article 121(1) of the Convention, naturally formed areas of land, surrounded by water, which are above water at high tide. However, under Article 121(3) of the Convention, the high-tide features at Scarborough Shoal are rocks that cannot sustain human habitation or economic life of their own and accordingly shall have no exclusive economic zone or continental shelf.^[54]
Johnson Reef, Cuarteron Reef, and Fiery Cross Reef contain, within the meaning of Article 121(1) of the Convention, naturally formed areas of land, surrounded by water, which are above water at high tide. However, for purposes of Article 121(3) of the Convention, the high-tide features at Johnson Reef, Cuarteron Reef, and Fiery Cross Reef are rocks that cannot sustain human habitation or economic life of their own and accordingly shall have no exclusive economic zone or continental shelf.^[55]
Tthe high-tide features at Gaven Reef (North) and McKennan Reef are rocks that cannot sustain human habitation or economic life of their own and accordingly shall have no exclusive economic zone or continental shelf.^[56]
Mischief Reef and Second Thomas Shoal are both low-tide elevations that generate no maritime zones of their own [and] that none of the high-tide features in the Spratly Islands are capable of sustaining human habitation or an economic life of their own within the meaning of those terms in Article 121(3) of the Convention. All of the high-tide features in the Spratly Islands are therefore legally rocks for purposes of Article 121(3) and do not generate entitlements to an exclusive economic zone or continental shelf. There is, accordingly, no possible entitlement by China to any maritime zone in the area of either Mischief Reef or Second Thomas Shoal and no jurisdictional obstacle to the tribunal’s consideration of the Philippines’ Submission No. 5.^[57]
Both Mischief Reef and Second Thomas Shoal are located within 200 nautical miles of the Philippines’ coast on the island of Palawan and are located in an area that is not overlapped by the entitlements generated by any maritime feature claimed by China. It follows, therefore, that, as between the Philippines and China, Mischief Reef and Second Thomas Shoal form part of the exclusive economic zone and continental shelf of the Philippines.^[58]

Regarding alleged interference with the Philippines' sovereign rights in its EEZ and continental shelf (Submission no. 8)

China has, through the operation of its marine surveillance vessels with respect to M/V Veritas Voyager on 1 to 2 March 2011 breached Article 77 of the Convention with respect to the Philippines’ sovereign rights over the non-living resources of its continental shelf in the area of Reed Bank [and] that China has, by promulgating its 2012 moratorium on fishing in the South China Sea, without exception for areas of the South China Sea falling within the exclusive economic zone of the Philippines and without limiting the moratorium to Chinese flagged vessels, breached Article 56 of the Convention with respect to the Philippines’ sovereign rights over the living resources of its exclusive economic zone.^[59]

Regarding alleged failure to prevent Chinese nationals from exploiting the Philippines' living resources (Submission no. 9)

China has, through the operation of its marine surveillance vessels in tolerating and failing to exercise due diligence to prevent fishing by Chinese flagged vessels at Mischief Reef and Second Thomas Shoal in May 2013, failed to exhibit due regard for the Philippines’ sovereign rights with respect to fisheries in its exclusive economic zone. Accordingly, China has breached its obligations under Article 58(3) of the Convention.^[60]

Regarding China's actions in respect of traditional fishing at Scarborough Shoal (Submission no. 10)

China has, through the operation of its official vessels at Scarborough Shoal from May 2012 onwards, unlawfully prevented Filipino fishermen from engaging in traditional fishing at Scarborough Shoal.^[61]

Regarding alleged failure to protect and preserve )the marine environment (Submissions no. 11 and 12(B))

China has, through its toleration and protection of, and failure to prevent Chinese fishing vessels engaging in harmful harvesting activities of endangered species at Scarborough Shoal, Second Thomas Shoal and other features in the Spratly Islands, breached Articles 192 and 194(5) of the Convention.^[62]
China has, through its island-building activities at Cuarteron Reef, Fiery Cross Reef, Gaven Reef (North), Johnson Reef, Hughes Reef, Subi Reef and Mischief Reef, breached Articles 192, 194(1), 194(5), 197, 123, and 206 of the Convention.^[63]

Regarding occupation and construction activities on Mischief Reef (Submission no. 12)

China has, through its construction of installations and artificial islands at Mischief Reef without the authorisation of the Philippines, breached Articles 60 and 80 of the Convention with respect to the Philippines’ sovereign rights in its exclusive economic zone and continental shelf [and], as a low-tide elevation, Mischief Reef is not capable of appropriation.^[64]

Regarding operation of law enforcement vessels in a dangerous manner (Submission no. 13)

China has, by virtue of the conduct of Chinese law enforcement vessels in the vicinity of Scarborough Shoal, created serious risk of collision and danger to Philippine vessels and personnel. The Tribunal finds China to have violated Rules 2, 6, 7, 8, 15, and 16 of the COLREGS and, as a consequence, to be in breach of Article 94 of the Convention.^[65]

Regarding aggravation or extension of the dispute between the parties (Submission No. 19)

China has in the course of these proceedings aggravated and extended the disputes between the Parties through its dredging, artificial island-building, and construction activities [in several particulars itemized in the award].^[66]

Regarding the future conduct of the parties (Submission no. 15)

Both Parties are obliged to comply with the Convention, including its provisions regarding the resolution of disputes, and to respect the rights and freedoms of other States under the Convention. Neither Party contests this.^[67]

Timeline

January 22, 2013 – Philippines served China with notification and Statement of Claim^[68]
February 19, 2013 – China rejected the Philippines’ Notification
July 11, 2013 – First meeting of the arbitral tribunal at The Hague
July 31, 2013 – Philippines commented on draft Rules of Procedure for the Tribunal
August 1, 2013 – China indicated that “it does not accept the arbitration initiated by the Philippines”
August 27, 2013 – Procedural Order No 1 issued via PCA Press Release on behalf of the arbitral tribunal^[69]
March 30, 2014 – Submission of the Philippines Memorial
May 14–15, 2014 – Second meeting of the arbitral tribunal at The Hague
May 21, 2014 – China comments on draft Procedural Order No 2 and observes that “it does not accept the arbitration initiated by the Philippines”.
May 29, 2014 – Philippines comments on draft Procedural Order No 2
June 3, 2014 – Procedural Order No 2 issued via PCA Press Release on behalf of the arbitral tribunal^[70]
December 15, 2014 – China had not filed a Counter-Memorial^[71]
December 17, 2014 – Procedural Order No 3 issued via PCA Press Release on behalf of the arbitral tribunal^[71]
March 16, 2015 – The Philippines made a Supplemental Written Submission to the Arbitral Tribunal^[72]
April 20–21, 2015 – Third meeting of the arbitral tribunal at The Hague^[72]
April 22, 2015 – Procedural Order No 4 issued via PCA Press Release on behalf of the arbitral tribunal^[72]
July 7–13, 2015 – Hearing of the arbitral tribunal at The Hague^[73]^[74]
October 29, 2015 – PCA issued the Award on jurisdiction and admissibility^[46]
July 12, 2016 - The tribunal of PCA gave a verdict claiming that China has no legal basis or historic claim on the Nine-dash line. China rejected the ruling.

Academic analysis

Role of the arbitral tribunal

Legal scholar Anthony Carty of University of Hong Kong states in a published book that the case has been criticized and the arbitration tribinal now faces a claim which is not justiciable.^[75]
Chinese Society of International Law, explains in a published report that the Award for the case is completely erroneous. It's against the principle of international law.^[5]
Abdul G. Koroma, former judge of the International Court of Justice, states that a tribunal is not allowed to pass judgement on a territorial and boundary dispute since a tribunal doesn't have competence nor power to judge such matter.^[76]
Wu Shicun, president and senior research fellow of the National Institute for South China Sea Studies, says that China’s claims are based on historic evidence. Philippines' occupation of South China Sea islands is illegal. The arbitration is against international law, and the only way for a peaceful resolution is to respect the commitment to negotiations.^[77]
Stefan Talmon, director of the Institute of Public International Law at the University of Bonn, states that the Permanent Court of Arbitration does not have jurisdiction over territorial issues which are governed by customary international law, not UNCLOS.^[78]
Antonios Tzanakopoulos, associate professor of public international law at the University of Oxford, states in his published paper that the dispute of the case is obviously about sovereignty and maritime delimitation. Sovereignty and maritime delimitation are beyond the stipulation of the UNCLOS.^[79]^[80]
Tom Zwart, Professor of Law, Utrecht University, and director of the Cross-Cultural Human Rights Centre, states that the case breaks down the culture of harmony in Asia. To bring people together, tea should be offered, not a sword. In Asia, the award will be considered as the fruit of a poisonous tree. The case has so many actors and can affect many interests, justice can never be rendered, the dispute should not be handled by a judicial tribunal. The United States should be prevented from getting involved because it is not a direct stakeholder of this issue.^[81]^[82]
Australian international lawyers Rothwell^[who?] and Stephens^[who?] wrote in a published book that “[t]he Part XV dispute settlement mechanisms ... do not have jurisdiction over disputes arising under general international law”^[5]

China's nine-dashed line

Kuen-Chen Fu, dean of South China Sea Institute, Xiamen University, chief editor of China Oceans Law Review, states that in contract, a gesture like the nine-dashed line does not constitute an offer. China demarcated the u-shaped line with the help of the United States legal office in 1947. Countries including the Philippines and the United States were acknowledged the existence of the nine-dashed line. The US requested permission to visit the Spratly Islands in 1960.^[21]
Jonathan London, Leiden University professor of political economy in Asia, said that the the ruling could be a "transformative moment" in the region and will let such nations say to China: "Look, here are the results of an international organization that has found that your claims have zero historical basis."^[83]
Ted L. McDorman, professor at the Faculty of Law, University of Victoria, states in a published book that historic waters are not regulated under UNCLOS. The ICJ in the 1982 Tunisia/Libya case clearly stated that historic rights of waters are governed by customary international law, not UNCLOS.^[84]
John Norton Moore, director of the Center for National Security Law and the Center for Oceans Law and Policy, said that the China's nine-dash line claim is illegal and has no basis in the UNCLOS.^[85] He also asserted that the nine-dashed line is not in China's interest, saying: "“If others were to do the same thing around the world, that China has done in the nine-dash line, it would be extremely harmful to the interests of China around the world.”^[86]
Wu Shicun, president and senior research fellow of the National Institute for South China Sea Studies, stated that the China's nine-dash line came almost half a century ahead of the UNCLOS, there is no reason to ask the nine-dash line to conform to a later convention. The non-retroactivity is a basic principle of international law, the existing facts of the past cannot be overwritten ^{[clarification needed]} by today's law.^[87]

Claims by the Philippines

Heydarian wrote that the country is "engaged in a crucial effort to ensure all claimant states align their claims in accordance to prevailing international legal regimes," but also noted that "the Aquino administration may have placed too much emphasis on its inherently uncertain lawfare at the expense of much-needed bilateral dialogue with its powerful neighbor, which seems determined to snub and defy the ongoing hearing at The Hague at all costs."^[88]
Zou Keyuan, Harris Professor of International Law at the Lancashire Law School of the University of Central Lancashire, United Kingdom, states in his published book that possible EEZ of the Spratly Archipelago is ignored in the Philippines' unilateral EEZ claim. Sovereignty over land territory always controls maritime jurisdiction. The Philippine argument of EEZ in the case may be an effort to muddy the juridical water and to try gain some international support for its weak sovereignty claim.^[89]
Kuan-Hsiung Wang, a professor at the Graduate Institute of Political Science, National Taiwan Normal University, has characterized the claims by the Philippines as "Dubious", opining that the Philippines is undermining efforts to resolve disputes and promote stability.^[90]

Potential ruling

Philippine Associate Justice Antonio Carpio states three possible ruling of the tribunal; (1) The validity of the nine dash line claim of China is not ruled which he describes as a worse case scenario for the Philippines saying it would not stop China from enforcing the claim and block activities of other claimants increasing tensions, (2) the nine dash line is ruled ineffective, Taiping Island is not entitled to an EEZ, and confirms the status of low-tide elevations identified by the Philippines, which he describes a best scenario for his country, (3) The nine dash line is declared invalid, and the Scarborough shoal is declared a traditional fishing ground for Filipinos although it would not resolve issues the southern portion of the South China Sea claimed by the Philippines, but adds that such scenario already a "big win" for the Philippines. He concedes that the arbitration would not resolve the dispute completely. He suggest another potential solution by declaring the South China Sea as a International Marine Protected Area where all claimant countries suspend their claims for 100 years which he says is a win-win for China and the Philippines.^[91]

Other parties

Nico Schrijver, academic director of the Leiden University's Grotius Center for International Legal Studies, stated that disputes should be solved by the claimant countries, and big powers such as the United States must be prevented from getting involved.^[92]^{[unreliable source?]}

International reactions

Before the ruling

There are countries and multinational bodies that have expressed support or opposition to the Philippines' move to take the South China Sea dispute to the Permanent Court of Arbitration. These entities however may not necessarily support either sides when it comes to the ownership of the disputed area affected by the case.

National governments

Support for the arbitration / Support for Philippines' stance

5

Opposition to the arbitration / Support for bilateral talks between the disputants / Support for China's stance

5

_{(Bahrain, Djibouti, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Morocco, Oman, Somalia, and Tunisia are not listed)}^{[clarification needed]}

In May 2016, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying said that there're more than 40 countries that had expressed their support on China's position.^[164] In June 2016, it has been reported nearly 60 countries support China's position. In July 2016, it was reported that more than 70 countries expressed their support on China's position.^[165] China stressed that 7 or 8 countries cannot represent international society.^[153]

One April 13, 2016, a joint press release by Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi and Fijian Minister for Foreign Affairs Inoke Kubuabola was published. The press release says Fiji supported China’s proposition, both countries agree that for sovereignty and maritime rights, parties should be committed to peaceful settlement and optional exceptions of the Convention should be respected.^[166] On the next day, Fijian government issued an statement saying the joint press release incorrectly depicted Fijian policy and the Fijian government does not support China's proposition^[167]

In August 2015, a junior Minister of State of India V K Singh told that territorial disputes should be resolved through peaceful means like that was done by India and Bangladesh using the mechanisms provided by the UNCLOS, and parties should abide by the Declaration of the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea.^[168] In October 2015, the Foreign Minister of India Sushma Swaraj stated in a joint statement that India supports a peaceful settlement of the dispute. Peaceful means should be used according to the principles of international law, including the UNCLOS. In April 2016, the Foreign Minister Sushma Swaraj stated in a communique that Russia, India and China agreed to maintain legal order of seas based on international law, including the UNCLOS, and all related disputes should be addressed through negotiations and agreements between the parties concerned.^[169]

During the 2015 East Asia Summit, President Park Geun-hye stated that concerned parties should observe the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea and that disputes should be resolved according to international law. "Korea has consistently stressed that the dispute must be peacefully resolved according to international agreements and code of conduct" and "China must guarantee the right of free navigation and flight.^[170]^[171] The Asahi Shimbun reports the the United States has made an unofficial request to South Korea to express its position on the arbitration case before the ruling but South Korea reportedly turned down the request saying its difficult make a position prior to the ruling.^[172]

Malaysia and Vietnam who has territorial claims in the South China Sea, as well as Australia, Indonesia, Japan, Singapore and Thailand sent observers to the proceedings.^[173]^[174]

Australia has not sought to take a public position on the matter other than to state that the ruling of the tribunal should be respected.^[175]^[176] However Australia has recognized the right of the Philippines to seek arbitration.^[177]

The foreign secretary of New Zealand stated in a speech that New Zealand supports the right to seek arbitration on South China Sea disputes.^[178]

European Union

European Union encourages all parties to seek peaceful solutions, through dialogue and cooperation, in accordance with international law – in particular with the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea.^[179] A foreign affairs of the EU issued a statement saying "Whilst not taking a position on claims, the EU is committed to a maritime order based upon the principles of international law, in particular as reflected in the United Nations Convention on the law of the Sea (UNCLOS),".^[180] The EU later stressed that China should respect the ruling from the Hague.^[181]

Group of Seven

The Group of 7 (Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States as well as a representation from the European Union) made a statement that the bloc should issue a "clear signal" to China's overlapping claims.^[182] European Council President Donald Tusk said on the sidelines of a summit in Ise-Shima that the bloc should take a "clear and tough stance" on China's contested maritime claims.^[183]

North Atlantic Treaty Organization

NATO General Petr Pavel said NATO has "no legal platform" to intervene militarily in the South China Sea territorial disputes, and NATO will not interfere in other region's issues. NATO supports any regional solutions based on political and diplomatic negotiations, “rules-based international system” and peaceful means for resolving discord.^[184]^[185]

Shanghai Cooperation Organisation

In a statement of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation Secretary-General Rashid Olimov on South China Sea issue, all SCO countries agreed and supported China's efforts made to safeguard peace and stability in the South China Sea. Directly concerned states should resolve disputes through negotiation and consultation in accordance with all bilateral treaties and the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea (DOC), the statement said. It urged to respect the right of every sovereign state to decide by itself the dispute resolution methods, and strongly opposed outsiders' intervention into the South China Sea issue, as well as the attempt to internationalize the dispute.^[186]

Foreign based organizations

Members from the Confederation of Toronto Chinese Canadian Organizations consisting of more than 80 Chinese Canadian organizations voiced their support for China's stance on the sovereignty issue of the South China Sea. The delegates bashed the deal reached between the United States and the Philippines which, in their view, troubled the region with instability.^[187]

Narayanman Bijukchhe, the party chairman of Nepal Workers and Peasants Party, said that the South China Sea has been unnecessarily dragged in dispute by Western countries, primarily the U.S., to maintain its hegemonic exploitation over Asian countries. Bijukchhe called on countries in Asia to be on alert for conspiracies being hatched to arouse fighting among the Asian countries. ^[188]

After the ruling

National governments

Australia: On 15 July 2016, Australian defense minister and foreign minister stated that the ruling is legal and binding, thus urged all parties involved in the dispute to "abide by the ruling". The ministers also further described the court's ruling as "consistent" with the nation's historical position.^[189]
India: On 12 July 2016, Indian ministry of external affairs stated that the country supports freedom of navigation, and urged all parties to demonstrate an utmost respect for the UNCLOS.^[190]
Indonesia: On 13 July 2016, Indonesia called on all parties involved in the territorial dispute to exercise self-restraint and to respect applicable international laws.^[191]
Japan: On 16 July 2016, Japan stated that the arbitration court's ruling "is legally binding and must be respected by all parties," thus urged Beijing to respect and comply the ruling.^[192]
Singapore: On 12 July 2016, Singapore urged that all parties involved in the South China Sea dispute to respect the legal and diplomatic processes.^[193]
South Korea: On 13 July 2016, South Korea stated that the country supports freedom of navigation and overflight in South China Sea, and support the peaceful means in resolving dispute according to international law.^[194]
Vietnam: On 12 July 2016, Vietnam immediately welcomed the arbitration tribunal ruling, thus announced that the country supports peace and order, also freedom of navigation and overflight in the region.^[195]

United Nations

The United Nations says it has no position regarding either legal merits or procedural merits of the case. ^[196]^[197] The UN's International Court of Justice says it has no involvement in the case either.^[198]

References

^ "The Republic of the Philippines v. The People's Republic of China". Permanent Court of Arbitration.
^ https://www.pcacases.com/web/sendAttach/1503
^ "Arbitration on South China Sea issue unilaterally initiated by Philippines unlawful: Chinese ambassador to Indonesia_China today_IISS".
^ "UNCLOS ANNEX VII. ARBITRATION".
^ ^a ^b ^c ^d ^e ^f Chinese Society of International Law. The Tribunal’s Award in the "South China Sea Arbitration" Initiated by the Philippines Is Null and Void (Report).
^ Declarations and statements, United Nations Division for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea.
^ Shicun Wu; Keyuan Zou (2 March 2016). Arbitration Concerning the South China Sea: Philippines versus China. Routledge. ISBN 978-1-317-17988-7.
^ Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China. Position Paper of the Government of the People's Republic of China on the Matter of Jurisdiction in the South China Sea Arbitration Initiated by the Republic of the Philippines (Report).
^ ^a ^b "Philippines asks tribunal to invalidate China's sea claims". The Philippine Star. Associated Press. 2015. {{cite web}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
^ ^a ^b "World tribunal to hear South China Sea case". Bangkok Post. 30 October 2015.
^ ^a ^b "PCA Press Release: The South China Sea Arbitration (The Republic of the Philippines v. The People's Republic of China) | PCA-CPA". pca-cpa.org. Retrieved 2016-07-12.
^ ^a ^b Perlez, Jane (2016-07-12). "Tribunal Rejects Beijing's Claims in South China Sea". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 2016-07-12.
^ Phillips, Tom; Holmes, Oliver; Bowcott, Owen. "Beijing rejects tribunal's ruling in South China Sea case". The Guardian. Retrieved 26 July 2016.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
^ Zannia, Neyla. "Taiwan rejects ruling on South China Sea with Taiping Island defined as 'rocks'". The Online Citizen. Retrieved 26 July 2016.
^ "Treaty of Peace with Japan". Taiwan Documents Project. 2013. Retrieved November 19, 2013. {{cite web}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help) See also: United Nations Treaty Series 1952 (reg. no. 1832), vol. 136, pp. 45–164.
^ ^a ^b Ying, Fu; Wu, Shicun (2016). "South China Sea: How We Got to This Stage".
^ ^a ^b ^c ^d ^e "Q&A: South China Sea dispute". BBC News. May 15, 2013. Retrieved November 19, 2013.
^ The Philippines Lacks Legal Ground to Go to Tribunal, And China Has No Obligation to Accept the Invitation Yi Ping, School of Law, Peking University]^{[unreliable source?]}
^ "Dispute in the South China Sea: A Legal Primer".
^ ^a ^b ^c ^d "Spratly Islands Conflicting Claims". Global Security. 2013. Retrieved November 19, 2013. {{cite web}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
^ ^a ^b Fu, Kuen-Chen. South China Sea: Conflict Or Cooperation?.^{[time needed]}
^ "China Voice: South China Sea arbitration lacks legal basis". Xinhua.
^ "Wang Yi on the South China Sea Issue At the ASEAN Regional Forum".
^ ^a ^b Valencia, Mark J.; Van Dyke, Jon M.; Ludwig, Noel A. (1999). Sharing the Resources of the South China Sea. University of Hawaii Press. pp. 36–38. ISBN 9780824818814.
^ "Declarations or Statements upon UNCLOS ratification".
^ "Stop meddling in South China Sea dispute, Chinese diplomat demands". Xinhua.
^ "Culture and Human Rights: Why the Tribunal Dealing with the South China Sea Dispute Should Step Aside to Make Way for a Negotiated Settlement". 15 May 2016.
^ "The Republic of the Philippines v. The People's Republic of China". Permanent Court of Arbitration. Retrieved 2013-10-24.
^ Del Cappar, Michaela (April 25, 2013). "ITLOS completes five-man tribunal that will hear PHL case vs. China". GMA News One. Retrieved October 24, 2013.
^ Torode, Greg (2013-09-27). "Philippines South China Sea legal case against China gathers pace". Reuters. Retrieved 2013-10-24.
^ "China rejects arbitration on disputed islands in S.China Sea CCTV News - CNTV English". Retrieved 2013-10-24.
^ "DECLARATION ON THE CONDUCT OF PARTIES IN THE SOUTH CHINA SEA". Association of Southeast Asian Nations. 14 May 2012. Retrieved 14 February 2016.
^ Ben Blanchard (24 July 2015),China also says U.S. is trying to influence Philippines' sea case Reuters.
^ Peterson, Luke Eric (28 August 2013). "Philippines-China UNCLOS arbitration moving forward without Chinese participation". Kluwer Arbitration Blog. Retrieved 24 October 2013.
^ ^a ^b Harvey, Adam (13 July 2016). "Philippines celebrates victory in South China Sea case, despite China's refusal to accept result". ABC News. Retrieved 13 July 2016.
^ hueviet (13 April 2016). "Water source crucial in determining status of Itu Aba".
^ Bulletin, The Manila. "PH leaves 'Taiping Island' issue to UN".
^ "Taiping Island deserves exclusive economic zone: president - Politics - FOCUS TAIWAN - CNA ENGLISH NEWS".
^ "Philippines rejects invitation to Taiping: Foreign Ministry".
^ ^a ^b "South China Sea Tensions Flare as Vietnam Files Stance to Court". Bloomberg. Archived from the original on 2014-12-14. {{cite news}}: |archive-date= / |archive-url= timestamp mismatch; 2014-12-13 suggested (help)
^ "Brunei Darussalam's Preliminary Submission concerning the Outer Limits of its Continental Shelf" (PDF). United Nations. Retrieved November 19, 2013.
^ ^a ^b "Submissions to the Commission: Joint submission by Malaysia and the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam". United Nations Division for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea. May 3, 2011. Retrieved November 19, 2013.
^ "CLCS submissions and claims in the South China Sea, by Robert C. Beckman & Tara Davenport". SouthChinaSeaStudies.org. August 11, 2011. Retrieved November 19, 2013.
^ Esmaquel, Paterno II (July 11, 2015). "PH lawyer vs China: 'Giant slayer' who defeated US". Rappler. Retrieved July 12, 2015.
^ "Tribunal schedules hearing on merits of PH arbitration case against China". Update.PH. 10 November 2015.
^ ^a ^b ^c "Award on Jurisdiction and Admissibility 29102015". Permanent Court of Arbitration. 29 October 2015. pp. 54–57.
^ "Press release: The South China Sea Arbitration" (PDF). Permanent Court of Arbitration. 12 July 2016. The Award is final and binding, as set out in Article 296 of the Convention and Article 11 of Annex VII.
^ ^a ^b ^c ^d ^e ^f ^g ^h ⁱ ^j ^k ^l ^m ⁿ ^o ^p ^q ^r ^s ^t "Award" (PDF). Permanent Court of Arbitration. 12 July 2016.
^ PCA Award, Section V(F)(d)(277), p.116.^[48]
^ PCA Award, Section V(F)(d)(278), p.117.^[48]
^ PCA Award, Section VI(B)(5)(d)(382), p.174.^[48]
^ PCA Award, Section VI(B)(5)(d)(383), p.174.^[48]
^ PCA Award, Section VI(B)(5)(d)(384), p.174.^[48]
^ PCA Award, Section VI(C)(5)(f)(643), p.259.^[48]
^ PCA Award, Section VI(C)(5)(f)(644), p.259.^[48]
^ PCA Award, Section VI(C)(5)(f)(645), p.259.^[48]
^ PCA Award, Section VI(C)(5)(f)(646), p.259-260.^[48]
^ PCA Award, Section VI(C)(5)(f)(647), p.260.^[48]
^ PCA Award, Section VII(A)(5)(c)(716), p.286.^[48]
^ PCA Award, Section VII(B)(5)(d)(757), p.297.^[48]
^ PCA Award, Section VII(C)(5)(c)(814), p.318.^[48]
^ PCA Award, Section VII(D)(5)(e)(992), p.397.^[48]
^ PCA Award, Section VII(D)(5)(e)(993), p.397.^[48]
^ PCA Award, Section VII(E)(5)(c)(1043), p.415.^[48]
^ PCA Award, Section VII(F)(5)(d)(1109), p.435.^[48]
^ PCA Award, Section VIII(E)(4)(1181), p.464.^[48]
^ PCA Award, Section IX(D)(1201), p.469.^[48]
^ Rothwell, Donald R. (January 30, 2015). "The Arbitration between the People's Republic of China and the Philippines Over the Dispute in the South China Sea". ANU College of Law Research Paper (14–48).
^ "Arbitration between the Republic of the Philippines and the People's Republic of China: Arbitral Tribunal Establishes Rules of Procedure and Initial Timetable" (PDF). Permanent Court of Arbitration. 27 August 2013.
^ "Arbitration between the Republic of the Philippines and the People's Republic of China" (PDF). Permanent Court of Arbitration. 3 June 2014.
^ ^a ^b "Arbitration between the Republic of the Philippines and the People's Republic of China" (PDF). Permanent Court of Arbitration. 17 December 2014.
^ ^a ^b ^c "Arbitration between the Republic of the Philippines and the People's Republic of China" (PDF). Permanent Court of Arbitration. 22 April 2015.
^ name=PCA20150707>"Arbitration between the Republic of the Philippines and the People's Republic of China" (PDF). Permanent Court of Arbitration. 7 July 2015.
^ "Arbitration between the Republic of the Philippines and the People's Republic of China" (PDF). Permanent Court of Arbitration. 13 July 2015.
^ Shicun Wu; Keyuan Zou (2 March 2016). Arbitration Concerning the South China Sea: Philippines Versus China. Routledge. pp. 5–. ISBN 978-1-317-17989-4.
^ 范俊梅. "Arbitration not answer to S. China Sea disputes - China.org.cn". Retrieved 29 June 2016.
^ Pengfei, Zhang. "Expert: Negotiation is the only way of Philippines' arbitration case's peaceful resolution - CCTV News - CCTV.com English".
^ "Spotlight: Experts say China's stance on South China Sea arbitration fully justified". Xinhua.
^ "Spotlight: Two law experts in Britain question arbitral tribunal's jurisdiction over South China Sea dispute". Xinhua. Retrieved 29 June 2016.
^ Tzanakopoulos, Antonios (10 April 2016). "Resolving Disputes Over the South China Sea Under the Compulsory Dispute Settlement System of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea". Retrieved 29 June 2016 – via papers.ssrn.com.
^ "South China Sea tribunal has no legal validity-Asia-Pacific-chinadaily.com.cn".
^ "Interview: UN Tribunal should think twice on South China Sea issue". Xinhua.
^ "The Latest: China Says Ruling Could Lead to Confrontation". AP. NYT. July 12, 2016.
^ S. Jayakumar; Tommy Koh; Robert Beckman (29 August 2014). The South China Sea Disputes and Law of the Sea. Edward Elgar Publishing. pp. 152–. ISBN 978-1-78347-727-2.
^ "UVA Law Professor John Norton Moore Explains South China Sea Controversy". Retrieved 29 June 2016.
^ "A CASE OF ROCKS OR ISLANDS? Examining the South China Sea Arbitration". Asia Maratime Transparency Initiative.
^ Jingya, Zhang. "Chinese scholar: China holds more solid claim - CCTV News - CCTV.com English". Retrieved 29 June 2016.
^ "THE BATTLE OF THE HAGUE: PHILIPPINES V. CHINA IN THE SOUTH CHINA SEA". Asia Maratime Transparency Initiative.
^ Keyuan Zou (January 2005). Law of the Sea in East Asia: Issues And Prospects. Psychology Press. ISBN 978-0-415-35074-7.
^ Kuan-Hsiung Wang (January 26, 2016). "The Philippines' Dubious Claims in South China Sea Arbitration". The Diplomat.
^ "Associate Justice Carpio outlines three possible rulings on PH maritime case".
^ "South China Sea tribunal has no legal validity-Eastday".
^ ^a ^b ^c ^d ^e ^f ^g ^h ⁱ ^j ^k ^l ^m ⁿ ^o ^p ^q ^r ^s ^t ^u "[Reporter's notebook] How S. Korea squandered its diplomatic goodwill with China". The Hankyoreh. 24 July 2016. Retrieved 24 July 2016.
^ "The Philippine Star - Headlines - 2014 - philstar.com".
^ Calonzo, Andreo (26 February 2015). "PHL, France to share intel, best practices vs. terrorism". GMA News. Retrieved 29 May 2016. France also expressed support for the Philippines' efforts to settle through international arbitration its territorial dispute with China over parts of the South China Sea, which Manila calls the West Philippine Sea.
^ "Germany backs Philippines' position to settle territorial disputes peacefully". The Manila Times. Philippine News Agency. 20 September 2014. Retrieved 29 May 2016.
^ Tiezzi, Shannon. "In China, Germany's Merkel Talks Trade, Syria, and South China Sea". The Diplomat. Retrieved 30 May 2016. She [German Chancellor, Angela Merkel] called the disputes "a serious conflict" and gently offered her support for a legal solution: "I am always a bit surprised why in this case multinational courts should not be an option for a solution." Merkel also emphasized Germany's "wish that the sea trade routes stay free and safe, because they are important for all."
^ "South China Sea ruling a shot in the arm for India, a damning indictment of Beijing, say experts - Times of India". Retrieved 2016-07-18.
^ Romero, Alexis (4 December 2015). "Italy backs Philippines on UN arbitration over sea dispute". The Philippine Star. Retrieved 26 May 2016.
^ Diola, Camille (1 April 2014). "Japan backs Philippines' legal move vs. China". The Philippine Star. Retrieved 29 May 2016.
^ ABC News. "International News - World News - ABC News". ABC News.
^ Barack Obama (16 Feb 2016). Remarks by President Obama at U.S.-ASEAN Press Conference (Speech). California, United States. Retrieved 28 Jun 2016. And we discussed how any disputes between claimants in the region must be resolved peacefully, through legal means, such as the upcoming arbitration ruling under the U.N. Convention of the Law of the Seas, which the parties are obligated to respect and abide by.
^ Tordesillas, Ellen T. "Vietnam supports PH position on South China Sea dispute".
^ ^a ^b ^c http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/xwfw_665399/s2510_665401/2511_665403/t1378753.shtml
^ http://allafrica.com/stories/201607050291.html
^ ^a ^b ^c ^d ^e ^f ^g ^h ⁱ ^j ^k ^l ^m ⁿ "Will China submit to South China Sea verdict?". Tibet Sun. 14 July 2016. Retrieved 24 July 2016.
^ ^a ^b ^c ^d ^e ^f ^g ^h ⁱ ^j ^k ^l ^m ⁿ "More countries stand with China against South China Sea arbitration". DNA India. 12 July 2016. Retrieved 24 July 2016.
^ Bodeen, Christopher (16 May 2016). "China: Afghanistan backs Beijing stance on South China Sea". WRAL.com. Capitol Broadcasting Company, Inc. Associated Press. Retrieved 23 May 2016.
^ ^a ^b ^c ^d ^e ^f "Spotlight: Many Arab nations back China's stance on South China Sea". Xinhua. 14 May 2016. Retrieved 29 May 2016.
^ ^a ^b ^c Wang, Xu (29 April 2016). "Kazakhstan adds voice to growing support". China Daily USA. Retrieved 29 May 2016.
^ http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2016-05/20/c_135375925.htm
^ ^a ^b "Laos Sides with China in South China Sea Dispute". Breitbart.
^ ^a ^b "China divides ASEAN in the South China Sea".
^ ^a ^b "China praises Mozambique, Burundi, Slovenia for support on South China Sea". Xinhua. 19 May 2016. Retrieved 25 May 2016.
^ ^a ^b ^c ^d "China says more than 40 countries support its stance on South China Sea dispute". Reuters. 20 May 2016. Retrieved 23 July 2016.
^ "CPP Backs PM on South China Sea". Retrieved 29 June 2016.
^ http://asia.nikkei.com/Politics-Economy/International-Relations/Cambodian-premier-won-t-back-South-China-Sea-ruling
^ IANS. "Cambodia not to support decision over South China Sea issue: PM". Retrieved 29 June 2016.
^ "China appreciates Cambodia's position on South China Sea". Say Chhum reaffirmed Cambodia's firm support for China's stance on the South China Sea
^ "South China Sea dispute: Cameroon calls for peaceful solution". Retrieved 29 June 2016.
^ "Interview: Arab states praiseworthy for stance on South China Sea issue -- Chinese envoy - Xinhua - English.news.cn".
^ "Interview: Egypt backs peaceful solution to South China Sea issue: Foreign Ministry official_XinHua - Asia Pacific Daily – Breaking News, Asia Pacific, World, China, Business, Lifestyle, Travel, Special Report, Video, Photo…". Retrieved 29 June 2016.
^ ^a ^b "More countries support China's stance on South China Sea issue: FM - Shanghai Daily".
^ ^a ^b "Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Hong Lei's Regular Press Conference on June 6, 2016".
^ "Dozens of countries support China's stance on South China Sea: FM - CCTV News - CCTV.com English". Retrieved 29 June 2016.
^ ^a ^b ^c "China refutes Japanese media's South China Sea related reports - Xinhua - English.news.cn". Retrieved 29 June 2016.
^ "Gambia backs China on S.China Sea issues". Global Times. 26 April 2016. Retrieved 23 May 2016.
^ "Kazakhstan announced its position regarding territorial disputes in South China Sea". Kazinform. 29 April 2016. Retrieved 29 May 2016.
^ "Kenya Backs China's Approach to South China Sea Disputes".
^ "Wang Yi Meets with Foreign Minister Erlan Abdyldaev of Kyrgyzstan".
^ ^a ^b "China appreciates position of Vanuatu, Lesotho, Palestine on South China Sea issue - Xinhua - English.news.cn".
^ ^a ^b ^c "South China Sea dispute: what you need to know about The Hague court ruling". The Guardian. Retrieved 24 July 2016.
^ ^a ^b "Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Hong Lei's Regular Press Conference on July 8, 2016". Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People’s Republic of China.
^ "Government Expresses Its Position on Recent Developments in the South China Sea". Government of the Republic of Liberia.
^ http://epaper.southcn.com/nfdaily/html/2016-06/02/content_7552937.htm
^ Jianing, Yao. "Malawian president supports China's stance on South China Sea - China Military Online". Retrieved 29 June 2016.
^ "Madagascar urges direct dialogue over South China Sea issue". Xinhua. 8 July 2016.
^ "Cambodia and Myanmar in Joint Stand on South China Sea Dispute". Cambodia and Myanmar completely support the negotiation for resolving the issue of the South China Sea peacefully by the claimants' parties
^ ^a ^b "Beijing lines up diplomatic battle groups over South China Sea".
^ "China and Pakistan Reach Consensus on South China Sea Issue". Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the People's Republic of China. 28 April 2016. Retrieved 29 May 2016.
^ http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2016-07/07/c_135496426.htm
^ "Wang Yi Holds Talks with Foreign Minister Witold Waszczykowski of Poland". (Foreign Minister of Poland) Witold Waszczykowski said that Poland supports China's policy of peacefully resolving disputes over some Nansha islands and reefs through dialogues and consultations.
^ "Republic of Congo calls for peaceful resolution of South China Sea dispute - Xinhua - English.news.cn". Retrieved 29 June 2016.
^ "Russia urges solving South China Sea disputes through negotiations". Xinhua. 27 May 2016. Retrieved 29 May 2016.
^ "South China Sea Controversy: Russia, Beijing Call For Negotiation, Consultation To Settle Territorial Dispute". International Business Times. 19 April 2016. Retrieved 23 July 2016.
^ "Russian ambassador: Tensions in South China Sea created artificially". Asia Maritime Reviews. 21 June 2016. Retrieved 23 July 2016.
^ http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/xwfw_665399/s2510_665401/2511_665403/t1379216.shtml
^ "China, Serbia call for settling South China Sea disputes by directly involved parties via negotiation - Xinhua - English.news.cn". Retrieved 29 June 2016.
^ "China voices appreciation for support on South China Sea issue - Xinhua - English.news.cn".
^ "Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Hong Lei's Regular Press Conference on May 19, 2016". Kamal Shaker, Representative of the Party of Modern Centre of Slovenia who is in Beijing for the 5th China-Europe High-level Political Parties Forum, made the following statement on behalf of the ruling party and government of Slovenia when meeting the leading official of the International Department of the CPC Central Committee. He said that the Slovenian side totally understands and supports China's stance on the issue of the South China Sea arbitration, and hopes that disputes would be peacefully resolved through consultation, dialogue and negotiation. {{cite news}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |1= (help)
^ "South Africa backs Chinese stance on South China Sea dispute". Retrieved 29 June 2016.
^ "GoSL reiterates its position on the disputed South China Sea". Retrieved 29 June 2016.
^ ^a ^b "Sudan urges peaceful solution to conflicts in South China Sea". Xinhua. 28 May 2016. Retrieved 29 May 2016.
^ "Syria Supports China's Sovereignty over Its Territory in South China Sea". Syria Times. 20 July 2016. Retrieved 23 July 2016.
^ http://kotakinabalu.china-consulate.org/eng/zgyw_4/t1366334.htm
^ "Wang Yi Meets with Foreign Minister Sirojiddin Aslov of Tajikistan".
^ "Taiwan rejects arbitration on South China Sea: Foreign ministry". Radio Taiwan International.
^ "Togo latest country to support China's stand on South China Sea issue". Global Times. SINA Corporation. 19 May 2016. Retrieved 29 May 2016.
^ "Uganda calls for peaceful resolution of South China Sea dispute - Xinhua - English.news.cn".
^ "Vanuatu supports China's proposition on South China Sea". Papua New Guinea Today. 26 May 2016. Retrieved 29 May 2016.
^ "China says has wide support for stance on South China Sea case". Reuters. 12 May 2016. Retrieved 29 May 2016.
^ http://zm.chineseembassy.org/eng/sgzxdthxx/t1372037.htm
^ "Zimbabwe's Mugabe Supports China's Stance on South China Sea Issue: Official". Retrieved 29 June 2016.
^ "China says more than 40 countries support its stance on South China Sea dispute".
^ http://english.hani.co.kr/arti/english_edition/e_international/753617.html
^ "Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Hong Lei's Regular Press Conference on May 19, 2016".
^ "Fiji doesn't support China in maritime dispute". Retrieved 29 June 2016.
^ "India once again ticks of China over South China Sea issue". Firstpost. 8 August 2015.
^ "Joint Communiqué of the 14th Meeting of the Foreign Ministers of the Russian Federation, the Republic of India and the People's Republic of China".
^ "South Korea and the South China Sea: A Domestic and International Balancing Act".
^ "Where does South Korea Stand on the South China Sea Dispute?". 2 July 2014.
^ Asahi: US Asked Seoul to Express Support for Ruling on Beijing-Manila Sea Dispute
^ Mina Pollmann; The Diplomat. "Amid South China Sea Tensions, Japan Strengthens Ties With Philippines, Vietnam". The Diplomat.
^ Calleja, Niña P. "7 countries send observers to monitor PH case vs China".
^ "Australia and the South China Sea arbitration case - The Strategist". 17 December 2015. Retrieved 29 June 2016.
^ "Australia: Nations will respect tribunal on S China Sea". Retrieved 29 June 2016.
^ Ben Blanchard; Tim Kelly (16 Feb 2016). "China raps Australia foreign minister ahead of Beijing trip". Reuters. Retrieved 28 June 2016. We recognize the Philippines' right to seek to resolve the matter through arbitration
^ Murray McCully (New Zealand Minister of Foreign Affairs) (9 Mar 2016). Address to Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy (Speech). Singapore. Retrieved 28 Jun 2016. We also support the role arbitration can play in resolving complex disputes and we support states' rights to access dispute settlement mechanisms. [...] We expect all parties to respect the result of the Tribunal's ruling.
^ "Philippines, EU show common stance on China".
^ "European Union sides with United States on South China Sea incident". 31 October 2015 – via Reuters.
^ Reuters (19 April 2016). "South China Sea: Britain says court of arbitration ruling must be binding". {{cite web}}: |last= has generic name (help)
^ "G7 sees need to send strong message on South, East China Sea disputes". 26 May 2016.
^ "Chinese state media warns G7 against South China Sea 'meddling'".
^ "Nato has 'no legal platforms' to intervene militarily in South China Sea".
^ "NATO General Says China Should Respect Tribunal on Maritime Claim". 3 June 2016.
^ 李珅. "SCO supports peace and stability in South China Sea".
^ 李潇. "Chinese Canadians back China's stance on South China Sea - China.org.cn".
^ "Nepali political party supports China's stance on South China Sea issue - CCTV News - CCTV.com English". Retrieved 29 June 2016.
^ Gareth Hutchens (15 July 2016). "South China Sea: Marise Payne says Julie Bishop right to warn Beijing". The Guardian.
^ Indrani Bagchi (12 July 2016). "South China Sea ruling a shot in the arm for India, a damning indictment of Beijing, say experts". The Times of India.
^ Liza Yosephine (13 July 2016). "Indonesia's statement on South China Sea dissatisfying: China's experts". The Jakarta Post. Jakarta.
^ Koya Jibiki (16 July 2016). "Abe calls on Li to abide by South China Sea ruling". Nikkei, Asian Review.
^ "Singapore urges respect for court ruling on South China Sea". Today online. 12 July 2016.
^ "[Analysis] Response on South China Sea ruling shows S. Korea's fragile position". The Hankyoreh. 14 July 2016.
^ "Vietnam welcomes Hague ruling on East Vietnam Sea disputes: foreign ministry". Tuoi Tre News. 13 July 2016.
^ "Arbitral court not a UN agency". Retrieved 24 July 2016. The United Nations said on Wednesday it has nothing to do with the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA), which set up a tribunal that handled the South China Sea arbitration case the Philippines filed unilaterally in 2013.
^ "Daily Press Briefing by the Office of the Spokesperson for the Secretary-General". Retrieved 20 July 2016. the UN doesn't have a position on the legal and procedural merits of the case or on the disputed claims.
^ "International Court of Justice". Retrieved 24 July 2016. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) wishes to draw the attention of the media and the public to the fact that the Award in the South China Sea Arbitration (The Republic of the Philippines v. The People's Republic of China) was issued by an Arbitral Tribunal acting with the secretarial assistance of the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA). The relevant information can be found on the PCA's website (www.pca-cpa.org). The ICJ, which is a totally distinct institution, has had no involvement in the above mentioned case

External links

"The Republic of the Philippines v. The People's Republic of China" (PDF). Permanent Court of Arbitration. Retrieved 14 February 2016.

[1] "The Republic of the Philippines v. The People's Republic of China". Permanent Court of Arbitration.

[2] ttps://www.pcacases.com/web/sendAttach/1503

[3] "Arbitration on South China Sea issue unilaterally initiated by Philippines unlawful: Chinese ambassador to Indonesia_China today_IISS".

[4] "UNCLOS ANNEX VII. ARBITRATION".

[csil-5] ^ ^a ^b ^c ^d ^e ^f Chinese Society of International Law. The Tribunal’s Award in the "South China Sea Arbitration" Initiated by the Philippines Is Null and Void (Report).

[6] Declarations and statements, United Nations Division for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea.

[WuZou2016-7] Shicun Wu; Keyuan Zou (2 March 2016). Arbitration Concerning the South China Sea: Philippines versus China. Routledge. ISBN 978-1-317-17988-7.

[position-8] Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China. Position Paper of the Government of the People's Republic of China on the Matter of Jurisdiction in the South China Sea Arbitration Initiated by the Republic of the Philippines (Report).

[APstory1-9] "Philippines asks tribunal to invalidate China's sea claims". The Philippine Star. Associated Press. 2015. {{cite web}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)

[auto-10] "World tribunal to hear South China Sea case". Bangkok Post. 30 October 2015.

[:1-11] "PCA Press Release: The South China Sea Arbitration (The Republic of the Philippines v. The People's Republic of China) | PCA-CPA". pca-cpa.org. Retrieved 2016-07-12.

[:2-12] Perlez, Jane (2016-07-12). "Tribunal Rejects Beijing's Claims in South China Sea". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 2016-07-12.

[13] Phillips, Tom; Holmes, Oliver; Bowcott, Owen. "Beijing rejects tribunal's ruling in South China Sea case". The Guardian. Retrieved 26 July 2016.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)

[14] Zannia, Neyla. "Taiwan rejects ruling on South China Sea with Taiping Island defined as 'rocks'". The Online Citizen. Retrieved 26 July 2016.

[taiwandocuments.org-15] "Treaty of Peace with Japan". Taiwan Documents Project. 2013. Retrieved November 19, 2013. {{cite web}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help) See also: United Nations Treaty Series 1952 (reg. no. 1832), vol. 136, pp. 45–164.

[fuying-16] Ying, Fu; Wu, Shicun (2016). "South China Sea: How We Got to This Stage".

[BBC-17] "Q&A: South China Sea dispute". BBC News. May 15, 2013. Retrieved November 19, 2013.

[18] The Philippines Lacks Legal Ground to Go to Tribunal, And China Has No Obligation to Accept the Invitation Yi Ping, School of Law, Peking University]^{[unreliable source?]}

[19] "Dispute in the South China Sea: A Legal Primer".

[globalsecurity.org-20] "Spratly Islands Conflicting Claims". Global Security. 2013. Retrieved November 19, 2013. {{cite web}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)

[kuen-21] Fu, Kuen-Chen. South China Sea: Conflict Or Cooperation?.^{[time needed]}

[22] "China Voice: South China Sea arbitration lacks legal basis". Xinhua.

[23] "Wang Yi on the South China Sea Issue At the ASEAN Regional Forum".

[Valencia_1999-24] Valencia, Mark J.; Van Dyke, Jon M.; Ludwig, Noel A. (1999). Sharing the Resources of the South China Sea. University of Hawaii Press. pp. 36–38. ISBN 9780824818814.

[25] "Declarations or Statements upon UNCLOS ratification".

[26] "Stop meddling in South China Sea dispute, Chinese diplomat demands". Xinhua.

[culture-human-rights.blogspot.com-27] "Culture and Human Rights: Why the Tribunal Dealing with the South China Sea Dispute Should Step Aside to Make Way for a Negotiated Settlement". 15 May 2016.

[28] "The Republic of the Philippines v. The People's Republic of China". Permanent Court of Arbitration. Retrieved 2013-10-24.

[29] Del Cappar, Michaela (April 25, 2013). "ITLOS completes five-man tribunal that will hear PHL case vs. China". GMA News One. Retrieved October 24, 2013.

[30] Torode, Greg (2013-09-27). "Philippines South China Sea legal case against China gathers pace". Reuters. Retrieved 2013-10-24.

[31] "China rejects arbitration on disputed islands in S.China Sea CCTV News - CNTV English". Retrieved 2013-10-24.

[32] "DECLARATION ON THE CONDUCT OF PARTIES IN THE SOUTH CHINA SEA". Association of Southeast Asian Nations. 14 May 2012. Retrieved 14 February 2016.

[33] Ben Blanchard (24 July 2015),China also says U.S. is trying to influence Philippines' sea case Reuters.

[34] Peterson, Luke Eric (28 August 2013). "Philippines-China UNCLOS arbitration moving forward without Chinese participation". Kluwer Arbitration Blog. Retrieved 24 October 2013.

[:0-35] Harvey, Adam (13 July 2016). "Philippines celebrates victory in South China Sea case, despite China's refusal to accept result". ABC News. Retrieved 13 July 2016.

[36] ueviet (13 April 2016). "Water source crucial in determining status of Itu Aba".

[37] Bulletin, The Manila. "PH leaves 'Taiping Island' issue to UN".

[38] "Taiping Island deserves exclusive economic zone: president - Politics - FOCUS TAIWAN - CNA ENGLISH NEWS".

[39] "Philippines rejects invitation to Taiping: Foreign Ministry".

[vietnam-40] "South China Sea Tensions Flare as Vietnam Files Stance to Court". Bloomberg. Archived from the original on 2014-12-14. {{cite news}}: |archive-date= / |archive-url= timestamp mismatch; 2014-12-13 suggested (help)

[41] "Brunei Darussalam's Preliminary Submission concerning the Outer Limits of its Continental Shelf" (PDF). United Nations. Retrieved November 19, 2013.

[Malaysia_Vietnam-42] "Submissions to the Commission: Joint submission by Malaysia and the Socialist Republic of Viet Nam". United Nations Division for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea. May 3, 2011. Retrieved November 19, 2013.

[Davenport-43] "CLCS submissions and claims in the South China Sea, by Robert C. Beckman & Tara Davenport". SouthChinaSeaStudies.org. August 11, 2011. Retrieved November 19, 2013.

[44] Esmaquel, Paterno II (July 11, 2015). "PH lawyer vs China: 'Giant slayer' who defeated US". Rappler. Retrieved July 12, 2015.

[45] "Tribunal schedules hearing on merits of PH arbitration case against China". Update.PH. 10 November 2015.

[PCA20151029-46] "Award on Jurisdiction and Admissibility 29102015". Permanent Court of Arbitration. 29 October 2015. pp. 54–57.

[47] "Press release: The South China Sea Arbitration" (PDF). Permanent Court of Arbitration. 12 July 2016. The Award is final and binding, as set out in Article 296 of the Convention and Article 11 of Annex VII.

[PCA_Award-48] ^ ^a ^b ^c ^d ^e ^f ^g ^h ⁱ ^j ^k ^l ^m ⁿ ^o ^p ^q ^r ^s ^t "Award" (PDF). Permanent Court of Arbitration. 12 July 2016.

[49] PCA Award, Section V(F)(d)(277), p.116.^[48]

[50] PCA Award, Section V(F)(d)(278), p.117.^[48]

[51] PCA Award, Section VI(B)(5)(d)(382), p.174.^[48]

[52] PCA Award, Section VI(B)(5)(d)(383), p.174.^[48]

[53] PCA Award, Section VI(B)(5)(d)(384), p.174.^[48]

[54] PCA Award, Section VI(C)(5)(f)(643), p.259.^[48]

[55] PCA Award, Section VI(C)(5)(f)(644), p.259.^[48]

[56] PCA Award, Section VI(C)(5)(f)(645), p.259.^[48]

[57] PCA Award, Section VI(C)(5)(f)(646), p.259-260.^[48]

[58] PCA Award, Section VI(C)(5)(f)(647), p.260.^[48]

[59] PCA Award, Section VII(A)(5)(c)(716), p.286.^[48]

[60] PCA Award, Section VII(B)(5)(d)(757), p.297.^[48]

[61] PCA Award, Section VII(C)(5)(c)(814), p.318.^[48]

[62] PCA Award, Section VII(D)(5)(e)(992), p.397.^[48]

[63] PCA Award, Section VII(D)(5)(e)(993), p.397.^[48]

[64] PCA Award, Section VII(E)(5)(c)(1043), p.415.^[48]

[65] PCA Award, Section VII(F)(5)(d)(1109), p.435.^[48]

[66] PCA Award, Section VIII(E)(4)(1181), p.464.^[48]

[67] PCA Award, Section IX(D)(1201), p.469.^[48]

[68] Rothwell, Donald R. (January 30, 2015). "The Arbitration between the People's Republic of China and the Philippines Over the Dispute in the South China Sea". ANU College of Law Research Paper (14–48).

[PCA20130827-69] "Arbitration between the Republic of the Philippines and the People's Republic of China: Arbitral Tribunal Establishes Rules of Procedure and Initial Timetable" (PDF). Permanent Court of Arbitration. 27 August 2013.

[PCA20140703-70] "Arbitration between the Republic of the Philippines and the People's Republic of China" (PDF). Permanent Court of Arbitration. 3 June 2014.

[PCA20141217-71] "Arbitration between the Republic of the Philippines and the People's Republic of China" (PDF). Permanent Court of Arbitration. 17 December 2014.

[PCA20150422-72] "Arbitration between the Republic of the Philippines and the People's Republic of China" (PDF). Permanent Court of Arbitration. 22 April 2015.

[73] =PCA20150707>"Arbitration between the Republic of the Philippines and the People's Republic of China" (PDF). Permanent Court of Arbitration. 7 July 2015.

[PCA20150713-74] "Arbitration between the Republic of the Philippines and the People's Republic of China" (PDF). Permanent Court of Arbitration. 13 July 2015.

[WuZou2016_Anthony-75] Shicun Wu; Keyuan Zou (2 March 2016). Arbitration Concerning the South China Sea: Philippines Versus China. Routledge. pp. 5–. ISBN 978-1-317-17989-4.

[76] 范俊梅. "Arbitration not answer to S. China Sea disputes - China.org.cn". Retrieved 29 June 2016.

[77] Pengfei, Zhang. "Expert: Negotiation is the only way of Philippines' arbitration case's peaceful resolution - CCTV News - CCTV.com English".

[78] "Spotlight: Experts say China's stance on South China Sea arbitration fully justified". Xinhua.

[79] "Spotlight: Two law experts in Britain question arbitral tribunal's jurisdiction over South China Sea dispute". Xinhua. Retrieved 29 June 2016.

[80] Tzanakopoulos, Antonios (10 April 2016). "Resolving Disputes Over the South China Sea Under the Compulsory Dispute Settlement System of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea". Retrieved 29 June 2016 – via papers.ssrn.com.

[81] "South China Sea tribunal has no legal validity-Asia-Pacific-chinadaily.com.cn".

[82] "Interview: UN Tribunal should think twice on South China Sea issue". Xinhua.

[83] "The Latest: China Says Ruling Could Lead to Confrontation". AP. NYT. July 12, 2016.

[JayakumarKoh2014-84] S. Jayakumar; Tommy Koh; Robert Beckman (29 August 2014). The South China Sea Disputes and Law of the Sea. Edward Elgar Publishing. pp. 152–. ISBN 978-1-78347-727-2.

[85] "UVA Law Professor John Norton Moore Explains South China Sea Controversy". Retrieved 29 June 2016.

[86] "A CASE OF ROCKS OR ISLANDS? Examining the South China Sea Arbitration". Asia Maratime Transparency Initiative.

[87] Jingya, Zhang. "Chinese scholar: China holds more solid claim - CCTV News - CCTV.com English". Retrieved 29 June 2016.

[88] "THE BATTLE OF THE HAGUE: PHILIPPINES V. CHINA IN THE SOUTH CHINA SEA". Asia Maratime Transparency Initiative.

[Zou2005-89] Keyuan Zou (January 2005). Law of the Sea in East Asia: Issues And Prospects. Psychology Press. ISBN 978-0-415-35074-7.

[90] Kuan-Hsiung Wang (January 26, 2016). "The Philippines' Dubious Claims in South China Sea Arbitration". The Diplomat.

[91] "Associate Justice Carpio outlines three possible rulings on PH maritime case".

[eastday.com-92] "South China Sea tribunal has no legal validity-Eastday".

[english.hani.co.kr-93] ^ ^a ^b ^c ^d ^e ^f ^g ^h ⁱ ^j ^k ^l ^m ⁿ ^o ^p ^q ^r ^s ^t ^u "[Reporter's notebook] How S. Korea squandered its diplomatic goodwill with China". The Hankyoreh. 24 July 2016. Retrieved 24 July 2016.

[94] "The Philippine Star - Headlines - 2014 - philstar.com".

[95] Calonzo, Andreo (26 February 2015). "PHL, France to share intel, best practices vs. terrorism". GMA News. Retrieved 29 May 2016. France also expressed support for the Philippines' efforts to settle through international arbitration its territorial dispute with China over parts of the South China Sea, which Manila calls the West Philippine Sea.

[96] "Germany backs Philippines' position to settle territorial disputes peacefully". The Manila Times. Philippine News Agency. 20 September 2014. Retrieved 29 May 2016.

[97] Tiezzi, Shannon. "In China, Germany's Merkel Talks Trade, Syria, and South China Sea". The Diplomat. Retrieved 30 May 2016. She [German Chancellor, Angela Merkel] called the disputes "a serious conflict" and gently offered her support for a legal solution: "I am always a bit surprised why in this case multinational courts should not be an option for a solution." Merkel also emphasized Germany's "wish that the sea trade routes stay free and safe, because they are important for all."

[98] "South China Sea ruling a shot in the arm for India, a damning indictment of Beijing, say experts - Times of India". Retrieved 2016-07-18.

[99] Romero, Alexis (4 December 2015). "Italy backs Philippines on UN arbitration over sea dispute". The Philippine Star. Retrieved 26 May 2016.

[100] Diola, Camille (1 April 2014). "Japan backs Philippines' legal move vs. China". The Philippine Star. Retrieved 29 May 2016.

[101] ABC News. "International News - World News - ABC News". ABC News.

[obama-press-conference-102] Barack Obama (16 Feb 2016). Remarks by President Obama at U.S.-ASEAN Press Conference (Speech). California, United States. Retrieved 28 Jun 2016. And we discussed how any disputes between claimants in the region must be resolved peacefully, through legal means, such as the upcoming arbitration ruling under the U.N. Convention of the Law of the Seas, which the parties are obligated to respect and abide by.

[103] Tordesillas, Ellen T. "Vietnam supports PH position on South China Sea dispute".

[ReferenceA-104] ttp://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/xwfw_665399/s2510_665401/2511_665403/t1378753.shtml

[105] ttp://allafrica.com/stories/201607050291.html

[tibetsun.com-106] ^ ^a ^b ^c ^d ^e ^f ^g ^h ⁱ ^j ^k ^l ^m ⁿ "Will China submit to South China Sea verdict?". Tibet Sun. 14 July 2016. Retrieved 24 July 2016.

[dnaindia.com-107] ^ ^a ^b ^c ^d ^e ^f ^g ^h ⁱ ^j ^k ^l ^m ⁿ "More countries stand with China against South China Sea arbitration". DNA India. 12 July 2016. Retrieved 24 July 2016.

[108] Bodeen, Christopher (16 May 2016). "China: Afghanistan backs Beijing stance on South China Sea". WRAL.com. Capitol Broadcasting Company, Inc. Associated Press. Retrieved 23 May 2016.

[manyarab-109] ^ ^a ^b ^c ^d ^e ^f "Spotlight: Many Arab nations back China's stance on South China Sea". Xinhua. 14 May 2016. Retrieved 29 May 2016.

[kazakhstan-110] Wang, Xu (29 April 2016). "Kazakhstan adds voice to growing support". China Daily USA. Retrieved 29 May 2016.

[111] ttp://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2016-05/20/c_135375925.htm

[laos-112] "Laos Sides with China in South China Sea Dispute". Breitbart.

[chinadivides-113] "China divides ASEAN in the South China Sea".

[Chinapraises-114] "China praises Mozambique, Burundi, Slovenia for support on South China Sea". Xinhua. 19 May 2016. Retrieved 25 May 2016.

[uk.reuters.com-115] "China says more than 40 countries support its stance on South China Sea dispute". Reuters. 20 May 2016. Retrieved 23 July 2016.

[116] "CPP Backs PM on South China Sea". Retrieved 29 June 2016.

[117] ttp://asia.nikkei.com/Politics-Economy/International-Relations/Cambodian-premier-won-t-back-South-China-Sea-ruling

[118] IANS. "Cambodia not to support decision over South China Sea issue: PM". Retrieved 29 June 2016.

[119] "China appreciates Cambodia's position on South China Sea". Say Chhum reaffirmed Cambodia's firm support for China's stance on the South China Sea

[120] "South China Sea dispute: Cameroon calls for peaceful solution". Retrieved 29 June 2016.

[121] "Interview: Arab states praiseworthy for stance on South China Sea issue -- Chinese envoy - Xinhua - English.news.cn".

[122] "Interview: Egypt backs peaceful solution to South China Sea issue: Foreign Ministry official_XinHua - Asia Pacific Daily – Breaking News, Asia Pacific, World, China, Business, Lifestyle, Travel, Special Report, Video, Photo…". Retrieved 29 June 2016.

[shanghaidaily.com-123] "More countries support China's stance on South China Sea issue: FM - Shanghai Daily".

[fmprc.gov.cn-124] "Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Hong Lei's Regular Press Conference on June 6, 2016".

[125] "Dozens of countries support China's stance on South China Sea: FM - CCTV News - CCTV.com English". Retrieved 29 June 2016.

[gabon-mauritania-venezuela-126] "China refutes Japanese media's South China Sea related reports - Xinhua - English.news.cn". Retrieved 29 June 2016.

[127] "Gambia backs China on S.China Sea issues". Global Times. 26 April 2016. Retrieved 23 May 2016.

[128] "Kazakhstan announced its position regarding territorial disputes in South China Sea". Kazinform. 29 April 2016. Retrieved 29 May 2016.

[129] "Kenya Backs China's Approach to South China Sea Disputes".

[130] "Wang Yi Meets with Foreign Minister Erlan Abdyldaev of Kyrgyzstan".

[xinhuanet.com-131] "China appreciates position of Vanuatu, Lesotho, Palestine on South China Sea issue - Xinhua - English.news.cn".

[theguardian.com-132] "South China Sea dispute: what you need to know about The Hague court ruling". The Guardian. Retrieved 24 July 2016.

[http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/-133] "Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Hong Lei's Regular Press Conference on July 8, 2016". Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People’s Republic of China.

[“http://www.mofa.gov.lr/public2/index.php”-134] "Government Expresses Its Position on Recent Developments in the South China Sea". Government of the Republic of Liberia.

[135] ttp://epaper.southcn.com/nfdaily/html/2016-06/02/content_7552937.htm

[136] Jianing, Yao. "Malawian president supports China's stance on South China Sea - China Military Online". Retrieved 29 June 2016.

[http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/newchina/index.htm-137] "Madagascar urges direct dialogue over South China Sea issue". Xinhua. 8 July 2016.

[138] "Cambodia and Myanmar in Joint Stand on South China Sea Dispute". Cambodia and Myanmar completely support the negotiation for resolving the issue of the South China Sea peacefully by the claimants' parties

[morningnewsusa.com-139] "Beijing lines up diplomatic battle groups over South China Sea".

[140] "China and Pakistan Reach Consensus on South China Sea Issue". Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the People's Republic of China. 28 April 2016. Retrieved 29 May 2016.

[141] ttp://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2016-07/07/c_135496426.htm

[142] "Wang Yi Holds Talks with Foreign Minister Witold Waszczykowski of Poland". (Foreign Minister of Poland) Witold Waszczykowski said that Poland supports China's policy of peacefully resolving disputes over some Nansha islands and reefs through dialogues and consultations.

[143] "Republic of Congo calls for peaceful resolution of South China Sea dispute - Xinhua - English.news.cn". Retrieved 29 June 2016.

[144] "Russia urges solving South China Sea disputes through negotiations". Xinhua. 27 May 2016. Retrieved 29 May 2016.

[145] "South China Sea Controversy: Russia, Beijing Call For Negotiation, Consultation To Settle Territorial Dispute". International Business Times. 19 April 2016. Retrieved 23 July 2016.

[146] "Russian ambassador: Tensions in South China Sea created artificially". Asia Maritime Reviews. 21 June 2016. Retrieved 23 July 2016.

[147] ttp://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/xwfw_665399/s2510_665401/2511_665403/t1379216.shtml

[148] "China, Serbia call for settling South China Sea disputes by directly involved parties via negotiation - Xinhua - English.news.cn". Retrieved 29 June 2016.

[xinhuanet.com1-149] "China voices appreciation for support on South China Sea issue - Xinhua - English.news.cn".

[150] "Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Hong Lei's Regular Press Conference on May 19, 2016". Kamal Shaker, Representative of the Party of Modern Centre of Slovenia who is in Beijing for the 5th China-Europe High-level Political Parties Forum, made the following statement on behalf of the ruling party and government of Slovenia when meeting the leading official of the International Department of the CPC Central Committee. He said that the Slovenian side totally understands and supports China's stance on the issue of the South China Sea arbitration, and hopes that disputes would be peacefully resolved through consultation, dialogue and negotiation. {{cite news}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |1= (help)

[151] "South Africa backs Chinese stance on South China Sea dispute". Retrieved 29 June 2016.

[152] "GoSL reiterates its position on the disputed South China Sea". Retrieved 29 June 2016.

[news.xinhuanet.com-153] "Sudan urges peaceful solution to conflicts in South China Sea". Xinhua. 28 May 2016. Retrieved 29 May 2016.

[154] "Syria Supports China's Sovereignty over Its Territory in South China Sea". Syria Times. 20 July 2016. Retrieved 23 July 2016.

[155] ttp://kotakinabalu.china-consulate.org/eng/zgyw_4/t1366334.htm

[156] "Wang Yi Meets with Foreign Minister Sirojiddin Aslov of Tajikistan".

[157] "Taiwan rejects arbitration on South China Sea: Foreign ministry". Radio Taiwan International.

[158] "Togo latest country to support China's stand on South China Sea issue". Global Times. SINA Corporation. 19 May 2016. Retrieved 29 May 2016.

[159] "Uganda calls for peaceful resolution of South China Sea dispute - Xinhua - English.news.cn".

[160] "Vanuatu supports China's proposition on South China Sea". Papua New Guinea Today. 26 May 2016. Retrieved 29 May 2016.

[reuters1-161] "China says has wide support for stance on South China Sea case". Reuters. 12 May 2016. Retrieved 29 May 2016.

[162] ttp://zm.chineseembassy.org/eng/sgzxdthxx/t1372037.htm

[163] "Zimbabwe's Mugabe Supports China's Stance on South China Sea Issue: Official". Retrieved 29 June 2016.

[164] "China says more than 40 countries support its stance on South China Sea dispute".

[165] ttp://english.hani.co.kr/arti/english_edition/e_international/753617.html

[166] "Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Hong Lei's Regular Press Conference on May 19, 2016".

[fiji2-167] "Fiji doesn't support China in maritime dispute". Retrieved 29 June 2016.

[168] "India once again ticks of China over South China Sea issue". Firstpost. 8 August 2015.

[mea.gov.in-169] "Joint Communiqué of the 14th Meeting of the Foreign Ministers of the Russian Federation, the Republic of India and the People's Republic of China".

[170] "South Korea and the South China Sea: A Domestic and International Balancing Act".

[171] "Where does South Korea Stand on the South China Sea Dispute?". 2 July 2014.

[172] Asahi: US Asked Seoul to Express Support for Ruling on Beijing-Manila Sea Dispute

[173] Mina Pollmann; The Diplomat. "Amid South China Sea Tensions, Japan Strengthens Ties With Philippines, Vietnam". The Diplomat.

[174] Calleja, Niña P. "7 countries send observers to monitor PH case vs China".

[aspistrategist.org.au-175] "Australia and the South China Sea arbitration case - The Strategist". 17 December 2015. Retrieved 29 June 2016.

[sg.news.yahoo.com-176] "Australia: Nations will respect tribunal on S China Sea". Retrieved 29 June 2016.

[reuters-australia-177] Ben Blanchard; Tim Kelly (16 Feb 2016). "China raps Australia foreign minister ahead of Beijing trip". Reuters. Retrieved 28 June 2016. We recognize the Philippines' right to seek to resolve the matter through arbitration

[nz-foreign-minister-178] Murray McCully (New Zealand Minister of Foreign Affairs) (9 Mar 2016). Address to Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy (Speech). Singapore. Retrieved 28 Jun 2016. We also support the role arbitration can play in resolving complex disputes and we support states' rights to access dispute settlement mechanisms. [...] We expect all parties to respect the result of the Tribunal's ruling.

[179] "Philippines, EU show common stance on China".

[180] "European Union sides with United States on South China Sea incident". 31 October 2015 – via Reuters.

[181] Reuters (19 April 2016). "South China Sea: Britain says court of arbitration ruling must be binding". {{cite web}}: |last= has generic name (help)

[182] "G7 sees need to send strong message on South, East China Sea disputes". 26 May 2016.

[183] "Chinese state media warns G7 against South China Sea 'meddling'".

[184] "Nato has 'no legal platforms' to intervene militarily in South China Sea".

[Czech-185] "NATO General Says China Should Respect Tribunal on Maritime Claim". 3 June 2016.

[186] 李珅. "SCO supports peace and stability in South China Sea".

[187] 李潇. "Chinese Canadians back China's stance on South China Sea - China.org.cn".

[188] "Nepali political party supports China's stance on South China Sea issue - CCTV News - CCTV.com English". Retrieved 29 June 2016.

[189] Gareth Hutchens (15 July 2016). "South China Sea: Marise Payne says Julie Bishop right to warn Beijing". The Guardian.

[190] Indrani Bagchi (12 July 2016). "South China Sea ruling a shot in the arm for India, a damning indictment of Beijing, say experts". The Times of India.

[191] Liza Yosephine (13 July 2016). "Indonesia's statement on South China Sea dissatisfying: China's experts". The Jakarta Post. Jakarta.

[192] Koya Jibiki (16 July 2016). "Abe calls on Li to abide by South China Sea ruling". Nikkei, Asian Review.

[193] "Singapore urges respect for court ruling on South China Sea". Today online. 12 July 2016.

[194] "[Analysis] Response on South China Sea ruling shows S. Korea's fragile position". The Hankyoreh. 14 July 2016.

[195] "Vietnam welcomes Hague ruling on East Vietnam Sea disputes: foreign ministry". Tuoi Tre News. 13 July 2016.

[196] "Arbitral court not a UN agency". Retrieved 24 July 2016. The United Nations said on Wednesday it has nothing to do with the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA), which set up a tribunal that handled the South China Sea arbitration case the Philippines filed unilaterally in 2013.

[197] "Daily Press Briefing by the Office of the Spokesperson for the Secretary-General". Retrieved 20 July 2016. the UN doesn't have a position on the legal and procedural merits of the case or on the disputed claims.

[198] "International Court of Justice". Retrieved 24 July 2016. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) wishes to draw the attention of the media and the public to the fact that the Award in the South China Sea Arbitration (The Republic of the Philippines v. The People's Republic of China) was issued by an Arbitral Tribunal acting with the secretarial assistance of the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA). The relevant information can be found on the PCA's website (www.pca-cpa.org). The ICJ, which is a totally distinct institution, has had no involvement in the above mentioned case

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

[11]

[12]

[13]

[14]

[15]

[16]

[17]

[18]

[19]

[20]

[21]

[22]

[23]

[24]

[25]

[26]

[27]

[28]

[29]

[30]

[31]

[32]

[33]

[34]

[35]

[36]

[37]

[38]

[39]

[40]

[41]

[42]

[43]

[44]

[45]

[46]

[47]

[48]

[49]

[50]

[51]

[52]

[53]

[54]

[55]

[56]

[57]

[58]

[59]

[60]

[61]

[62]

[63]

[64]

[65]

[66]

[67]

[68]

[69]

[70]

[71]

[72]

[73]

[74]

[75]

[76]

[77]

[78]

[79]

[80]

[81]

[82]

[83]

[84]

[85]

[86]

[87]

[88]

[89]

[90]

[91]

[92]

[164]

[165]

[153]

[166]

[167]

[168]

[169]

[170]

@@ Line 218: / Line 218: @@
 ;Opposition to the arbitration / Support for bilateral talks between the disputants / Support for China's stance
 {{col-list|5|
+* {{flag|Angola}}<ref name="ReferenceA">http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/xwfw_665399/s2510_665401/2511_665403/t1378753.shtml</ref><ref>http://allafrica.com/stories/201607050291.html</ref><ref name="tibetsun.com">{{cite news|title=Will China submit to South China Sea verdict?|url=https://www.tibetsun.com/opinions/2016/07/14/will-china-submit-to-south-china-sea-verdict|accessdate=24 July 2016|agency=Tibet Sun|date=14 July 2016}}</ref><ref name="dnaindia.com">{{cite news|title=More countries stand with China against South China Sea arbitration|url=http://www.dnaindia.com/world/report-more-countries-stand-with-china-against-south-china-sea-arbitration-2233751|accessdate=24 July 2016|agency=DNA India|date=12 July 2016}}</ref>
-* {{flag|Cambodia}}<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.khmertimeskh.com/news/26488/cpp-backs-pm-on-south-china-sea/|title=CPP Backs PM on South China Sea|publisher=|accessdate=29 June 2016}}</ref><ref>[http://web.archive.org/web/20141213103712/http://mobile.bloomberg.com/news/2014-12-12/south-china-sea-tensions-flare-as-vietnam-files-stance-to-court.html South China Sea Tensions Flare as Vietnam Files Stance to Court] (archived from [http://asia.nikkei.com/Politics-Economy/International-Relations/Cambodian-premier-won-t-back-South-China-Sea-ruling the original] on 2014-12-13)</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.business-standard.com/article/international/cambodia-not-to-support-decision-over-south-china-sea-issue-pm-116062800154_1.html|title=Cambodia not to support decision over South China Sea issue: PM|first=|last=IANS|publisher=|accessdate=29 June 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=China appreciates Cambodia's position on South China Sea|url=http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2016-07/05/c_135490867.htm|quote=Say Chhum reaffirmed Cambodia's firm support for China's stance on the South China Sea}}</ref>
-* {{flag|Kazakhstan}}<ref name="kazakhstan">{{cite news|last1=Wang|first1=Xu|title=Kazakhstan adds voice to growing support|url=http://usa.chinadaily.com.cn/epaper/2016-04/29/content_24967561.htm|accessdate=29 May 2016|publisher=China Daily USA|date=29 April 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=Kazakhstan announced its position regarding territorial disputes in South China Sea|url=http://www.inform.kz/eng/article/2898331|accessdate=29 May 2016|publisher=Kazinform|date=29 April 2016}}</ref>
+* {{flag|Afghanistan}}<ref>{{cite news|last1=Bodeen|first1=Christopher|title=China: Afghanistan backs Beijing stance on South China Sea|url=http://www.wral.com/china-afghanistan-backing-beijing-stance-on-south-china-sea/15706837/|accessdate=23 May 2016|work=WRAL.com|agency=Associated Press|publisher=Capitol Broadcasting Company, Inc.|date=16 May 2016}}</ref>
-* {{flag|Kenya}}<ref>{{cite web|url=http://allafrica.com/stories/201606140827.html|title=Kenya Backs China's Approach to South China Sea Disputes|publisher=}}</ref>
+* {{flag|Algeria}}<ref name=manyarab>{{cite news|title=Spotlight: Many Arab nations back China's stance on South China Sea|url=http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2016-05/14/c_135359002.htm|accessdate=29 May 2016|agency=Xinhua|date=14 May 2016}}</ref>
+* {{flag|Bangladesh}}<ref name="kazakhstan"/>
-* {{flag|Liberia}}<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.mofa.gov.lr/public2/2press.php?news_id=2136&related=7&pg=sp|title=Government Expresses Its Position on Recent Developments in the South China Sea|publisher=}}</ref>
+* {{flag|Belarus}}<ref name="kazakhstan"/>
+* {{flag|Bosnia and Herzegovina}}<ref>http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2016-05/20/c_135375925.htm</ref>
+* {{flag|Brunei}}<ref name="english.hani.co.kr">{{cite news|title=[Reporter’s notebook] How S. Korea squandered its diplomatic goodwill with China|url=http://english.hani.co.kr/arti/english_edition/e_international/753617.html|accessdate=24 July 2016|agency=The Hankyoreh|date=24 July 2016}}</ref><ref name=laos/><ref name=chinadivides>{{cite web|url=http://www.eastasiaforum.org/2016/05/21/china-divides-asean-in-the-south-china-sea/|title=China divides ASEAN in the South China Sea|publisher=}}</ref>
+* {{flag|Burundi}}<ref name="Chinapraises">{{cite news|title=China praises Mozambique, Burundi, Slovenia for support on South China Sea|url=http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2016-05/19/c_135372702.htm|accessdate=25 May 2016|agency=Xinhua|date=19 May 2016}}</ref><ref name="uk.reuters.com">{{cite web|url=http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-southchinasea-china-idUKKCN0YB1C6|title=China says more than 40 countries support its stance on South China Sea dispute|accessdate=23 July 2016|agency=Reuters|date=20 May 2016}}</ref>
+* {{flag|Cambodia}}<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.khmertimeskh.com/news/26488/cpp-backs-pm-on-south-china-sea/|title=CPP Backs PM on South China Sea|publisher=|accessdate=29 June 2016}}</ref><ref>http://asia.nikkei.com/Politics-Economy/International-Relations/Cambodian-premier-won-t-back-South-China-Sea-ruling</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.business-standard.com/article/international/cambodia-not-to-support-decision-over-south-china-sea-issue-pm-116062800154_1.html|title=Cambodia not to support decision over South China Sea issue: PM|first=|last=IANS|publisher=|accessdate=29 June 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=China appreciates Cambodia's position on South China Sea|url=http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2016-07/05/c_135490867.htm|quote=Say Chhum reaffirmed Cambodia's firm support for China's stance on the South China Sea}}</ref>
+* {{flag|Cameroon}}<ref name="english.hani.co.kr">{{cite news|title=[Reporter’s notebook] How S. Korea squandered its diplomatic goodwill with China|url=http://english.hani.co.kr/arti/english_edition/e_international/753617.html|accessdate=24 July 2016|agency=The Hankyoreh|date=24 July 2016}}</ref><ref name="tibetsun.com">{{cite news|title=Will China submit to South China Sea verdict?|url=https://www.tibetsun.com/opinions/2016/07/14/will-china-submit-to-south-china-sea-verdict|accessdate=24 July 2016|agency=Tibet Sun|date=14 July 2016}}</ref><ref name="dnaindia.com">{{cite news|title=More countries stand with China against South China Sea arbitration|url=http://www.dnaindia.com/world/report-more-countries-stand-with-china-against-south-china-sea-arbitration-2233751|accessdate=24 July 2016|agency=DNA India|date=12 July 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.cameroonweb.com/CameroonHomePage/politics/South-China-Sea-dispute-Cameroon-calls-for-peaceful-solution-376552|title=South China Sea dispute: Cameroon calls for peaceful solution|publisher=|accessdate=29 June 2016}}</ref>
+* {{flag|Central African Republic}}<ref name="ReferenceA">http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/xwfw_665399/s2510_665401/2511_665403/t1378753.shtml</ref>
+* {{flag|Comoros}}<ref>{{cite web|url=http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2016-05/14/c_135359047.htm|title=Interview: Arab states praiseworthy for stance on South China Sea issue -- Chinese envoy - Xinhua - English.news.cn|publisher=}}</ref>
+* {{flag|Democratic Republic of the Congo}}<ref name="english.hani.co.kr">{{cite news|title=[Reporter’s notebook] How S. Korea squandered its diplomatic goodwill with China|url=http://english.hani.co.kr/arti/english_edition/e_international/753617.html|accessdate=24 July 2016|agency=The Hankyoreh|date=24 July 2016}}</ref>
+* {{flag|Egypt}}<ref name="english.hani.co.kr">{{cite news|title=[Reporter’s notebook] How S. Korea squandered its diplomatic goodwill with China|url=http://english.hani.co.kr/arti/english_edition/e_international/753617.html|accessdate=24 July 2016|agency=The Hankyoreh|date=24 July 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://en.apdnews.com/xin-hua/431642.html|title=Interview: Egypt backs peaceful solution to South China Sea issue: Foreign Ministry  official_XinHua -  Asia Pacific Daily – Breaking News, Asia Pacific, World, China, Business, Lifestyle, Travel, Special Report, Video, Photo…|publisher=|accessdate=29 June 2016}}</ref>
+* {{flag|Eritrea}}<ref name="shanghaidaily.com">{{cite web|url=http://www.shanghaidaily.com/article/article_xinhua.aspx?id=329673|title=More countries support China's stance on South China Sea issue: FM - Shanghai Daily|publisher=}}</ref><ref name="fmprc.gov.cn">{{cite web|url=http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/xwfw_665399/s2510_665401/2535_665405/t1370122.shtml|title=Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Hong Lei's Regular Press Conference on June 6, 2016|publisher=}}</ref>
+* {{flag|Ethiopia}}<ref name="tibetsun.com">{{cite news|title=Will China submit to South China Sea verdict?|url=https://www.tibetsun.com/opinions/2016/07/14/will-china-submit-to-south-china-sea-verdict|accessdate=24 July 2016|agency=Tibet Sun|date=14 July 2016}}</ref><ref name="dnaindia.com">{{cite news|title=More countries stand with China against South China Sea arbitration|url=http://www.dnaindia.com/world/report-more-countries-stand-with-china-against-south-china-sea-arbitration-2233751|accessdate=24 July 2016|agency=DNA India|date=12 July 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://english.cctv.com/2016/06/21/ARTIK8Co2hvzv50Xg2IzROzm160621.shtml|title=Dozens of countries support China's stance on South China Sea: FM - CCTV News - CCTV.com English|publisher=|accessdate=29 June 2016}}</ref>
+* {{flag|Gabon}}<ref name="gabon-mauritania-venezuela">{{cite web|url=http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2016-05/13/c_135358006.htm|title=China refutes Japanese media's South China Sea related reports - Xinhua - English.news.cn|publisher=|accessdate=29 June 2016}}</ref>
+* {{flag|Gambia}}<ref>{{cite news|title=Gambia backs China on S.China Sea issues|url=http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/980087.shtml|accessdate=23 May 2016|publisher=Global Times|date=26 April 2016}}</ref>
+* {{flag|Guinea-Bissau}}<ref name="ReferenceA">http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/xwfw_665399/s2510_665401/2511_665403/t1378753.shtml</ref>
+* {{flag|Kazakhstan}}<ref name="english.hani.co.kr">{{cite news|title=[Reporter’s notebook] How S. Korea squandered its diplomatic goodwill with China|url=http://english.hani.co.kr/arti/english_edition/e_international/753617.html|accessdate=24 July 2016|agency=The Hankyoreh|date=24 July 2016}}</ref><ref name="kazakhstan">{{cite news|last1=Wang|first1=Xu|title=Kazakhstan adds voice to growing support|url=http://usa.chinadaily.com.cn/epaper/2016-04/29/content_24967561.htm|accessdate=29 May 2016|publisher=China Daily USA|date=29 April 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=Kazakhstan announced its position regarding territorial disputes in South China Sea|url=http://www.inform.kz/eng/article/2898331|accessdate=29 May 2016|publisher=Kazinform|date=29 April 2016}}</ref>
+* {{flag|Iran}}<ref name="english.hani.co.kr">{{cite news|title=[Reporter’s notebook] How S. Korea squandered its diplomatic goodwill with China|url=http://english.hani.co.kr/arti/english_edition/e_international/753617.html|accessdate=24 July 2016|agency=The Hankyoreh|date=24 July 2016}}</ref>
+* {{flag|Kenya}}<ref name="tibetsun.com">{{cite news|title=Will China submit to South China Sea verdict?|url=https://www.tibetsun.com/opinions/2016/07/14/will-china-submit-to-south-china-sea-verdict|accessdate=24 July 2016|agency=Tibet Sun|date=14 July 2016}}</ref><ref name="dnaindia.com">{{cite news|title=More countries stand with China against South China Sea arbitration|url=http://www.dnaindia.com/world/report-more-countries-stand-with-china-against-south-china-sea-arbitration-2233751|accessdate=24 July 2016|agency=DNA India|date=12 July 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://allafrica.com/stories/201606140827.html|title=Kenya Backs China's Approach to South China Sea Disputes|publisher=}}</ref>
+* {{flag|Kyrgyzstan}}<ref name="english.hani.co.kr">{{cite news|title=[Reporter’s notebook] How S. Korea squandered its diplomatic goodwill with China|url=http://english.hani.co.kr/arti/english_edition/e_international/753617.html|accessdate=24 July 2016|agency=The Hankyoreh|date=24 July 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/zxxx_662805/t1359734.shtml|title=Wang Yi Meets with Foreign Minister Erlan Abdyldaev of Kyrgyzstan|publisher=}}</ref>
+* {{flag|Laos}}<ref name="english.hani.co.kr">{{cite news|title=[Reporter’s notebook] How S. Korea squandered its diplomatic goodwill with China|url=http://english.hani.co.kr/arti/english_edition/e_international/753617.html|accessdate=24 July 2016|agency=The Hankyoreh|date=24 July 2016}}</ref><ref name=laos>{{cite web|url=http://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2016/05/03/3-may-16-world-view-laos-sides-china-south-china-sea-dispute/|title=Laos Sides with China in South China Sea Dispute|work=Breitbart}}</ref><ref name=chinadivides/>
+* {{flag|Lebanon}}<ref name=manyarab/>
+* {{flag|Lesotho}}<ref name="xinhuanet.com">{{cite web|url=http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2016-05/26/c_135391041.htm|title=China appreciates position of Vanuatu, Lesotho, Palestine on South China Sea issue - Xinhua - English.news.cn|publisher=}}</ref><ref name="theguardian.com">{{cite news|title=South China Sea dispute: what you need to know about The Hague court ruling|url=https://www.theguardian.com/news/2016/jul/12/south-china-sea-dispute-what-you-need-to-know-about-the-hague-court-ruling|accessdate=24 July 2016|agency=The Guardian|date=}}</ref>
+* {{flag|Liberia}}<ref name= "http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/">{{cite web|title=Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Hong Lei's Regular Press Conference on July 8, 2016|url=http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/xwfw_665399/s2510_665401/2511_665403/t1378753.shtml|accessdate=|agency=Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People’s Republic of China|date=}}</ref><ref name="tibetsun.com">{{cite news|title=Will China submit to South China Sea verdict?|url=https://www.tibetsun.com/opinions/2016/07/14/will-china-submit-to-south-china-sea-verdict|accessdate=24 July 2016|agency=Tibet Sun|date=14 July 2016}}</ref><ref name="dnaindia.com">{{cite news|title=More countries stand with China against South China Sea arbitration|url=http://www.dnaindia.com/world/report-more-countries-stand-with-china-against-south-china-sea-arbitration-2233751|accessdate=24 July 2016|agency=DNA India|date=12 July 2016}}</ref><ref name= “http://www.mofa.gov.lr/public2/index.php”>{{cite web|url=http://www.mofa.gov.lr/public2/2press.php?news_id=2136&related=7&pg=sp|title=Government Expresses Its Position on Recent Developments in the South China Sea|accessdate=|agency=Government of the Republic of Liberia|date=}}</ref>
+* {{flag|Libya}}<ref>http://epaper.southcn.com/nfdaily/html/2016-06/02/content_7552937.htm</ref>
+* {{flag|Malawi}}<ref name="tibetsun.com">{{cite news|title=Will China submit to South China Sea verdict?|url=https://www.tibetsun.com/opinions/2016/07/14/will-china-submit-to-south-china-sea-verdict|accessdate=24 July 2016|agency=Tibet Sun|date=14 July 2016}}</ref><ref name="dnaindia.com">{{cite news|title=More countries stand with China against South China Sea arbitration|url=http://www.dnaindia.com/world/report-more-countries-stand-with-china-against-south-china-sea-arbitration-2233751|accessdate=24 July 2016|agency=DNA India|date=12 July 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://english.chinamil.com.cn/news-channels/pla-daily-commentary/2016-06/17/content_7106742.htm|title=Malawian president supports China’s stance on South China Sea - China Military Online|first=Yao|last=Jianing|publisher=|accessdate=29 June 2016}}</ref>
+* {{flag|Malaysia}}<ref name="english.hani.co.kr">{{cite news|title=[Reporter’s notebook] How S. Korea squandered its diplomatic goodwill with China|url=http://english.hani.co.kr/arti/english_edition/e_international/753617.html|accessdate=24 July 2016|agency=The Hankyoreh|date=24 July 2016}}</ref>
+* {{flag|Madagascar}}<ref name= "http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/">{{cite web|title=Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Hong Lei's Regular Press Conference on July 8, 2016|url=http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/xwfw_665399/s2510_665401/2511_665403/t1378753.shtml|accessdate=|agency=Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People’s Republic of China|date=}}</ref><ref name="tibetsun.com">{{cite news|title=Will China submit to South China Sea verdict?|url=https://www.tibetsun.com/opinions/2016/07/14/will-china-submit-to-south-china-sea-verdict|accessdate=24 July 2016|agency=Tibet Sun|date=14 July 2016}}</ref><ref name="dnaindia.com">{{cite news|title=More countries stand with China against South China Sea arbitration|url=http://www.dnaindia.com/world/report-more-countries-stand-with-china-against-south-china-sea-arbitration-2233751|accessdate=24 July 2016|agency=DNA India|date=12 July 2016}}</ref><ref name= "http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/newchina/index.htm">{{cite news|title=Madagascar urges direct dialogue over South China Sea issue|url=http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2016-07/08/c_135498943.htm|accessdate=|agency=Xinhua|date=8 July 2016}}</ref>
+* {{flag|Mauritania}}<ref name="tibetsun.com">{{cite news|title=Will China submit to South China Sea verdict?|url=https://www.tibetsun.com/opinions/2016/07/14/will-china-submit-to-south-china-sea-verdict|accessdate=24 July 2016|agency=Tibet Sun|date=14 July 2016}}</ref><ref name="dnaindia.com">{{cite news|title=More countries stand with China against South China Sea arbitration|url=http://www.dnaindia.com/world/report-more-countries-stand-with-china-against-south-china-sea-arbitration-2233751|accessdate=24 July 2016|agency=DNA India|date=12 July 2016}}</ref><ref name="gabon-mauritania-venezuela" />
+* {{flag|Mongolia}}<ref name="english.hani.co.kr">{{cite news|title=[Reporter’s notebook] How S. Korea squandered its diplomatic goodwill with China|url=http://english.hani.co.kr/arti/english_edition/e_international/753617.html|accessdate=24 July 2016|agency=The Hankyoreh|date=24 July 2016}}</ref>
+* {{flag|Mozambique}}<ref name="Chinapraises" /><ref name="uk.reuters.com">{{cite web|url=http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-southchinasea-china-idUKKCN0YB1C6|title=China says more than 40 countries support its stance on South China Sea dispute|accessdate=23 July 2016|agency=Reuters|date=20 May 2016}}</ref>
 * {{flag|Myanmar}}<ref>{{cite news|title=Cambodia and Myanmar in Joint Stand on South China Sea Dispute|url=http://www.khmertimeskh.com/news/26852/cambodia-and-myanmar-in-joint--stand-on-south-china-sea-dispute/|quote=Cambodia and Myanmar completely support the negotiation for resolving the issue of the South China Sea peacefully by the claimants’ parties}}</ref>
-* {{flag|Niger}}<ref>{{cite news|title=Beijing lines up diplomatic battle groups over South China Sea|url=http://www.morningnewsusa.com/south-china-sea-ww3-china-boasts-40-countries-supporting-territorial-ambition-2378942.html}}</ref>
+* {{flag|Niger}}<ref name="uk.reuters.com">{{cite web|url=http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-southchinasea-china-idUKKCN0YB1C6|title=China says more than 40 countries support its stance on South China Sea dispute|accessdate=23 July 2016|agency=Reuters|date=20 May 2016}}</ref><ref name="morningnewsusa.com">{{cite news|title=Beijing lines up diplomatic battle groups over South China Sea|url=http://www.morningnewsusa.com/south-china-sea-ww3-china-boasts-40-countries-supporting-territorial-ambition-2378942.html}}</ref><ref name="morningnewsusa.com">{{cite news|title=Beijing lines up diplomatic battle groups over South China Sea|url=http://www.morningnewsusa.com/south-china-sea-ww3-china-boasts-40-countries-supporting-territorial-ambition-2378942.html}}</ref>
+* {{flag|Pakistan}}<ref name="english.hani.co.kr">{{cite news|title=[Reporter’s notebook] How S. Korea squandered its diplomatic goodwill with China|url=http://english.hani.co.kr/arti/english_edition/e_international/753617.html|accessdate=24 July 2016|agency=The Hankyoreh|date=24 July 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=China and Pakistan Reach Consensus on South China Sea Issue|url=http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/zxxx_662805/t1360240.shtml|accessdate=29 May 2016|publisher=Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the People's Republic of China|date=28 April 2016}}</ref>
-* {{flag|South Africa}}<ref>{{cite web|url=http://thebricspost.com/south-africa-backs-chinese-stance-on-south-china-sea-dispute/#.V3IZUHUrKkA|title=South Africa backs Chinese stance on South China Sea dispute|publisher=|accessdate=29 June 2016}}</ref>
+* {{flag|Palestine}}<ref name="xinhuanet.com"/><ref name="theguardian.com">{{cite news|title=South China Sea dispute: what you need to know about The Hague court ruling|url=https://www.theguardian.com/news/2016/jul/12/south-china-sea-dispute-what-you-need-to-know-about-the-hague-court-ruling|accessdate=24 July 2016|agency=The Guardian|date=}}</ref>
+* {{flag|Papua New Guinea}}<ref name="tibetsun.com">{{cite news|title=Will China submit to South China Sea verdict?|url=https://www.tibetsun.com/opinions/2016/07/14/will-china-submit-to-south-china-sea-verdict|accessdate=24 July 2016|agency=Tibet Sun|date=14 July 2016}}</ref><ref name="dnaindia.com">{{cite news|title=More countries stand with China against South China Sea arbitration|url=http://www.dnaindia.com/world/report-more-countries-stand-with-china-against-south-china-sea-arbitration-2233751|accessdate=24 July 2016|agency=DNA India|date=12 July 2016}}</ref><ref>http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2016-07/07/c_135496426.htm</ref>
+* {{flag|Poland}}<ref name="english.hani.co.kr">{{cite news|title=[Reporter’s notebook] How S. Korea squandered its diplomatic goodwill with China|url=http://english.hani.co.kr/arti/english_edition/e_international/753617.html|accessdate=24 July 2016|agency=The Hankyoreh|date=24 July 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=Wang Yi Holds Talks with Foreign Minister Witold Waszczykowski of Poland|url=http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/zxxx_662805/t1359199.shtml|quote=(Foreign Minister of Poland) Witold Waszczykowski said that Poland supports China’s policy of peacefully resolving disputes over some Nansha islands and reefs through dialogues and consultations.}}</ref>
+* {{flag|Qatar}}<ref name=manyarab/>
+* {{flag|Republic of Congo}}<ref>{{cite web|url=http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2016-06/22/c_135457794.htm|title=Republic of Congo calls for peaceful resolution of South China Sea dispute - Xinhua - English.news.cn|publisher=|accessdate=29 June 2016}}</ref>
+* {{flag|Russia}}<ref name="english.hani.co.kr">{{cite news|title=[Reporter’s notebook] How S. Korea squandered its diplomatic goodwill with China|url=http://english.hani.co.kr/arti/english_edition/e_international/753617.html|accessdate=24 July 2016|agency=The Hankyoreh|date=24 July 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=Russia urges solving South China Sea disputes through negotiations|url=http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2016-05/27/c_135392754.htm|accessdate=29 May 2016|agency=Xinhua|date=27 May 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=South China Sea Controversy: Russia, Beijing Call For Negotiation, Consultation To Settle Territorial Dispute|url=http://www.ibtimes.com/south-china-sea-controversy-russia-beijing-call-negotiation-consultation-settle-2355906|accessdate=23 July 2016|agency=International Business Times|date=19 April 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=Russian ambassador: Tensions in South China Sea created artificially|url=http://asiamaritime.net/russian-ambassador-tensions-in-south-china-sea-created-artificially/|accessdate=23 July 2016|agency=Asia Maritime Reviews|date=21 June 2016}}</ref>
+* {{flag|Saudi Arabia}}<ref name=manyarab/>
+* {{flag|Senegal}}<ref name="tibetsun.com">{{cite news|title=Will China submit to South China Sea verdict?|url=https://www.tibetsun.com/opinions/2016/07/14/will-china-submit-to-south-china-sea-verdict|accessdate=24 July 2016|agency=Tibet Sun|date=14 July 2016}}</ref><ref name="dnaindia.com">{{cite news|title=More countries stand with China against South China Sea arbitration|url=http://www.dnaindia.com/world/report-more-countries-stand-with-china-against-south-china-sea-arbitration-2233751|accessdate=24 July 2016|agency=DNA India|date=12 July 2016}}</ref><ref>http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/xwfw_665399/s2510_665401/2511_665403/t1379216.shtml</ref>
+* {{flag|Serbia}}<ref>{{cite web|url=http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2016-06/18/c_135447452.htm|title=China, Serbia call for settling South China Sea disputes by directly involved parties via negotiation - Xinhua - English.news.cn|publisher=|accessdate=29 June 2016}}</ref>
+* {{flag|Sierra Leone}}<ref name="xinhuanet.com1">{{cite web|url=http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2016-06/14/c_135436696.htm|title=China voices appreciation for support on South China Sea issue - Xinhua - English.news.cn|publisher=}}</ref>
+* {{flag|Slovenia}}<ref name="uk.reuters.com">{{cite web|url=http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-southchinasea-china-idUKKCN0YB1C6|title=China says more than 40 countries support its stance on South China Sea dispute|accessdate=23 July 2016|agency=Reuters|date=20 May 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Hong Lei's Regular Press Conference on May 19, 2016|url=http://www.chinaembassy.cz/cze/fyrth/t1364924.htm||quote=Kamal Shaker, Representative of the Party of Modern Centre of Slovenia who is in Beijing for the 5th China-Europe High-level Political Parties Forum, made the following statement on behalf of the ruling party and government of Slovenia when meeting the leading official of the International Department of the CPC Central Committee. He said that the Slovenian side totally understands and supports China's stance on the issue of the South China Sea arbitration, and hopes that disputes would be peacefully resolved through consultation, dialogue and negotiation.}}</ref>
+* {{flag|South Africa}}<ref name="tibetsun.com">{{cite news|title=Will China submit to South China Sea verdict?|url=https://www.tibetsun.com/opinions/2016/07/14/will-china-submit-to-south-china-sea-verdict|accessdate=24 July 2016|agency=Tibet Sun|date=14 July 2016}}</ref><ref name="dnaindia.com">{{cite news|title=More countries stand with China against South China Sea arbitration|url=http://www.dnaindia.com/world/report-more-countries-stand-with-china-against-south-china-sea-arbitration-2233751|accessdate=24 July 2016|agency=DNA India|date=12 July 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://thebricspost.com/south-africa-backs-chinese-stance-on-south-china-sea-dispute/#.V3IZUHUrKkA|title=South Africa backs Chinese stance on South China Sea dispute|publisher=|accessdate=29 June 2016}}</ref>
 * {{flag|Sri Lanka}}<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.mea.gov.lk/index.php/en/home/39-ministry-news/4642-gosl-reiterates-its-position-on-the-disputed-south-china-sea|title=GoSL reiterates its position on the disputed South China Sea|publisher=|accessdate=29 June 2016}}</ref>
+* {{flag|Sudan}}<ref name=manyarab/><ref name="news.xinhuanet.com">{{cite news|title=Sudan urges peaceful solution to conflicts in South China Sea|url=http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2016-04/28/c_135321177.htm|accessdate=29 May 2016|agency=Xinhua|date=28 May 2016}}</ref>
-* {{flag|Tajikistan}}<ref>{{cite web|url=http://kotakinabalu.china-consulate.org/eng/zgyw_4/t1366334.htm|title=Wang Yi Meets with Foreign Minister Sirojiddin Aslov of Tajikistan|publisher=}}</ref>
+* {{flag|Syria}}<ref>{{cite news|title=Syria Supports China’s Sovereignty over Its Territory in South China Sea|url=http://syriatimes.sy/index.php/don-t-miss/25238-syria-supports-china-s-sovereignty-over-its-territory-in-south-china-sea|accessdate=23 July 2016|agency=Syria Times|date=20 July 2016}}</ref>
+* {{flag|Tajikistan}}<ref name="english.hani.co.kr">{{cite news|title=[Reporter’s notebook] How S. Korea squandered its diplomatic goodwill with China|url=http://english.hani.co.kr/arti/english_edition/e_international/753617.html|accessdate=24 July 2016|agency=The Hankyoreh|date=24 July 2016}}</ref><ref>http://kotakinabalu.china-consulate.org/eng/zgyw_4/t1366334.htm</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://kotakinabalu.china-consulate.org/eng/zgyw_4/t1366334.htm|title=Wang Yi Meets with Foreign Minister Sirojiddin Aslov of Tajikistan|publisher=}}</ref>
+* {{flag|Tanzania}}<ref name="tibetsun.com">{{cite news|title=Will China submit to South China Sea verdict?|url=https://www.tibetsun.com/opinions/2016/07/14/will-china-submit-to-south-china-sea-verdict|accessdate=24 July 2016|agency=Tibet Sun|date=14 July 2016}}</ref><ref name="dnaindia.com">{{cite news|title=More countries stand with China against South China Sea arbitration|url=http://www.dnaindia.com/world/report-more-countries-stand-with-china-against-south-china-sea-arbitration-2233751|accessdate=24 July 2016|agency=DNA India|date=12 July 2016}}</ref><ref name="shanghaidaily.com"/><ref name="fmprc.gov.cn"/>
 * {{flag|Taiwan}}<ref>{{cite web|url=http://english.rti.org.tw/news/?recordId=42761|title=Taiwan rejects arbitration on South China Sea: Foreign ministry|publisher=Radio Taiwan International}}</ref>
 * {{flag|Togo}}<ref>{{cite news|title=Togo latest country to support China’s stand on South China Sea issue|url=http://english.sina.com/china/d/2016-05-19/doc-ifxsktkr5735115.shtml|accessdate=29 May 2016|work=Global Times|publisher=SINA Corporation|date=19 May 2016}}</ref>
+* {{flag|Uganda}}<ref>{{cite web|url=http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2016-05/30/c_135399658.htm|title=Uganda calls for peaceful resolution of South China Sea dispute - Xinhua - English.news.cn|publisher=}}</ref>
-* {{flag|Vanuatu}}<ref>{{cite news|title=Vanuatu supports China’s proposition on South China Sea|url=http://news.pngfacts.com/2016/05/vanuatu-supports-chinas-proposition-on.html|accessdate=29 May 2016|publisher=Papua New Guinea Today|date=26 May 2016}}</ref>
+* {{flag|United Arab Emirates}}<ref name="english.hani.co.kr">{{cite news|title=[Reporter’s notebook] How S. Korea squandered its diplomatic goodwill with China|url=http://english.hani.co.kr/arti/english_edition/e_international/753617.html|accessdate=24 July 2016|agency=The Hankyoreh|date=24 July 2016}}</ref>
+* {{flag|Uzbekistan}}<ref name="english.hani.co.kr">{{cite news|title=[Reporter’s notebook] How S. Korea squandered its diplomatic goodwill with China|url=http://english.hani.co.kr/arti/english_edition/e_international/753617.html|accessdate=24 July 2016|agency=The Hankyoreh|date=24 July 2016}}</ref>
+* {{flag|Vanuatu}}<ref name="theguardian.com">{{cite news|title=South China Sea dispute: what you need to know about The Hague court ruling|url=https://www.theguardian.com/news/2016/jul/12/south-china-sea-dispute-what-you-need-to-know-about-the-hague-court-ruling|accessdate=24 July 2016|agency=The Guardian|date=}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=Vanuatu supports China’s proposition on South China Sea|url=http://news.pngfacts.com/2016/05/vanuatu-supports-chinas-proposition-on.html|accessdate=29 May 2016|publisher=Papua New Guinea Today|date=26 May 2016}}</ref>
+* {{flag|Venezuela}}<ref name="english.hani.co.kr">{{cite news|title=[Reporter’s notebook] How S. Korea squandered its diplomatic goodwill with China|url=http://english.hani.co.kr/arti/english_edition/e_international/753617.html|accessdate=24 July 2016|agency=The Hankyoreh|date=24 July 2016}}</ref><ref name="gabon-mauritania-venezuela" />
+* {{flag|Yemen}}<ref name=manyarab/><ref name="reuters1">{{cite news|title=China says has wide support for stance on South China Sea case|url=http://www.reuters.com/article/us-southchinasea-china-idUSKCN0Y30GB|accessdate=29 May 2016|agency=Reuters|date=12 May 2016}}</ref>
+* {{flag|Zambia}}<ref name="tibetsun.com">{{cite news|title=Will China submit to South China Sea verdict?|url=https://www.tibetsun.com/opinions/2016/07/14/will-china-submit-to-south-china-sea-verdict|accessdate=24 July 2016|agency=Tibet Sun|date=14 July 2016}}</ref><ref name="dnaindia.com">{{cite news|title=More countries stand with China against South China Sea arbitration|url=http://www.dnaindia.com/world/report-more-countries-stand-with-china-against-south-china-sea-arbitration-2233751|accessdate=24 July 2016|agency=DNA India|date=12 July 2016}}</ref><ref>http://zm.chineseembassy.org/eng/sgzxdthxx/t1372037.htm</ref>
+* {{flag|Zimbabwe}}<ref name="tibetsun.com">{{cite news|title=Will China submit to South China Sea verdict?|url=https://www.tibetsun.com/opinions/2016/07/14/will-china-submit-to-south-china-sea-verdict|accessdate=24 July 2016|agency=Tibet Sun|date=14 July 2016}}</ref><ref name="dnaindia.com">{{cite news|title=More countries stand with China against South China Sea arbitration|url=http://www.dnaindia.com/world/report-more-countries-stand-with-china-against-south-china-sea-arbitration-2233751|accessdate=24 July 2016|agency=DNA India|date=12 July 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://english.cri.cn/12394/2016/06/22/3746s931609.htm|title=Zimbabwe's Mugabe Supports China's Stance on South China Sea Issue: Official|publisher=|accessdate=29 June 2016}}</ref>
 }}
 ;<sub> (Bahrain, Djibouti, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Morocco, Oman, Somalia, and Tunisia are not listed)</sub>{{clarify |date=July 2016 |reason=Do the countries in the support China's position or not? If they do, where is the source?}}

v t e Territories claimed by the Philippines
Current	Sabah / North Borneo dispute South China Sea West Philippine Sea designation PCA arbitration case Scarborough Shoal Spratly Islands dispute Philippine activities
Former	Miangas / Island of Palmas case

Revision as of 14:16, 26 July 2016

Background

Optional exceptions to applicability of compulsory procedure

Participants

Philippine stance

Chinese stance

Claimants of the South China Sea

Taiwanese stance

Vietnamese stance

Other stances

Arbitration

Hearings

Award on Jurisdiction and Admissibility

Award

Timeline

Academic analysis

Role of the arbitral tribunal

China's nine-dashed line

Claims by the Philippines

Potential ruling

Other parties

International reactions

Before the ruling

National governments

European Union

Group of Seven

North Atlantic Treaty Organization

Shanghai Cooperation Organisation

Foreign based organizations

After the ruling

National governments

United Nations

See also

References

External links