Editor's Note: Ten years after the so-called "South China Sea Arbitration Award" case, CGTN presents a special series examining China's position on the South China Sea from four perspectives. Drawing on historical evidence and insights from Chinese and international experts, the series seeks to highlight that, rather than resolving disputes, the so-called arbitration has become a poisoned legacy – fueling confrontation, distorting the application of international law, and undermining peace and stability in the region.
A decade after the Philippines unilaterally initiated the so-called South China Sea arbitration, the ripples of this legal and political farce continue to agitate regional waters. At the heart of this prolonged dispute lies a calculated cognitive warfare spearheaded by Washington and Manila – the deliberate blurring of legal definitions surrounding "islands," "rocks," and "low-tide elevations." By rewriting the textbook definition of maritime features, they have sought to hollow out China's historic rights and legitimate maritime claims.
The absurd deconstruction of 'Islands'
Under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), the classification of a maritime feature determines the rights it generates. A naturally formed area of land that remains above water at high tide and is capable of sustaining human habitation or an economic life of its own is classified as an "island," entitled to a 12-nautical-mile territorial sea, a 24-nautical-mile contiguous zone, and a 200-nautical-mile Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) and continental shelf. Conversely, "rocks" possess only a 12-nautical-mile territorial sea, while "low-tide elevations" generate no maritime rights.