In News:

The Scarborough Shoal, a triangular atoll in the South China Sea, has once again become a flashpoint after China announced the establishment of a 3,524-hectare nature reserve in the disputed waters. The move has drawn strong protests from the Philippines, which claims sovereignty over the feature and views China’s step as an assertion of jurisdiction under the guise of ecological protection.

Geographical and Strategic Significance

• The shoal is located about 220 km west of the Philippines’ Luzon Island and falls well within Manila’s 200-nautical mile Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) under the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).
• Claimed by both China (which calls it Huangyan Island) and the Philippines (locally known as Panatag Shoal or Bajo de Masinloc), sovereignty over the shoal remains unsettled.
• Its location near major global shipping lanes that carry over $3 trillion worth of trade annually enhances its geostrategic value.
• The lagoon and surrounding waters are rich in fish stocks, shellfish, and sea cucumbers, making it a vital fishing ground for regional communities.

Historical and Legal Context

• China’s claim: Traced back to maps from the Yuan Dynasty (1200s), Beijing argues historical sovereignty.
• Philippines’ claim: Based on proximity, falling within its EEZ, and backed by the 2016 Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) ruling under UNCLOS, which invalidated China’s “nine-dash line” claim. The ruling, however, did not adjudicate on sovereignty but recognized the shoal as a traditional fishing ground for multiple nations.
• Control: China seized effective control of the shoal in 2012 after a naval standoff and has since maintained coast guard and fishing militia presence, often intercepting Filipino vessels.

China’s Nature Reserve Plan

• China has approved a marine protected area to conserve the coral reef ecosystem of the shoal.
• Chinese officials argue it reflects improved “jurisdiction and governance” and claim Filipino fishermen are responsible for overfishing and pollution.
• Critics, however, view the reserve as a political instrument to strengthen Chinese control and potentially restrict access to Filipino fishermen under the pretext of conservation.
• The Philippines has accused China of coral destruction and giant clam harvesting, raising the possibility of fresh international arbitration on environmental grounds.

Regional and Global Reactions

• Philippines: Strongly protested the move, viewing it as a violation of its sovereign rights. President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. has leveraged the issue domestically while deepening ties with the United States.
• United States: Condemned the reserve plan as “destabilising and coercive.” Under the 1951 Mutual Defence Treaty, Washington has pledged to defend the Philippines against armed attacks, including those occurring “anywhere in the South China Sea.”
• Risk of escalation: Recent incidents—such as the use of water cannons, ramming of boats, and close aerial encounters—underline the danger of miscalculation, though both sides avoid direct combat to prevent escalation.
• Expert views: Chinese analysts frame the reserve as ecological protection, while Philippine experts argue it is a strategic tool to consolidate Beijing’s de facto control and marginalize other claimants.

Implications

• For the Philippines:
  • Raises questions about maritime security and economic livelihood of fishermen.
  • Strengthens its reliance on the U.S. alliance for deterrence.
• For China:
  • Enhances its long-term maritime footprint and jurisdictional claims.
  • Risks further international pushback, reinforcing perceptions of coercion.
• For International Order:
  • Challenges the enforcement of UNCLOS and undermines multilateral dispute settlement mechanisms.
  • Escalates tensions in one of the world’s busiest waterways with direct implications for global trade.