Latest news with #PermanentCourtofArbitration
New Indian Express
4 hours ago
- Politics
- New Indian Express
China's insertion into India-Pakistan waters dispute adds a further ripple in South Asia
With the future of a crucial water-sharing treaty between India and Pakistan up in the air, one outside party is looking on with keen interest: China. For 65 years, the Indus Waters Treaty has seen the two South Asian rivals share access and use of the Indus Basin, a vast area covered by the Indus River and its tributaries that also stretches into Afghanistan and China. For much of that history, there has been widespread praise for the agreement as a successful demonstration of cooperation between adversarial states over a key shared resource. But experts have noted the treaty has long held the potential for conflict. Drafters failed to factor in the effects of climate change, and the Himalayan glaciers that feed the rivers are now melting at record rates, ultimately putting at risk the long-term sustainability of water supply. Meanwhile, the ongoing conflict over Kashmir, where much of the basin is situated, puts cooperation at risk. With treaty on ice, China steps in That latest provocation threatening the treaty was a terrorist attack in the Indian union territory of Jammu and Kashmir on April 22, 2025. In response to that attack, which India blamed on Pakistan and precipitated a four-day confrontation, New Delhi temporarily suspended the treaty. But even before that attack, India and Pakistan had been locked in negotiation over the future of the treaty – the status of which has been in the hands of international arbitrators since 2016. In the latest development, on June 27, 2025, the Permanent Court of Arbitration issued a supplementary award in favor of Pakistan, arguing that India's holding of the treaty in abeyance did not affect its jurisdiction over the case. Moreover, the treaty does not allow for either party to unilaterally suspend the treaty, the ruling suggested. Amid the wrangling over the treaty's future, Pakistan has turned to China for diplomatic and strategic support. Such support was evident during the conflict that took place following April's terrorist attack, during which Pakistan employed Chinese-made fighter jets and other military equipment against its neighbor.
AllAfrica
8 hours ago
- Politics
- AllAfrica
China adding ripples to India-Pakistan river rift
With the future of a crucial water-sharing treaty between India and Pakistan up in the air, one outside party is looking on with keen interest: China. For 65 years, the Indus Waters Treaty has seen the two South Asian rivals share access and use of the Indus Basin, a vast area covered by the Indus River and its tributaries that also stretches into Afghanistan and China. For much of that history, there has been widespread praise for the agreement as a successful demonstration of cooperation between adversarial states over a key shared resource. But experts have noted the treaty has long held the potential for conflict. Drafters failed to factor in the effects of climate change, and the Himalayan glaciers that feed the rivers are now melting at record rates, ultimately putting at risk the long-term sustainability of water supply. Meanwhile, the ongoing conflict over Kashmir, where much of the basin is situated, puts cooperation at risk. That latest provocation threatening the treaty was a terrorist attack in the Indian union territory of Jammu and Kashmir on April 22, 2025. In response to that attack, which India blamed on Pakistan and precipitated a four-day confrontation, New Delhi temporarily suspended the treaty. But even before that attack, India and Pakistan had been locked in negotiation over the future of the treaty – the status of which has been in the hands of international arbitrators since 2016. In the latest development, on June 27, 2025, the Permanent Court of Arbitration issued a supplementary award in favor of Pakistan, arguing that India's holding of the treaty in abeyance did not affect its jurisdiction over the case. Moreover, the treaty does not allow for either party to unilaterally suspend the treaty, the ruling suggested. Amid the wrangling over the treaty's future, Pakistan has turned to China for diplomatic and strategic support. Such support was evident during the conflict that took place following April's terrorist attack, during which Pakistan employed Chinese-made fighter jets and other military equipment against its neighbor. Meanwhile, in an apparent move to counter India's suspension of the treaty, China and Pakistan have ramped up construction of a major dam project that would provide water supply and electricity to parts of Pakistan. So, why is China getting involved? In part, it reflects the strong relationship between Pakistan and China, developed over six decades. But as an expert in hydro politics, I believe Beijing's involvement raises concerns: China is not a neutral observer in the dispute. Rather, Beijing has long harbored a desire to increase its influence in the region and to counter an India long seen as a rival. Given the at-times fraught relationship between China and India – the two countries went to war in 1962 and continue to engage in sporadic border skirmishes – there are concerns in New Delhi that Beijing may respond by disrupting the flow of rivers in its territory that feed into India. In short, any intervention by Beijing over the Indus Waters Treaty risks stirring up regional tensions. The Indus Waters Treaty has already endured three armed conflicts between Pakistan and India, and until recently, it served as an exemplar of how to forge a successful bilateral agreement between two rival neighbors. Riccardo Pravettoni, CC BY-SA Under the initial terms of the treaty, which each country signed in 1960, India was granted control over three eastern rivers the countries share – Ravi, Beas and Satluj – with an average annual flow of 40.4 billion cubic meters. Meanwhile, Pakistan was given access to almost 167.2 billion cubic meters of water from the western rivers – Indus, Jhelum and Chenab. In India, the relatively smaller distribution has long been the source of contention, with many believing the treaty's terms are overly generous to Pakistan. India's initial demand was for 25% of the Indus waters. For Pakistan, the terms of the division of the Indus Waters Treaty are painful because they concretized unresolved land disputes tied to the partition of India in 1947. In particular, the division of the rivers is framed within the broader political context of Kashmir. The three major rivers – Indus, Jhelum and Chenab – flow through Indian-administered Jammu and Kashmir before entering the Pakistan-controlled western part of the Kashmir region. But the instability of the Kashmir region – disputes around the Line of Control separating the Indian- and Pakistan-controlled areas are common – underscores Pakistan's water vulnerability. Nearly 65% of Pakistanis live in the Indus Basin region, compared with 14% for India. It is therefore not surprising that Pakistan has warned that any attempt to cut off the water supply, as India has threatened, would be considered an act of war. It also helps to explain Pakistan's desire to develop hydropower on the rivers it controls. One-fifth of Pakistan's electricity comes from hydropower, and nearly 21 hydroelectric power plants are located in the Indus Basin region. Since Pakistan's economy relies heavily on agriculture and the water needed to maintain agricultural land, the fate of the Indus Waters Treaty is of the utmost importance to Pakistan's leaders. Such conditions have driven Islamabad to be a willing partner with China in a bid to shore up its water supply. China provides technical expertise and financial support to Pakistan for numerous hydropower projects in Pakistan, including the Diamer Bhasha Dam and Kohala Hydropower Project. These projects play a significant role in addressing Pakistan's energy requirements and have been a key aspect of the transboundary water relationship between the two nations. With its rivalry with India and its desire to simultaneously work with Pakistan on numerous issues, China increasingly sees itself as a stakeholder in the Indus Waters Treaty, too. Chinese media narratives have framed India as the aggressor in the dispute, warning of the danger of using 'water as a weapon' and noting that the source of the Indus River lies in China's Western Tibet region. Doing so fits Beijing' s greater strategic presence in South Asian politics. After the terrorist attack, China's Foreign Minister Wang Yi reaffirmed China's support for Pakistan, showcasing the relationship as an 'all-weather strategic' partnership and referring to Pakistan as an 'ironclad friend.' And in response to India's suspension of the treaty, China announced it was to accelerate work on the significant Mohmand hydropower project on the tributary of the Indus River in Pakistan. Construction at the Mohmand Dam. Photo: Pakistan Water and Power Development Authority via The Conversation Chinese investment in Pakistan's hydropower sector presents substantial opportunities for both countries in regards to energy security and promoting economic growth. The Indus cascade project under the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor initiative, for example, promises to provide cumulative hydropower generation capacity of around 22,000 megawatts. Yet the fact that the project broke ground in Gilgit-Baltistan, a disputed area in Pakistan-controlled Kashmir, underscores the delicacy of the situation. Beijing's backing of Pakistan is largely motivated by a mix of economic and geopolitical interests, particularly in legitimizing the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor. But it comes at the cost of stirring up regional tensions. As such, the alignment of Chinese and Pakistani interests in developing hydro projects can pose a further challenge to the stability of South Asia's water-sharing agreements, especially in the Indus Basin. Recently, the chief minister of the Indian state of Arunachal Pradesh, which borders China, warned that Beijing's hydro projects in the Western Tibet region amount to a ticking 'water bomb.' To diffuse such tensions – and to get the Indus Waters Treaty back on track – it behooves India, China and Pakistan to engage in diplomacy and dialogue. Such engagement is, I believe, essential in addressing the ongoing water-related challenges in South Asia. Pintu Kumar Mahla is research associate at the Water Resources Research Institute, University of Arizona This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Filipino Times
a day ago
- Business
- Filipino Times
US to build boat maintenance facility in Palawan to boost PH maritime capability
The United States is set to build a boat maintenance facility in Palawan, the US Embassy in the Philippines announced Tuesday. In a statement, the embassy said the US Naval Facilities Engineering Systems Command issued a public solicitation on July 7 for the design and construction of the facility at the Naval Detachment Oyster Bay. The facility will provide repair and maintenance capabilities for several small Philippine military watercraft. It will also include two multi-purpose interior rooms for equipment storage or conference use. The embassy clarified that the facility is not a US military base and has been approved by the Philippine government in accordance with local laws and regulations of both countries. 'Our U.S.-Philippine alliance, with its roots in the 1951 Mutual Defense Treaty, remains a cornerstone of peace and security, promoting our common vision for a free, open, and resilient Indo-Pacific,' the embassy said. The planned facility will be located near the West Philippine Sea, where tensions remain high due to China's sweeping claims over the South China Sea, including parts within the Philippines' exclusive economic zone. In 2016, the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague ruled that China's expansive claims had no legal basis. China has refused to recognize the ruling.
Memri
2 days ago
- Politics
- Memri
The Historical Context Of The South China Sea Territorial Conflict
On July 12, 2016, exactly, nine years ago, the Permanent Court of Arbitration delivered its final ruling on the case filed by the Philippines against China over territorial disputes in the South China Sea.[1] The court affirmed that China's claim, as embodied by its nine-dash line, has no basis under international law.[2] This following analysis provides the historical context of the disputed waters. (Source: X) The waters first appeared in Indian, Arab, and Chinese historical records as early 206 BCE. The waters were depicted as fishing grounds and trading routes that connected Eastern and Western Asia to Southeast Asia. The waters are peppered with tiny islands and sunken reefs. There, safe havens were built by ancient seafarers as they navigated the open sea. Artifacts originating from a myriad of cultures were found in the islets suggesting that they were used not by one but a host of civilizations. Fast forward to World War II, it became clear that the waters were strategic in a time of war. They were used by Japan as naval outposts during the expansion of its empire in South East Asia. In the 1960s, it was discovered that beneath the seas lie an estimated 11 billion barrels of oil, 190 trillion cubic feet of natural gas and 10 percent of the world's fishing resources. It has also emerged as one of the most important global trading routes. The strategic importance of the waters could not be denied. Of particular interest is the Spratly Islands. The Spratlys is a group of some 100 islets, reefs and shoals. It straddles the Philippines to the east, Vietnam to the west, Malaysia and Brunei to the south, and China and Taiwan to the north. Control over the Spratlys allows military projection and surveillance over the entire Asian region. Six nations claim ownership of the Spratlys but China claims not only the Spratlys but all of the South China Sea. Satellite images shows that Beijing had already constructed artificial islands with airstrips, missile platforms and harbors at Fiery Cross Reef, Subi Reef, and Mischief Reef, among others. Tensions have been escalating, thanks to China's coercive activities and bad behavior. To defuse tensions, ASEAN called for the establishment of a code of conduct as early as 2002. But drafting the code did not start until 2017. By mid‑2023, the second version of the code of conduct was completed with China and ASEAN agreeing to write a third version due to significant disagreements. ASEAN claimants (notably the Philippines, Vietnam) want a legally binding agreement enforceable under international law. China insists on a non-binding framework. Moreover, China is pushing to exclude third‑party military navies (like the U.S.) from the agreement, which ASEAN found self-serving and unacceptable. Without a functioning code of conduct, China has aggressively asserted its claims by way of coercion and deployment of grey zone tactics. The Philippine-China Conflict The Philippine-China stand-off started in 2013, when, in a unilateral act of aggression, China announced that the Spratlys, Parcel islands and Macclesfeild Bank would be administered by Sansha City, a territory of China. Suspicions were rife that China would build a military base to support its navy and air force – something China vehemently denied. Years later, the suspicions were proven true and China was caught in its own lie. The Chinese Coast Guard roped off the entrance of the Scarborough lagoon preventing Philippine vessels from entering, including those of fishermen. The Chinese accosted Philippine vessels that traversed the area, confiscated their contents and detained the crew. It was a blatant disrespect of Philippine sovereignty. The Philippines resisted China's bullying and moved swiftly to defend its sovereignty. It did what any law-abiding republic would do – it took China to court. It was the only claimant of the disputed territories with the courage to do so. In 2014, the Philippines filed a case against China before the Permanent Court of Arbitration of the United Nations Convention of the Laws of the Seas (UNCLOS). The Philippines argued that China's territorial claim was in defiance of the UNCLOS accord for which both China and the Philippines are signatories. The Philippines further argued that the basis of China's claim, its nine-dash line, was conjured out of convenience only in 1946 in contrast to Philippine historical claims whose basis are nautical records dating back to the XV century. For those unaware, China's campaign to claim the entire South China Sea for itself started when a power vacuum arose after Japan's defeat in World War II. In 1946, China's Ministry of Interior Committee deployed two geography students named Fu Jiaojin and Zheng Ziyue to define China's boundaries in the South China Sea. The basis of their claim was an atlas drafted in 1936 by Bai Meichu, a Chinese professor whose atlas was proven to be riddled with errors. The dashes drawn by the two students were a cartographic sketch without clearly defined boundaries. It does not specify where exactly the sovereignty ends and what rights China claims (sovereignty, historic fishing rights, administrative control, etc.). Its ambiguity was deliberate as it allows China to assert a wide range of claims flexibly. The nine-dash line is a preposterous claim by any account. It is for this reason that the international community supports the Philippine's legal argument and absolutely no nation support's China's claim. In 2016, the tribunal ruled in the Philippine's favor saying that China's nine-dash Line is invalid and illegal. It further ruled that China has no legal claim nor historical rights over Philippine Exclusive Economic Zone and that it had behaved unlawfully. The ruling bestows upon the Philippines the legal rights on the waters. On the next installment, an in-depth analysis will be provided on the decision of the Permanent Court of Arbitration. *Andrew J. Masigan is the MEMRI China Media Studies Project Special Advisor. He is a Manila-based economist, businessman, and political columnist for The Philippine Star. Masigan's articles in MEMRI are also published in The Philippine Star.
GMA Network
2 days ago
- Politics
- GMA Network
Palace says Marcos to continue asserting PH rights in WPS
President Ferdinand ''Bongbong'' Marcos Jr. will continue to assert the Philippines' sovereignty in the West Philippine Sea, Palace Press Officer Undersecretary Atty. Claire Castro said Tuesday. She was asked to comment on the Chinese Foreign Ministry refusing to recognize the arbitral ruling, which invalidated China's massive territorial claims in the South China Sea. To recall, it was on July 12 that Manila commemorated the ninth year of the said ruling, favoring the country over Beijing. ''Parang nadinig na po natin iyan noong nakaraan pa, na ang sinasabing arbitral award ay isang papel na dapat lamang ibasura. Hindi po ganyan ang paningin at pananaw ng kasalukuyang administrasyon. Nagsalita na po si Secretary Tess Lazaro, nagsalita na rin si Secretary Gibo Teodoro pati na po si Secretary Año,'' Castro said in a briefing. (It seems like we have heard that before, that the so-called arbitral award is a piece of paper that should just be thrown away. That is not the vision and perspective of the current administration. Secretary Tess Lazaro has already spoken, Secretary Gibo Teodoro has also spoken, and Secretary Año.) ''Isang tagumpay po na mapaalam sa buong mundo kung no ang pinaglalaban natin at kung ano ang para sa Pilipinas at para sa taumbayan. Muli, ang Pangulo, hindi isusuko ang soberanya, ang karapatan ng bansa at ng taumbayan kahit kanino pa man,'' she added. (It is a victory to let the whole world know what we are fighting for and what is for the Philippines and the people. Once again, the President will not surrender the sovereignty, the rights of the country and the people to anyone.) The Philippines has said the nine-year-old arbitral ruling served as a guide in peaceful resolution of maritime territorial disputes. The Department of Foreign Affairs said it is ''an illuminating precedent for States facing similarly challenging circumstances in the seas, and the clearest of reminders to the international community that the rule of law can be the great equalizer between and among nations, and serve as the bedrock of peace and stability for the international community.'' On July 12, 2016, the Permanent Court of Arbitration based in The Hague, Netherlands issued a ruling on the case filed by the Philippines in January 2013. The case hinges on the legal status of reefs, rocks and artificial islands in the Scarborough Shoal and Spratly Island group. Manila's 15-point case critically asked the tribunal to rule on the status of China's so-called "nine-dash line", a boundary that is the basis for its 69-year-old claim to roughly 85% of the South China Sea. The Arbitral court ruled in favor of the Philippines and invalidated China's 'nine-dash line' claim, which virtually covers the entire South China Sea. China has since ignored the ruling and continues its aggression in the region. — BAP, GMA Integrated News
