Philippines wins case vs China

(UPDATED) This ruling by an arbitral tribunal in The Hague, Netherlands, on the maritime dispute on the West Philippine Sea comes after a 3-year process pursued by Manila but snubbed by Beijing.

MANILA, Philippines (3rd UPDATE) – The Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) on Tuesday, July 12, said an arbitral tribunal has ruled in favor of the Philippines in its historic case against China over the West Philippine Sea (South China Sea).

"[The] Tribunal concluded that, as between the Philippines and China, there was no legal basis for China to claim historic rights to resources, in excess of the rights provided for by the Convention, within the sea areas falling within the ‘nine-dash line’," a press release from the PCA said.

According to the tribunal, "all of the high-tide features in the Spratly Islands (including, for example, Itu Aba, Thitu, West York Island, Spratly Island, North-East Cay, South-West Cay) are legally “rocks” that do not generate an exclusive economic zone or continental shelf." (READ: FAST FACTS: South China Sea dispute)

In a statement, Philippine Foreign Secretary Perfecto Yasay Jr said the Philippines “welcomes” the award from The Hague.

“Our experts are studying the Award with the care and thoroughness that this significant arbitral outcome deserves. In the meantime, we call on all those concerned to exercise restraint and sobriety,” Yasay said.

Yasay added that the Philippines "strongly affirms its respect for this milestone decision" to help address disputes in the South China Sea.

"The decision upholds international law, particularly the 1982 [UN Convention on the Law of the Sea]," he said.

Key findings

The 501-page document was uploaded shortly after 11 am The Hague time (5 pm Manila time), and was accompanied by a shorter, 11-page press release summarizing key parts of the award.

The tribunal had the following key rulings:

The so-called "9-dash line" is invalid: "The Tribunal concluded that there was no legal basis for China to claim historic rights to resources within the sea areas falling within the 'nine-dash-line'".

Reclaimed islands have no exclusive economic zone: "The Tribunal noted that the current presence of official personnel on many of the features is dependent on outside support and not reflective of the capacity of the features... (and) ....that none of the Spratly Islands is capable of generating extended maritime zones.

"The Tribunal found that it could – without delimiting a boundary – declare that certain sea areas are within the exclusive economic zone of the Philippines, because those areas are not overlapped by any possible entitlement of China."

China has behaved unlawfully: "China had violated the Philippines' sovereign rights in its exclusive economic zone. The Tribunal further held that Chinese law-enforcement vessels had unlawfully created a serious risk of collision when they physically obstructed Philippine vessels."

Beijing has damaged the environment: China's large-scale land reclamation has "caused severe harm to the coral reef environment and violated its obligation to preserve and protect fragile ecosystems".

Island building should have stopped during the dispute process: The panel said it had no jurisdiction over the military standoff at Second Thomas Shoal, where Chinese and Philippine military and law enforcement vessels are locked in confrontation.

However, "China's recent large-scale reclamation and construction of artificial islands was incompatible with the obligations on a state during dispute resolution proceedings, insofar as China has... destroyed evidence of the natural condition of features of the South China Sea that formed part of the Parties' dispute."

Three-year process

This ruling by an arbitral tribunal in The Hague, Netherlands, comes after a 3-year process pursued by Manila but snubbed by Beijing.

The Philippines made the following moves in pursuing the case for the past 3 years:

• Filing a case against China on January 22, 2013

• Submitting a 4,000-page pleading or memorial on March 30, 2014

• Submitting a 3,000-page supplemental memorial on March 17, 2015

• Appearing before the arbitral tribunal in The Hague from July 7-13, 2015, to argue that the tribunal has the right to hear the Philippines’ case

• Returning to The Hague to discuss the merits of its case against China from November 24-30, 2015

President-elect Rodrigo Duterte said he wanted to wait for this ruling before deciding on the Philippines’ next moves in the sea dispute.

Incoming Foreign Secretary Perfecto Yasay Jr said he is open to bilateral or one-on-one talks with China after the tribunal releases its ruling. – With reports from Agence France-Presse / Rappler.com

PH vs China: Which countries support Beijing?

Most of China’s 8 public supporters come from Africa, a continent to which China has pledged billions of dollars in aid

MANILA, Philippines – China says nearly 60 countries support its opposition to the case filed by the Philippines over the West Philippine Sea (South China Sea). But an independent think tank says otherwise – only 8 countries publicly do.

Gregory Poling, director of the Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative (AMTI), told Rappler that China is trying to project "that it has far more explicit support than it actually does."

On top of this supposedly bloated figure, most of China’s public supporters come from Africa, a continent to which China has pledged billions of dollars in aid.

In its Arbitration Support Tracker, the AMTI of the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) listed the following as countries publicly supporting China's position:

• Afghanistan
• Gambia
• Kenya
• Lesotho
• Niger
• Sudan
• Togo
• Vanuatu

This is based on data as of Saturday, July 9.

Six of these 8 countries (Gambia, Kenya, Lesotho, Niger, Sudan, and Togo) are in Africa.

The AMTI said these countries publicly support China’s position which regards as "illegitimate" the arbitral tribunal handling Manila’s case against Beijing.

China: More African supporters

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei on Friday, July 8, said more African countries have publicly supported China's position.

He said that "the government of the Central African Republic, the government of Madagascar, the Prime Minister of Guinea-Bissau, the foreign ministry of Zimbabwe, the foreign ministry of Angola, and the foreign minister of Liberia" have also "made statements and endorsed China’s position on the South China Sea issue."

Hong said on Friday: "To date, more than 30 African countries have expressed their explicit support to China’s position through various channels, for which we would like to express our high appreciation."

"It also stands as a strong proof that standing for justice and objectiveness and upholding international rule of law is the mainstream of the international community. The arbitral tribunal and its ruling will not gain popular support and will only prove to be delusional," the Chinese foreign ministry spokesman said.

The additional countries mentioned by Hong have not been reflected in the AMTI's database as of Saturday.

The Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague, Netherlands, is set to announce the tribunal’s ruling on Tuesday, July 12.

Same arguments, same words

While waiting for this ruling, China’s supporters have separately issued strong statements against the Philippine case in The Hague.

They echoed China’s position, sometimes even using the same words.

Gambia, for one, said the tribunal in The Hague "has no jurisdiction in pronouncing a verdict on maritime boundaries in the South China Sea."

By saying this, Gambia reiterated China’s strongest argument: that the tribunal in The Hague has no right to hear the Philippines' case. The tribunal rejected this argument in October 2015, handing the Philippines a round one victory in the arbitral proceedings.

Kenya, for its part, said that "disputes over the South China Sea should be peacefully resolved through consultations and negotiations in accordance with bilateral agreements and the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea."

Curiously, Lesotho said the same thing, with roughly the same phrasing: that "disputes in the South China Sea should be resolved peacefully through friendly consultations and negotiations, in accordance with bilateral agreements and the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea by parties directly concerned."

Part of 'PR campaign'

Experts, however, downplay the support of these countries.

For Poling, Beijing’s claim that it has almost 60 supporters is part of "a public relations campaign to try to deflect the reputational cost it will suffer after the ruling" on July 12.

Of the countries reportedly supporting China, Poling said only 8 "have actually done so in public."

Most others "have said only vague niceties about peacefully resolving disputes or engaging in consultation." He said this is "something that either Manila or Washington would probably agree with."

Poling added, "Most of those supporting China’s position on the arbitration are heavily dependent on Chinese aid and investment, and many are small or land-locked, making them less invested in the regime of international maritime law."

Poling also pointed out that most countries supporting China "rank low on indices like Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index and Freedom House’s Freedom in the World Index."

"In other words, there is a correlation between respect for rule of law at home and support for this arbitration and international law more broadly," Poling said. This simply means that the higher the respect for rule of law at home is, the higher the support for arbitration is, too.

China’s 8 supporters have the following rankings in the Corruption Perceptions Index in 2015. In these cases, the higher the number, the higher the perception of corruption:

• Afghanistan – 166
• Gambia – 123
• Kenya – 139
• Lesotho – 61
• Niger – 99
• Sudan – 165
• Togo – 107
• Vanuatu – N/A

US, UK support ruling

On the other hand, Poling said, those supporting the Philippine case have higher rankings in the indices he cited, meaning, they are perceived to be less corrupt.

The AMTI Arbitration Tracker said 40 countries "have voiced support for the arbitral proceedings, said the award will be legally binding, and/or called on China and the Philippines to respect it."

The AMTI Arbitration Tracker listed the following countries as "publicly supporting" the upcoming ruling as binding:

• Albania
• Australia
• Austria
• Belgium
• Bosnia and Herzegovina
• Botswana
• Bulgaria
• Canada
• Croatia
• Cyprus
• Czech Republic
• Denmark
• Estonia
• Finland
• France
• Germany
• Greece
• Hungary
• Ireland
• Italy
• Japan
• Latvia
• Liechtenstein
• Lithuania
• Luxembourg
• Malta
• Moldova
• Montenegro
• Netherlands
• New Zealand
• Poland
• Portugal
• Romania
• Slovakia
• Slovenia
• Spain
• Sweden
• United Kingdom
• United States
• Vietnam

Supporters of the upcoming ruling include 7 countries in the Top 10 of Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index for 2015. They are seen as relatively "clean" countries.

Ruling 'the most important thing'

Lionel Jensen, an Asian studies expert from the University of Notre Dame, agreed that majority of the countries supporting China "are largely undemocratic in their political conditions."

In an interview on Thursday, July 7, Jensen added, "I think Africa has had a unique degree of indebtedness to China in recent years." (Watch the video below)

source:  Rappler

Carpio says president who shares West PH Sea with China should be impeached

Supreme Court Justice Antonio Carpio on Thursday, Nov. 5, 2015, said a president who would think of splitting the West Philippine Sea into two and share it with China will surely be impeached.

In a forum on the maritime and territorial dispute, Carpio said it would be an impeachable offense to split the sea and go against the Constitution.

“Why don’t we just cooperate with China? If the bully goes to your house, and say, ‘get out,’ and you have the title of your house, but because he’s a bully and you’re a small guy, will you just tell him, ‘Okay, I’ll give you one half of the house?’ The UNCLOS grants us 200 nautical miles, the same with China,” Carpio said.

The Associate Justice was referring to the international law that governs maritime disputes and grants a country 200 nautical miles of exclusive economic zone.

“We have an agreement (under UNCLOS). China is saying we are entitled to 200 nautical miles but we’re claiming the rest of the South China Sea because of historic right. They cannot do that anymore… Fifty-fifty na lang? It would be unconstitutional.  A person who would do that would be impeached,” he added.

It seems like a “patama” to Vice President Jejomar Binay, who remains the only presidential aspirant who espoused a “joint venture” with China to explore the oil and gas of the contested waters.

Binay has said he is open to opening bilateral talks and that a small country like the Philippines needs China’s capital.

Carpio said any such presidency which would withdraw the case before the International Arbitration Tribunal just because it wants to talk with China is a catastrophe.

“I think the case would be decided before the next president assumes office. In the event it would not be decided, and there’s a new president, the UNCLOS itself encourages parties to come to an amicable settlement even while the case is going on,” Carpio said.

“If a new president comes in and the case is still going on, there is nothing wrong with talking to China. What is wrong is if the case is withdrawn. It should not be withdrawn… If the president will withdraw the case because we’re willing to talk with China, that would be catastrophic,” he added.

Carpio also lauded the tribunal’s latest decision to take jurisdiction of the case, and that the arbitration court even ignored the ancient nine-dash line, China’s strongest evidence to show that it owns the waters within the said boundary based on historic rights.

source:  Politiko

China's president talks tough ahead of tribunal ruling

China will never compromise on sovereignty, President Xi Jinping said Friday ahead of an international tribunal ruling over Beijing's maritime claims, as he celebrated the Communist Party's 95th anniversary.

The ruling party must maintain absolute power in the country, strengthen its military and establish a greater role in world leadership, Xi told serried ranks of top officials in Beijing’s Great Hall of the People, to rapturous applause.

"No foreign country... should expect us to swallow the bitter pill of harm to our national sovereignty, security or development interests," Xi said, adding: "We are not afraid of trouble.”

His remarks come as regional tensions rise over Beijing's claims to nearly all of the South China Sea, with the US sending naval patrols close to artificial islands Beijing has built in the disputed waters.

Xi took an apparent stab at the US, saying: "We will not show up at other people's front doors to flex our muscles. That does not show strength or scare anyone."

An international tribunal in The Hague will rule on July 12 in a case brought by the Philippines challenging China's claims in the strategic waterway.

Beijing insists that the Permanent Court of Arbitration has no jurisdiction over the issue and has boycotted the proceedings.

Since assuming the party's top post in 2012, Xi has rapidly consolidated power while overseeing a more assertive foreign policy and a tighter authoritarian stance at home.

- Chinese wisdom -

In his speech, Xi heaped praise on the ruling party and vowed to maintain the country's centralised Communist-led political system.

"All party comrades must remember what we are constructing is socialism with Chinese characteristics, and not any other ideology," he said.

The Communist party, which had some 88.7 million members at the end of last year, must maintain "absolute leadership," he said.

Xi has won popularity with a much-publicised anti-corruption campaign that has claimed the scalps of several former top-ranked officials.

"The biggest threat to our ruling party is corruption," he said, calling for a "complete purification of the party's political environment".

He credited the Communist party with expelling "imperialism" from Chinese soil, and stressed the country's economic growth in recent decades.

He stressed the need for "Mao Zedong thought" but did not refer to the tens of millions killed in famines and political campaigns under the founder of the People's Republic founder.

The speech contained more than 20 references to "Marxism" and ended with a rendition of the left-wing anthem "The Internationale" by a brass band.

He also issued a warning to Taiwan's newly elected Beijing-sceptic President Tsai Ying-wen -- saying: "we will resolutely oppose all Taiwanese separatist forces".

Shortly before the ceremony began, a Taiwanese warship mistakenly launched a supersonic "aircraft carrier killer" missile towards the mainland, which landed in the Taiwan Strait, Taipei's navy said.

Xi vowed to "build, in line with our global status and in accordance with national interests, a strong army and consolidate national defence".

He also said that China would take an active role in what he called "global governance", suggesting it was seeking a weightier role in international affairs.

"China will actively participate in building a global governance system, and will contribute Chinese wisdom to perfecting such a system," Xi added.

source:  Yahoo!

Duterte to seek ‘soft landing’ with China after dispute ruling

MANILA - President Rodrigo Duterte said Thursday he would seek a “soft landing” after a United Nations-backed tribunal decides on the Philippines’ protest against China’s sea claims in two weeks.

While a favorable ruling for Manila would be a “moral victory,” Duterte said it would also put the government in an “awkward position.”

“It should be a soft landing for everybody, kung meron man, we don’t taunt or flaunt it… We will study progressively kung paano natin magamit,” he said in a televised Cabinet meeting immediately after he was sworn into office.

Duterte’s predecessor, former President Benigno Aquino III, had asked the Hague-based Arbitral Tribunal to declare as invalid Beijing’s claims in the South China Sea. A ruling is expected on July 12.

China responded to the Philippines’ legal challenge by building massive structures fit for military use on the disputed reefs.

Foreign Affairs Secretary Perfecto Yasay said the ruling could go either way and must be studied carefully.

The decision could also provoke China, he said.

“What if in the face of these circumstances, China will dig in and put us to a test? They will disallow again our fishermen from fishing in Scarborough Shoal,” Yasay said, referring to an outcrop that China has held since 2012, following a tense naval standoff with Philippine ships.

“When the decision will come, we will advise. We will study the case and inform the President and the Cabinet,” Yasay said.

China claims almost the entire South China Sea, which hosts vital shipping gains over vast oil and gas reserves.

Aside from the Philippines, its claims overlap with those of Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei and Taiwan.

source:  ABS-CBN News

Philippines v China: facts about a much-watched legal battle

A UN-backed tribunal is expected to soon deliver a verdict on a Philippine challenge to China's claims to most of the South China Sea.

Spanning three years, two hearings, and nearly 4,000 pages of evidence, the arbitration case at The Hague is complex.

In essence, China claims most of the sea, even waters approaching neighbouring countries, based on a vaguely defined "nine-dash" Chinese map dating back to the 1940s. The Philippines disputes this.

Here are the key facts on the case:

- What is the tribunal and what are its powers?

The tribunal was set up by the Permanent Court of Arbitration, an intergovernmental organisation established in 1899. The PCA has 116 member states, including the Philippines and China. It is allowed to arbitrate on certain matters of international law, including the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).

The five-member tribunal hearing this case is composed of top maritime affairs experts, with the Philippines appointing one member. China waived its right to choose one arbitrator.

The tribunal has the power to set the rules of procedure and make a decision that cannot be appealed. However the tribunal and the PCA have no means to enforce the verdict, with compliance left to parties.

- What are Manila's key points?

The Philippines has presented five main claims before the tribunal:

1. China is not entitled to exercise what it calls "historic rights" over waters beyond limits defined in UNCLOS, a treaty to which both the Philippines and China are parties.

2. China's "nine-dash line" has no basis under international law.

3. The various maritime features relied upon by China to assert its claims in the South China Sea are not in fact islands and, as such, are not legally capable of generating such entitlements. China's recent massive artificial island-building does not change the situation.

4. China violated UNCLOS by preventing the Philippines from exercising its fishing and exploration rights.

5. China has irreversibly damaged the environment by destroying coral reefs, using harmful fishing practises, and catching endangered species in the South China Sea.

- Why did Manila take the action?

The Philippines said, after 17 years of negotiations with China, it had exhausted all political and diplomatic avenues to settle the dispute.

The Philippines calls international law "the great equaliser" allowing small countries to challenge more powerful states. A nation of about 100 million, the Philippines has one of Asia's weakest militaries, and its economic and diplomatic clout pales in comparison with China's.

- What is China's position and how will it react?

China denies the tribunal has jurisdiction on the issue and insists that it will not abide by the decision.

The country's first move to an unfavourable ruling will be to reject it. But no one is sure what China will do after that. Its response could range from provocative to diplomatic.

On the aggressive end of the spectrum, Beijing may take it as an opportunity to increase its construction activities and further assert its claims by declaring an Air Defence Identification Zone (ADIZ) in the sea, essentially demanding that aircraft transiting it announce themselves to Chinese authorities and follow their instructions.

When it proclaimed one in 2013 that covered islands in the East China Sea disputed with Japan, the move prompted international fury, and Washington made a point of sending warplanes through it without complying with Beijing's rules.

A more diplomatic option would be to try and mount opposition to the ruling in the UN by challenging the tribunal's legitimacy. Beijing claims that more than 60 countries back its position on settling disputes in the South China Sea through direct negotiations, and it could seek to call a vote on the issue in the general assembly. But only a handful of countries have explicitly confirmed they support China's stance.

- If the tribunal can't enforce its ruling and China has vowed to ignore it, what's at stake?

The Philippines hopes a favourable ruling will help to build international pressure on China to make concessions and reverse or stall its expansionist efforts in the sea. For instance, the United States has already said it will call on China to respect the ruling.

The Philippines also hopes a favourable ruling will give it much-needed leverage in any negotiations with China.

source: AFP

Indonesia defends opening fire on Chinese boat

Indonesia on Monday defended opening fire on Chinese sailors as an action aimed at stopping illegal fishing, as China said it had overlapping maritime claims with Jakarta.

Beijing protested strongly over Friday's clash near Indonesia's Natuna Islands in the South China Sea, saying one Chinese fisherman was injured.

The Indonesian navy insisted no one was hurt when it detained seven sailors on a Chinese-flagged vessel after firing warning shots.

It was the third such skirmish in recent months between Indonesia and China near the Natunas, which are west of Borneo, as tensions rise between Beijing and several nations over its growing assertiveness in the disputed South China Sea.

Unlike some of its Southeast Asian neighbours, Indonesia does not dispute ownership of reefs or islets in the sea with China.

But Beijing's claims to fishing rights near the Natunas and some 3,000 kilometers from its mainland appear to overlap with Indonesia's exclusive economic zone around the islands.

Indonesian Fisheries Minister Susi Pudjiastuti, who is leading a campaign to crack down on illegal fishing, defended the navy's actions.

"The Indonesian navy made the right move by maintaining the sovereignty of our seas," she tweeted. "The shooting was definitely according to procedure."

She added that "stealing fish is a crime. It is impossible that there is an agreement between countries that allows for stealing fish".

President Joko Widodo met with Security Minister Luhut Panjaitan on Monday following the clash and ordered him to defend Indonesia's sovereignty, presidential spokesman Johan Budi said.

"The president ordered him to defend Indonesia's territorial sovereignty that we have struggled to build up since our independence," he said.

But he added the president wanted this to be done without "affecting good relations". Indonesia's aggressive crackdown on illegal fishing, which began in 2014, has riled several of its neighbours.

Chinese foreign ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying said the latest clash took place in "traditional Chinese fishing ground".

"China and Indonesia have overlapping claims for maritime rights and interests," in the area, she told a regular briefing on Monday.

She did not provide a direct answer when asked whether those fishing grounds overlapped with Indonesia's exclusive economic zone.

Indonesia's navy said it intercepted 12 foreign vessels illegally fishing which fled as their warships approached.

Navy vessels pursued and fired several warning shots, until eventually a Chinese-flagged ship was stopped and boarded, it said.

In March Chinese coastguards rammed a boat detained near the Natunas and helped it escape as the Indonesians towed the vessel to shore.

Last month, the Indonesian navy opened fire on a Chinese trawler near the islands and seized the vessel. Beijing said it protested the move.

China asserts authority over almost all the South China Sea, basing its claim on historical documents, despite partial counter-claims from several Southeast Asian nations.

source:  Yahoo!

COMMENT: China splits a leaderless, rudderless Asean

The way China split Asean at a dramatic meeting in Kunming last week has exposed a major vacuum that has plagued the regional group for a while.

Asean’s strongest link is now its weakest link. It doesn’t have a country or politician to provide strong moral and ideological leadership to get a group of 10 countries at different stages of economic, political and social development into speaking with one voice.

How different things were when the regional grouping came into being with just five members in 1967. Then, Asean had a unity of purpose: to make sure that the vacuum left behind by the US military withdrawal from South Vietnam would not be exploited by a communist North Vietnam.

Indonesia’s Adam Malik, Singapore’s S. Rajaratnam and others took the fight to the UN arguing the case to punish a united Vietnam that marched into Cambodia with impunity.

Asean’s fear was that if Vietnam was allowed to get away with its unlawful expansion, it would embolden its military to push south and create a South-east Asia that became a vassal of the communists.

It was a time when the Domino Theory was being pushed by diplomats and academics to stop the communist tide. By working behind the scenes and openly, Asean politicians and diplomats got cracking by denying Vietnam a moral victory in the UN.

Last week’s Kunming meeting showed Asean at its vulnerable worst with China using big money politics, convincing Laos and Cambodia to split Asean.

There was no joint statement. Singapore Foreign Minister Vivian Balakrishnan, who was co-chair of that meeting, did not sit down with Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi to talk to the media and Malaysia added to the drama by issuing an Asean statement and then retracting it. 

It seems Laos, the chairman of Asean this time round, was against the proposed Asean joint statement expressing serious concern over China’s adventures in the South China Sea.

The South China Sea has become a big irritant in relations with China. China says the sea belongs to them but the Philippines, Brunei, Malaysia and Vietnam have staked their claims, with Manila taking China to the international court in The Hague.

China’s intentions to drive a wedge in Asean are not new. In 2012, Asean foreign ministers ended their annual meeting when China talked chairman Cambodia into keeping the South China Sea off the table.

With most of the other members disagreeing, the customary joint statement was not issued – the first time this has happened in Asean’s 45-year history.

China is opening another beach head with Timor Leste, which is likely to be admitted into the Asean fold soon. China was the first one to recognise the former Indonesian state when it gained independence in 2002 and has poured money into big development projects there.

Resetting the Asean leadership button looks unlikely as Indonesia, the natural leader because of its size, is still trying to sort out the turmoil left behind by strongman Suharto’s downfall. And Singapore, whose diplomatic dance with the important players on the world stage makes it a good choice for Asean leadership, is viewed with suspicion by its neighbours.

Does all this mean Asean will continue its rudderless ride into the stormy waters of the South China Sea? Or will it wait for the problem to solve itself?

Both scenarios can only further weaken the regional grouping. The other possibility is for the regional bloc to abandon its long-held principle of reaching a consensus in its decision-making.

With the next Asean Foreign Ministers’ huddle looming in the background and with China not in the mood to compromise, Asean might have no choice but to move towards a view that the majority should not be held to ransom by the minority.

That is the stark reality facing a grouping that has become an important player in global affairs.

P N Balji is a veteran Singaporean journalist who is the former chief editor of TODAY newspaper, and a media consultant. The views expressed are his own.

source:  Yahoo!