The islands, for the most part uninhabitable, have never been settled (until the intrusion of recent military garrisons). The Law of the Sea is very clear: rocks that cannot sustain human habitation or an economic life of their own cannot generate exclusive economic zones or continental shelf claims.
US policy has been to stay out of the South China Sea dispute. This makes good sense. But it would be useful if the US would sign and ratify the Law of the Sea -- as all its European allies have done. Having been one of its determining forces during the long and intense negotiations that led to its adoption it dropped its zeal and interest during the Reagan years and never rediscovered it.
It is bottled up in US Senator Jesse Helms' Foreign Relations Committee and US President Bill Clinton has shown little interest in going into battle over it.
Indonesia, Philippines, Vietnam and Singapore have all ratified it. But China, partly if not wholly taking its cue -- or its excuse -- from the US, has not.
The Law of the Sea, arguably the international treaty with the least sex appeal as far as the media is concerned, is without doubt the key to ending the Spratly dispute. This would allow for a regional "common heritage" area, encouraging cooperative management of semi-enclosed seas.
Indeed, China as the country (if Taiwan is included) with the largest claim should probably have the chairmanship.
China would gain much: legitimacy for at least part of its rather weak claim and the stabilization of a dispute that it could only settle in one way or another by force, putting it in perpetual conflict with most of its neighbors.
The time to make peace is now, while there is still peace.
Jonathan Power is a syndicated columnist living in London.
RSS