所謂“南海仲裁案”的真相
The Truth of the So-called South China Sea Arbitration

中國(guó)駐馬爾代夫大使 王福康
Wang Fukang, Ambassador of the People’s Republic of China to the Republic of Maldives

2016年5月16日
May 16, 2016

近一段時(shí)間以來(lái)，菲律賓單方面執(zhí)意推進(jìn)南海仲裁案，引起國(guó)際輿論關(guān)注，并引發(fā)各方對(duì)南海緊張局勢(shì)加劇的擔(dān)憂。作為南海問(wèn)題的利益攸關(guān)方，中國(guó)被貼上“恃強(qiáng)凌弱”、“目無(wú)法紀(jì)”的標(biāo)簽，被描繪成影響南海和平與穩(wěn)定的不安因素。
Recently, the South China Sea Arbitration unilaterally initiated and pushed forward by the Philippines has attracted international attention and raised all parties’ concerns on the tension in the South China Sea. As a stakeholder of the South China Sea Issue, it seems that China has been stuck labeled bullying small by being big and described as a challenge to peace and stability in the South China Sea.

在南海仲裁案問(wèn)題上，涉及到中國(guó)，是是非非總“亂花漸欲迷人眼”，不乏偏見(jiàn)和誤會(huì)，導(dǎo)致做出錯(cuò)誤的判斷，累積惡意和對(duì)抗，成為籠罩在南海和平上的陰霾。中國(guó)在南海問(wèn)題上的外交主張清晰而連貫，即始終維護(hù)南海和平穩(wěn)定和航行及飛越自由，始終堅(jiān)持由直接當(dāng)事國(guó)通過(guò)協(xié)商談判和平解決有關(guān)爭(zhēng)議，由地區(qū)沿岸國(guó)家共同管控矛盾，共同維護(hù)南海和平與安全。
When it comes to China’s role in the South China Sea Arbitration, what is right or wrong looks like bunches of flowers which make eyes confused. It is hard for China to shake off prejudices and misunderstandings. Accumulated hostility and confrontation becomes black clouds covering peace of the South China Sea. The diplomatic proposition of China on the South China Sea Issue is consistent and clear-cut, that is, China always upholds peace, stability and freedom of navigation and overflight in the South China Sea, always insists that the relevant disputes should be resolved through friendly consultations and negotiations by the countries directly concerned and the countries along the South China Sea coast should work together to manage disputes and maintain peace and stability in the South China Sea.

南海問(wèn)題的實(shí)質(zhì)是領(lǐng)土問(wèn)題和海洋劃界爭(zhēng)議。歷史事實(shí)是南海諸島自古以來(lái)是中國(guó)的領(lǐng)土，中方從日本手中收回南沙群島是世界反法西斯戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)的重要?jiǎng)倮麑?shí)，為《開(kāi)羅宣言》和《波茨坦公告》所莊嚴(yán)宣告。菲律賓覬覦南海油氣資源，自1970年起悍然違反《聯(lián)合國(guó)憲章》，侵占中方8個(gè)島嶼。為掩蓋其侵略事實(shí)，菲方玩起了黑魔法，提出了仲裁案，試圖借助《聯(lián)合國(guó)海洋法公約》有關(guān)規(guī)定，以侵占島礁位于其領(lǐng)土200海里內(nèi)為理由，通過(guò)海洋管轄權(quán)主張否定中方既有領(lǐng)土主權(quán)和海洋權(quán)益，混淆視聽(tīng)，嘩眾取寵，令人不齒。
The nature of the South China Sea Issue is the territorial issues and disputes of maritime delimitation. The South China Sea Islands and Reefs have been China’s territory since ancient time. That China restored Nansha Islands from Japanese was an important fruit of victory in the World Anti-Fascist War, and was solemnly announced by the Potsdam Proclamation and the Cairo Declaration. The Philippines coveted the oil and gas resources in the South China Sea, wantonly violated the UN Charter and invaded and illegally occupied 8 islands and reefs of China since 1970s. In order to conceal its invasion, the Philippines began to play “black magic”, initiated the arbitration, and tried to deny China’s existing territorial sovereignty and maritime rights and interests by taking advantage of the relevant stipulations of United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and by claiming that the islands and reefs it had invaded and illegally occupied was located within the 200 nautical miles off its coast. The Philippines tried to mislead the international opinion and catch people’s attention by hyping the issue, which is shameful.

2002年，中菲共同簽署《南海各方行為宣言》，規(guī)定應(yīng)由直接有關(guān)的主權(quán)國(guó)家通過(guò)談判協(xié)商解決有關(guān)領(lǐng)土和海權(quán)爭(zhēng)議。2011年，兩國(guó)政府發(fā)表聯(lián)合聲明，亦選擇通過(guò)談判解決爭(zhēng)議。現(xiàn)在菲方單方面挑起仲裁案，背棄了約定，失信于中方，失信于世人。中方不接受、不參與仲裁則是依法行事，首先《聯(lián)合國(guó)海洋法公約》無(wú)法調(diào)整領(lǐng)土問(wèn)題，因而仲裁庭無(wú)權(quán)對(duì)領(lǐng)土問(wèn)題作出裁定；其次中方早在2006年即依據(jù)《公約》規(guī)定做出聲明，將海洋劃界問(wèn)題排除在強(qiáng)制仲裁之外。中方站得正，坐得端，也希望國(guó)際社會(huì)在仲裁案上去偽存真，擇善而從。因?yàn)橹蟹阶龀雠懦龔?qiáng)制性仲裁決定正是基于《公約》第298條賦予的權(quán)利。
Paragraph 4 of the Declaration of Conduct on the South China Sea (DOC) signed by China and ASEAN Member States, including the Philippines, in 2002, clearly stipulates that “the parties concerned undertake to resolve their territorial and jurisdictional disputes by peaceful means, through friendly consultations and negotiations by sovereign states directly concerned”. The Philippines still issued a statement jointly with China in 2011 undertaking to resolve disputes through negotiations and consultations. Now, the Philippines unilaterally initiated the arbitration. It is an act dishonoring its commitment to China and the world. As a result, it is a legal act that China does not accept or recognize such arbitration. Firstly, territorial issues are subject to general international law, not UNCLOS. Secondly, the declaration on optional exceptions China made in 2006 in accordance with Article 298 of UNCLOS excludes disputes concerning maritime delimitation. China’s claim is justifiable and China is also willing to discard the false and retain the true, and accept what is just in the international community.

沿著古老的海上絲綢之路，中國(guó)人民最早發(fā)現(xiàn)、命名和開(kāi)發(fā)經(jīng)營(yíng)南海諸島，并將它們做為溝通友鄰，溝通文明的紐帶。如今，伴隨著21世紀(jì)海上絲綢之路建設(shè)的推進(jìn)，南海諸島將在“開(kāi)放合作、互利共贏”新時(shí)代精神指引下為地區(qū)和平和繁榮發(fā)揮更大作用。和平深植中華民族的基因，中方從不散布沖突和對(duì)抗，南海的航行和飛越自由也從未因中方而受阻。中方愿與有關(guān)國(guó)家共同維護(hù)南海的和平穩(wěn)定，實(shí)現(xiàn)共同繁榮。中方呼吁菲方從大局出發(fā)，以更建設(shè)性的姿態(tài)處理南海問(wèn)題，重返談判協(xié)商的軌道。
Along the ancient maritime Silk Route, it was the Chinese people that first to discover, name and develop the South China Sea Islands and Reefs and made them a link to connect friends, neighbors and other civilizations. Now, as the initiative of 21st Century Maritime Silk Road is pushing forward, the South China Sea Islands will play a larger role in maintaining peace and prosperity under the direction of the spirit of new era featuring “openness, cooperation, mutual benefit and win-win”. Peace is deeply rooted in the gene of the Chinese nation. China has never disseminated conflicts and confrontations. The Chinese side urges the Philippines side to think from the perspective of the overall situation, address the South China Sea issue in a more constructive way and return to the track of negotiations and consultations.?