Spratly Islands dispute

In 1968, oil was discovered in the region.Note that the oil and gas discovered in the region so far has been in shallow / coastal-shelf waters, whereas (with notable exceptions), the majority of waters in the area are very deep, and unexplored. (One of the exceptions is the Reed Bank area.) Source: {{cite web |date=7 February 2013 |title=South China Sea |url=http://www.eia.gov/countries/analysisbriefs/South_China_Sea/south_china_sea.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140712135222/http://www.eia.gov/countries/analysisbriefs/South_China_Sea/south_china_sea.pdf |archive-date=12 July 2014 |access-date=7 June 2014 |publisher=US Energy Information Administration (eia) |page=13}} On 11 March 1976, the first major Philippine oil discovery occurred off the coast of Palawan, near the Spratly Islands territory. In 2010, these oil fields supplied 15% of all petroleum consumed in the Philippines.{{cite web |last=TED (Trade and Environment Database) |first=Mandala Project |date=December 1997 |title=Spratly Islands Dispute |url=http://www1.american.edu/projects/mandala/TED/ice/spratly.htm |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140107062330/http://www1.american.edu/projects/mandala/TED/ice/spratly.htm |archive-date=7 January 2014 |access-date=29 October 2013 |work=ICE Case Studies |publisher=American University}} In 1992, the PRC and Vietnam granted oil exploration contracts to US oil companies that covered overlapping areas in the Spratlys. In May 1992,{{cite book |last=Lai To |first=Lei |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=mTYKbYSsA4kC&pg=PA63 |title=Chian and the South China Sea dialogues |publisher=Praeger Publishers |year=1999 |isbn=978-0-275-96635-5 |location=Westport |page=63}} the China National Offshore Oil Corporation (CNOOC) and Crestone Energy (a US company based in Denver, Colorado) signed a co-operation contract for the joint exploration of the Wan'an Bei-21 block, a {{convert|25155|km2|mi2|-1}} section of the southwestern South China Sea that includes Spratly Island areas.{{cite news |last=Kate |first=Daniel |date=27 May 2011 |title=South China Sea Oil Rush Risks Clashes as U.S. Emboldens Vietnam on Claim |url=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-05-26/s-china-sea-oil-rush-risks-clashes-as-u-s-emboldens-vietnam.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140107033714/http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-05-26/s-china-sea-oil-rush-risks-clashes-as-u-s-emboldens-vietnam.html |archive-date=7 January 2014 |access-date=29 October 2013 |newspaper=Bloomberg News}}

In 2012–2013, the United States Energy Information Administration estimates very little oil and natural gas in contested areas such as the Paracels and the Spratly Islands. Most of the proved or probable 11 billion barrels of oil and 190 trillion cubic feet of natural gas in the South China Sea exist near undisputed shorelines.{{Cite web |title=Contested areas of South China Sea likely have few conventional oil and gas resources – Today in Energy – U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) |url=http://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.cfm?id=10651 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150523073201/http://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.cfm?id=10651 |archive-date=23 May 2015 |access-date=23 May 2015 |website=Energy Information Administration}}{{Cite web |date=5 April 2013 |title=All those oil and gas deposits everyone wants in the South China Sea may not even be there |url=https://foreignpolicy.com/2013/04/05/all-those-oil-and-gas-deposits-everyone-wants-in-the-south-china-sea-may-not-even-be-there/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150523055354/http://foreignpolicy.com/2013/04/05/all-those-oil-and-gas-deposits-everyone-wants-in-the-south-china-sea-may-not-even-be-there/ |archive-date=23 May 2015 |access-date=23 May 2015 |website=Foreign Policy|author-first1=John|author-last1=Hudson}}

In 2010, the Western Central Pacific (excluding the northernmost reaches of the South China Sea closest to the PRC coast) accounted for 14% of the total world catch at 11.7 million tonnes. This was up from less than 4 million tonnes in 1970.{{cite book |url=http://www.fao.org/docrep/016/i2727e/i2727e01.pdf |title=World review of fisheries and aquaculture |publisher=Food and Agriculture Organisation |year=2012 |location=Rome |pages=55–59 |access-date=29 October 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150828131307/http://www.fao.org/docrep/016/i2727e/i2727e01.pdf |archive-date=28 August 2015 |url-status=live}} In 1984, Brunei established an exclusive fishing zone encompassing Louisa Reef in the southeastern Spratly Islands.{{cite web |author=Lily B. Libo-on |date=13 June 2003 |title=When All Else Has Failed, Diplomacy Sets In |url=http://www.icriforum.org/secretariat/press_061303.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20050107032434/http://www.icriforum.org/secretariat/press_061303.html |archive-date=7 January 2005 |work=Borneo Bulletin.}} (Archived from [http://www.icriforum.org/secretariat/press_061303.html the original] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080228205656/http://www.icriforum.org/secretariat/press_061303.html|date=28 February 2008}} on 2005-01-07).

Additionally, pages 48 and 51 of "The Brunei-Malaysia Dispute over Territorial and Maritime Claims in International Law" by R. Haller-Trost, Clive Schofield, and Martin Pratt, published by the [http://www.dur.ac.uk/ibru/ International Boundaries Research Unit] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20091018082015/http://www.dur.ac.uk/ibru/|date=18 October 2009}}, University of Durham, UK, points out that this is a "territorial dispute" between Brunei and other claimants over the ownership of one above-water feature – Louisa Reef.

The area is close to some of the busiest shipping lanes in the world, accounting for $3.4 trillion of the $16 trillion global trade in 2016.{{cite web |last1=Schrag |first1=Jacque |date=2 August 2017 |title=How Much Trade Transits the South China Sea? |url=https://chinapower.csis.org/much-trade-transits-south-china-sea/ |website=ChinaPower Project |access-date=31 October 2023 |archive-date=8 June 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190608020005/https://chinapower.csis.org/much-trade-transits-south-china-sea/ |url-status=live }}

{{See also|List of maritime features in the Spratly Islands}}

File:Spratly_Islands_in_the_South_China_Sea_Department_of_State_map_2016587286_(2015).jpg

{{Spratly Islands OSM}}

File:South_China_Sea_claims_map.svg

File:China_Sea_-_Southern_Portion_-_Eastern_Sheet.png

China, the Philippines, Taiwan (ROC) and Vietnam claim the whole Spratly Islands while Brunei and Malaysia claim part of the Islands.

Brunei claims the part of the South China Sea nearest to it as part of its continental shelf and exclusive economic zone (EEZ). In 1984, Brunei declared an EEZ encompassing the above-water islets it claims in Louisa Reef. Brunei does not practice military control in the area.

Brunei's claims to the reef are based on the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).[https://www.un.org/Depts/los/index.htm Oceans & Law of the Sea] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170625183944/http://www.un.org/depts/los/index.htm|date=25 June 2017}}, United Nations{{cite web |date=22 August 2013 |title=Overview |url=https://www.un.org/Depts/los/convention_agreements/convention_overview_convention.htm |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170702090152/http://www.un.org/depts/los/convention_agreements/convention_overview_convention.htm |archive-date=2 July 2017 |access-date=29 June 2017 |work=United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 10 December 1982 |publisher=United Nations}} Brunei states that the southern part of the Spratly Islands chain is actually a part of its continental shelf, and therefore a part of its territory and resources.[https://web.archive.org/web/20120722052731/http://www1.american.edu/ted/SPRATLY.HTM Spratly Island Dispute (SPRATLY Case)], 30 April 1996, Trade Environment Database (TED), American University. (Archived from [http://www.american.edu/TED/SPRATLY.htm the original] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100814164634/http://www1.american.edu/TED/SPRATLY.htm|date=14 August 2010}} on 22 July 2012)

File:1947_Nanhai_Zhudao.png

The People's Republic of China (PRC) claims are based on history and not UNCLOS.{{cite journal |last1=Beckman |first1=Robert |year=2013 |title=The UN Convention on the Law of the Sea and the Maritime Disputes in the South China Sea |journal=The American Journal of International Law |publisher=American Society of International Law |volume=107 |issue=1 |pages=142–163 |doi=10.5305/amerjintelaw.107.1.0142 |jstor=10.5305/amerjintelaw.107.1.0142 |s2cid=140403142}} However, the PRC still claims all of the Spratly Islands as part of China. The PRC is a party to the UNCLOS, signing the agreement on 29 July 1994.

The Republic of China (ROC), which ruled Mainland China before 1949 and has been confined to Taiwan since 1949, also claims all of the Spratly Islands.

Chinese (Qin dynasty) fishermen may have fished around the islands since 200 BC,{{cite book |last1=Wortzel |first1=Larry M. |author-link1=Larry Wortzel |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=rfu-hR8msh4C&pg=PA180 |title=Dictionary of Contemporary Chinese Military History |last2=Higham |first2=Robin D. S. |publisher=ABC-CLIO |year=1999 |isbn=0-313-29337-6 |edition=illustrated |page=180 |access-date=12 July 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160101102529/https://books.google.com/books?id=rfu-hR8msh4C&pg=PA180 |archive-date=1 January 2016 |url-status=live}} although activity dates to before recorded history, thousands of years ago along with neighboring Nusantaria (present-day Philippines, Indonesia, Malaysia, Brunei, Taiwan, and East Timor).{{cite web |last1=Bowring |first1=Philip |title=Identity History: Austronesian Asia? |website=YaleGlobal Online |publisher=Yale University |access-date=18 Dec 2024 |url=https://archive-yaleglobal.yale.edu/content/identity-history-austronesian-asia |date=2 July 2019}} China's discovery claims to date back to the Han dynasty in 2 BC. The islands are claimed to have been marked on maps compiled during the Eastern Han dynasty and Eastern Wu (one of the Three Kingdoms). In the Yuan dynasty (12th century), several islands that may be the Spratlys were labelled as Chinese territory according to the Yuanshi, an official history commissioned by the Hongwu Emperor of the Ming dynasty in 1369.{{Citation |title=《元史》地理志;《元代疆域图叙》 |trans-title=History of Yuan Geographic Records; Yuan dynasty Annotated Territory Map}}{{Citation |title=《海南卫指挥佥事柴公墓志铬》 |trans-title=Hainan Commandery Comprehensive Public Memorial Records}} Similar labeling also occurred in the Qing dynasty (13th to 19th century);{{Citation |title=《清直省分图》天下总舆图 |trans-title=Qing dynasty Provincial maps: Tianxia Overview Map}} the islands may have appeared on a 1755 map, among others.{{Citation |title=《大清一统天下全图》 |trans-title=Qing dynasty Overview Tianxia Map}} French divers found remains of a 15th-century Chinese galleon near the coast of Brunei, cited by Beijing as proof that 15th-century Chinese sailed these waters.[http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/331763.stm Undersea Treasure Chest Stirs up Tensions] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060620030618/http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/331763.stm|date=20 June 2006}}, BBC, 29 April 1999.

In the 19th century, Europeans found that Chinese fishermen from Hainan annually sojourned to the Spratly Islands for part of the year, similar to neighboring Austronesians for thousands of years.{{cite journal |last1=Lipson |first1=Mark |last2=Loh |first2=Po-Ru |last3=Patterson |first3=Nick |last4=Moorjani |first4=Priya |last5=Stoneking |first5=Mark |last6=Berger |first6=Bonnie |last7=Reich |first7=David |title=Reconstructing Austronesian population history in Island Southeast Asia |journal=Nature Communications |date=19 Aug 2014 |volume=5 |page=4689 |doi=10.1038/ncomms5689|pmid=25137359 |pmc=4143916 |bibcode=2014NatCo...5.4689L }}{{cite journal |last1=Klamer |first1=Marian |title=The dispersal of Austronesian languages in Island South East Asia: Current findings and debates |journal=Language and Linguistics Compass |date=Apr 2019 |volume=13 |issue=4 |doi=10.1111/lnc3.12325|hdl=1887/74585 |hdl-access=free }} In 1877 the British launched the first modern legal claims to the Spratlys.{{cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=CNVf9R_L5FAC&pg=PA9 |title=War Or Peace in the South China Sea? |publisher=NIAS Press |others=Contributor: Nordic Institute of Asian Studies |year=2002 |isbn=87-91114-01-2 |editor-last=Kivimäki |editor-first=Timo |edition=illustrated |pages=9–11 |issn=0904-597X |access-date=10 March 2014 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140403224917/http://books.google.com/books?id=CNVf9R_L5FAC&pg=PA9 |archive-date=3 April 2014 |url-status=live |issue=Issue 45 of NIAS reports}}{{cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=9VrMXX3CgBMC |title=Security and International Politics in the South China Sea: Towards a co-operative management regime |publisher=Taylor & Francis |year=2008 |isbn=978-0-203-88524-6 |editor1-last=Bateman |editor1-first=Sam |edition=illustrated |page=43 |access-date=10 March 2014 |editor2-last=Emmers |editor2-first=Ralf |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160424071301/https://books.google.com/books?id=9VrMXX3CgBMC |archive-date=24 April 2016 |url-status=live}}

When it was discovered that the area was being surveyed by Germany in 1883, China issued protests against them. China sent naval forces on inspection tours in 1902 and 1907 of the Paracel Islands and placed flags and markers on the islands. In 1909 it established a naval presence for a time in the Paracels as a reaction to Japanese moves.{{cite journal|last=Bonnet|first=Francois-Xavier|title=Geopolitics of Scarborough Shoal|journal=Irasec's Discussion Paper|number=14|date=November 2012|url=http://www.irasec.com/documents/fichiers/40.pdf|publisher=Institut de Recherche sur l'Asie du Sud-Est Contemporaine – Research Institute on Contemporary Southeast Asia}}{{rp|p=14}} The Qing dynasty's successor state, the Republic of China, was to later claim the Spratly and Paracel Islands under the jurisdiction of Hainan.{{cite book |last=Severino |first=Rodolfo |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=83BIxG7Ig2cC&pg=PA76 |title=Where in the World is the Philippines?: Debating Its National Territory |publisher=Institute of Southeast Asian Studies |year=2011 |isbn=978-981-4311-71-7 |edition=illustrated |pages=74, 76 |access-date=12 July 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160101102529/https://books.google.com/books?id=83BIxG7Ig2cC&pg=PA76 |archive-date=1 January 2016 |url-status=live}}

The Spratlys and the Paracels were conquered from France{{cite journal |last=Claudius Madrolle |date=1939 |title=La question de Hai-nan et des Paracels |trans-title=The question of Hai-nan and Paracel |journal=Politique étrangère |language=fr |volume=4 |issue=3 |pages=302–312 |doi=10.3406/polit.1939.5631}} by Japan in 1939. Japan administered the Spratlys via Taiwan's jurisdiction and the Paracels via Hainan's jurisdiction. Upon its surrender in 1945, Japan handed the Paracels and Spratlys to Republic of China as the Allied powers had assigned the Republic of China to receive Japanese surrenders in that area.{{cite book |last1=Morley |first1=James W. |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=taOrjN83rLEC&pg=PA124 |title=Vietnam Joins the World |last2=Nishihara |first2=Masashi |date=1997 |publisher=M.E. Sharpe |isbn=978-0-7656-3306-4 |page=124 |access-date=12 July 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160101132938/https://books.google.com/books?id=taOrjN83rLEC&pg=PA124 |archive-date=1 January 2016 |url-status=live}}

After World War II ended, the Republic of China was the "most active claimant". The Republic of China then garrisoned Itu Aba (Taiping) Island in 1946 and posted Chinese flags and markers on it along with Woody island in the Paracels, France tried, but failed to make them leave Woody island. The aim of the Republic of China was to block the French claims.{{cite encyclopedia |title=Spratly Islands |encyclopedia=Encyclopædia Britannica |url=http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/561209/Spratly-Islands |access-date=16 May 2014 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150520232007/http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/561209/Spratly-Islands |archive-date=20 May 2015 |author2=Lotha, Gloria |name-list-style=amp |author1=Das, Darshana |url-status=live}} The Republic of China drew up the map showing the U-shaped claim on the entire South China Sea including the Spratly and Paracels in 1947.

Taiwan's garrison from 1946 to 1950 and 1956–present on Itu Aba represents an "effective occupation" of the Spratly Islands.{{cite book |last=Pak |first=Hŭi-gwŏn |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=szcywfgKySAC&pg=PA92 |title=The Law of the Sea and Northeast Asia: A Challenge for Cooperation |publisher=Martinus Nijhoff Publishers |year=2000 |isbn=90-411-1407-6 |edition=illustrated |volume=35 of Publications on Ocean Development |pages=91–92 |access-date=12 July 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160101132938/https://books.google.com/books?id=szcywfgKySAC&pg=PA92 |archive-date=1 January 2016 |url-status=live}}{{cite news |last=Lin |first=Cheng-yi |date=22 February 2008 |title=Buffer benefits in Spratly initiative |url=http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/JB22Ad02.html |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131019105844/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/JB22Ad02.html |archive-date=19 October 2013 |access-date=14 May 2014 |newspaper=Asia Times Online}}

On May 15, 1996, the PRC submitted to the United Nations its geographic baseline, which included the Paracel Islands and Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands, but did not include the Spratly Islands.{{cite web |date=26 April 2021 |title=Baselines of the Territorial Sea of the People's Republic of China that claimed in 1996 |url=http://iilss.net/baselines-of-the-territorial-sea-of-the-peoples-republic-of-china-that-claimed-in-1996/ |access-date=5 May 2023 |website=IILSS-International institute for Law of the Sea Studies |archive-date=5 May 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230505015800/http://iilss.net/baselines-of-the-territorial-sea-of-the-peoples-republic-of-china-that-claimed-in-1996/ |url-status=live }}{{cite web |title=Declaration of the Government of the Peoples Republic of China on the Baseline of the Territorial Sea of the People's Republic of China |url=https://www.un.org/Depts/los/LEGISLATIONANDTREATIES/PDFFILES/DEPOSIT/chn_mzn7_1996.pdf |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200921165712/https://www.un.org/Depts/los/LEGISLATIONANDTREATIES/PDFFILES/DEPOSIT/chn_mzn7_1996.pdf |archive-date=2020-09-21 |access-date=5 May 2023}}{{cite web |title=Submission with the Compliance of the Deposit Obligations Pursuant to the UNCLOS |url=https://www.un.org/depts/los/LEGISLATIONANDTREATIES/STATEFILES/CHN.htm |access-date=5 May 2023 |website=www.un.org}}

China and Taiwan rejected a 2016 UNCLOS arbitration that found no support for their historical titles to the maritime areas and resources within the nine-dash line, without making determinations regarding the sovereignty of the terrestrial islands there.{{cite web |date=7 December 2016 |title=Eleventh Press Release 12072016 (English) |url=https://pcacases.com/web/sendAttach/1801 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220120114023/http://www.pcacases.com/web/sendAttach/1801 |archive-date=20 January 2022 |access-date=30 January 2022 |publisher=Permanent Court of Arbitration}}{{cite web |author1=Phillips, Tom |author2=Holmes, Oliver |author3=Bowcott, Owen |date=12 July 2016 |title=Beijing rejects tribunal's ruling in South China Sea case |url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jul/12/philippines-wins-south-china-sea-case-against-china |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160712220441/https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jul/12/philippines-wins-south-china-sea-case-against-china |archive-date=12 July 2016 |access-date=26 July 2016 |work=The Guardian}}{{cite web |last=Zannia |first=Neyla |date=14 July 2016 |title=Taiwan rejects ruling on South China Sea with Taiping Island defined as 'rocks' |url=http://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2016/07/taiwan-rejects-ruling-on-south-china-sea-with-taiping-island-defined-as-rocks/ |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160715145720/http://www.theonlinecitizen.com/2016/07/taiwan-rejects-ruling-on-south-china-sea-with-taiping-island-defined-as-rocks/ |archive-date=15 July 2016 |access-date=26 July 2016 |publisher=The Online Citizen}}

Malaysia claims a small number of islands in the Spratly Islands and its claims cover only the islands included in its exclusive economic zone of 200 miles as defined by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. Malaysia has militarily occupied five islands that it considers to be within its continental shelf.{{Cite web |title=Malaysia Archives |url=https://amti.csis.org/island-tracker/malaysia/ |access-date=2021-12-01 |website=Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative |language=en-US |archive-date=1 December 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211201220608/https://amti.csis.org/island-tracker/malaysia/ |url-status=live }} Swallow Reef (Layang Layang / Terumbu Layang / Pulau Layang Layang) was under control in 1983 and has been turned into an island through a land reclamation which now also hosts a dive resort.{{cite book |author=Ooi, Keat Gin |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=QKgraWbb7yoC&pg=PA1241 |title=Southeast Asia: A Historical Encyclopedia, from Angkor Wat to East Timor |date=2004 |publisher=ABC-CLIO |isbn=978-1-57607-770-2 |pages=1241– |access-date=12 July 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140707141226/http://books.google.com/books?id=QKgraWbb7yoC&pg=PA1241 |archive-date=7 July 2014 |url-status=live}} The Malaysian military also occupies Ardasier Reef (Terumbu Ubi), and Mariveles Reef (Terumbu Mantanani).{{citation needed|date=July 2024}}

Malaysia's claims are based upon the continental shelf principle, and have clearly defined coordinates within the limits of its EEZ defined in 1979.{{cite book |author=Chia Lin Sien |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=5oaKNzGs_CgC&pg=PA78 |title=Southeast Asia Transformed: A Geography of Change |publisher=Institute of Southeast Asian Studies |year=2003 |isbn=978-981-230-119-2 |pages=78– |access-date=12 July 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140707134522/http://books.google.com/books?id=5oaKNzGs_CgC&pg=PA78 |archive-date=7 July 2014 |url-status=live}} This argument requires that the islands were res nullius and this requirement is said to be satisfied as when Japan renounced their sovereignty over the islands according to the San Francisco Treaty, there was a relinquishment of the right to the islands without any special beneficiary. Therefore, the islands became res nullius and available for annexation.{{Cite journal |last=Furtado |first=Xavier |date=December 1999 |title=International Law and the Dispute over the Spratly Islands: Whither UNCLOS? |journal=Contemporary Southeast Asia |volume=21 |issue=3 |pages=386–404 |doi=10.1355/CS21-3D|doi-broken-date=16 January 2025 }}

{{Main|Philippines and the Spratly Islands}}

File:1801_Cary_Map_of_the_East_Indies_and_Southeast_Asia_(_Singapore,_Borneo,_Sumatra,_Java,_Philippines)_-_Geographicus_-_EastIndies-cary-1801.jpg Isles which shows the placement of the Spratly Islands. Most of the names have changed since then.]]

The Republic of the Philippines claims the Spratly islands and are based on sovereignty over the Spratly Islands on the issues of res nullius and geography.{{citation needed|date=November 2024}}

When the Philippines gained independence in 1946, the Philippine nationalists wanted to claim the Spratly Islands. The American advisors, however, discouraged them due to the fact that the Spanish-American Treaty of 1898 clearly stipulated that the western limit of the Philippine islands did not include the Spratlys. The Americans did not want to bring conflict with the Chiang Kai-shek regime in China.

The Philippines contend their claim was res nullius as there was no effective sovereignty over the islands until the 1930s when France and then Japan acquired the islands. When Japan renounced their sovereignty over the islands according to the San Francisco Treaty, there was a relinquishment of the right to the islands without any special beneficiary. Therefore, the islands became res nullius and available for annexation, according to the claim.

In 1956, a private Filipino citizen, Tomás Cloma, unilaterally declared a state on 53 features in the South China Sea, calling it "Freedomland". In December 1974, Cloma was arrested and forced to sign a document to convey to the Philippines whatever rights he might have had in the territory for one peso.{{cite book |author=Womack, Brantly |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=kzBWq44_VSUC&pg=PA218 |title=China and Vietnam |publisher=Cambridge University Press |year=2006 |isbn=978-1-139-44844-4 |page=218 |access-date=12 July 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140708085548/http://books.google.com/books?id=kzBWq44_VSUC&pg=PA218 |archive-date=8 July 2014 |url-status=live}} Cloma sold his claim to the Philippine government, which annexed (de jure) the islands in 1978, calling them Kalayaan.{{citation needed|date=May 2015}} On 11 June 1978, President Ferdinand Marcos of the Philippines issued Presidential decree No. 1596, declaring the Spratly Islands (referred to therein as the Kalayaan Island Group) as Philippine territory.{{cite web |date=11 June 1978 |title=Presidential Decree No. 1596 – Declaring certain area part of the Philippine Territory and providing for their government and Administration |url=http://www.chanrobles.com/presidentialdecrees/presidentialdecreeno1596.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131026073255/http://www.chanrobles.com/presidentialdecrees/presidentialdecreeno1596.html |archive-date=26 October 2013 |access-date=28 May 2012 |publisher=Chan Robles Law Library}}

File:Ph_Territorial_Map.png

The Philippine claim to Kalayaan on a geographical basis can be summarised using the assertion that Kalayaan is distinct from other island groups in the South China Sea, because of the size of the biggest island in the Kalayaan group.{{Citation needed|date=April 2012}} A second argument used by the Philippines regarding their geographical claim over the Spratlys is that all the islands claimed by the Philippines lie within its 200-mile exclusive economic zone according to the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. This argument assumes that the islands were res nullius. The Republic of the Philippines also contend, under maritime law that the People's Republic of China can not extend its baseline claims to the Spratlys because the PRC is not an archipelagic state.{{Citation needed|date=August 2024}}

File:Bia_VNCH_Truong_Sa_-_Republic_of_Vietnam_Spratly_Islands_Territorial_Marker.JPG (South Vietnam) on Southwest Cay, Spratly Islands, defining the cay as part of Vietnamese territory (to Phước Tuy province). Used from 22 August 1956 until 1975, when replaced by another one from the Socialist Republic of Vietnam (successor state after the Fall of Saigon)]]

On 25 July 1994, Vietnam ratified the UNCLOS. Upon ratification it declared:

{{blockquote|The National Assembly reiterates Viet Nam's sovereignty over the Hoang Sa and Truong Sa archipelagoes and its position to settle those disputes relating to territorial claims as well as other disputes in the Eastern Sea through peaceful negotiations in the spirit of equality, mutual respect and understanding, and with due respect of international law, particularly the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, and of the sovereign rights and jurisdiction of the coastal States over their respective continental shelves and exclusive economic zones{{cite web |url= https://www.un.org/depts/los/convention_agreements/convention_declarations.htm#Viet%20Nam%20Upon%20ratification |title= UNCLOS. Declarations upon ratification: Viet Nam |publisher= United Nations |date= 25 July 1994 |access-date= 29 June 2017 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20130206162003/http://www.un.org/Depts/los/convention_agreements/convention_declarations.htm#Viet%20Nam%20Upon%20ratification |archive-date= 6 February 2013 |url-status= live }}}}

Vietnam's response to China's claim is that Chinese records on Qianli Changsha and Wanli Shitang are records about non-Chinese territories.{{cite web |author=Luu Van Loi |year=1996 |title=The Sino-Vietnamese difference on the Hoang Sa and Truong Sa archipelagos |url=http://paracels.info/luuvanloi_1996_sinovietnamesedifference.pdf |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090327150654/http://paracels.info/luuvanloi_1996_sinovietnamesedifference.pdf |archive-date=27 March 2009 |publisher=The Gioi publisher}} For example, Qianli Changsha and Wanli Shitang were referred to in the ancient Chinese texts Ling Wai Dai DaLing Wai Dai Da (Information on Things Beyond the Passes) by Zhou Choufei and Zhu Fan ZhiZhu Fan Zhi (Notes on Foreign Countries) by Zhao Juguo as being in the Sea of Jiaozhi, Jiaozhi being the old name for a Chinese province in modern-day northern Vietnam, or as writings on foreign countries.

Vietnam's view is that the Chinese records do not constitute the declaration and exercise of sovereignty and that China did not declare sovereignty over the Spratlys until after World War II.{{citation needed|date=November 2024}}

Vietnam claims the Spratlys based on international law on declaring and exercising sovereignty.

File:Quân_đội_duyệt_binh_ở_Trường_Sa.JPG Naval Infantry marching on Spratly Island]]

Vietnam claims that it has occupied the Spratly and the Paracel islands at least since the 17th century, when they were not under the sovereignty of any state, and that they exercised sovereignty over the two archipelagos continuously and peacefully until they were invaded by Chinese armed forces.{{cite book |last1=Dzurek, Daniel J. |author-link1=Daniel Dzurek |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=o5P4U4UlucMC&pg=PA8 |title=The Spratly Islands dispute: who's on first? |last2=Schofield |first2=Clive H. |publisher=IBRU |year=1996 |isbn=978-1-897643-23-5 |page=8}} In Phủ biên tạp lục (撫邊雜錄, Miscellaneous Records of Pacification in the Border Area) by the scholar Lê Quý Đôn, Hoàng Sa (Paracel Islands), and Trường Sa (Spratly Islands) were defined as belonging to Quảng Ngãi District. In Đại Nam nhất thống toàn đồ (大南ー統全圖), an atlas of Vietnam completed in 1838, Trường Sa was shown as Vietnamese territory.{{cite web |title=The Vietnamese state's long standing and uninterrupted sovereignty over the Hoang Sa and Truong Sa archipelagoes |url=http://vietnam.vn/the-vietnamese-states-long-standing-and-uninterrupted-sovereignty-over-the-hoang-sa-and-truong-sa-archipelagoes-c1070n20120102114104437.htm |access-date=28 October 2012 |publisher=Authority of Foreign Information Service (Vietnam)}} {{dead link|date=March 2014|url=http://vietnam.vn/the-vietnamese-states-long-standing-and-uninterrupted-sovereignty-over-the-hoang-sa-and-truong-sa-archipelagoes-c1070n20120102114104437.htm}} Vietnam had conducted many geographical and resource surveys of the islands. The results of these surveys have been recorded in Vietnamese literature and history published since the 17th century. After the treaty signed with the Nguyễn dynasty, France represented Vietnam in international affairs and exercised sovereignty over the islands.

The Cairo Declaration, drafted by the Allies and China towards the end of World War II, listed the territories that the Allies intended to strip from Japan and return to China. Despite China being among the authors of the declaration, this list did not include the Spratlys.{{cite news |date=1 December 1943 |title=Cairo Communiquè, December 1, 1943 |url=http://www.ndl.go.jp/constitution/e/shiryo/01/002_46shoshi.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170726215106/http://www.ndl.go.jp/constitution/e/shiryo/01/002_46shoshi.html |archive-date=26 July 2017 |access-date=24 August 2012 |publisher=Japan National Diet Library}} Vietnam's response to China's claim that the Cairo Declaration somehow recognised the latter's sovereignty over the Spratlys is that it has no basis in fact.{{citation needed|date=November 2024}}

At the San Francisco Conference on the peace treaty with Japan, the Soviet Union proposed that the Paracels and Spratlys be recognised as belonging to China. This proposal was rejected by an overwhelming majority of the delegates. On 7 July 1951, Tran Van Huu, head of the Bảo Đại Government's (State of Vietnam) delegation to the conference declared that the Paracels and Spratlys were part of Vietnamese territory. This declaration met with no challenge from the 51 representatives at the conference. North Vietnam, however, supported China's authority.{{Citation |last=Ma |first=Xuechan |title=Introduction |date=2021-11-20 |work=The Spratly Islands and International Law |pages=1–12 |url=https://brill.com/display/book/9789004504332/BP000001.xml |access-date=2024-09-20 |publisher=Brill Nijhoff |language=en |isbn=978-90-04-50433-2}} The final text of the Treaty of San Francisco did not name any recipient of the Spratlys.[http://www.taiwandocuments.org/sanfrancisco01.htm San Francisco Peace Treaty] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20010221045459/http://www.taiwandocuments.org/sanfrancisco01.htm|date=21 February 2001}}. Taiwandocuments.org. Retrieved 12 May 2015.

The Geneva Accords, which China was a signatory, settled the First Indochina War end. French Indochina was split into three countries: Laos, Cambodia and Vietnam. Vietnam was to be temporarily divided along the 17th Parallel.{{citation needed|date=November 2024}}

Chapter I, Article 4 states:

{{blockquote|The provisional military demarcation line between the two final regrouping zones is extended into the territorial waters by a line perpendicular to the general line of the coast. All coastal islands north of this boundary shall be evacuated by the armed forces of the French Union, and all islands south of it shall be evacuated by the forces of the People's Army of Viet-Nam.{{cite web |url=https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1952-54v16/d1044 |title=Agreement on the Cessation of Hostilities in Vietnam |publisher=Office of the Historian, Bureau of Public Affairs, United States Department of State |access-date=5 May 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190531045335/https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1952-54v16/d1044 |archive-date=31 May 2019 |url-status=live }}}}

On 26 October 1955, the Republic of Vietnam "South Vietnam" replaced the State of Vietnam (part of the French Union) and inherit of its rights. The Vietnamese government's Vietnam United Youth League, which runs the newspaper Thanh Niên News, claims that although, nothing was said explicitly about offshore archipelagos, which was of small interest by that times, it was clearly understood by all the parties that the Republic of Vietnam inherit of all the French Indochina's Vietnamese territories under the 17th Parallel. As the Paracel and the Spratly archipelagos (which lay below the 17th parallel) were part of the French Indochina since 1933, they were part of "South Vietnam" territory. The French bestowed its titles, rights, and claims over the two island chains to the Republic of Vietnam.{{cite news |author=Thao Vi |date=2 June 2014 |title=Late Vietnam PM's letter gives no legal basis to China's island claim |url=http://www.thanhniennews.com/politics/late-vietnam-pms-letter-gives-no-legal-basis-to-chinas-island-claim-26821.html |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160315081937/http://www.thanhniennews.com/politics/late-vietnam-pms-letter-gives-no-legal-basis-to-chinas-island-claim-26821.html |archive-date=15 March 2016 |access-date=4 May 2016 |newspaper=Thanh Nien News}}{{Unreliable source?|reason=Vietnamese media Thanh Niên news is run by Hội Liên hiệp Thanh niên Việt Nam (Vietnam United Youth League) which is run by the Vietnamese government|date=May 2016}}

The Republic of Vietnam (RVN) exercised sovereignty over the islands, by placing border markers on the Spratlys to indicate South Vietnamese sovereignty over the archipelago. Up to the end of the Vietnam War the Republic of Vietnam Navy held military control over the majority of the Spratly Islands until 1975, when North Vietnamese troops attacked South Vietnamese troops and occupied the islands. After the Vietnam War, the unified Vietnam SRV (Socialist Republic of Vietnam) continued to claim the Spratly islands as an indisputably integral part of Vietnam.{{citation needed|date=November 2024}}

The islands occupied by Vietnam are organised as a district of Khánh Hòa Province. According to the 2009 census, the Trường Sa District has a population of 195 people.{{cite web |title=The 2009 Vietnam Population and Housing census: Completed results |url=http://www.gso.gov.vn/default_en.aspx?tabid=515&idmid=5&ItemID=10799 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121113222152/http://www.gso.gov.vn/default_en.aspx?tabid=515&idmid=5&ItemID=10799 |archive-date=13 November 2012 |access-date=20 December 2012 |publisher=General Statistics Office of Vietnam}} At the 12th National Assembly (2007–2011) Election held early in Trường Sa, the people and soldiers also voted for their local district government for the first time. For the first time, Trường Sa is organised like a normal inland district, with a township (Trường Sa) and two communes (Sinh Tồn and Song Tử Tây). Forty nine people were elected to the communes' people's councils.{{citation needed|date=May 2014}} In July 2012 the National Assembly of Vietnam passed a law demarcating Vietnamese sea borders to include the Spratly and Paracel Islands.[http://www.smh.com.au/world/china-gets-tough-as-vietnam-claims-disputed-islands-20120622-20th6.html China gets tough as Vietnam claims disputed islands] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120626045014/http://www.smh.com.au/world/china-gets-tough-as-vietnam-claims-disputed-islands-20120622-20th6.html |date=26 June 2012 }}, Sydney Morning Herald, 23 June 2012 (archived from [http://www.smh.com.au/world/china-gets-tough-as-vietnam-claims-disputed-islands-20120622-20th6.html the original] on 22 June 2012).{{cite news |last=Perlez |first=Jane |date=21 June 2012 |title=China Criticizes Vietnam in Dispute Over Islands – Pittsburgh Post-Gazette |url=http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/news/world/china-criticizes-vietnam-in-dispute-over-islands-641399/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120623063435/http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/news/world/china-criticizes-vietnam-in-dispute-over-islands-641399/ |archive-date=23 June 2012 |access-date=25 June 2012 |work=Pittsburgh Post-Gazette}}

Champa historically had a large presence in the South China Sea. The Vietnamese broke Champa's power in an invasion of Champa in 1471, and then finally conquered the last remnants of the Cham people in a war in 1832.{{cite book |author=Ian Glover |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=6kDm5d3cMIYC&pg=PA209 |title=Southeast Asia: From Prehistory to History |publisher=Psychology Press |year=2004 |isbn=978-0-415-29777-6 |page=209 |access-date=12 July 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160617182540/https://books.google.com/books?id=6kDm5d3cMIYC&pg=PA209 |archive-date=17 June 2016 |url-status=live}}{{cite book |author=Bill Hayton |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=01FmBAAAQBAJ&pg=PA14 |title=The South China Sea: The Struggle for Power in Asia |date=2014 |publisher=Yale University Press |isbn=978-0-300-18954-4 |pages=14–16 |access-date=12 July 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160519230620/https://books.google.com/books?id=01FmBAAAQBAJ&pg=PA14 |archive-date=19 May 2016 |url-status=live}}{{cite book |author=Robert D. Kaplan |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=gIcpAgAAQBAJ&pg=PT12 |title=Asia's Cauldron: The South China Sea and the End of a Stable Pacific |date=2014 |publisher=Random House Publishing Group |isbn=978-0-8129-9433-9 |pages=12–16 |access-date=12 July 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160610173411/https://books.google.com/books?id=gIcpAgAAQBAJ&pg=PT12 |archive-date=10 June 2016 |url-status=live}}{{cite book |author=Anthony Reid |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=YNMGBAAAQBAJ&pg=PT34 |title=Charting the Shape of Early Modern Southeast Asia |date=2000 |publisher=Silkworm Books |isbn=978-1-63041-481-8 |pages=34–38 |access-date=12 July 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160427191056/https://books.google.com/books?id=YNMGBAAAQBAJ&pg=PT34 |archive-date=27 April 2016 |url-status=live}} The Vietnamese government fears that using the evidence of Champa's historical connection to the disputed islands in the South China Sea would expose the human rights violations and killings of ethnic minorities in Vietnam such as in the 2001 and 2004 uprisings, and lead to the issue of Cham autonomy being brought to attention.{{cite journal |last=Bray |first=Adam |date=16 June 2014 |title=The Cham: Descendants of Ancient Rulers of South China Sea Watch Maritime Dispute From Sidelines |url=http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/06/140616-south-china-sea-vietnam-china-cambodia-champa/ |url-status=dead |journal=National Geographic News |publisher=National Geographic |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140924055038/http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/06/140616-south-china-sea-vietnam-china-cambodia-champa/ |archive-date=24 September 2014 |access-date=3 September 2014}}

File:1958_diplomatic_note_from_phamvandong_to_zhouenlai.jpg of North Vietnam to Chinese premier Zhou Enlai in 1958 regarding the 12-nautical mile breadth of China's territorial waters.]]

During the Hai Yang Shi You 981 standoff, also known as the 2014 China-Vietnam oil rig crisis near the Paracel Islands China has produced a letter written by North Vietnam's former prime minister Phạm Văn Đồng in 1958 as proof that it holds sovereignty over the Paracel and Spratly islands.{{cite news |author=Wu Yuanfu |date=18 June 2014 |title=Vietnam must honor Pham's note |url=https://www.chinadaily.com.cn/opinion/2014-06/18/content_17595777.htm |newspaper=China Daily}}

The Vietnamese newspaper Thanh Niên News claims China has intentionally misrepresented the letter, which contains no direct reference to either island chain. In addition, they claim that China is ignoring the spirit and time in which the letter was written. During that time, the two communist neighbours shared extremely close ties and the US navy was patrolling the Taiwan Strait, threatening them both. The letter, according to the newspaper, represented a diplomatic gesture of goodwill that has no legal relevance to the current territorial dispute.{{Unreliable source?|reason=Vietnamese media Thanh Niên news is run by Hội Liên hiệp Thanh niên Việt Nam (Vietnam United Youth League) which is run by the Vietnamese government|date=May 2016}}

On 4 September 1958, with the seventh fleet of the US Navy patrolling the Taiwan Strait, China announced its decision to extend the breadth of its territorial waters to 12 nautical miles. The United Nations (to which China was not yet a member) had just held its first Conference on the Law of the Sea in Switzerland in 1956, and the resulting treaties, including the Convention on the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone, were signed in 1958. Though the UN conference was considered a success, it left the exact breadth of each nation's territorial waters somewhat unresolved; the US, for instance, said it should extend just three nautical miles.

On 14 September 1958, North Vietnam's PM Phạm Văn Đồng wrote a letter to PM Zhou Enlai in response to China's declaration.

The Vietnamese newspaper Thanh Nien News claims that the letter has no legal relevance in China's sovereignty claims to the Paracel and Spratly archipelagos for the three following reasons:

• Point 1: The Democratic Republic of Vietnam (North Vietnam) was not in control of the Paracel and the Spratly archipelagos at the time PM Dong wrote his letter.
• Point 2: The Constitutions of 1946 and 1957 of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam stipulated that territorial transfers must be decided by an act of parliament, the most powerful body in the country. As such, the prime minister had no right to relinquish the islands.
• Point 3: PM Phạm Văn Đồng's letter is a unilateral declaration written solely as a response to China's declaration on a 12 nautical mile territorial waters. The letter makes no mention, whatsoever, of territorial sovereignty over any archipelago.{{Unreliable source?|reason=Vietnamese media Thanh Niên news is run by Hội Liên hiệp Thanh niên Việt Nam (Vietnam United Youth League) which is run by the Vietnamese government|date=May 2016}}

File:South_China_Sea_Claims_and_Boundary_Agreements_2012.jpg

The doctrine of intertemporal law was established after the Island of Palmas Case ruling. Under the doctrine, treaty rights are assessed under the laws in force at the time the treaty is made, not at the time a dispute takes place.Island of Palmas Case, p.845, Report of International Arbitral Awards, United Nations (2006)The Evolutionary Interpretation of Treaties, Eirik Bjorgee, Oxford, p. 142 (2014)

International law on claims differ if the territory is inhabited or uninhabited. In the 1928 Island of Palmas case, for inhabited territories, the court stated that "although continuous in principle, sovereignty cannot be exercised in fact at every moment on every point of a territory. The intermittence and discontinuity compatible with the maintenance of the right necessarily differ according as inhabited or inhabited regions are involved, or region enclosed within territories in which sovereignty is incontestably displayed or again regions accessible from, for instance, the high seas."Island of Palmas Case, p.840, Report of International Arbitral Awards, United Nations (2006) For uninhabited territories, the 1931 Clipperton Island case ruled that "if a territory, by virtue of the fact it was completely uninhabited, is, from the first moment when the occupying state makes its appearance there, at the absolute and undisputed disposition of that state, from the moment the taking of possession must be considered as accomplished, and the occupation is thereby completed. Xxx [T]the fact that [France] has not exercised her authority there in a positive manner does not imply the forfeiture of an acquisition already definitely perfected."Arbitral Award on the Subject of the Difference Relative to the Sovereignty over Clipperton Island, American Journal of International Law 26, No. 2 (April 1931); 390. The ruling was affirmed in the 1933 Eastern Greenland case.Legal Status of Eastern Greenland (Norway v. Denmark), Permanent Court of International Justice, 1933, pp. 51-52, PCIJ Series A/B. 53

In the Eastern Greenland Case between Norway and Denmark, the critical date doctrine was established. It was ruled by the Permanent Court of International Justice (PCIJ) that the Norwegian proclamation on July 10, 1931, annexing Eastern Greenland was the "critical date" in that specific case.Legal Status of Eastern Greenland (Norway v. Denmark), Permanent Court of International Justice, 1933, PCIJ Series A/B. No. 53

Under the principle of uti possidetis juris, the boundaries of former colonies must be respected by all states. It was established after the Frontier Dispute case between Burkina Faso and Mali. The ICJ ruled that uti possidetis juris is a "general principle, which is logically connected with the phenomenon of the obtaining of independence, wherever it occurs. Its obvious purpose is to prevent the independence and stability of new States being endangered by fratricidal struggles provoked by the challenging of frontiers following the withdrawal of the administering power…Its purpose, at the time of the achievement of independence by the former Spanish colonies of America, was to scotch any designs which non-American colonizing powers might have on regions which had been assigned by the former metropolitan State to one division or another, but which were still uninhabited or unexplored."{{Cite web |url=https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/uti_possidetis_juris |title=uti possidetis juris |access-date=19 June 2024 |archive-date=14 February 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180214073609/https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/uti_possidetis_juris |url-status=live }}

Maps cannot establish title to territory unless if it is attached to a treaty. Moreover, maps unilaterally produced by a state, even if not attached to a treaty, can bind the producing state if it is "adverse to its interest". This was established in the 2002 Delimitation of the Border between the State of Eritrea and Ethiopia case, and was affirmed further in the Pedra Blanca arbitration between Malaysia and Singapore in 2008, when the ICJ ruled: "The map still stands as a statement of geographical fact, especially when the State adversely affected has itself produced and disseminated it, even against its own interest."Case Concerning Sovereignty over Pedra Blanca/Pulau Batu Puteh, Middle Rocks and South Ledge, Malaysia v.Singapore, ICJ, May 23, 2008.

{{Main|Extended continental shelf}}

Via UNCLOS, the United Nations provided for countries with coastlines to submit claims to the UN's Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf (CLCS) for their continental shelf to be extended beyond 200 nautical miles of their shores.[https://www.un.org/Depts/los/clcs_new/clcs_home.htm Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170620043207/http://www.un.org/depts/los/clcs_new/clcs_home.htm|date=20 June 2017}} (CLCS), United Nations By 13 May 2009, a total of 48 nations made full claims, and dozens more made preliminary submissions.{{cite news |date=13 May 2009 |title=China asserts sea border claims |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8047206.stm |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090519084700/http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8047206.stm |archive-date=19 May 2009 |access-date=11 June 2009 |publisher=BBC}} Two of the submissions made to the CLCS addressed claims in the South China Sea (SCS) – one by Vietnam for a claim over the northern portion of the SCS (which included the Paracel Islands), and another jointly by Vietnam and Malaysia for a joint claim over a "defined area" in the middle of the SCS between the two countries, which included part of the Spratly Islands. Brunei made a preliminary submission notifying of its intention to claim a continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles from its shores.Refer to the [https://www.un.org/Depts/los/clcs_new/clcs_home.htm CLCS website] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170620043207/http://www.un.org/depts/los/clcs_new/clcs_home.htm|date=20 June 2017}} for more information on Brunei's preliminary submission.

China (PRC) immediately issued protests over the two submissions and called on the United Nations not to consider them. It also issued a stern warning to countries not to claim the islands which it said were its sovereign territory.{{cite web |date=10 May 2009 |title=Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Ma Zhaoxu's remarks on Vietnam's Submission on Outer Limits of the Continental Shelf in South China Sea |url=http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/eng/xwfw/s2510/2535/t561454.htm |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090528091434/http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/eng/xwfw/s2510/2535/t561454.htm |archive-date=28 May 2009 |access-date=11 June 2009 |publisher=Ministry of Foreign Affairs, People's Republic of China}}

On 23 May 2011, Former Philippine President Benigno Aquino III warned the visiting Chinese defense minister Liang Guanglie of a possible arms race in the region if tensions worsened over disputes in the South China Sea. In March, the Philippines complained that Chinese patrol boats had harassed a Philippine oil exploration vessel in disputed waters near the Spratlys, and subsequently filed a formal protest at the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS).{{cite web |date=24 May 2011 |title=Philippines warns of arms race in South China Sea |url=http://globalnation.inquirer.net/2247/philippines-warns-of-arms-race-in-south-china-sea |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110525234118/http://globalnation.inquirer.net/2247/philippines-warns-of-arms-race-in-south-china-sea |archive-date=25 May 2011 |access-date=25 May 2011 |publisher=Inquirer Global Nation |agency=Agence France-Presse}}

{{Excerpt|South China Sea Arbitration}}

On 22 July 1992, ASEAN issued a declaration on the South China Sea, emphasising that the dispute should be solved peacefully without resorting to violence.{{Cite web |title=1992 Asean Declaration on the South China Sea|url=http://cil.nus.edu.sg/rp/pdf/1992%20ASEAN%20Declaration%20on%20the%20South%20China%20Sea-pdf.pdf |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160311053631/http://cil.nus.edu.sg/rp/pdf/1992%20ASEAN%20Declaration%20on%20the%20South%20China%20Sea-pdf.pdf |archive-date=11 March 2016 |access-date=23 February 2016|date =22 July 1992}}

On 4 November 2002 in Phnom Penh, the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea{{cite web |date=4 November 2002 |title=Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea |url=http://www.aseansec.org/13163.htm |url-status=usurped |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120630211214/http://www.aseansec.org/13163.htm |archive-date=30 June 2012 |access-date=20 June 2012 |publisher=Association of Southeast Asian Nations}} was signed by the 10 foreign ministers of ASEAN countries and China (PRC). The parties explicitly undertook in this declaration, "to resolve their territorial and jurisdictional disputes by peaceful means, without resorting to the threat or use of force, through friendly consultations and negotiations by sovereign states directly concerned".

In July 2012, China (PRC) announced that it is open to launching discussions on the Code of Conduct in the South China Sea, but called for all parties to exercise self-restraint in keeping with the spirit of previous declarations and United Nation conventions. This announcement has been criticised by many neighbouring states because of the contradictions seen in the Scarborough Shoal at that time where China has established de facto control.{{cite news |date=13 July 2012 |title=China open to discussion on South China Sea code |url=http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2012-07/13/content_15579101.htm |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120719000326/http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2012-07/13/content_15579101.htm |archive-date=19 July 2012 |access-date=14 July 2012 |work=China Daily}}

{{Further|Spratly Islands#History}}

From approximately 500 BC to 100 AD, shipping routes of the Sa Huynh-Kalanay trading network traversed the South China Sea. They were used to exchange pottery and jewelry (such as jade) across Taiwan, the Philippines, and Borneo.Everington, K. (2017). Birthplace of Austronesians is Taiwan, capital was Taitung: Scholar. Taiwan News.Bellwood, P., H. Hung, H., Lizuka, Y. (2011). Taiwan Jade in the Philippines: 3,000 Years of Trade and Long-distance Interaction. Semantic Scholar.

In 1734, the Carta Hydrographica y Chorographica de las Islas Filipinas (commonly referred as the Velarde map) was published by the Spanish colonial government. According to Philippine judge Antonio Carpio, the map shows Philippine sovereignty over the Spratly Islands (referred as Los Bajos de Paragua) and is the earliest map showing sovereignty over the said territories.{{cite AV media|url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UKf8iQ1Vje4|title=Philippine Island Territories in the West Philippine Sea|date=May 24, 2024|type=YouTube video |author=Antonio Carpio|location=Institute for Maritime and Ocean Affairs}}{{page needed|time=yes|date=June 2024}}{{Failed verification|date=August 2024|reason=poor reference-video without timestamp, likely better written original source}}{{cite news |last=Braid |first=Florangel Rosario |date=February 10, 2024 |title='Amplifying the true narrative of the West Philippine Sea' |url=https://mb.com.ph/2024/2/9/amplifying-the-true-narrative-of-the-west-philippine-sea |newspaper=The Manila Bulletin |access-date=19 June 2024 |archive-date=4 July 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240704170507/https://mb.com.ph/2024/2/9/amplifying-the-true-narrative-of-the-west-philippine-sea |url-status=live }}{{cite news |last=Layug |first=Margaret Claire |date=11 September 2017 |title=Murillo Velarde Map refutes 'false history', China's claims – Carpio |url=https://www.gmanetwork.com/news/news/nation/625435/carpio-murillo-velarde-map-to-correct-false-history-amid-china-s-claims-on-phl-territory/story/ |access-date=4 January 2019 |publisher=GMA News |archive-date=4 January 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190104232532/https://www.gmanetwork.com/news/news/nation/625435/carpio-murillo-velarde-map-to-correct-false-history-amid-china-s-claims-on-phl-territory/story/ |url-status=live }} Philippine officials and writers also assert that the 1808 and 1875 editions of Carita General del Archipelago Filipino, published by the Spanish colonial government, included the Spratly islands as sovereign territory of the Philippines and was recognized by the international community.{{Cite web |url=https://www.philstar.com/the-freeman/opinion/2024/03/27/2343536/panatag-proven-ph-territory-china-claims-it-bogus-history |title=Panatag is proven PH territory; China claims it by bogus history |website=The Philippine STAR |access-date=19 June 2024 |archive-date=18 June 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240618055557/https://www.philstar.com/the-freeman/opinion/2024/03/27/2343536/panatag-proven-ph-territory-china-claims-it-bogus-history |url-status=live }}{{Cite web |url=https://mb.com.ph/2024/2/9/amplifying-the-true-narrative-of-the-west-philippine-sea |title='Amplifying the true narrative of the West Philippine Sea' |website=Manila Bulletin |access-date=19 June 2024 |archive-date=18 June 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240618153105/https://mb.com.ph/2024/2/9/amplifying-the-true-narrative-of-the-west-philippine-sea |url-status=live }}https://www.imoa.ph/imoawebexhibit/Splices/The%20Historical%20Facts%20in%20the%20WPS-page54.pdf

In the 19th century, Europeans found that Chinese fishermen from Hainan annually sojourned on the Spratly islands for part of the year specifically for trade, which was also common for other ethnic groups in the area such as the Cham of Vietnam and the people of Palawan, Sulu, and Luzon in the Philippines. In 1877, the British laid a claim to two Spratly islands and dispatched an expedition group there after learning of the presence of guano from locals in British-colonized Borneo. However, the group forgot to plant the British flag after the white businesspersons and their Chinese employees attacked one another due to a dispute.{{cite journal|title=The South China Sea in the Age of European Decline|first=Stein|last= Tonnesson|journal=Modern Asian Studies|date = February 2006|volume=40|issue=1|pages=1–57 |doi=10.1017/S0026749X06001727}}{{rp|pp=6–48}}

When the Spratlys and Paracels were being surveyed by Germany in 1883, China issued protests against them.

After the Spanish-American War, Spain ceded the territory of the Philippines to the United States through the 1898 Treaty of Paris. The treaty lines drawn were inaccurate, leading to the Spanish to retain sovereign control over the Spratly Islands, Scarborough Shoal, and parts of Tawi-Tawi. According to the Philippine government, this was later rectified retroactively in the 1900 Treaty of Washington where the mentioned remaining territories were formally ceded to the United States and their interpretation is that this was as part of the territory of the Philippines at their independence.

In 1930 a French vessel formally laid claims to an area of the Spratlys without naming any specific island in order to avoid any overlap with the Philippine territory as defined in 1898. The French were unaware of Britain's earlier claim. After a series of internal debates, British officials decided not to push their claims due to disagreements over how important the Spratlys were, a perceived weakness of their claim from not following up on it since 1877, and their wish for France to act as a buffer in the South China Sea against growing threats to the British from Japan.

Between April 7, 1933, and April 13, 1933, France took possession of the Spratly Islands and notification of the occupation appeared in the Official Journal of July 26, 1933. France claimed the Spratlys for the French Union, rather than as part of Indochina (and its successor Vietnam). China protested.{{Cite web |date=1933-07-24 |title=Journal officiel de la République française. Lois et décrets |url=https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k6546978f |access-date=2022-02-23 |website=Gallica |language=EN |archive-date=23 February 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220223141323/https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k6546978f |url-status=live }}{{cite journal|title=The South China Sea in the Age of European Decline|first=Stein|last= Tonnesson|journal=Modern Asian Studies|date = February 2006|volume=40|issue=1|pages=1–57 |doi=10.1017/S0026749X06001727}}{{rp|p=8}}China's Claim to the Spratly Islands is Just a Mistake, Bill Hayton, CIMSEC, May 16, 2018

The Spratlys and the Paracels were conquered by Japan in 1939. Japan annexed the Spratly Islands via Taiwanese jurisdiction as part of Kaohsiung on 30 March 1939. France{{Cite book |last=Ministère de L'Europe et des Affaires étrangères |first=France Commission de publication des documents relatifs aux origines de la guerre|url=https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bd6t5327074x |title=Documents diplomatiques français 1932–1939. 2e série, 1936–1939|publisher =Ministère des affaires étrangères, Commission de publication des documents relatifs aux origines de la guerre 1939–1945.|chapter =15, 16 mars-30 avril 1939|location=Paris |date=1981 |language=EN |access-date=23 February 2022 |archive-date=23 February 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220223141320/https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bd6t5327074x |url-status=live|pages=1–1002 }} and UK protested and reasserted French sovereignty.{{Cite book |last=Ministère de L'Europe et des Affaires étrangères |first=France Commission de publication des documents relatifs aux origines de la guerre|url=https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bd6t5327048d |title=Documents diplomatiques français 1932–1939. 2e série, 1936–1939|publisher =Ministère des affaires étrangères, Commission de publication des documents relatifs aux origines de la guerre 1939–1945|chapter = 9, 21 mars-9 juin 1938 |date=1974 |language=EN |access-date=23 February 2022 |archive-date=23 February 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220223141324/https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bd6t5327048d |url-status=live |location=Paris}}

China Handbook 1937–1943: A comprehensive survey of major developments in China in six years of war was published by the Republic of China in 1943 and stated its southernmost territory as "Triton Island of the Paracel Group".{{cite web|title=China Handbook 1937-1943 戰時中華志 A Comprehensive Survey of Major Developments in China in Six Years of War|editor=The Chinese Ministry of Information|url=https://archive.org/details/china-handbook-1937-1943/China%20Handbook%201937-1943%20Part%201%20of%205/|access-date=7 August 2024|publisher =The Macmillan Company|place=New York|year =1943}} China Handbook 1937–1945, a revised edition covering the entire Second Sino-Japanese War, claimed that the Spratly islands were contested among China, the Philippines, and Indochina.{{cite book|title =China Handbook 1937–1945, New Edition with 1946 Supplement|editor = Chinese Ministry of Information|location=New York|publisher=Macmillan Co.|year =1947|pages=1–844}}{{Failed verification|date=August 2024|reason=not able to access a copy}}

The Paracels and Spratlys were handed over to Republic of China control from Japan after the 1945 surrender of Japan, since the Allied powers assigned the Republic of China to receive Japanese surrenders in that area.

The Republic of China garrisoned Itu Aba (Taiping) island in 1946 and posted Chinese flags and markers on it along with Woody island in the Paracels, France tried, but failed to make them leave Woody island. The aim of the Republic of China was to block the French claims.

In 1947, the Republic of China drew up the map showing the U-shaped claim on the entire South China Sea, showing the Spratly and Paracels in Chinese territory. In 1947, the ROC government renamed 159 islands in the area and published the Map of the South China Sea Islands. The ROC has occupied Taiping Island, the largest island in the Spratlys, constantly since 1956.{{cite book |author=Wiencek, David G. |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=y6Ad9K_dCvwC&pg=PA19 |title=Cooperative monitoring in the South China Sea: satellite imagery, confidence-building measures, and the Spratly Islands disputes |publisher=Greenwood Publishing Group |year=2002 |isbn=978-0-275-97182-3 |page=19 |access-date=12 July 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190520175413/https://books.google.com/books?id=y6Ad9K_dCvwC&pg=PA19 |archive-date=20 May 2019 |url-status=live}}

After pulling out its garrison in 1950 when the Republic of China evacuated to Taiwan, when the Filipino Tomas Cloma uprooted an ROC flag on Itu Aba laid claim to the Spratlys and, the Republic of China (now Taiwan) again regarrisoned Itu Aba in 1956.{{Harvnb|Morley|Nishihara|1997|pp=125–126}}

Taiwan's garrison from 1946 to 1950 and 1956-now on Itu Aba represents an "effective occupation" of the Spratlys. China established a coastal defence system against Japanese pirates or smugglers.{{Harvnb|Pak|2000|p=81}} During the San Francisco Peace Conference of 1951, the San Francisco Peace Treaty was signed. During the conference, the USSR motioned for the Paracels and the Spratly to be awarded to China, but the motion was rejected by a vote of 46 to 3, with one abstention.US Department of State Publication, Record of Proceedings of the Conference for the Conclusion and Signature of the Treaty of Peace with Japan, 119, 292 (1951).

In 1953, the French Foreign Ministry declared that the Spratlys were "not attached to Vietnam in 1949, when the former colony of Conchinchina was ceded to this Associated State. They (Spratlys) therefore depend on (administered by) the Ministry of Overseas France." In 1955, the French Foreign Ministry prepared another "Note" that "beyond doubt that the Spratlys belonged to the French Union, not Vietnam."

North Vietnam recognised China's claims on the Paracels and Spratlys during the Vietnam War as it was being supported by China. Only after winning the war and conquering South Vietnam did North Vietnam retract its recognition and admitted it recognised them as part of China to receive aid from China in fighting the Americans.{{Harvnb|Morley|Nishihara|1997|pp=126–127}}

The Philippines claimed the Spratlys in 1971 under President Marcos, after Taiwanese troops attacked and shot at a Philippine fishing boat on Itu Aba.

Under President Lee Teng-hui, Taiwan stated that "legally, historically, geographically, or in reality", all of the South China Sea and Spratly islands were Taiwan's territory and under Taiwanese sovereignty, and denounced actions undertaken there by Malaysia and the Philippines, in a statement on 13 July 1999 released by the foreign ministry of Taiwan.{{cite news |author=STRATFOR |date=14 July 1999 |title=Taiwan sticks to its guns, to U.S. chagrin |url=http://www.atimes.com/china/AG15Ad01.html |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://archive.today/20140325150303/http://www.atimes.com/china/AG15Ad01.html |archive-date=25 March 2014 |access-date=10 March 2014 |work=STRATFOR's Global Intelligence Update |publisher=Asia Times}} Taiwan and China's claims "mirror" each other; during international talks involving the Spratly islands, China and Taiwan have cooperated with each other since both have the same claims.{{cite news |last=Sisci |first=Francesco |date=29 June 2010 |title=US toe-dipping muddies South China Sea |url=http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/LG29Ad01.html |url-status=dead |archive-url=http://webarchive.loc.gov/all/20130710122041/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/LG29Ad01.html |archive-date=10 July 2013 |access-date=14 May 2014 |newspaper=Asia Times Online}}

Taiwan and China are largely strategically aligned on the Spratly islands issue, since they both claim exactly the same area, so Taiwan's control of Itu Aba (Taiping) island is viewed as an extension of China's claim. Taiwan and China both claim the entire island chain, while all the other claimants only claim portions of them. China has proposed co-operation with Taiwan against all the other countries claiming the islands. Taiwanese lawmakers have demanded that Taiwan fortify Itu Aba (Taiping) island with weapons to defend against the Vietnamese, and both China and Taiwanese NGOs have pressured Taiwan to expand Taiwan's military capabilities on the island, which played a role in Taiwan expanding the island's runway in 2012.{{cite news |last=Kastner |first=Jens |date=10 August 2012 |title=Taiwan pours cement on maritime dispute |url=http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/NH10Ad01.html |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://archive.today/20140325150413/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/NH10Ad01.html |archive-date=25 March 2014 |access-date=10 March 2014 |newspaper=Asia Times Online}} China has urged Taiwan to co-operate and offered Taiwan a share in oil and gas resources while shutting out all the other rival claimants. Taiwanese lawmakers have complained about repeated Vietnamese aggression and trespassing on Taiwan's Itu Aba (Taiping), and Taiwan has started viewing Vietnam as an enemy over the Spratly Islands, not China.{{cite news |last=Kastner |first=Jens |date=13 June 2012 |title=Taiwan circling South China Sea bait |url=http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/NF13Ad01.html |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://archive.today/20140325150328/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/NF13Ad01.html |archive-date=25 March 2014 |access-date=14 May 2014 |newspaper=Asia Times Online}} Taiwan's state run oil company CPC Corp's board director Chiu Yi has called Vietnam as the "greatest threat" to Taiwan. Taiwan's airstrip on Taiping has irritated Vietnam.{{cite news |last=Lee |first=Peter |date=29 July 2010 |title=US goes fishing for trouble |url=http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/LG29Ad03.html |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140517153132/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/LG29Ad03.html |archive-date=17 May 2014 |access-date=14 May 2014 |newspaper=Asia Times Online |page=2}} China views Taiwan's expansion of its military and airstrip on Taiping as benefiting China's position against the other rival claimants from southeast Asian countries.

In 1990, China published the first volume of its "An Atlas of Ancient Maps of China" through the Cultural Relics Publishing House, Beijing, a publishing arm of the State Bureau of Cultural Relics of China. The second volume was published in 1994, while the third and final volume was published in 1997. The ancient maps in all three volumes showed Hainan as the southernmost territory of any of the dynasties of China.An Atlas of Ancient Maps in China (1990). Cultural Relics Publishing House, Beijing.An Atlas of Ancient Maps in China (1994). Cultural Relics Publishing House, Beijing.An Atlas of Ancient Maps in China (1997). Cultural Relics Publishing House, Beijing.

Malaysia has militarily occupied three islands that it considers to be within its continental shelf. Swallow Reef (Layang Layang / Terumbu Layang / Pulau Layang Layang) was under control in 1983 and has been turned into an island through a land reclamation which now also hosts a dive resort. The Malaysian military also occupies Ardasier Reef (Terumbu Ubi), and Mariveles Reef (Terumbu Mantanani).{{citation needed|date=July 2024}}

Since 1992, Malaysia and Vietnam have agreed to jointly develop areas around these disputed islands.{{cite book |author=Sik, Swan |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=50I_5Y600z0C&pg=PA344 |title=Asian Yearbook of International Law: 1992 |date=1994 |publisher=Martinus Nijhoff Publishers |isbn=0-7923-2239-8 |pages=344– |access-date=12 July 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140707134547/http://books.google.com/books?id=50I_5Y600z0C&pg=PA344 |archive-date=7 July 2014 |url-status=live}} Malaysia has said that it is monitoring all of the actions made by countries involved in the dispute.{{cite web |date=8 August 2011 |title=Resolve South China Sea Disputes Diplomatically – Ahmad Zahid |url=https://www.kln.gov.my/archive/content.php?t=4&articleId=1643195 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140517114241/https://www.kln.gov.my/archive/content.php?t=4&articleId=1643195 |archive-date=17 May 2014 |access-date=17 May 2014 |publisher=Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Malaysia}}

Taiwan performed live fire military exercises on Taiping island in September 2012; reports said that Vietnam was explicitly named by the Taiwanese military as the "imaginary enemy" in the drill. Vietnam protested against the exercises as violation of its territory and "voiced anger", demanding that Taiwan stop the drill. Among the inspectors of the live fire drill were Taiwanese national legislators, adding to the tensions.

• {{cite web |date=23 April 2013 |title=Taiwan holds live-fire drill in Spratlys: official |url=http://www.roc-taiwan.org/LV/ct.asp?xItem=372040&ctNode=7925&mp=507 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140814162557/http://www.roc-taiwan.org/LV/ct.asp?xItem=372040&ctNode=7925&mp=507 |archive-date=14 August 2014 |access-date=14 May 2014 |publisher=Taipei Mission in the Republic of Latvia}}
• {{cite news |last=Yeh |first=Joseph |date=23 April 2013 |title=Drills held on Taiwan-controlled Taiping island in South China Sea |url=http://www.chinapost.com.tw/taiwan/national/national-news/2013/04/23/376779/Drills-held.htm |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140517122222/http://www.chinapost.com.tw/taiwan/national/national-news/2013/04/23/376779/Drills-held.htm |archive-date=17 May 2014 |access-date=14 May 2014 |newspaper=China Post}}
• {{cite news |date=23 August 2012 |title=Vietnam Demands Taiwan Cancel Spratly Island Live Fire Drill |url=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-08-23/vietnam-demands-taiwan-cancel-spratly-island-live-fire-drill.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140517153329/http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-08-23/vietnam-demands-taiwan-cancel-spratly-island-live-fire-drill.html |archive-date=17 May 2014 |access-date=14 May 2014 |publisher=Bloomberg News}}
• {{cite news |date=23 August 2012 |title=Vietnam protests Taiwan's fire drill exercise plan on island |url=http://thanhniennews.com/politics/vietnam-protests-taiwans-fire-drill-exercise-plan-on-island-5633.html |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140517132601/http://thanhniennews.com/politics/vietnam-protests-taiwans-fire-drill-exercise-plan-on-island-5633.html |archive-date=17 May 2014 |access-date=14 May 2014 |newspaper=Thanh Nien News}}{{Unreliable source?|reason=Vietnamese media Thanh Niên news is run by Hội Liên hiệp Thanh niên Việt Nam (Vietnam United Youth League) which is run by the Vietnamese government|date=May 2016}}
• {{cite news |date=12 August 2012 |title=Vietnam angry at Taiwan as it stages live-fire drill in the Spratlys |url=http://www.philippinenews.com/read/latest-news/8067-vietnams-angry-at-taiwan-as-it-stages-live-fire-drill-in-the-spratlys.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140325175801/http://www.philippinenews.com/read/latest-news/8067-vietnams-angry-at-taiwan-as-it-stages-live-fire-drill-in-the-spratlys.html |archive-date=25 March 2014 |newspaper=Philippines News |agency=Agence France-Presse}}
• {{cite news |date=21 August 2012 |title=Taiwan to conduct live-fire Taiping Island drill in Sept. |url=http://www.chinapost.com.tw/taiwan/foreign-affairs/2012/08/21/351637/Taiwan-to.htm |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140517122233/http://www.chinapost.com.tw/taiwan/foreign-affairs/2012/08/21/351637/Taiwan-to.htm |archive-date=17 May 2014 |access-date=14 May 2014 |newspaper=China Post}}
• {{cite news |last=Carpenter |first=Ted Galen |date=28 February 2013 |title=Taiwan Challenges Its Neighbors |url=http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/taiwan-challenges-its-neighbors |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140517152742/http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/taiwan-challenges-its-neighbors |archive-date=17 May 2014 |access-date=10 March 2014 |newspaper=The National Interest |publisher=Cato Institute}}

In 2010, it was reported that the former Malaysian prime minister Mahathir Mohamad believed Malaysia could profit from China's economic growth through co-operation with China,{{cite web |date=27 April 2010 |title=Mahathir: China no threat to Malaysia |url=http://biz.thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2010/4/27/business/6136931&sec=business |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100430165347/http://biz.thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=%2F2010%2F4%2F27%2Fbusiness%2F6136931&sec=business |archive-date=30 April 2010 |access-date=14 May 2014 |work=The Star}} and said that China "was not a threat to anyone and was not worried about aggression from China", as well accusing the United States of provoking China and trying to turn China's neighbours against China.{{cite news |author=Kazuto Tsukamoto |date=9 November 2011 |title=Malaysia's Mahathir says China is no threat |url=http://ajw.asahi.com/article/asia/around_asia/AJ2011110916910 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140517120553/https://ajw.asahi.com/article/asia/around_asia/AJ2011110916910 |archive-date=17 May 2014 |access-date=14 May 2014 |newspaper=The Asahi Shimbun}} Malaysian authorities displayed no concern over China conducting a military exercise at James Shoal in March 2013,{{cite web |author=Shahriman Lockman |date=24 April 2013 |title=Why Malaysia isn't afraid of China (for now) |url=http://www.aspistrategist.org.au/why-malaysia-isnt-afraid-of-china-for-now/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140517152545/http://www.aspistrategist.org.au/why-malaysia-isnt-afraid-of-china-for-now/ |archive-date=17 May 2014 |access-date=14 May 2014 |publisher=The Strategist: The Australian Strategic Policy Institute Blog}}* {{cite AV media |url=https://www.bloomberg.com/video/malaysia-breaks-ranks-on-south-china-sea-wLpV4lb3SnmNuf~~2KQzfA.html |title=Malaysia Breaks Ranks on South China Sea |date=29 August 2013 |author=Haslinda Amin |medium=video |publisher=Bloomberg |series=First Up |access-date=14 May 2014 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140517153342/http://www.bloomberg.com/video/malaysia-breaks-ranks-on-south-china-sea-wLpV4lb3SnmNuf~~2KQzfA.html |archive-date=17 May 2014 |url-status=live}}

• {{cite web |date=29 August 2013 |title=Malaysia splits with ASEAN on China Sea threat |url=http://www.businessmirror.com.ph/index.php/en/news/world/18640-malaysia-splits-with-asean-on-china-sea-threat |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140517153540/http://www.businessmirror.com.ph/index.php/en/news/world/18640-malaysia-splits-with-asean-on-china-sea-threat |archive-date=17 May 2014 |access-date=14 May 2014 |work=Bloomberg |publisher=Business Mirror}} However, until present Malaysia still maintained a balance relations with the countries involved in this dispute.{{cite news |author=Camille Diola |date=25 June 2014 |title=Why Malaysia, unlike Philippines, keeps quiet on sea row |url=http://www.philstar.com/headlines/2014/06/25/1338864/why-malaysia-unlike-philippines-keeps-quiet-sea-row |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140627165932/http://www.philstar.com/headlines/2014/06/25/1338864/why-malaysia-unlike-philippines-keeps-quiet-sea-row |archive-date=27 June 2014 |access-date=25 June 2014 |newspaper=The Philippine Star}} But since China has start encroaching its territorial waters,{{cite news |date=27 September 2015 |title=Presence of China Coast Guard ship at Luconia Shoals spooks local fishermen |url=http://www.theborneopost.com/2015/09/27/presence-of-china-coast-guard-ship-at-luconia-shoals-spooks-local-fishermen/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150929005731/http://www.theborneopost.com/2015/09/27/presence-of-china-coast-guard-ship-at-luconia-shoals-spooks-local-fishermen/ |archive-date=29 September 2015 |access-date=28 September 2015 |newspaper=The Borneo Post}} Malaysia has become active in condemning China.{{cite web |date=15 August 2015 |title=Malaysia lodges diplomatic protest against intrusion at Beting Patinggi Ali |url=http://www.therakyatpost.com/news/2015/08/15/malaysia-lodges-diplomatic-protest-against-intrusion-at-beting-patinggi-ali/ |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150929024442/http://www.therakyatpost.com/news/2015/08/15/malaysia-lodges-diplomatic-protest-against-intrusion-at-beting-patinggi-ali/ |archive-date=29 September 2015 |access-date=16 August 2015 |work=Bernama |publisher=The Rakyat Post}}{{cite web |author-first1=Ben |author-last1=Blanchard |author-first2=Richard |author-last2=Pullin |date=18 October 2015 |title=Malaysia slams China's 'provocation' in South China Sea |url=http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/asiapacific/malaysia-slams-china-s/2200744.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151019120244/http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/asiapacific/malaysia-slams-china-s/2200744.html |archive-date=19 October 2015 |access-date=20 October 2015 |publisher=Channel News Asia |agency=Reuters}}

File:Subi_Reef_May_2015.jpg being built up into an artificial island, 2015]]

In 2014 Janes reported that during 2013–2014 China had begun dredging and land reclamation at three sites in the Spratlys. In contrast to the construction projections of other countries, Beijing's efforts involved reefs that for the most part were under water at high tide. Harry Harris, Pacific fleet commander of the U.S. Navy, unofficially described the project as "Great Wall of Sand" in March 2015.{{Cite web |date=31 March 2015 |title=Speech delivered to the Australian Strategic Policy Institute |url=http://www.cpf.navy.mil/leaders/harry-harris/speeches/2015/03/ASPI-Australia.pdf |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160529035123/http://www.cpf.navy.mil/leaders/harry-harris/speeches/2015/03/ASPI-Australia.pdf |archive-date=29 May 2016 |access-date=29 May 2015 |website=Commander, US Pacific Fleet |publisher=U.S. Navy}}

In April 2015, satellite images showed that China was constructing an airfield at Fiery Cross Reef.[http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/world/68466821/Island-building-in-the-South-China-Sea Island building in the South China Sea] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150924134532/http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/world/68466821/Island-building-in-the-South-China-Sea|date=24 September 2015}}. Stuff.co.nz. Retrieved 12 May 2015. By September, it had completed a 3125-metre runway.{{cite web |title=China completes runway on Fiery Cross Reef |url=http://www.janes.com/article/54814/china-completes-runway-on-fiery-cross-reef |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150927212448/http://www.janes.com/article/54814/china-completes-runway-on-fiery-cross-reef |archive-date=27 September 2015 |access-date=28 September 2015 |work=janes.com}}

{{Further|Territorial disputes in the South China Sea}}

• Southwest Cay Invasion (1975)
• East Sea Campaign (April 1975)
• Johnson South Reef Skirmish (14 March 1988)
• Scarborough Shoal standoff (commenced on 8 April 2012)
• Hai Yang Shi You 981 standoff (2014)

{{see also|Timeline of the South China Sea dispute}}

{{more citations needed|date=November 2013}}

• Great Wall of Sand
• Senkaku Islands dispute
• Territories claimed by the Philippines
• Territorial disputes of the People's Republic of China

{{reflist|30em}}

{{Library resources box}}

• {{cite journal |last=Bautista |first=Lowell B. |date=December 2011 |title=Philippine territorial boundaries: internal tensions, colonial baggage, ambivalent conformity |url=http://umrefjournal.um.edu.my/filebank/published_article/3162/035-053%20Lowell%20B.%20Bautista-Philippine%20Territorial,%20JATI%20VOL16,%202011-%20new.pdf |journal=JATI – Journal of Southeast Asian Studies |publisher=University of Malaya |volume=16 |pages=35–53 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130730103741/http://umrefjournal.um.edu.my/filebank/published_article/3162/035-053%20Lowell%20B.%20Bautista-Philippine%20Territorial,%20JATI%20VOL16,%202011-%20new.pdf |archive-date=30 July 2013}}
• {{cite journal |last=Bautista |first=Lowell B. |date=February 2012 |title=The Implications of Recent Decisions on the Territorial and Maritime Boundary Disputes in East and Southeast Asia |url=https://www.academia.edu/1245306 |journal=Maritime Energy Resources in Asia: Legal Regimes and Cooperation: NBR Special Report No. 37 |publisher=Academia.edu}}
• {{cite journal |last=Bautista |first=Lowell B. |date=1 January 2010 |title=The Legal Status of the Philippine Treaty Limits in International Law |url=https://www.academia.edu/446908 |journal=Aegean Review of the Law of the Sea and Maritime Law |publisher=Academia.edu |volume=1 |pages=111–139 |doi=10.1007/s12180-009-0003-5 |s2cid=153653227}}
• {{cite journal |last=Bautista |first=Lowell B. |date=Fall 2009 |title=The Historical Background, Geographical Extent and Legal Bases of the Philippine Territorial Water Claim |url=https://www.academia.edu/4610611 |journal=The Journal of Comparative Asian Development |volume=8 |issue=2 |pages=365–395 |doi=10.1080/15339114.2009.9678488 |s2cid=219624498}}
• François-Xavier Bonnet, [http://www.irasec.com/components/com_irasec/media/upload/DP14-ScarboroughShoal.pdf Geopolitics of Scarborough Shoal], {{dead link|date=March 2014|url=http://www.irasec.com/components/com_irasec/media/upload/DP14-ScarboroughShoal.pdf}} [http://www.irasec.com Irasec's Discussion Papers], No. 14, November 2012.
• {{cite book |last1=Dzurek |first1=Daniel J. |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=o5P4U4UlucMC |title=The Spratly Islands dispute: who's on first? |last2=Schofield |first2=Clive H. |publisher=IBRU |year=1996 |isbn=978-1-897643-23-5}}
• {{Citation |last=Emmers |first=Ralf |title=The De-escalation of the Spratly Dispute in Sino-Southeast Asian Relations |date=June 2007 |journal=S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies Working Paper |number=129 |url=http://www.rsis.edu.sg/publications/WorkingPapers/WP129.pdf |access-date=9 October 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090521073907/http://www.rsis.edu.sg/publications/WorkingPapers/WP129.pdf |archive-date=21 May 2009}}
• Forbes, Andrew, and Henley, David: Vietnam Past and Present: The North (Sino-Viet relations in Paracels and Spratlys). Chiang Mai. Cognoscenti Books, 2012. {{ASIN|B006DCCM9Q}}.
• Menon, Rajan, [http://nationalinterest.org/commentary/worry-about-asia-not-europe-7447?page=1 "Worry about Asia, Not Europe"], The National Interest, Sept–Oct 2012 Issue, 11 September 2012
• {{cite news |last=Bezlova |first=Antoaneta |date=29 January 2008 |title=China moves to expand its reach |url=http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/JA29Ad01.html |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080512021926/http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/JA29Ad01.html |archive-date=12 May 2008 |access-date=10 March 2014 |newspaper=Asia Times Online}}
• {{cite news |date=13 May 2014 |title=Timing of flareups in South China Sea is no coincidence |url=http://www.wantchinatimes.com/news-subclass-cnt.aspx?cid=1701&MainCatID=17&id=20140513000104 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140517152216/http://www.wantchinatimes.com/news-subclass-cnt.aspx?cid=1701&MainCatID=17&id=20140513000104 |archive-date=17 May 2014 |access-date=14 May 2014 |newspaper=Want China Times}}

{{Territorial disputes in East and South Asia}}

{{Navboxes|title=Articles related to Spratly Islands dispute|list={{Foreign relations of Brunei}}

{{Geography of Sabah}}

{{Geography of Sarawak}}

{{Islands of Hainan}}

{{Philippine territorial disputes}}

{{South China Sea}}

{{Spratly Islands topics}}}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Spratly Islands Dispute}}

*

Category:Disputed territories in Southeast Asia

Category:Territorial disputes of Brunei

Category:Territorial disputes of China

Category:Territorial disputes of Malaysia

Category:Territorial disputes of the Philippines

Category:Territorial disputes of the Republic of China

Category:Territorial disputes of Vietnam

Category:Incidents in the South China Sea