Jump to content

Scarborough Shoal

Coordinates: 15°11′N 117°46′E / 15.183°N 117.767°E / 15.183; 117.767
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 121.54.29.68 (talk) at 23:50, 27 February 2014. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Scarborough Shoal
Map
Other namesScarborough Reef
Bajo de Masinloc
Huangyan Island
Minzhu Jiao
Panatag Shoal
Panacot Shoal
Geography
LocationSouth China Sea
Coordinates15°11′N 117°46′E / 15.183°N 117.767°E / 15.183; 117.767
Archipelagoland area: a few hectares or less at high tide; water area: about 150 km2 (58 sq mi)
Administration
People's Republic of China
Demographics
Populationnone

Scarborough Shoal or Scarborough Reef,[1] also known as Huangyan Island[2] (simplified Chinese: 黄岩岛; traditional Chinese: 黃岩島; pinyin: Huángyán Dǎo), Bajo de Masinloc[3] or Panatag Shoal[4] (Filipino: Kulumpol ng Panatag), is a shoal located between the Macclesfield Bank and Luzon island in the Philippines in the South China Sea.

It is a disputed territory claimed by the People's Republic of China, Republic of China (Taiwan), and the Philippines. The shoal's status is often discussed in conjunction with other territorial disputes in the South China Sea such as those involving the Spratly Islands or the Paracel Islands. Since the 2012 Scarborough Shoal standoff, access to the territory has been restricted by the People's Republic of China.[5]

The shoal was named after the East India Company tea-trade ship Scarborough which was wrecked on one of its rocks on September 12, 1784 with all lives lost.[6][7]

Geography

South China Sea

Scarborough Shoal forms a triangle-shaped chain of reefs and rocks with a circumference of 46 km (29 mi). Its total area, including an inner lagoon, is 150 km2 (58 sq mi). The shoal's highest point, South Rock, measures 1.8 m (5.9 ft) above water during high tide. Located north of it is a channel, approximately 370 m (1,214 ft) wide and 9–11 m (30–36 ft) deep, leading into the lagoon. Several other coral rocks encircle the lagoon, forming a large atoll.[1]

The shoal is about 198 kilometres (123 mi) west of Subic Bay. To the east of the shoal is the 5,000–6,000 m (16,000–20,000 ft) deep Manila Trench. The nearest landmass is Palauig, Zambales on Luzon island in the Philippines, 220 km (137 mi) due east.

Activities in the surrounding area

The shoal and its surrounding area are rich fishing grounds.

There are thick layers of guano lying on the rocks in the area. Several diving excursions and amateur radio operations, DX-peditions (1994, 1995, 1997 and 2007), have been carried out in the area.[8]

Sovereignty dispute

Claims by China and Taiwan

Map depicting China's territory in South China Sea, with Scarborough Shoal depicted within its U-shape line, by the Republic of China's Ministry of the Interior, 1947

China conducted astronomical and geographical surveys of the South China Sea,including Huangyan Island, in the 13th century during the Yuan Dynasty. It shows that China discovered and exploited Huangyan Island in the Yuan Dynasty.

In 1935, the Lands and Waters Mapping Review Committee of the then Chinese government approved and publicized the geographical names of 132 islands, shoals, reefs and sand bars in the South China Sea, and Huangyan Island, with the name of Scarborough Shoal was included in the list as part of the Zhongsha Islands of the Chinese territory. In 1947, the Department of Territory of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Chinese government approved and publicized the geographical names of 172 islands in the South China Sea, including Huangyan Island which was then named Minzhu Jiao in Chinese as part of the Zhongsha Islands. In the early 1980s, the Chinese government conducted a survey on island names in the South China Sea. In 1983, China Committee on Geographical Names was authorized to publicize a list of geographic names of some South China Sea islands, which used Huangyan Island as the standard name of the island, with Minzhu Jiao as an alternative name.

Huangyan Island and its surrounding waters have been China's traditional fishing grounds since ancient times. Chinese fishermen have engaged in fishery activities for generations. In addition, they have used Huangyan Island as a safe haven in their voyage in the South China Sea. Genglubu, an ancient Chinese navigation log recording trips in the South China Sea, and other ancient documents and literature contain complete records of Chinese fishermen's activities around Huangyan Island. Since the Yuan Dynasty, the Chinese people have never stopped developing and exploiting Huangyan Island and its surrounding waters and the Chinese government has exercised effective management and jurisdiction over their activities all these years. These historical facts are supported by official documents, local chronicles and official maps in the past centuries.

The Chinese government has also sent out scientific expedition teams to Huangyan Island on many occasions. For instance, scientists of South China Sea Institute of Oceanology of the Chinese Academy of Sciences landed on Huangyan Island for research activities in October 1977 and June 1978 respectively. The South China Sea Branch of the State Oceanic Administration organized a comprehensive survey on Huangyan Island in April 1985. The Chinese South China Sea Scientific Expedition Team stepped onto Huangyan Island for scientific research and erected a one-meter-high cement monument in 1994. The relevant department of the Chinese government approved the application by radio amateurs to embark on Huangyan Island for radio exploration activities in 1994, 1995, 1997 and 2007 respectively.

Among the 132 islands, shoals, reefs and sand bars in the South China Sea in the list of geographical names approved and publicized by the Water and Land Mapping Review Committee of the Chinese government in 1935, Huangyan Island was listed as part of the Zhongsha Islands. The committee subsequently issued the Map of China's Islands in the South China Sea and included Huangyan Island into China's territory. The Internal Affairs Ministry of the Chinese government produced a Location Map of the South China Sea Islands in 1947,in which the geographical names of the Dongsha, Xisha, Zhongsha and Nansha islands were clearly marked, together with 172 islands, shoals, reefs and sand bars. Huangyan Island, then named Minzhu Jiao, was marked as part of the Zhongsha Islands. In 1948, this Location Map was officially publicized by the Internal Affairs Ministry of the Chinese government as an appendix to the Administrative Map of the Republic of China.

After the founding of the People's Republic of China in 1949, China has continued to exercise sovereignty over Huangyan Island. Chinese Foreign Minister Zhou Enlai, in his 1951 statement on the US and UK's draft peace treaty with Japan and the San Francisco Conference, explicitly stated the following: " The Xisha Islands and Nanwei Island, just like the Nansha, Zhongsha and Dongsha islands, have always been China's territory. Although they had been occupied by Japan for some time during the war of aggression waged by Japanese imperialists, they were all taken back by the then Chinese government following Japan's surrender." Therefore, Huangyan Island as part of the Zhongsha Islands indisputably belongs to China. China issued the Statement of the People's Republic of China on the Territorial Sea in 1958,in which China reaffirmed its sovereignty over the Dongsha, Xisha, Zhongsha and Nansha islands. In 1959, the Office for Xisha, Nansha and Zhongsha Islands' Affairs under the government of Guangdong Province, was opened by the Chinese government on the Yongxing Island, which is a part of the Xisha Islands. The office became a part of the government of the newly-established Hainan Province in 1988.

In the early 1980s, the Chinese government conducted a survey of the geographical names of the Nanhai Islands. In 1983, the Committee on Geographical Names of China was authorized to publicize the geographical names of selected islands in the South China Sea, in which Huangyan Island was included as the standard name and Minzhu Jiao as its alternative name. The Law of the People's Republic of China on the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone publicized in 1992 has explicitly provided in article 2 that " The land territory of the People's Republic of China includes the mainland of the People's Republic of China and its coastal islands; Taiwan and all islands appertaining there to including the Diaoyu Islands; the Penghu Islands; the Dongsha Islands; the Xisha Islands; the Zhongsha Islands and the Nansha Islands; as well as all the other islands belonging to the People's Republic of China." Once again, China reaffirmed its sovereignty over the islands in the South China Sea, including Huangyan Island. It needs to be mentioned that not any country has ever opposed or disputed China's sovereignty over Huangyan Island.

Before 1997, the Philippines had never claimed sovereignty over Huangyan Island. In fact, the composition and scope of the Philippine territory was clearly determined by a series of international treaties. The "Treaty of Paris between Spain and the United States" in 1898, the "Treaty of Washington between Spain and the United States" in 1900 and the "Anglo-American Treaty" in 1930 had clearly defined that 118 degrees east longitude is the western limit of Philippine territory. The Huangyan Island is outside it. After the Second World War, the Philippines signed a series of treaties and agreements with the US, which have all reiterated the legal effect of the above-mentioned three treaties. The Act 3046 set by Philippines about its territorial sea baseline in 1961 and the amendment of the territorial sea baseline by Philippines in 1968 have both clearly reaffirmed that 118 degree east longitude is the western limit of the Philippine territory and Huangyan Island is not a base point of the Philippine territorial sea baseline.

The Philippines officially and explicitly stated that Huangyan Island did not belong to the Philippines. For instance, the former Philippine ambassador to Germany stated clearly in his letter to German radio amateurs on 5 February 1990 that "Huangyan Island is not within the territory of the Philippines according to the National Mapping and Resource Information Authority of the Philippines (NAMRIA)." Both the official document issued by NAMRIA dated 18 October 1994 and a document from the Philippine Amateur Radio Association to the American Radio Relay League dated on 18 November 1994 made it clear that "the territorial boundary and sovereignty of the Philippines were provided for in Article 3 of the Treaty of Paris between the US and Spain on 10 December 1898 with Huangyan Island outside the Philippine territory."[9][10]

Claim by the Philippines

1774 map of the Philippine Islands depicting Scarborough Shoal as Panacot Shoal

In Comparison with China’s claim, the claim made by the Philippines is rather new. This was acknowledged by the Philippine Foreign Affairs Secretary Domingo Siazon when he delivered a statement on the Scarborough Reef in a public hearing of the Senate Foreign Relations and Defense Committees on 5 June 1997, saying that “Scarborough Shoal is a new issue on overlapping claims between the Philippines and China”. Historically, the Philippines had no territorial claim to Scarborough Reef. Even in a 1978 map which was published by the Philippine National Mapping and Resource Information Authority, Scarborough Reef was not marked as Philippine territory.[11]

The Philippines states that its assertion of sovereignty over the shoal is based on the juridical criteria established by public international law on the lawful methods for the acquisition of sovereignty. Among the criteria (effective occupation, cession, prescription, conquest, and accretion), the Philippine Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) has asserted that the country exercised both effective occupation and effective jurisdiction over the shoal, which it terms Bajo de Masinloc, since its independence. Thus, it claims to have erected flags in some islands and a lighthouse which it reported to the International Maritime Organization. It also asserts that the Philippine and US Naval Forces have used it as impact range and that its Department of Environment and Natural Resources has conducted scientific, topographic and marine studies in the shoal, while Filipino fishermen regularly use it as fishing ground and have always considered it their own.[12]

The DFA also claims that the name Bajo de Masinloc (translated as "under Masinloc") itself identifies the shoal as a particular political subdivision of the Philippine Province of Zambales, known as Masinloc.[12] As basis, the Philippines cites the Island of Palmas Case, where the sovereignty of the island was adjudged by the international court in favor of the Netherlands because of its effective jurisdiction and control over the island despite the historic claim of Spain. Thus, the Philippines argues that the historic claim of China over the Scarborough Shoal still needs to be substantiated by a historic title, since a claim by itself is not among the internationally recognized legal basis for acquiring sovereignty over territory.

It also asserts that there is no indication that the international community has acquiesced to China's historical claim, and that the activity of fishing of private Chinese individuals, claimed to be a traditional exercise among these waters, does not constitute a sovereign act of the Chinese state.[13]

The Philippine government argues that since the legal basis of its claim is based on the international law on acquisition of sovereignty, the Exclusive Economic Zone claim on the waters around Scarborough is different from the sovereignty exercised by the Philippines in the shoal.[12][14]

The Philippine government has proposed taking the dispute to the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) as provided in Part XV of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, but the Chinese government has rejected this, insisting on bilateral discussions.[15][16][17]

The Philippines also claims that as early as the Spanish colonization of the Philippines, Filipino fishermen were already using the area as a traditional fishing ground and shelter during bad weather.[18]

Several official Philippine maps published by Spain and United States in 18th and 20th centuries show Scarborough Shoal as Philippine territory. The 18th-century map "Carta hydrographica y chorographica de las Islas Filipinas" (1734) shows the Scarborough Shoal then was named as Panacot Shoal. The map also shows the shape of the shoal as consistent with the current maps available as today. During the 1900s, Mapa General, Islas Filipinas, Observatorio de Manila, and US Coast and Geodetic Survey Map include the Scarborough Shoal named as "Baju De Masinloc."[19] In 1792, another map drawn by the Malaspina expedition and published in 1808 in Madrid, Spain also showed Bajo de Masinloc as part of Philippine territory. The map showed the route of the Malaspina expedition to and around the shoal. It was reproduced in the Atlas of the 1939 Philippine Census, which was published in Manila a year later and predates the controversial 1947 Chinese South China Sea Claim Map that shows no Chinese name on it.[20] Another topographic map drawn in 1820 shows the shoal, named there as "Bajo Scarburo," as a constituent part of Sambalez (Zambales province).[21]

In 1957, the Philippine government conducted an oceanographic survey of the area and together with the US Navy force based in then U.S. Naval Base Subic Bay in Zambales, used the area as an impact range for defense purposes. An 8.3 meter high flag pole flying a Philippine flag was raised in 1965. An iron tower that was to serve as a small lighthouse was also built and operated the same year.[22][23] In 1992, the Philippine Navy rehabilitated the lighthouse and reported it to the International Maritime Organization for publication in the List of Lights. As of 2009, the military-maintained lighthouse is non-operational.[24]

Territorial map claimed by the Philippines, showing internal waters, territorial sea, international treaty limits and exclusive economic zone.

The 1900 Treaty of Washington provided that any and all islands belonging to the Philippine archipelago, lying outside the lines described in Article III of the Treaty of Paris, were also ceded to the United States. This included Scarborough Shoal, which is outside the Treaty of Paris treaty lines. In effect, the Treaty of Washington amended the Treaty of Paris, so that the islands ceded by Spain to the U.S. included islands within and outside the Treaty of Paris treaty lines, so long as Spain had title or claim of title to the islands.

The DFA asserts that the basis of Philippine sovereignty and jurisdiction over the rock features of Bajo de Masinloc are not premised on the cession by Spain of the Philippine archipelago to the United States under the Treaty of Paris, and argues that the matter that the rock features of Bajo de Masinloc are not included or within the limits of the Treaty of Paris as alleged by China is therefore immaterial and of no consequence.[12][14]

President Ferdinand Marcos, by virtue of the Presidential Decree No. 1596 issued on June 11, 1978 asserted that islands designated as the Kalayaan Island Group and comprising most of the Spratly Islands are subject to the sovereignty of the Philippines,[25] and by virtue of the Presidential Decree No. 1599 issued on June 11, 1978 claimed an Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) up to 200 nautical miles (370 km) from the baselines from which their territorial sea is measured.[26]

The Philippines first had a bilateral dispute with China over the shoal on April 30, 1997 when Filipino naval ships prevented Chinese boats from approaching the shoal.[1]

In 2009, President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo enacted the Philippine Baselines Law of 2009 (RA 9522). The new law classified the Kalayaan Island Group and the Scarborough Shoal as a regime of islands under the Republic of the Philippines.[3][27]

See also

Maritime claims in the South China Sea

Other East Asian island disputes

References

  1. ^ a b c Zou, Keyuan (1999). "Scarborough Reef: a new flashpoint in Sino-Philippine relations?" (PDF). IBRU Boundary & Security Bulletin, University of Durham. 7 (2): 11.
  2. ^ Johanson, Mark (September 17, 2012). "Senkaku Islands Dispute May Hurt Japan's Recovering Tourism Industry". International Business Times. Retrieved February 15, 2014.
  3. ^ a b "An Act to amend certain provisions of Republic Act No. 3046, as amended by Republic Act No. 5446, to define the archipelagic baselines of the Philippines and for other purposes". Official Gazette (Philippines). March 12, 2009. Retrieved February 15, 2014.
  4. ^ Aning, Jerome (May 7, 2012). "Manila seeks to 'lay claim' over Huangyan with new name". Sina. Retrieved February 15, 2014.
  5. ^ Tordesillas, Ellen (January 21, 2013). "Chinese 'occupation' of Bajo de Masinloc could reduce PH territorial waters by 38 percent". VERA Files. ABS-CBN News and Current Affairs. Retrieved February 15, 2014.
  6. ^ Richard Bayly (Colonel.) (1896). Diary of Colonel Bayly, 12th Regiment, 1796-1830. Naval & Military Press. p. 108.
  7. ^ Various (1801). The Oriental Navigator: Or, New Directions for Sailing to and from the East Indies, China, New Holland &c. London UK, Laurie and Whittle. p. 454
  8. ^ 陈若冰, 21 April 2012, 中国与菲律宾中沙黄岩岛之争 (The dispute between China and the Philippines over Zhongsha Huangyan Island), Sohu News. (English translation of original Chinese text available here.)
  9. ^ http://ph.china-embassy.org/eng/xwfb/t941672.htm
  10. ^ http://ph.china-embassy.org/eng/xwfb/t939694.htm
  11. ^ Law of the Sea in East Asia: Issues and Prospects, Keyuan Zou, 2005, Univ. of Singapore. pg 58
  12. ^ a b c d Philippine Position on Bajo de Masinloc and the Waters Within its Vicinity (18 April 2012), The Department of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of the Philippines.
  13. ^ "Philippine Position on Bajo de Masinloc and the Waters Within its Vicinity". April 18, 2012.
  14. ^ a b PH sovereignty based on Unclos, principles of international law (20 April 2012), The Department of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of the Philippines (as reported by globalnation.inquirer.net).
  15. ^ "China deploys gunboat". Philippine Daily Inquirer. April 20, 2012.
  16. ^ Fr. Joaquin G. Bernas S. J. (April 22, 2012). "Scarborough Shoal". Philippine Daily Inquirer.
  17. ^ PART XV : SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES, UNITED NATIONS CONVENTION ON THE LAW OF THE SEA : AGREEMENT RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF PART XI OF THE CONVENTION, The United Nations.
  18. ^ Zou 2005, pp. 64–65.
  19. ^ In a Troubled Sea: Reed Bank, Kalayaan, Lumbay, Galit, and Panacot - Yahoo! News Philippines
  20. ^ ‘Panatag Shoal ours since 1734’ | Top Stories
  21. ^ "Scarborough belongs to PH, old maps show". Philippine Daily Inquirer. April 23, 2012.
  22. ^ "In The Know: The Scarborough Shoal". Philippine Daily Inquirer. April 12, 2012. Retrieved June 12, 2012.
  23. ^ What’s become of the MMDA?[dead link], Philippine Star, 2 April 2008
  24. ^ COAST GUARD DISTRICT NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION - CENTRAL LUZON LIGHTSTATIONS (archived from the original on 2010-01-16)
  25. ^ "PRESIDENTIAL DECREE NO. 1596 - DECLARING CERTAIN AREA PART OF THE PHILIPPINE TERRITORY AND PROVIDING FOR THEIR GOVERNMENT AND ADMINISTRATION". Chan Robles Law Library. June 11, 1978.
  26. ^ "PRESIDENTIAL DECREE No. 1599 ESTABLISHING AN EXCLUSIVE ECONOMIC ZONE AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES". Chan Robles Law Library. June 11, 1978.
  27. ^ Philippine Baselines Law of 2009 (March 11, 2009), GMA News.

Further reading

Template:Sansha

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Scarborough_Shoal&oldid=597448375"