South China Sea row: Beijing rejects US advise to follow India's example vis-à-vis Bangladesh
UN-backed international tribunal has struck down China's claims over strategic South China Sea.
Beijing: A day after UN-backed international tribunal struck down its claims over the strategic South China Sea, Beijing on Thursday turned down the advice of United States to follow India's example of settling its maritime row with Bangladesh by implementing the judgement saying that there was 'no comparison' between the two cases.
At the same time, China also launched a blistering attack on the jurists of the tribunal today, saying a Japanese judge, who appointed the arbitrators, 'manipulated' the judgement against Beijing.
Except for a German judge who was appointed at the instance of the Philippines - the petitioner in the dispute - the rest of the four were appointed by Japanese jurist and diplomat Shunji Yanai, China's Assistant Foreign Minister Liu Zhenmin told a nationally televised media conference.
Claiming that the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague has no international status and its judgement can not be enforceable, he specially targeted Yanai saying he is a former Japanese diplomat and assisted Prime Minister Shinzo Abe.
Yanai manipulated the tribunal against China by appointing four judges from different European countries. These judges were not paid by the UN and who has paid them, Liu asked.
The judges - all European and one African - living in Europe has no knowledge of Asian history and culture, he said.
At the same time, China also said that the tribunal's verdict should be "dumped into garbage" and asserted that it has the right to declare a unilateral air-defence zone over the strategic South China Sea after its expansive maritime claims in the region was shunned by a five- member international jury.
China claims almost all of the South China Sea but its claims are fiercely contested by the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei and Taiwan.
It had refused to take part in the tribunal proceedings, with officials saying the tribunal had "no jurisdiction".
On the other hand, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Lu Kang told PTI, "There is a premise for the settlement of the relevant territorial dispute between India and Bangladesh through arbitration, that is, the two respected each other's sovereign wills and reached an agreement on the arbitration request through consultation."
"It is not like imposing one party's will on the other" unlike the Philippines which "unilaterally" filed the petition in Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA), he said in response to question over US Assistant Secretary of Defence for East Asia Abraham Denmark's recent comments that China should follow India's example of resolving its maritime boundary dispute with Bangladesh by implementing the award by a similar tribunal appointed by the PCA.
India accepted the award which was given in favour of Bangladesh to resolve the over 40-year maritime row.
The tribunal awarded Bangladesh 19,467 sq km of area in Bay Bengal in 2014.
"To India's great credit, it accepted the decision and has abided by it, noting at the time that settlement of the issue would enhance mutual understanding and goodwill between the two countries. This is an example we would encourage China to follow," Denmark told lawmakers at a Congressional hearing in Washington last week.
"The arbitral tribunal's upcoming ruling will present an opportunity for those in the region to determine whether the Asia-Pacific's future will be defined by adherence to international laws and norms that have helped keep the peace and enabled it to prosper, or whether the region's future will be determined by raw calculations of power," Denmark said.
Lu said previous Philippines President Benigno S Aquino unilaterally opted for arbitration and "imposed" it on China.
"By doing that the Aquino administration severely violated the agreement between China and Philippines and the consensus in the region, breached relevant provisions under UN Convention on Law of Seas (UNCLOS), infringed upon China's right as a sovereign state and state party to UNCLOS to resolve disputes by means of its own choice and went against international law," he said.
"Therefore there is no comparison between the two things," he said.
China has often accused the US for fomenting trouble in the South China Sea, through which USD 3 trillion of trade passes annually.
(With Agency inputs)