A compass pointing towards contested islands in a stormy sea, symbolizing the need for direction and resolution.

Navigating Murky Waters: Can Revisions to the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea Resolve South China Sea Disputes?

Soraya Malik in Global Affairs August 2025 • 4 min read.

"Exploring the potential of UNCLOS revisions to address gaps and interpretations fueling tensions in the South China Sea, offering a path towards peaceful resolution."

For over two decades, the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) has served as a cornerstone of international maritime law. Initially hailed as a significant step towards resolving territorial disputes, the South China Sea remains a contested region, highlighting critical gaps in the convention's provisions.

The core issue lies in the differing interpretations of UNCLOS by the various nations involved. Brunei, China, Malaysia, the Philippines, and Vietnam each assert their claims, confident that their actions align with international law. This divergence underscores the urgent need to revisit and revise specific aspects of UNCLOS to foster a more unified understanding and prevent further escalation.

This article dives deep into the heart of the matter, focusing on key areas where revisions could make a tangible difference. We'll examine the contentious 'island or rock' distinction, the implications of 'straight baselines,' and the absence of provisions addressing historical claims, all of which contribute to the ongoing instability in the South China Sea.

Island or Rock? The Contentious Heart of the Matter

A compass pointing towards contested islands in a stormy sea, symbolizing the need for direction and resolution.

One of the most critical points of contention in the South China Sea revolves around the classification of land formations as either 'islands' or 'rocks,' a distinction that carries significant legal weight under UNCLOS. Article 121 stipulates that islands are entitled to generate exclusive economic zones (EEZs) and continental shelves, extending their sovereign rights over vast maritime areas. Rocks, however, defined as land features unable to sustain human habitation or economic life, do not possess these rights.

This distinction has fueled intense debate, particularly as nations attempt to bolster their claims by occupying and developing small islands and reefs. The construction of airstrips, research stations, and military facilities serves as a means to assert control and demonstrate the capacity to sustain human activity, regardless of the original state of the land formation.

Ambiguity in Definition: The lack of a clear, objective standard for determining 'human habitation' or 'economic life' leads to subjective interpretations and conflicting claims.
Technological Advancement: Modern technology allows for the artificial creation of habitable conditions on even the most barren rocks, further blurring the line between islands and rocks.
Resource Implications: The classification of a land feature directly impacts access to valuable mineral and ocean resources, making it a high-stakes issue for all claimants.

To address this ambiguity, revisions to UNCLOS should consider incorporating specific, measurable criteria for distinguishing between islands and rocks. This could include defining minimum size requirements, assessing the availability of natural resources like fresh water, and evaluating the long-term sustainability of human presence. Such revisions would promote greater transparency and reduce the potential for manipulation and misinterpretation.

A Call for Clarity and Cooperation

The South China Sea disputes are complex and multifaceted, with deep historical roots and significant geopolitical implications. While UNCLOS has provided a framework for managing maritime issues, its ambiguities have inadvertently contributed to the ongoing tensions. By addressing these gaps through carefully considered revisions, the international community can foster a more stable and cooperative environment in the region, paving the way for peaceful resolution and shared prosperity.

About this Article -

This article was crafted using a human-AI hybrid and collaborative approach. AI assisted our team with initial drafting, research insights, identifying key questions, and image generation. Our human editors guided topic selection, defined the angle, structured the content, ensured factual accuracy and relevance, refined the tone, and conducted thorough editing to deliver helpful, high-quality information.See our About page for more information.

This article is based on research published under:

DOI-LINK: 10.5539/ass.v11n18p274, Alternate LINK

Title: United Nation Convention On The Law Of The Sea: Inevitable Way Towards Revision To Overcome South China Sea Disputes

Subject: General Economics, Econometrics and Finance

Journal: Asian Social Science

Publisher: Canadian Center of Science and Education

Authors: Natalia Prisekina, Roman Dremliuga

Published: 2015-06-05

Everything You Need To Know

What is the primary role of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) in the context of the South China Sea?

UNCLOS serves as a cornerstone of international maritime law, aiming to provide a framework for managing maritime issues, including territorial disputes. However, in the South China Sea, differing interpretations of UNCLOS by claimant nations have led to ongoing tensions, highlighting the need for revisions to address ambiguities and clarify provisions.

How does the classification of 'islands' versus 'rocks' under UNCLOS impact the disputes in the South China Sea?

The distinction between 'islands' and 'rocks' is critical because it determines the extent of maritime rights a land feature generates under UNCLOS. Islands, according to Article 121, can generate exclusive economic zones (EEZs) and continental shelves, whereas rocks cannot. This classification is a major point of contention, with nations attempting to develop features to assert island status and gain control over resources. The ambiguity in the definition of 'human habitation' and 'economic life' allows for subjective interpretations and conflicting claims.

What specific areas of UNCLOS are considered ambiguous and in need of revision to resolve South China Sea disputes?

The main areas requiring revision include the distinction between 'islands' and 'rocks' (specifically, the criteria for 'human habitation' and 'economic life'), the implications of 'straight baselines', and the absence of provisions addressing historical claims. Clarifying these areas is crucial to reduce subjective interpretations and prevent further escalation of tensions among the involved nations.

Why is it important to revise UNCLOS to address the issues in the South China Sea, and what benefits could this bring?

Revising UNCLOS is crucial because its current ambiguities contribute to ongoing tensions in the South China Sea. By addressing these gaps, the international community can foster a more stable and cooperative environment in the region. This includes promoting a more unified understanding of maritime rights, reducing the potential for manipulation, and ultimately paving the way for peaceful resolution and shared prosperity among the claimant nations.

What concrete steps could be taken to clarify the distinction between 'islands' and 'rocks' within UNCLOS to reduce tensions in the South China Sea?

To clarify the 'island or rock' distinction, revisions to UNCLOS should incorporate specific, measurable criteria. This could involve defining minimum size requirements for land features, assessing the availability of natural resources like fresh water, and evaluating the long-term sustainability of human presence. The aim is to establish more objective and transparent standards to prevent subjective interpretations and reduce the potential for manipulating the classification to gain maritime rights.