Sabina Shoal: Difference between revisions - Wikipedia

Line 1:

{{Short description|Atoll of Spratly Islands in South China Sea}}

{{Short description|none}}

{{pp-dispute|small=yes}}

{{POV|date=September 2024}}

<!-- suggest this remains during period of heavy editing following events August 2024 --->

Line 31 ⟶ 32:

It is claimed by [[China]], the [[Philippines]], [[Taiwan]] and [[Vietnam]]. These countries claim the Spratly Islands either in part or their entirety.<ref name="manilaAccusesBeijingOfIslandBuilding">{{Cite news |title=Manila accuses Beijing of island building in South China Sea |url=https://www.rfa.org/english/news/southchinasea/china-scs-island-building-05132024043146.html |work=RFA}}</ref>

The shoal lies within the [[exclusive economic zone of the Philippines]]. The [[EEZ]] itself does not definegrant the actual [[sovereignty]] for any islands and shoals within the zone but grantsexcept certain exclusive rights and jurisdictions to the Philippines under [[United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea|UNCLOS]].<ref name="preambleToUNCLOS">{{cite web |title=PREAMBLE TO THE UNITED NATIONS CONVENTION ON THE LAW OF THE SEA |url=https://www.un.org/depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/part5.htm |website=[[United Nations]] |publisher=[[United Nations]] |access-date=September 22, 2024}}</ref>

==Other names==

Line 48 ⟶ 49:

==Sovereignty and sovereign rights==

{{main article|Exclusive economic zone|UNCLOS|Spratly Islands dispute}}

[[File:Zonmar-en.svg|thumb|right|upright=1.0|Graphic definition of sea areas (top down view)]]

Sabina Shoal is a disputed low-tide elevation<ref name="scmp-new-hotspot" /><ref name="amti-map" /> in the Spratly Islands which is [[Territorial disputes in the South China Sea|claimed by multiple states]]: China, the Philippines, Taiwan and Vietnam. As a low-tide elevation that is not within the territorial sea of a [[littoral]] state, Sabina Shoal itself does not generate any [[territorial sea]] of its own per Article 13 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).<ref>{{cite web |title=United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea |url=https://www.un.org/depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/part2.htm |publisher=[[United Nations]] |access-date=23 September 2024}}</ref>

There is a distinction between sovereignty and sovereign rights according to international maritime law.<ref name="sovereigntyVsSovereignRights">{{cite news |last1=Basu |first1=Pratnashree |title=Sovereignty Vs. Sovereign Rights: De-escalating Tensions in the South China Sea |url=https://www.orfonline.org/research/sovereignty-vs-sovereign-rights-de-escalating-tensions-in-the-south-china-sea |publisher=[[Observer Research Foundation]] |date=August 14, 2023}}</ref><ref name="seaDisputeSovereigntyVsSovereignRights">{{cite news |last1=Alfarsi |first1=Haroun |title=Sea Dispute: Sovereignty vs. Sovereign Rights |url=https://www.profolus.com/topics/sovereignty-vs-sovereign-rights-difference/ |publisher=Profolus |date=April 27, 2024}}</ref> Determining sovereignty of disputed features is beyond the jurisdiction of UNCLOS according to Professor Robert Beckman of [[Nanyang Technological University]].<ref name="beckmanRoleOfUNCLOS">{{Cite web |first1 =Andrea| last1 =Ho|date=2021-05-06 |title=Professor Robert Beckman on the Role of UNCLOS in Maritime Disputes |url=https://gjia.georgetown.edu/2021/05/06/professor-robert-beckman-on-the-role-of-unclos-in-maritime-disputes/ |access-date=2024-07-09 |website=Georgetown Journal of International Affairs |language=en-US}}</ref> The 2016 [[South China Sea Arbitration]] by the arbitral tribunal at [[Permanent Court of Arbitration]] in [[The Hague]] specifically stated that it doeswas not "ruleempowered onto anyaddress the question of sovereignty over the Spratly Islands.<ref name="scsArbitration2016">{{cite web |last1=Mensah |first1=Thomas A. |title=The South China Sea Arbitration Award of 12 July 2016 |url=https://pcacases.com/web/sendAttach/2086 |website=PCA Cases |publisher=[[Permanent Court of Arbitration]] |access-date=September 29, 2024}}</ref><ref name=jurisadmiss>{{cite web |title=Award on Jurisdiction and Admissibility |date=29 October 2015 |publisher=Permanent Court of Arbitration |url=https://pcacases.com/web/sendAttach/2579 |language=en |access-date=30 January 2022 |archive-date=3 May 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220503202232/https://pcacases.com/web/sendAttach/2579 |url-status=live }}</ref> The ruling did address specific issues brought to it which included where the Philippines' sovereign rights in its exclusive economic zone had been breached by others.<ref name=jurisadmiss/> OtherWhile partsSabina ofShoal itswas exclusivenot economicspecifically zonementioned suchin asthe Sabina2016 ShoalPCA wereruling,<ref notname="scsArbitration2016" specifically/> consideredthe byruling was a landmark decision which affirmed the rulingrights of the Philippines over the waters surrounding the shoal.<ref name="newFirestormEruptsgeostrategicSignificanceSabina">{{cite news |last1=Seidel |first1=Jamieweb |title=NewAnalysisThe ‘firestorm’Geostrategic eruptsSignificance betweenof ChinaSabina andShoal: PhilippinesA Flashpoint in the South China Sea Dispute |url=https://www.newsthepacificreports.com.au/technology2024/innovation08/military24/newthe-firestormgeostrategic-eruptssignificance-betweenof-chinasabina-andshoal-philippinesa-flashpoint-in-the-south-china-sea/news-storydispute/ad4eee1ab3a200f752cbf3ff451b14d8 |publisher=[[News.com.au]]The Pacific Report |access-date=September 529, 2024}}</ref> There is a distinction between sovereignty and sovereign rights according to international maritime law.<ref name="sovereigntyVsSovereignRightsnewFirestormErupts">{{cite news |last1=BasuSeidel |first1=PratnashreeJamie |title=SovereigntyNew Vs.‘firestorm’ Sovereignerupts Rights:between De-escalatingChina Tensionsand Philippines in the South China Sea |url=https://www.orfonlinenews.orgcom.au/researchtechnology/sovereigntyinnovation/military/new-vsfirestorm-sovereignerupts-rightsbetween-dechina-escalatingand-tensionsphilippines-in-the-south-china-sea/news-story/ad4eee1ab3a200f752cbf3ff451b14d8 |publisher=[[Observer Research FoundationNews.com.au]] |date=AugustSeptember 145, 20232024}}</ref><ref name="seaDisputeSovereigntyVsSovereignRights">{{citeBetter newssource needed|last1date=AlfarsiOctober 2024|first1reason=Harounmany |title=Sea Dispute: Sovereignty vs. Sovereign Rights |url=https://www.profolus.com/topics/sovereignty-vs-sovereign-rights-difference/ |publisher=Profolus |date=April 27, 2024inaccuracies}}</ref>

The Philippines as the coastal state has the sovereign rights to explore, manage, and conserve the natural resources of the sea within its EEZ according to UNCLOS.<ref name="chineseShipsReturnSabinaShoal">{{cite news |last1=Powell |first1=Ray |title=Chinese ships return to Sabina Shoal |url=https://www.sealight.live/posts/chinese-ships-return-to-sabina-shoal |publisher=SeaLight |date=November 19, 2023}}</ref><ref name="philippinesDidNotSurrender">{{cite news |last1=Gutierrez |first1=Jason |title=Philippines says it did not surrender Sabina Shoal to China |url=https://www.rfa.org/english/news/southchinasea/south-china-sea-sabina-shoal-09162024141029.html |publisher=[[Radio Free Asia]] |date=September 16, 2024}}</ref> It also has jurisdiction on "the establishment and use of artificial islands, installations and structures; marine scientific research; and the protection and preservation of the marine environment" according to the same.<ref name="preambleToUNCLOS" />

While China does not claim all waters within its [[nine-dash line]] as its internal waters and territorial sea,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://kw.china-embassy.gov.cn/eng/zgxw/202009/t20200911_1572845.htm|title=Wang Yi Laid Out Three Basic Facts of the Issue of the South China Sea|access-date=September 26, 2024|publisher=Chinese Embassy|location=Kuwait|date=September 9, 2020}}</ref> its actions near Sabina Shoal, has resulted in commentators implying this applies.<ref name="whyDoesChinaClaim">{{cite news |last1=Zhang |first1=Anson |title=Why does China claim almost the entire South China Sea? |url=https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/10/24/why-does-china-claim-almost-the-entire-south-china-sea |publisher=[[Al-Jazeera]] |date=October 24, 2023}}</ref> The 2016 arbitral tribunal ruled that China has no legal basis for claims of historic rights with respect to maritime area (surrounding sea area) claims within its nine-dash line.<ref name="noLegalBasisForChinasSCSClaims">{{cite news |title=‘No legal basis’ for China’s South China Sea claims |url=https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/7/13/no-legal-basis-for-chinas-south-china-sea-claims |publisher=[[Al-Jazeera]] |date=July 13, 2016}}</ref><ref name="chinaUNCLOS">{{cite news |last1=Wang |first1=Zheng |title=China and UNCLOS: An Inconvenient History |url=https://thediplomat.com/2016/07/china-and-unclos-an-inconvenient-history/ |publisher=[[The Diplomat]] |date=July 11, 2016}}</ref> China rejected the ruling as "ill-founded", and said its territorial sovereignty and marine rights in South China Sea would not be affected by the ruling.<ref>{{cite news |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 |agency=The Guardian |date=12 Jul 2016}}</ref>

== Incidents ==

Line 72 ⟶ 73:

===Ramming incidents===

On August 19, 2024, [[Philippine Coast Guard]] vessels [[BRP Cape Engaño (MRRV-4411)|BRP ''Cape Engaño'']] along with the [[BRP Bagacay (MRRV-4410)|BRP ''Bagacay'']] suffered damage after being rammed by [[China Coast Guard]] (CCG) ships off Sabina Shoal. ''Bagacay'' suffered a 3-foot hole above the [[waterline]].<ref name=":0">{{Cite news |last=Aaron-Matthew |first=Lariosa |date=19 August 2024 |title=China Coast Guard Rams Philippine Cutters Near Disputed South China Sea Shoals |url=https://news.usni.org/2024/08/19/china-coast-guard-rams-philippine-cutters-near-disputed-south-china-sea-shoals |access-date=23 August 2024 |work=USNI News}}</ref> A [[60 Minutes]] crew with journalist [[Cecilia Vega]] were onboard the ''Cape Engaño'' when it was surrounded by 14 Chinese Coast Guard and [[Maritime Militia]] ships and rammed at 4am by a China Coast GuardCCG vessel. The ramming tore a 3 1/2 foot hole above the waterline on the ''Cape Engaño''.<ref name="chinaRamsPhilippineShip60Minutes">{{cite news |title=China rams Philippine ship while 60 Minutes on board; South China Sea tensions could draw U.S. in |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V80MGYrWWaM |publisher=[[60 Minutes]] |date=September 16, 2024}}</ref>

[[File:BRPChina TeresaCoast MagbanuaGuard beingvessel rammed21555 byramming ChinaBRP CoastDatu GuardSanday vesselnear 5205Escoda Shoal.webm|thumb|China Coast Guard vessel 520521555 turning and ramming BRP Teresa''Datu MagbanuaSanday'' on August 3125, 2024 innear Sabina Shoal]]▼

The day after a clash between the two coast guards near the shoal on August 19, 2024, the Philippine government stated it was examining expanding the provisional agreement that had been established to de-escalate tensions near the [[Second Thomas Shoal]] to other areas.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1231566 |title=PH mulls expanding Ayungin Shoal 'provisional arrangement' with China |author=Darryl John Esguerra |work=Philippine News Agency |date=August 20, 2024 |access-date=August 20, 2024}}</ref>

On August 25, 2024, while approaching Sabina Shoal on a humanitarian mission to resupply Filipino fishermen with fuel, food and medical supplies, the Philippine [[Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources|Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (BFAR)]] vessel [[BRP Datu Sanday (MMOV-3002)|BRP ''Datu Sanday'']] was rammed and had water cannons deployed on itsurrounded by at least 8 Chinese vessels, which caused an engine failure on the vessel, disabling it. BRP Datu Sanday was targeted byincluding the [[People's Liberation Army Navy|People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN)]] ship 626 and, multiple China Coast Guard cutters, and two tugboats.<ref name=":1" /><ref name="usniBRPDatuSanday">{{cite news |last1=Lariosa |first1=Aaron-Matthew |title=Chinese Cutters Ram Philippine Vessel in the South China Sea |url=https://news.usni.org/2024/08/25/chinese-cutters-ram-philippine-vessel-in-the-south-china-sea |publisher=[[USNI News]] |date=August 25, 2024}}</ref><ref name="8ChineseShipsRamHarassBFAR">{{cite news |last1=Naval |first1=Rex Anthony |title=NTF-WPS: 8 Chinese ships ram, harass BFAR vessel |url=https://businessmirror.com.ph/2024/08/26/ntf-wps-8-chinese-ships-ram-harass-bfar-vessel/ |publisher=[[Business Mirror]] |date=August 26, 2024}}</ref>{{Better source needed|date=October 2024|reason=Some details differ from the USNI article for example.}} Philippine officials said the ''Datu Sanday'' was on a "humanitarian mission"; the vessel is traditionally used to resupply fishing crews.<ref name=":0" /> It was rammed and suffered engine failure after being doused by water cannons from the Chinese vessels. China Coast Guard spokesperson Gan Yu accused the Philippine vessel of intentionally colliding with their ship, but a video released by the Philippine Coast Guard showed the Chinese Coast Guard vessel 21555 ramming the ''Datu Sanday''.<ref name="chineseShipsWaterCannonsRamBFAR">{{cite news |title=Chinese Ships Deploy Water Cannons & Ram BFAR Vessel To Disrupt Humanitarian Mission |url=https://www.marineinsight.com/shipping-news/chinese-ships-deploy-water-cannons-ram-bfar-vessel-to-disrupt-humanitarian-mission/ |publisher=Marine Insight |date=August 26, 2024}}</ref>

[[File:BRP Teresa Magbanua being rammed by China Coast Guard vessel 5205.webm|thumb|China Coast Guard vessel 5205 ramming BRP ''Teresa Magbanua'' on August 31, 2024 in Sabina Shoal]]

On August 31, 2024, PCG Commodore Jay Tarriela said China Coast Guard vessel 5205 rammed the port bow of the PCG patrol ship [[BRP Teresa Magbanua|BRP ''Teresa Magbanua'']], then turned around and struck its starboard quarter, turned around once more and struck its port bow again.<ref name="ccgRamPCGThreeTimes">{{cite news |last1=Ong |first1=Ghio |title=Chinese Vessel Rams PCG Patrol Ship 3 times |url=https://www.onenews.ph/articles/chinese-vessel-rams-pcg-patrol-ship-3-times |publisher=[[One News (TV channel)|One News]] |date=September 1, 2024}}</ref><ref name="newFirestormErupts" /> Tarriela released video footage of the incident showing the damage to the Philippine ship, including a man-sized hole on the [[Freeboard (nautical)|freeboard]], as well as dents, deformed railings, and waterlogged equipment.<ref name="chinaRammingManSizedHoleBRP">{{cite news |date=September 2, 2024 |title=China ramming pokes man-sized hole on BRP Teresa Magbanua |url=https://www.gmanetwork.com/news/topstories/nation/918961/china-ramming-pokes-man-sized-hole-on-brp-teresa-magbanua/story/ |publisher=[[GMA News Online]]}}</ref> China Coast Guard said it was conducting enforcement against the ''Teresa Magbanua'' in "China's Xianbin Reef" and despite warnings "the Philippine ship 9701 deliberately collided with the Chinese ship 5205."<ref name="chineseVesselRamsPCG">{{cite news |last1=Ong |first1=Ghio |title=Chinese vessel rams PCG patrol ship 3 times |url=https://www.philstar.com/headlines/2024/09/01/2382040/chinese-vessel-rams-pcg-patrol-ship-3-times |publisher=[[The Philippine Star]] |date=September 1, 2024}}</ref>

▲[[File:BRP Teresa Magbanua being rammed by China Coast Guard vessel 5205.webm|thumb|China Coast Guard vessel 5205 ramming BRP Teresa Magbanua on August 31, 2024 in Sabina Shoal]]

The United States, Japan, Taiwan, Australia, and the European Union condemned China's actions of repeatedly ramming the ''Teresa Magbanua'', demanding that China stop its aggression.<ref name="euJoins4Nations">{{cite news |last1=Abarca |first1=Charie |title=EU joins 4 nations in denouncing China’s ramming of PH boat in West Philippine Sea |url=https://www.inquirer.net/412458/eu-joins-4-nations-in-denouncing-chinas-ramming-of-ph-boat-in-west-philippine-sea/ |publisher=[[Philippine Daily Inquirer]] |date=September 2, 2024}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=2024-09-01 |title=US stands with PH, condemns China's actions in WPS |url=https://www.gmanetwork.com/news/topstories/nation/918907/us-stands-with-ph-condemns-china-s-actions-in-wps/story/ |access-date=2024-10-03 |website=GMA News Online |language=en}}</ref> This was the fifth incident since the breakdown of a June provisional agreement between China and the Philippines.<ref name=":0" />

On August 31, 2024, China Coast Guard vessel 5205 rammed the port bow of the Philippines Coast Guard patrol ship [[BRP Teresa Magbanua|BRP ''Teresa Magbanua'']], then turned around and struck its starboard quarter, turned around once more and struck its port bow. Parts of the Philippine Coast Guard ship were left with holes after the Chinese Coast Guard vessel's actions.<ref name="ccgRamPCGThreeTimes">{{cite news |last1=Ong |first1=Ghio |title=Chinese Vessel Rams PCG Patrol Ship 3 times |url=https://www.onenews.ph/articles/chinese-vessel-rams-pcg-patrol-ship-3-times |publisher=[[One News (TV channel)|One News]] |date=September 1, 2024}}</ref> Footage released on social media by Philippine Coast Guard spokesperson Jay Tarriela showed how the China Coast Guard vessel deliberately rammed the Philippine Coast Guard patrol ship multiple times.<ref name="newFirestormErupts" /> The China Coast Guard spokesperson Liu Dejun's claim was released hours earlier that “At 12:06, the Philippine ship deliberately rammed into the Chinese ship 5205 in an unprofessional and dangerous manner, causing a collision for which the Philippines bears full responsibility.”<ref name="chineseVesselRamsPCG">{{cite news |last1=Ong |first1=Ghio |title=Chinese vessel rams PCG patrol ship 3 times |url=https://www.philstar.com/headlines/2024/09/01/2382040/chinese-vessel-rams-pcg-patrol-ship-3-times |publisher=[[The Philippine Star]] |date=September 1, 2024}}</ref> Tariella released further footage showing the damage to the Philippine ship, including a man-sized hole.<ref name="chinaRammingManSizedHoleBRP">{{cite news |title=China ramming pokes man-sized hole on BRP Teresa Magbanua |url=https://www.gmanetwork.com/news/topstories/nation/918961/china-ramming-pokes-man-sized-hole-on-brp-teresa-magbanua/story/ |publisher=[[GMA News Online]] |date=September 2, 2024}}</ref>

On September 15 the ''Teresa Magbanua'' arrived at the Philippines with four soldiers suffering from dehydration due to China's prolonged blockade attempt.<ref>{{Cite AV media |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cvCAkNdNHhE |title=Philippine Coast Guard ship in South China Sea standoff returns to port |date=2024-09-16 |last=Al Jazeera English |access-date=2024-10-03 |via=YouTube}}</ref> China said it may tow the Philippine vessel away if it is anchored at the Sabina Shoal again, although such an attempt can be challenging due to ''Teresa Magbanua''<nowiki/>'s size and the risk of drawing the United States into the conflict.<ref name=":1">{{Cite web |date=2024-09-07 |title=China could tow Philippine ship from Sabina Shoal, but is it worth the backlash? |url=https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy/article/3277494/china-could-tow-philippine-ship-disputed-sabina-shoal-it-worth-backlash |access-date=2024-10-03 |website=South China Morning Post |language=en}}</ref>

The United States,<ref name="usStandsWithPH">{{cite news |last1=KG |title=US stands with PH, condemns China's actions in WPS |url=https://www.msn.com/en-ph/news/national/us-stands-with-ph-condemns-chinas-actions-in-wps/ar-AA1pMPud |publisher=[[MSN]] |date=September 1, 2024}}</ref> Japan, Taiwan, Australia, and the European Union condemned China's repeated ramming of the Filipino vessel and denounced China's actions, demanding that China stop its "aggression".<ref name="euJoins4Nations">{{cite news |last1=Abarca |first1=Charie |title=EU joins 4 nations in denouncing China’s ramming of PH boat in West Philippine Sea |url=https://www.inquirer.net/412458/eu-joins-4-nations-in-denouncing-chinas-ramming-of-ph-boat-in-west-philippine-sea/ |publisher=[[Philippine Daily Inquirer]] |date=September 2, 2024}}</ref>

==Environmental destruction==

Line 88 ⟶ 93:

[[File:Philippine Coast Guard examining crushed dead corals dumped in Sabina Shoal.jpg|thumb|Philippine Coast Guard examining crushed dead corals dumped in Sabina Shoal]]

In September of 2023, athe Philippine Coast Guard survey revealedreported "massive damage" to the marine environment and coral reef in Sabina Shoal.<ref name="massiveDamageRozulEscoda">{{cite news |last1=Manabat |first1=Jacque |title=Coast Guard videos show massive damage to Rozul Reef, Escoda Shoal |url=https://news.abs-cbn.com/news/09/18/23/pcg-videos-show-damage-to-rozul-reef-escoda-shoal |publisher=[[ABS-CBN News]] |date=September 18, 2023}}</ref> TheIt presencesuggested ofthat crushedthe coralsdestruction inmay have been the reefresult indicatedof dumping, and potential attempts at reclamationillegal activitiesfishing, similar toand [[artificialland islandsreclamation]] created by China in the South China Sea,efforts (also known as theChina's [[Great Wall of Sand]].) In May, 2024,by the Philippine Coast Guard discovered more crushed corals at the shoal, and said that [[maritime militia|Chinese maritime militia]] vessels were suspected as they were swarming the area with [[cabbage tactics]] prior to the environmental destruction.<ref name="escodaShoalSorryState">{{cite news |last1=Delizo |first1=Michael |title=PCG: Escoda Shoal in sorry state after coral dumping for reclamation attempt |url=https://news.abs-cbn.com/news/2024/5/11/pcg-escoda-shoal-in-sorry-state-after-coral-dumping-for-reclamation-attempt-1517 |publisher=[[ABS-CBN News]] |date=May 11, 2024}}</ref><ref name="manilaAccusesBeijingOfIslandBuilding" />

China said there was no scientific or factual basis for the claims made by the Philippines. It claimed that the PCG ship (BRP Teresa Magbanua) which had been anchored at the shoal in April 2024<ref name="scsAVisualGuide" /> had caused continuous damage to the surrounding natural environment.<ref>{{cite news |title=China says no scientific, factual basis for Philippines' damage claims at Sabina Shoal |url=https://www.thestandard.com.hk/breaking-news/section/3/219951/China-says-no-scientific,-factual-basis-for-Philippines'-damage-claims-at-Sabina-Shoal |publisher=The Standard |date=30 Aug 2024}}</ref>