Ban urges ‘amicable’ end to Philippines, China sea dispute


U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon. AP

UNITED NATIONS—UN leader Ban Ki-moon on Tuesday called for an “amicable” settlement to a mounting West Philippine Sea territorial dispute between China and other Asian nations.

Asked about the Philippines decision to refer the case to a UN tribunal, Ban told reporters he has been following the dispute “carefully”.

“It is important for those countries in the region to resolve all these issues through dialogue in a peaceful and amicable way,” he said.

The United Nations is ready “to provide technical and professional assistance, but primarily all these issues should be resolved by the parties concerned,” the UN leader added, carefully avoiding backing any country involved.

China, the Philippines, Brunei, Malaysia, Vietnam and Taiwan all have overlapping claims to the territory.

The Philippine government announced Tuesday that it would ask an arbitration panel under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea — a 1982 treaty signed by both countries — to rule on China’s claims.

Philippine Foreign Secretary Albert del Rosario said, “The Philippines has exhausted almost all political and diplomatic avenues for a peaceful negotiated settlement of its maritime dispute with China.”

Over the past two years the Philippines and Vietnam have complained at China’s increasing assertiveness in enforcing its claims, particularly in areas believed rich in oil and natural gas reserves.

China has said the rival claims should be settled through negotiations.

Get Inquirer updates while on the go, add us on these apps:

Inquirer Viber

Disclaimer: The comments uploaded on this site do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of management and owner of We reserve the right to exclude comments that we deem to be inconsistent with our editorial standards.

  • Andrew Pc

    Is what Mr. Ban means ” Don’t waste everybody’s time, we have more important stuffs to take care of ?”

    • Lumad01

      Gung Gung

  • Lumad01

    gung gung

  • Lumad01

    settle with unclo what yours is yours….

  • Raul

    China should take history lessons: China’s 9-Dash-Claim is groundless from historical and legal perspectives

    The South China Sea in Southeast Asia is bordered by 7 countries: China, Taiwan, the Philippines, Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia and Vietnam. The name of that water, like others such as Gulf of Mexico, Indian Ocean, Arabian Sea, Persian Gulf, Gulf of Thailand, Philippines Sea, East China Sea and Sea of Japan, do not imply any notion of sovereignty because they were invented for convenience by European explorers.

    UNCLOS gave a coastal nation or an inhabited island an exclusive economic zone (EEZ) of 200 miles from the baseline (shoreline at low tide) in which the coastal nation or the inhabited island has the exclusive right to exploit natural resources. China’s nine-dash claim extends beyond her EEZ, biting into the EEZs of her neighbors. Also, UNCLOS said that rocks on the sea that cannot support human habitation and do not have economic life of their own cannot have EEZ. By UNCLOS definition, the South China Sea islands cannot have EEZ because they cannot support permanent human habitation on their own. Only China argued that they have EEZs, a hypocritical argument because in the dispute about Okinotori, China had argued that Okinotori cannot have EEZ because Okinotori cannot support human habitation on its own. As the Paracel islands lie halfway between China and Vietnam while Spratly islands and Scarborough shoal lie within the EEZs of China’s neighbors, China argued that those islands have EEZs simultaneously with claiming sovereignty over all the islands in order to maximize China’s EEZ at the expense of her neighbors.

    China justified her exaggerated claim on the South China Sea by arguing that ancient Chinese texts mentioned certain islands in the South China Sea, proving that Chinese people were the first to navigate that sea and the first to discover the islands in the area, that China was the first country to exercise jurisdiction over the islands and that the South China Sea was China’s historic water. China further argued that in 1947, when China published a map of that sea with an eleven-dash line (predecessor of the nine-dash line), nobody protested, proving that the world had accepted China’s claim. However, close examination shows that China’s arguments are baseless.

    First, in 1947, the world did not react to the map of the South China Sea with the eleven-dash line because the world ignored that map. That map carried as much legal weight as the traditional Chinese political thought which said that the world (All-under-heaven) is under the authority of Chinese emperors. Can China argue that the world had accept China’s sovereignty over the world because nobody protested when the Chinese emperors declared that the world is under their authority ? .

    Second, countries that had historical border with the Arctic Ocean formed the Arctic Council to divide the Arctic natural resources according to the rules of UNCLOS. China never had any historical border with the Arctic Ocean, yet China asked to join the Arctic Council in order to have a share of Arctic natural rersources, arguing that the Arctic Ocean is a “common heritage for all of humankind”. If the Arctic Ocean is a “common heritage for all of humankind”, then the South China Sea is a common heritage for all the peoples who live on its shores, not only for China.

    • DakuAkongUtin

      Raubayut, dont waste your time and energy trying to look legit and respector of international law. The world knows the Kayumanggis of Pinas are backstabbers and killers of men. How about the continued marginalization and discrimination of Moro Tribes in Mindanao for 500 yrs .

      You know what, you will not pass the water test.Lulubok kaagad yang bangka mo.

      • Raul

        Buhay ka pa? Akala ko na tepok ka ng Lason mula sa China. You embarrassed Chinese embassy by chupaping inside in the comfort room. Kung saan abutin ng Libog hal tira. Lahing kayumaomao. Sinusunod mga gawain ni mao shoktong? Swallowing Lenin sperm?

      • Raul

        Chinese Mao killed fellow Chinese in imaginable magnitude. 100 million…. wow backstabber!!!!!

      • jurbinsky77

        Check the University of Mindanao so taht you would know who are being marginalized.

        Malaki nga siguro ang ari mo, dapat naman mas malaki ang alam mo.

  • zdrx

    like i said in my posts before…war is inevitable. how will it play out? well……….it makes no sense. LOL.

    the UN is just the way it is. take the case of israel. when israel was born in 1948 thru UN mandate …it was left to fend for itself when it was attacked by surrounding arab states. in 1967, when pres. nasser of egypt ordered the UN to withdraw its peacekeeping force that separates egyptian and israeli forces…UN sec gen u thant COMPLIED…resulting in 6 day war. what had it done to prevent yom kippur war in 1973 that resulted in oil crisis worldwide?

    UN inaction resulted in many more wars…bloodshed and millions of suffering. russian invasions, vietnam and korean wars, afghan and gulf wars etc. did it prevent falklands war? argentina and england acted as if it did not even know there exist a UN to mediate or arbitrate differences. how about biafran, eritrean, balkan, bangladesh and other ethnic wars? UN is not proactive and even seldom reactive if any…as if it did not exists. it makes rules…and let you do all the tricks you want to do to violate it, regardless. LOL.
    with an international body like that…do you think war can be avoided and there will be peace? dream on… at least the philippines is not to blame when bad comes to worse.
    HA HA HA

  • Maitum

    Wala tayong makukuha dito kay Ban. Amoy ko na ang punto nito.

  • f35

    Mr. BAN KI MOON, China’s answer to what you call as resolving the issue through ‘dialogue in a peaceful and amicable way” is to send her ships of war to the disputed areas. If the UN through your stewardship is not keen on resolving the issue through UNCLOS, then better resign and go home to Korea and let somebody else take the cudgels for you. Apparently, you are not reading the news surrounding the dispute.

To subscribe to the Philippine Daily Inquirer newspaper in the Philippines, call +63 2 896-6000 for Metro Manila and Metro Cebu or email your subscription request here.

Factual errors? Contact the Philippine Daily Inquirer's day desk. Believe this article violates journalistic ethics? Contact the Inquirer's Reader's Advocate. Or write The Readers' Advocate:

c/o Philippine Daily Inquirer Chino Roces Avenue corner Yague and Mascardo Streets, Makati City,Metro Manila, Philippines Or fax nos. +63 2 8974793 to 94


editors' picks




latest videos