Fact Check: "China claims almost the entirety of the South China Sea despite an invalid ruling."
What We Know
The South China Sea has been a contentious area, with multiple countries claiming parts of it. In 2016, an arbitral tribunal ruled in favor of the Philippines, stating that China's claims—particularly the nine-dash line—were unlawful under international law. The tribunal determined that China had violated the Philippines' rights within its exclusive economic zone (EEZ) and that China's land reclamation activities were illegal (source-1). Following this ruling, China rejected the tribunal's decision, labeling it "null and void" and asserting its historical claims to the South China Sea (source-2).
Despite the ruling, China continues to assert its claims over almost the entire South China Sea, which overlaps with the EEZs of several other nations, including Vietnam, Malaysia, and Brunei. The international community's response to China's claims has been mixed, with some nations supporting the tribunal's ruling while others, influenced by economic ties to China, have been less vocal (source-5).
Analysis
The claim that "China claims almost the entirety of the South China Sea despite an invalid ruling" is supported by the evidence presented in multiple credible sources. The 2016 arbitral ruling, which China has dismissed, explicitly stated that China's extensive claims lacked legal basis under international law. This ruling was a significant victory for the Philippines and undermined China's position in the region (source-1, source-2).
China's rejection of the ruling is consistent with its historical narrative of territorial sovereignty, which it claims dates back to ancient times. However, this narrative is not supported by international law, particularly the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), to which China is a signatory (source-5). The tribunal's decision has been described as a "devastating" blow to China's strategy in the South China Sea, as it provides a legal framework for other nations to challenge China's claims (source-2).
The reliability of the sources used in this analysis is high. The information comes from established news agencies and research commissions that specialize in international relations and maritime law. The AP News report provides direct quotes from Chinese officials and analysts, adding context to China's position and the implications of the ruling (source-2). The U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission is a reputable body that monitors U.S.-China relations, further validating the claims made (source-1).
Conclusion
The claim that "China claims almost the entirety of the South China Sea despite an invalid ruling" is True. The evidence indicates that China continues to assert its expansive claims in the South China Sea, despite a 2016 international tribunal ruling that invalidated these claims. China's rejection of the ruling and its ongoing activities in the region demonstrate a clear defiance of international law, reinforcing the validity of the claim.
