Jump to content

Sabina Shoal: Difference between revisions

Coordinates: 9°45′N 116°28′E / 9.750°N 116.467°E / 9.750; 116.467 (Sabina Shoal)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Line 47: Line 47:
Determining sovereignty of disputed features is beyond the jurisdiction of [[UNCLOS]] according to Professor Robert Beckman of [[Nanyang Technological University]],<ref name="beckmanRoleOfUNCLOS">{{Cite web |first1 =Andrea| last1 =Ho|date=2021-05-06 |title=Professor Robert Beckman on the Role of UNCLOS in Maritime Disputes |url=https://gjia.georgetown.edu/2021/05/06/professor-robert-beckman-on-the-role-of-unclos-in-maritime-disputes/ |access-date=2024-07-09 |website=Georgetown Journal of International Affairs |language=en-US}}</ref> The 2016 [[South China Sea Arbitration]] by the arbitral tribunal at [[Permanent Court of Arbitration]] in [[The Hague]] specifically stated that it does not "rule on any question of sovereignty".<ref name=jurisadmiss>{{cite web |title=Award on Jurisdiction and Admissibility |date=29 October 2015 |publisher=Permanent Court of Arbitration |url=https://pcacases.com/web/sendAttach/2579 |language=en |access-date=30 January 2022 |archive-date=3 May 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220503202232/https://pcacases.com/web/sendAttach/2579 |url-status=live }}</ref> The ruling did address specific issues brought to it which included where the Phillipines sovereign rights in its exclusive economic zone had been breached by others.<ref name=jurisadmiss/>
Determining sovereignty of disputed features is beyond the jurisdiction of [[UNCLOS]] according to Professor Robert Beckman of [[Nanyang Technological University]],<ref name="beckmanRoleOfUNCLOS">{{Cite web |first1 =Andrea| last1 =Ho|date=2021-05-06 |title=Professor Robert Beckman on the Role of UNCLOS in Maritime Disputes |url=https://gjia.georgetown.edu/2021/05/06/professor-robert-beckman-on-the-role-of-unclos-in-maritime-disputes/ |access-date=2024-07-09 |website=Georgetown Journal of International Affairs |language=en-US}}</ref> The 2016 [[South China Sea Arbitration]] by the arbitral tribunal at [[Permanent Court of Arbitration]] in [[The Hague]] specifically stated that it does not "rule on any question of sovereignty".<ref name=jurisadmiss>{{cite web |title=Award on Jurisdiction and Admissibility |date=29 October 2015 |publisher=Permanent Court of Arbitration |url=https://pcacases.com/web/sendAttach/2579 |language=en |access-date=30 January 2022 |archive-date=3 May 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220503202232/https://pcacases.com/web/sendAttach/2579 |url-status=live }}</ref> The ruling did address specific issues brought to it which included where the Phillipines sovereign rights in its exclusive economic zone had been breached by others.<ref name=jurisadmiss/>


Because Sabina Shoal lies within the 200-nautical mile exclusive economic zone of the country, the Philippines has sovereign rights to explore, conserve, and manage the shoal for natural resources, according to UNCLOS.<ref name="chineseShipsReturnSabinaShoal">{{cite news |last1=Powell |first1=Ray |title=Chinese ships return to Sabina Shoal |url=https://www.sealight.live/posts/chinese-ships-return-to-sabina-shoal |publisher=SeaLight |date=November 19, 2023}}</ref><ref name="philippinesDidNotSurrender">{{cite news |last1=Gutierrez |first1=Jason |title=Philippines says it did not surrender Sabina Shoal to China |url=https://www.rfa.org/english/news/southchinasea/south-china-sea-sabina-shoal-09162024141029.html |publisher=[[Radio Free Asia]] |date=September 16, 2024}}</ref><ref name="newFirestormErupts">{{cite news |last1=Seidel |first1=Jamie |title=New ‘firestorm’ erupts between China and Philippines in South China Sea |url=https://www.news.com.au/technology/innovation/military/new-firestorm-erupts-between-china-and-philippines-in-south-china-sea/news-story/ad4eee1ab3a200f752cbf3ff451b14d8 |publisher=[[News.com.au]] |date=September 5, 2024}}</ref> Note that there is a distinction between sovereignty and sovereign rights according to international martitime law.<ref name="sovereigntyVsSovereignRights">{{cite news |last1=Basu |first1=Pratnashree |title=Sovereignty Vs. Sovereign Rights: De-escalating Tensions in the South China Sea |url=https://www.orfonline.org/research/sovereignty-vs-sovereign-rights-de-escalating-tensions-in-the-south-china-sea |publisher=[[Observer Research Foundation]] |date=August 14, 2023}}</ref>
Because Sabina Shoal lies within the 200-nautical mile exclusive economic zone of the country, the Philippines has sovereign rights to explore, conserve, and manage the shoal for natural resources, according to UNCLOS.<ref name="chineseShipsReturnSabinaShoal">{{cite news |last1=Powell |first1=Ray |title=Chinese ships return to Sabina Shoal |url=https://www.sealight.live/posts/chinese-ships-return-to-sabina-shoal |publisher=SeaLight |date=November 19, 2023}}</ref><ref name="philippinesDidNotSurrender">{{cite news |last1=Gutierrez |first1=Jason |title=Philippines says it did not surrender Sabina Shoal to China |url=https://www.rfa.org/english/news/southchinasea/south-china-sea-sabina-shoal-09162024141029.html |publisher=[[Radio Free Asia]] |date=September 16, 2024}}</ref><ref name="newFirestormErupts">{{cite news |last1=Seidel |first1=Jamie |title=New ‘firestorm’ erupts between China and Philippines in South China Sea |url=https://www.news.com.au/technology/innovation/military/new-firestorm-erupts-between-china-and-philippines-in-south-china-sea/news-story/ad4eee1ab3a200f752cbf3ff451b14d8 |publisher=[[News.com.au]] |date=September 5, 2024}}</ref> Note that there is a distinction between sovereignty and sovereign rights according to international martitime law.<ref name="sovereigntyVsSovereignRights">{{cite news |last1=Basu |first1=Pratnashree |title=Sovereignty Vs. Sovereign Rights: De-escalating Tensions in the South China Sea |url=https://www.orfonline.org/research/sovereignty-vs-sovereign-rights-de-escalating-tensions-in-the-south-china-sea |publisher=[[Observer Research Foundation]] |date=August 14, 2023}}</ref><ref name="seaDisputeSovereigntyVsSovereignRights">{{cite news |last1=Alfarsi |first1=Haroun |title=Sea Dispute: Sovereignty vs. Sovereign Rights |url=https://www.profolus.com/topics/sovereignty-vs-sovereign-rights-difference/ |publisher=Profolus |date=April 27, 2024}}</ref>


China, which is a signatory to UNCLOS,<ref name="chinaUNCLOS">{{cite news |last1=Wang |first1=Zheng |title=China and UNCLOS: An Inconvenient History |url=https://thediplomat.com/2016/07/china-and-unclos-an-inconvenient-history/ |publisher=[[The Diplomat]] |date=July 11, 2016}}</ref> has refused to acknowledge the 2016 arbitration ruling, and instead claims the region as part of its [[Nine-dash line]],<ref name="whyDoesChinaClaim">{{cite news |last1=Zhang |first1=Anson |title=Why does China claim almost the entire South China Sea? |url=https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/10/24/why-does-china-claim-almost-the-entire-south-china-sea |publisher=[[Al-Jazeera]] |date=October 24, 2023}}</ref> which the arbitral tribunal ruled as having no basis in international law.<ref name="noLegalBasisForChinasSCSClaims">{{cite news |title=‘No legal basis’ for China’s South China Sea claims |url=https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/7/13/no-legal-basis-for-chinas-south-china-sea-claims |publisher=[[Al-Jazeera]] |date=July 13, 2016}}</ref>
China, which is a signatory to UNCLOS,<ref name="chinaUNCLOS">{{cite news |last1=Wang |first1=Zheng |title=China and UNCLOS: An Inconvenient History |url=https://thediplomat.com/2016/07/china-and-unclos-an-inconvenient-history/ |publisher=[[The Diplomat]] |date=July 11, 2016}}</ref> has refused to acknowledge the 2016 arbitration ruling, and instead claims the region as part of its [[Nine-dash line]],<ref name="whyDoesChinaClaim">{{cite news |last1=Zhang |first1=Anson |title=Why does China claim almost the entire South China Sea? |url=https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/10/24/why-does-china-claim-almost-the-entire-south-china-sea |publisher=[[Al-Jazeera]] |date=October 24, 2023}}</ref> which the arbitral tribunal ruled as having no basis in international law.<ref name="noLegalBasisForChinasSCSClaims">{{cite news |title=‘No legal basis’ for China’s South China Sea claims |url=https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/7/13/no-legal-basis-for-chinas-south-china-sea-claims |publisher=[[Al-Jazeera]] |date=July 13, 2016}}</ref>

Revision as of 22:35, 20 September 2024

Sabina Shoal
Disputed atoll
Sabina Shoal
Sabina Shoal is located in Spratly Islands
Sabina Shoal
Sabina Shoal
Other namesBãi Sa Bin (Vietnamese)
Buhanginan ng Escoda (Filipino)
Escoda Shoal (Philippine English)
仙賓礁 / 仙宾礁 Xiānbīn Jiāo (Chinese)
Geography
LocationSouth China Sea
Coordinates9°45′N 116°28′E / 9.750°N 116.467°E / 9.750; 116.467 (Sabina Shoal)
ArchipelagoSpratly Islands
Claimed by
 China
 Philippines
 Taiwan
 Vietnam

Sabina Shoal, also known as Bãi Sa Bin (Template:Lang-vi); Escoda Shoal (Template:Lang-fil); Xianbin Jiao (Chinese: 仙賓礁/仙宾礁; pinyin: Xiānbīn Jiāo), is a disputed atoll which lies within the exclusive economic zone of the Philippines.[1] It is located in the northeast of Dangerous Ground in the Spratly Islands, South China Sea.

It is claimed by China, the Philippines, Taiwan and Vietnam. These countries claim the Spratly Islands either in part or their entirety.[2]

Geography

Sabina Shoal is part of the Spratly Islands in the South China Sea. It lies in position 09° 45' N 116° 28' E,[3] 75 nautical miles from Palawan Island and lies within the 200-nautical mile exclusive economic zone (EEZ) of the Philippines.[4][5] It is situated 56 nautical miles southwest of Carnatic Shoal, with two main parts and an area of 115 square kilometres (44 sq mi).

The eastern half of Sabina Shoal consists of reefs awash, while the western half consists of banks 3.7 to 8.3 metres (12 to 27 feet) deep, and reefs enclosing a lagoon.[6]

Sovereignty and sovereign rights

Sabina Shoal is a disputed low-tide elevation in the Spratly Islands, that is claimed by multiple states: China, the Philippines, Taiwan and Vietnam.

Determining sovereignty of disputed features is beyond the jurisdiction of UNCLOS according to Professor Robert Beckman of Nanyang Technological University,[7] The 2016 South China Sea Arbitration by the arbitral tribunal at Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague specifically stated that it does not "rule on any question of sovereignty".[8] The ruling did address specific issues brought to it which included where the Phillipines sovereign rights in its exclusive economic zone had been breached by others.[8]

Because Sabina Shoal lies within the 200-nautical mile exclusive economic zone of the country, the Philippines has sovereign rights to explore, conserve, and manage the shoal for natural resources, according to UNCLOS.[9][10][11] Note that there is a distinction between sovereignty and sovereign rights according to international martitime law.[12][13]

China, which is a signatory to UNCLOS,[14] has refused to acknowledge the 2016 arbitration ruling, and instead claims the region as part of its Nine-dash line,[15] which the arbitral tribunal ruled as having no basis in international law.[16]

Incidents

In 1995, soon after occupying Mischief Reef, China (PRC) installed three buoys near Sabina Shoal. They were confiscated by the Philippines.[17]

On April 27, 2021, during a joint maritime patrol operations of the Philippine Coast Guard (PCG) and Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (BFAR) in the area, seven Chinese maritime militia vessels were spotted anchored at the atoll. After several challenges from BRP Cabra of the PCG, the militia vessels left the area.[18][19]

Alleging reclamation activities by China, the PCG stationed the BRP Teresa Magbanua at Sabina Shoal in April 2024. China responded by deploying its 12,000-ton 165 meter Coast Guard ship which is nicknamed "The Monster" because of its size.[20]

On the Independence Day of the Philippines in 2024, Rear Admiral Armando Balilo of the PCG, aboard BRP Teresa Magbanua in that part of the South China Sea called by the Philippines the West Philippine Sea, held a flag-raising ceremony claiming Sabina Shoal for the Philippines.[21] China responded with a vow to take "strong measures" against the Philippines.[22]

Up to 71 Coast Guard ships and other vessels from China were seen at Sabina Shoal from August 27 to September 2, 2024.[23]

Ramming incidents

On August 19, 2024, Philippine Coast Guard vessels BRP Cape Engaño along with the BRP Bagacay suffered damage after being rammed by China Coast Guard ships off Sabina Shoal. Bagacay suffered a 3-foot hole above the waterline.[24] A 60 Minutes crew with journalist Cecilia Vega were onboard the Cape Engaño when it was surrounded by 14 Chinese Coast Guard and Maritime Militia ships and rammed at 4am by a China Coast Guard vessel. The ramming tore a 3 1/2 foot hole above the waterline on the Cape Engaño.[25]

The day after a clash between the two coast guards near the shoal on August 19, 2024, the Philippine government stated it was examining expanding the provisional agreement that had been established to de-escalate tensions near the Second Thomas Shoal to other areas.[26]

China Coast Guard vessel 5205 ramming BRP Teresa Magbanua on August 31, 2024 in Sabina Shoal

On August 31, 2024, China Coast Guard vessel 5205 rammed the port bow of the Philippines Coast Guard patrol ship BRP Teresa Magbanua, then turned around and struck its starboard quarter, turned around once more and struck its port bow. Parts of the Philippine Coast Guard ship were left with holes after the Chinese Coast Guard vessel's actions.[27] Footage released on social media by Philippine Coast Guard spokesperson Jay Tarriela showed how the China Coast Guard vessel deliberately rammed the Philippine Coast Guard patrol ship multiple times.[11] The China Coast Guard spokesperson Liu Dejun's claim was released hours earlier that “At 12:06, the Philippine ship deliberately rammed into the Chinese ship 5205 in an unprofessional and dangerous manner, causing a collision for which the Philippines bears full responsibility.”[28] Tariella released further footage showing the damage to the Philippine ship, including a man-sized hole.[29]

The United States,[30] Japan, Taiwan, Australia, and the European Union condemned China's repeated ramming of the Filipino vessel and denounced China's actions, demanding that China stop its "aggression".[31]

Environmental destruction

In September of 2023, a Philippine Coast Guard survey revealed massive damage to the marine environment and coral reef in Sabina Shoal.[32] The presence of crushed corals in the reef indicated dumping and potential attempts at reclamation activities, similar to artificial islands created by China in the South China Sea, also known as the Great Wall of Sand. In May, 2024, the Philippine Coast Guard discovered more crushed corals at the shoal, and said that Chinese maritime militia vessels were suspected as they were swarming the area with cabbage tactics prior to the environmental destruction.[33][2]

China said there was no scientific or factual basis for the claims made by the Philippines. It claimed that the PCG ship (BRP Teresa Magbanua) anchored at the shoal had caused continuous damage to the surrounding natural environment.[34]

Other names

The US BGN Advisory Committee on Undersea Features (ACUF) database also documents other names as Template:Lang-fr, Template:Lang-ms and alternative Chinese names as Hsien-pin An-sha, Xianbin Ansha, Yulin, 仙濱暗沙, 鱼鳞.[35]

References

  1. ^ Gan, Nectar (August 27, 2024). "A dangerous new flashpoint is fast emerging in the South China Sea". CNN.
  2. ^ a b "Manila accuses Beijing of island building in South China Sea". RFA.
  3. ^ D.J Hancox; John Prescott. A Geographical Description of the Spratly Islands. UK: International Boundaries Research Unit. p. 28.
  4. ^ "Philippines condemns latest China Coast Guard aggression". Presidential Communications Office. August 31, 2024.
  5. ^ "Philippines to Take Steps to Prevent Chinese Reclamation in South China Sea". The Diplomat.
  6. ^ Admiralty Sailing Directions - South China Sea. Taunton: UKHO - United Kingdom Hydrographic Office. 2004. p. 64.
  7. ^ Ho, Andrea (2021-05-06). "Professor Robert Beckman on the Role of UNCLOS in Maritime Disputes". Georgetown Journal of International Affairs. Retrieved 2024-07-09.
  8. ^ a b "Award on Jurisdiction and Admissibility". Permanent Court of Arbitration. 29 October 2015. Archived from the original on 3 May 2022. Retrieved 30 January 2022.
  9. ^ Powell, Ray (November 19, 2023). "Chinese ships return to Sabina Shoal". SeaLight.
  10. ^ Gutierrez, Jason (September 16, 2024). "Philippines says it did not surrender Sabina Shoal to China". Radio Free Asia.
  11. ^ a b Seidel, Jamie (September 5, 2024). "New 'firestorm' erupts between China and Philippines in South China Sea". News.com.au.
  12. ^ Basu, Pratnashree (August 14, 2023). "Sovereignty Vs. Sovereign Rights: De-escalating Tensions in the South China Sea". Observer Research Foundation.
  13. ^ Alfarsi, Haroun (April 27, 2024). "Sea Dispute: Sovereignty vs. Sovereign Rights". Profolus.
  14. ^ Wang, Zheng (July 11, 2016). "China and UNCLOS: An Inconvenient History". The Diplomat.
  15. ^ Zhang, Anson (October 24, 2023). "Why does China claim almost the entire South China Sea?". Al-Jazeera.
  16. ^ "'No legal basis' for China's South China Sea claims". Al-Jazeera. July 13, 2016.
  17. ^ Bondoc, Jarius (16 April 2012). "China out to grab Zambales shoal". Philippine Star. Retrieved 23 May 2014. (Zambales Shoal is also known as Scarborough Shoal.)
  18. ^ Bagaoisan, Anjo (May 5, 2021). "7 barko ng China, pinaalis ng PCG sa Sabina Shoal". ABS-CBN News. Retrieved May 6, 2021.
  19. ^ Viray, Patricia Lourdes (May 5, 2021). "Chinese militia vessels at Sabina Shoal disperse after challenge by coast guard — Esperon". The Philippine Star. Retrieved May 6, 2021.
  20. ^ "South China Sea: a visual guide to the key shoals, reefs and islands". The Guardian. July 30, 2024.
  21. ^ Dela Cruz, Raymond Carl (June 12, 2024). "PH flag raised for 1st time at Sabina Shoal on Independence Day". Philippine News Agency. Retrieved June 21, 2024.
  22. ^ "China vows 'strong measures' against Philippines over encroaching ships in South China Sea". South China Morning Post. n.d. Retrieved August 18, 2024.
  23. ^ "Philippines says 200-plus Chinese vessels have clustered in its EEZ". Radio Free Asia. September 3, 2024.
  24. ^ Aaron-Matthew, Lariosa (19 August 2024). "China Coast Guard Rams Philippine Cutters Near Disputed South China Sea Shoals". USNI News. Retrieved 23 August 2024.
  25. ^ "China rams Philippine ship while 60 Minutes on board; South China Sea tensions could draw U.S. in". 60 Minutes. September 16, 2024.
  26. ^ Darryl John Esguerra (August 20, 2024). "PH mulls expanding Ayungin Shoal 'provisional arrangement' with China". Philippine News Agency. Retrieved August 20, 2024.
  27. ^ Ong, Ghio (September 1, 2024). "Chinese Vessel Rams PCG Patrol Ship 3 times". One News.
  28. ^ Ong, Ghio (September 1, 2024). "Chinese vessel rams PCG patrol ship 3 times". The Philippine Star.
  29. ^ "China ramming pokes man-sized hole on BRP Teresa Magbanua". GMA News Online. September 2, 2024.
  30. ^ KG (September 1, 2024). "US stands with PH, condemns China's actions in WPS". MSN.
  31. ^ Abarca, Charie (September 2, 2024). "EU joins 4 nations in denouncing China's ramming of PH boat in West Philippine Sea". Philippine Daily Inquirer.
  32. ^ Manabat, Jacque (September 18, 2023). "Coast Guard videos show massive damage to Rozul Reef, Escoda Shoal". ABS-CBN News.
  33. ^ Delizo, Michael (May 11, 2024). "PCG: Escoda Shoal in sorry state after coral dumping for reclamation attempt". ABS-CBN News.
  34. ^ "China says no scientific, factual basis for Philippines' damage claims at Sabina Shoal". The Standard. 30 Aug 2024.
  35. ^ "Geographic Names Server (GNS} database". Springfield, Virginia, USA: National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency. Retrieved September 11, 2024.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sabina_Shoal&oldid=1246761011"