Probing Vietnam’s Legal Prospects in the South China Sea Dispute

Asia Policy 16 (3):105-132 (2021)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
Although most Asian states are signatories to UNCLOS, which offers options for dispute resolution by either voluntary or compulsory processes, in reality fewer than a dozen Asian states have taken advantage of such an approach. The decision to adopt third-party mechanisms comes under great scrutiny and deliberation, not least because of the entailing legal procedures and the politically sensitive nature of disputes. Vietnam claims the second-largest maritime area in the South China Sea dispute after China. A comparison of two recent cases—the arbitration between the Philippines and China and the conciliation between Timor-Leste and Australia—highlights the importance of selecting between binding and nonbinding decisions and framing a complaint. In particular, any legal action under UNCLOS should specify China’s claims and actions in areas that encroach on Vietnam’s claimed exclusive economic zone (EEZ) and violate international law.
PhilPapers/Archive ID
NGUPVL
Upload history
Archival date: 2021-08-10
View other versions
Added to PP index
2021-08-10

Total views
31 ( #59,574 of 2,448,300 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
31 ( #21,368 of 2,448,300 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.