India's initial response to China's demarche asserting that Beijing's permission was necessary for Indian companies to explore oil and natural gas in the South China Sea was singularly inept. To recapitulate, ONGC Videsh (OVL) had signed a contract with Vietnamese authorities to explore blocks 127 and 128 off the Spratly Islands, claimed by China (both the PRC and Taiwan) and Vietnam. The PRC official spokesman, Jiang Yu, reacted on September 15, claiming indisputable sovereignty over these 'Nan Sha' islands while hoping that the South China Sea dispute would not be subjected to involvement from any foreign country.
The Global Times, a mouthpiece of the Chinese communist party, took the cue to call the Indo-Vietnam deal a serious political provocation and urged the Chinese government to "try every means possible to stop this cooperation from happening". Subsequently, the People's Daily pulled back somewhat, dubbing the claims and counter-claims as 'vague' and asking all three countries to come out with the specific location of the concession so that jurisdiction over it could be verified.
In contrast, India's official spokesman mounted a vague defence of the country's energy cooperation with Vietnam on the basis of international law. External affairs minister Krishna also gave a restrained response during his visit to Vietnam in September, reiterating India's intention to go ahead with the exploration.
It is only during the visit of Vietnamese President Troung Tan Sang that a firmer line emerged with the signing of the agreement on new investments in exploration and supply of oil and gas between OVL and its Vietnamese counterpart. And then, in perhaps the first indication of a 'forward policy' on security issues relating to the South China Sea, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh also struck an uncharacteristically bold note in a statement after official talks.
The Third United Nations Conventions on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS III), 1982, provides each coastal nation with an exclusive economic zone (EEZ) extending 200 nautical miles from the edge of its territorial sea and a continental shelf up to 200-m depth from its continental margin. The coastal state has the sole right to exploit minerals and other non-living natural resources under the seabed of both its EEZ and continental shelf.
The rub lies in the further provision that these rights will also extend to the seas around islands under their sovereignty that are unsubmerged during high tide, regardless of whether they are small specks of land. Consequently, much larger surrounding swathes of oil and gas-rich seabeds fall under the jurisdiction of the state having sovereignty over the South China Sea islands.
The Global Times, a mouthpiece of the Chinese communist party, took the cue to call the Indo-Vietnam deal a serious political provocation and urged the Chinese government to "try every means possible to stop this cooperation from happening". Subsequently, the People's Daily pulled back somewhat, dubbing the claims and counter-claims as 'vague' and asking all three countries to come out with the specific location of the concession so that jurisdiction over it could be verified.
In contrast, India's official spokesman mounted a vague defence of the country's energy cooperation with Vietnam on the basis of international law. External affairs minister Krishna also gave a restrained response during his visit to Vietnam in September, reiterating India's intention to go ahead with the exploration.
It is only during the visit of Vietnamese President Troung Tan Sang that a firmer line emerged with the signing of the agreement on new investments in exploration and supply of oil and gas between OVL and its Vietnamese counterpart. And then, in perhaps the first indication of a 'forward policy' on security issues relating to the South China Sea, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh also struck an uncharacteristically bold note in a statement after official talks.
The Third United Nations Conventions on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS III), 1982, provides each coastal nation with an exclusive economic zone (EEZ) extending 200 nautical miles from the edge of its territorial sea and a continental shelf up to 200-m depth from its continental margin. The coastal state has the sole right to exploit minerals and other non-living natural resources under the seabed of both its EEZ and continental shelf.
The rub lies in the further provision that these rights will also extend to the seas around islands under their sovereignty that are unsubmerged during high tide, regardless of whether they are small specks of land. Consequently, much larger surrounding swathes of oil and gas-rich seabeds fall under the jurisdiction of the state having sovereignty over the South China Sea islands.
No comments:
Post a Comment