China
Chinese lawfare, resource disputes and the law of the sea
Author: Douglas Guilfoyle, UNSW Canberra
China notoriously claims special maritime rights in the South China Sea within the ‘nine-dash line’ that appears on official Chinese maps. The precise origin of the line remains obscured. The ‘nine-dash line’ did not appear on government maps prior to 1947 or in private cartographic exercises before 1933. As late as 2013, prominent Chinese scholars accepted that China had never expressly articulated the line’s legal significance.
Recent Chinese claims to exclusive jurisdiction over resources within it have escalated tensions not only over oil but also over exploited and declining fish stocks ‘fundamental to the food security of coastal populations numbering in the hundreds of millions’. But China’s legal argument about the South China Sea should be seen both in its historical context and in light of China’s doctrine on information warfare.
Law plays an important role in the dispute over the nine-dash line because the line cuts deep into what various coastal states including Vietnam and the Philippines regard as their 200 nautical mile Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). Ironically, in the marathon negotiations that lead to UNCLOS, China was a principal advocate of the EEZ concept, aligning itself with developing countries against Russia and the United States.
It is useful to review the issues that were of fundamental concern to China in the UNCLOS negotiations. These are documented in Chinese working papers submitted to the UN Seabed Committee in the early 1970s and in speeches China made during the negotiation process.
China advocated for five main positions. First, that there was no fixed maximum width to the territorial sea — the extent of a state’s maritime domain was a sovereign decision to be informed by economic and security needs. Second, warships had no automatic right of innocent passage through territorial seas and straits. Third, China’s own Chiungchow Strait and vast Bohai Bay had a special status as ‘internal waters’. Fourth, that maritime boundaries should be settled only by consultation and UNCLOS should make no provision for the judicial settlement of such disputes. Fifth, a continental state with sovereignty over an outlying archipelago could draw straight baselines around it and use these to measure a territorial sea.
Notably, though China expressly claimed a special status for some waters it never did so for the South China Sea. China maintained its Chiungchow Strait and Bohai Bay claims throughout negotiations, along with its position on warships and innocent passage. But Beijing abandoned its position on the width of the territorial sea and on ‘outlying archipelagos’. This history shows that China’s recent supposed enjoyment of ‘special historic rights’ within the nine-dash line is the product of a very new legal claim.
A major blow to the Chinese position in favour of coastal states enjoying their ‘ordinary’ EEZs came in the Philippines v China arbitration. Since then, the Chinese government has pivoted back to a version of the ‘outlying archipelago’ argument previously abandoned during UNCLOS negotiations, an argument revived in the Chinese Society of International Law’s ‘critical study’ of the Philippines v China arbitral award. China now claims it can bundle up various maritime features into ‘archipelagos’, enclose them in straight baselines and project EEZs from them.
The argument is both historically revisionist and legally unconvincing. However, in addition to the creation of EEZ claims, re-characterising certain features as islands or archipelagos allows China to claim US warships are constrained in navigating near such features. The United States maintains that such features are not capable of generating territorial seas and that it is exercising freedom of navigation applicable in an EEZ or on the high seas. But why is China bothering to make such arguments at all?
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) appreciates the power of law. Its ‘three warfares’ doctrine outlines a triad of non-kinetic methods for achieving China’s national goals: public opinion warfare, psychological warfare and legal warfare. Among these, the function of legal warfare (‘lawfare’) is explained by Livermore as ‘leveraging of existing legal regimes and processes to constrain adversary behaviour, contest disadvantageous circumstances, confuse legal precedent, and maximise advantage in situations related to the PRC’s core interests’.
The function…
China
Navigating Turbulent Waters: Trust Between China and the Philippines
Despite a July 2024 deal ensuring Philippine resupply missions at Second Thomas Shoal, tensions with China persist, marked by confrontations and deep distrust, indicating potential for future conflict escalation.
Ongoing Tensions in the South China Sea
Despite a July 2024 agreement facilitating uninterrupted resupply missions to the contentious Second Thomas Shoal, tensions between China and the Philippines remain significantly high. Increased aerial and naval confrontations in August, compounded by longstanding mutual mistrust, hint at a precarious situation. Both nations are employing legal strategies alongside military maneuvers, while China’s recent maritime regulations and the Philippines’ military modernization efforts suggest a future marked by conflict.
Rising Provocations and Distrust
The situation deteriorated further in June 2024, when Manila accused Chinese forces of intercepting its boats and injuring a sailor. Although the July deal allowed for a resupply mission without incident, broader tensions persisted as China reportedly fired flares dangerously close to Philippine aircraft in August. The incidents at Second Thomas Shoal illustrate the deepening security crisis that has persisted since 2021, as China continues to challenge Philippine resupply efforts.
Potential for Escalation
While the recent agreement may offer temporary relief, it is unlikely to resolve the long-standing maritime disputes in the region comprehensively. The continuing misinterpretations of the deal and the profound distrust between the two nations suggest an ongoing trajectory of escalating tensions. As disputes over competing claims in the South China Sea intensify, the situation at Second Thomas Shoal serves as a volatile flashpoint for future conflicts.
China
Is life getting better for China’s tech billionaires?
Pony Ma, Tencent co-founder, is China’s richest person with over A$65 billion. Despite past crackdowns, his wealth indicates a potential market recovery, while maintaining state control over the economy.
According to the latest Bloomberg Billionaires Index, Pony Ma, co-founder of Tencent Holdings, is once again China’s richest person, now with a net worth of more than A$65 billion, placing him 27th globally.
Close behind him in the rankings are bottled water tycoon Zhong Shanshan, and Zhang Yiming, the main co-founder of tech giant ByteDance, which owns TikTok.
Only a few years ago, China’s ruling Communist Party launched a crackdown on billionaires and other business leaders. Some were publicly jailed. Others simply disappeared from public view.
Ma’s resurgence might seem like a positive signal of a more permissive market environment. But as we watch China’s private sector grow, we should remember it follows China’s unique playbook.
The ascent of Tencent
Ma’s wealth primarily comes from his stake in Tencent, which he co-founded in 1998 with its headquarters in Shenzhen. As China’s economy grew, Tencent became a world-leading internet and technology company.
Tech billionaire Pony Ma at a government meeting in 2018.
Song Fan/AP
Tencent is well-known for QQ and WeChat, which quickly became two of the most popular instant messaging apps in China and connect more than a billion people.
Tencent is also the largest video game vendor in China, with popular games such as “Honour of Kings” and “League of Legends”.
Last month, Tencent released “Black Myth: Wukong”, China’s first-ever “AAA” video game. AAA is a globally recognised gaming industry buzzword that refers to major, high-budget, standalone productions.
The much-hyped game surpassed 10 million sales across platforms within three days of its release, becoming one of China’s most successful games of all time.
The game itself draws on a 16th century Chinese novel called “Journey to the West” and features various Chinese landscapes. Its popularity aligns with Beijing’s ongoing efforts to boost China’s international cultural appeal.
China’s state-owned media outlet Xinhua highly praised the game for “telling Chinese stories with world-class quality” and offering a new way for global players to understand Chinese culture.
Ma’s fortunes reflect his company’s
This official appraisal means a lot. In previous years, Tencent has had a challenging time coping with Beijing’s strict gaming regulations.
In August 2021, China’s video game regulator announced policies to limit online gamers under the age of 18 to only one hour of play on Fridays, weekends and holidays. This was a major blow to China’s gaming industry, including Tencent.
In December 2023, Beijing introduced more legislation aimed at further capping the amount of money and time that could be spent on video games. The announcement resulted in a 12.4% drop in Tencent’s share price. But the company still promised to strictly implement any new regulatory requirements.
The success of ‘Black Myth: Wukong’ reflects an improving outlook for Tencent.
Andy Wong/AP
A cautionary tale
In China, complying with state regulations is important. Another Chinese tech billionaire, Jack Ma, faced the consequences of publicly challenging them.
In 2020, Jack Ma was poised to launch what was set to be the world’s largest initial public offering (IPO), raising about A$50 billion for his financial technology giant, Ant Group.
However, after he gave a speech in Shanghai harshly criticising Chinese financial regulators for outdated rules and excessive intervention, regulators halted the Ant Group IPO.
Citing concerns that Ant Group’s e-finance products encouraged unrestrained borrowing and investment, China ultimately suspended the IPO in late 2020.
Over the following years, Ant and its affiliate company Alibaba were slapped with billions in fines for alleged breaches of financial regulations.
Getting on the front foot
This phase marked a much stricter regulatory posture from China. The tech tycoons had to adapt to a new reality.
In 2021, Pony Ma publicly stressed the importance of tightly regulating internet businesses, including his own. He also proactively volunteered to meet with antitrust authorities.
Tencent downsized by divesting stakes in various sectors, and the government demanded a restructuring of its financial business.
Many of China’s other billionaires heeded lessons from Jack Ma’s troubles at Ant Group.
Alex Plavevski/EPA
The party remains the ultimate authority
China’s economy is a “socialist market economy”. That is, China’s government thinks of the market as a useful tool to achieve socialist objectives.
That doesn’t mean the private sector doesn’t play a huge role, but the government has long been cautious about the emerging market power of oligarchs as a potential threat to the party’s authorities.
Over past decades of reform and opening up, Beijing has been committed to unleashing market forces, encouraging private sector development and modernising its financial institutions. The precondition is that the state should maintain the ultimate authority to regulate and mobilise market resources.
However, its economy has been stubbornly sluggish post-COVID. The clampdown on the private sector has undermined the confidence of many investors and entrepreneurs, which is crucial for restoring China’s economic vitality.
Last year, Beijing introduced a 31-point action plan in response, aiming to make the private economy “bigger, better and stronger”. Hours after its release, Pony Ma publicly praised the government’s move as “encouraging and inspiring”.
Could spring now be coming for China’s private sector? Perhaps, but only on China’s terms.
Remember, market development is always a means for the state to achieve its own ends. This will never be a story of the market growing while the state steps back.
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
China
Zhejiang Province Increases Marriage Leave to 13 Days
On September 27, Zhejiang Province expanded marriage leave from 3 to 13 days for legally married employees. The new regulations ensure continued pay and benefits during leave and address demographic challenges by encouraging population growth. Businesses must update internal policies accordingly.
On September 27, the 12th meeting of the Standing Committee of the 14th Zhejiang Provincial People’s Congress approved the Zhejiang Province Marriage Leave Regulations (hereinafter referred to as the “Regulations”), extending the marriage leave to 13 days from three days.
According to the Regulations, employees who legally register their marriage are entitled to 13 days of marriage leave, excluding national statutory holidays and rest days. During the marriage leave, employees’ wages, bonuses, and other benefits will continue to be paid by their employers.
Notably, to ensure a smooth transition between the old and new leave regulations and to minimize disputes following the implementation of the new rules, the Regulations state that employees who registered their marriage within one year before the implementation of the new regulations and have not yet taken their marriage leave will be entitled to the new 13-day leave. Those who have already taken their marriage leave can supplement it according to the new regulations.
Businesses with operations in Zhejiang province are advised to amend their internal leave policies and employee handbook as soon as possible.
The extension of marriage leave in Zhejiang Province is part of a broader effort to support population growth and address demographic challenges. The province has seen some positive effects from its initial fertility support policies, which have helped to slow the sharp decline in birth rates.
*Granted to those who take pre-marital checkups, which involve being checked for any health conditions that will affect childbirth.
| This article was first published by China Briefing , which is produced by Dezan Shira & Associates. The firm assists foreign investors throughout Asia from offices across the world, including in in China, Hong Kong, Vietnam, Singapore, and India . Readers may write to info@dezshira.com for more support. |
Read the rest of the original article.
- Navigating Turbulent Waters: Trust Between China and the Philippines
- Is life getting better for China’s tech billionaires?
- Zhejiang Province Increases Marriage Leave to 13 Days
- China ETFs Celebrate Beijing’s Stimulus Initiative
- From Bubble Tea to Business Partnerships: Exploring China-ASEAN Trade Integration
- With China seeking AI dominance, Taiwan’s efforts to slow neighbor’s access to advanced chips needs support from the West
