‘Clarify South China Sea patrol’

McCain calls on Pentagon to explain legal intent

WASHINGTON, Nov 12, (RTRS): The chairman of the influential US Senate Armed Services committee has called on the Pentagon to clarify publicly the legal intent of a US patrol last month within 12 nautical miles of an island China has built in the South China Sea.

US officials said last week that the US Navy avoided military drills that could have further inflamed tensions with Beijing during the Oct 27 patrol by the destroyer USS Lassen in the Spratly islands, an approach experts said could reinforce rather than challenge China’s sovereignty claims.

Senator John McCain, the Republican head of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said in a Nov 9 letter to US Defense Secretary Ash Carter it was vital there should be no misunderstanding about US objectives.

“I believe it is critical that the Department of Defense publicly clarify ... the legal intent behind this operation and any future operations of a similar nature,” McCain wrote in the letter seen by Reuters on Wednesday.

Washington argues that islands China has built up in the South China Sea are not entitled to a territorial limit under international law as they used to be under water at high tide.

China reacted angrily to the patrol near Subi Reef, which followed months of US preparation, despite its lack of military drills.

But analysts said that if the Lassen failed to conduct military drills, the operation would have resembled what is known as “innocent passage,” and could have reinforced China’s claim to a territorial limit around the reef.

McCain called on Carter to clarify what excessive claims the Lassen was intending to challenge and whether the warship operated under the rules of innocent passage.

Innocent passage occurs when a ship quickly transits another country’s territorial waters, and can only take place in waters belonging to another country.

Pentagon officials have given conflicting descriptions of the Lassen’s maneuver.

A US official speaking to Reuters at the time described it as an “innocentpassage” operation but later said that had been a mistake.

Pentagon spokesman Captain Jeff Davis said on Nov 4 the patrol was not an “innocent passage,” but when pressed further the following day, he declined to explicitly restate that position or elaborate.

Respond

The Pentagon has yet to respond to McCain’s letter, a spokesman said.

Meanwhile, Indonesia has asked China to clarify its claims over the South China Sea but has yet to receive a response, the Foreign Ministry said on Thursday, a day after Indonesia’s security chief said Jakarta could take Beijing to court over an island dispute.

Beijing’s claim to almost the entire resource-rich sea is shown on Chinese maps with a nine-dash line that stretches deep into the maritime heart of Southeast Asia. Vietnam, the Philippines, Taiwan, Malaysia and Brunei also claim parts of the waterway.

Last year, the Indonesian armed forces chief accused China of including parts of the Indonesian-ruled Natuna islands within the nine-dash line.

Indonesian President Joko Widodo’s administration departed from its usual low-profile role in the dispute on Wednesday when security chief Luhut Panjaitan said Jakarta could take China to an international court if dialogue over the islands failed. But China said on Thursday it did not dispute Indonesia’s claim to the Natunas.

“The position of Indonesia is clear at this stage that we do not recognise the nine-dash line because it is not in line with ... international law,” Indonesian Foreign Ministry spokesman Armanatha Nasir told reporters.

“We asked for clarification on what they mean and what they mean by the nine-dash line. That has not been clarified.”

Nasir could not say when the request through diplomatic channels was made to China.

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei said China did not dispute Indonesia’s sovereignty over the Natunas but that there were “some maritime disputes”. It was not clear what disputes he was referring to.

“We have consistently upheld that China and Indonesia should find a means of appropriate resolution through direct negotiations and consultation, with respect for international law and on the basis of historical fact,” Hong said.

Refuses

The Philippines has taken China to the Permanent Court of Arbitration in the Hague, a case Beijing refuses to recognise. For years, China has insisted that disputes with rival claimants be handled bilaterally.

When asked if Indonesia could also take China to court, as Panjaitan had said, Nasir responded: “We cannot preempt things before we know how they evolve. But what is clear is that we are not a claimant state and we don’t recognise the issue of the nine-dash line, which we have made clear to China.”

Regional leaders are expected to discuss the issue at the meeting of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) later this month.

Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi said the Philippines’ case against China at an arbitration tribunal over rival claims in the South China Sea had strained relations and that it was up to the Philippines to heal the rift.

Beijing’s claim to almost the entire South China Sea is shown on Chinese maps with a nine-dash line that stretches deep into the maritime heart of Southeast Asia. Vietnam, the Philippines, Taiwan, Malaysia and Brunei also claim parts of the waterway.

The arbitration case against China in the Hague “is a knot that has impeded the improvement and development of Sino-Philippine relations”, a statement on the Foreign Ministry’s website cited Wang as saying in Manila.

“We do not want this knot to become tighter and tighter, so that it even becomes a dead knot,” Wang told reporters. “As for how to loosen or open the knot, (we’ll) have to look at the Philippines.”

The nine-dash line also includes parts of the Indonesian-held Natuna islands and Jakarta, which has kept a low profile in the dispute, could take China to the “International Criminal Court” if Beijing’s claim was not resolved through dialogue, Indonesia’s security chief, Luhut Panjaitan, told reporters on Wednesday.

Although he specified the International Criminal Court, which deals with war crimes, it would appear he meant an international tribunal such as the Permanent Court of Arbitration.

For years, China has insisted that disputes with rival claimants be handled bilaterally.