In early June, Malaysian Foreign Minister Mohammed Hama met with the Philippines President Magos in Manila.Regardless of the official and folk levels, Ma Fei maintains a harmonious and effective relationship.However, it is reported that almost at the same time as the meeting, the Philippines officially submitted an application to the United Nations Mainland Limits Committee (UNCLCS) to extend the Philippine continental shelf from the Philippine coastline facing the South China Sea.From the perspective of the Philippines, this submission aims to ensure the rights and interests of the Philippines in the underwater resource in related waters.
The large area of the South China Sea involved in territorial sovereign disputes in modern times, at least there are China, the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia, Indonesia, and Brunei proposed most of the sovereignty of territorial territorial collar sovereignty.In the past, some South China Sea disputes have also submitted similar mainland shelf extension applications, and sometimes they are opposed by other disputers because they believe that these applications may affect their sovereignty extension.Therefore, if the latest request submitted by the Philippines to UNCLCS will be opposed by other South China Sea competitions, it will not be surprising.Because the dispute must publicly declare their opposition, in order to maintain the effectiveness of the country's claim from the perspective of law and diplomacy.Therefore, in a macro perspective, the latest request submitted by the Philippines to UNCLCS and any opposition that may be caused by this can be regarded as the normal performance of all parties in the South China Sea dispute.
However, the application for the extension of the continental shelf submitted by the Philippines this time is not only the above impact.From a more micro perspective, at least some continental shelf claims from the Philippines's application from the baseline of Sabah this time.Malaysia believes that Sabah is its sovereign territory, while the Philippines retains historic sovereignty claims to Sabah.Therefore, Malaysia also submitted a diplomatic photo meeting to the United Nations, which is said to "clearly" the application for the Philippines to submit to Unclcs.
From the perspective of media reports, Malaysia's opposition is mainly based on the extension of the continental frame described in the Filipino application, which is "projected from the baseline of Sabah, Malaysia".It is unclear whether Malaysia's opposition is part of the rights of equity involving the two countries.
My position on the sovereign dispute between Family is clear and unambiguous.As a native Sabah, I think at least in the modern sense, Sabah is an irresistible part of Malaysia, which is obvious.The main reason is that the Sabah people were willing to let Sabah and Sarawak, Malaysia and Singapore form Malaysia's willingness to be determined by the United Nations's public opinion investigation process. Establishing a Malaysian Malaysia agreement is also a treaty that has properly filed with the United Nations for the United NationsEssence
The Philippines insisted that Sabah was "leased" out
As for the sovereignty of the Philippines for Sabah, it can be traced back to more than 100 years ago. It is said that the Sultan State of the Sushu Sultan in the east of Sabah at least the sultan of Sabah was to "rent" or "cut" Sabah to the British colonists.The British and even inherited the sovereignty of the British rule of Sabah considers it to be concessions, but the Philippine Fang, who inherited Sulu's sovereignty, insisted that Sabah had only been "leased" at that time, so he strives to claim the sovereignty back to Sabah for many years.
All official maps in the Philippines are drawn Sabah as the Philippine territory, so this time proposes an extension of the continental shelf, and naturally it also regards the Sabah coastline as part of the relevant baseline.
This is not the first time Ma Fei has competed on the Sabah issue.Before and after the establishment of Malaysia, the same period of confrontation between Indonesia and Malaysia under the rule of Sucano, the Philippines also carried out some fierce confrontation measures as in Indonesia, but later calmed down.
Although there are many Philippines in Sabah, the Philippines is determined to refuse to take the "special work team" in Sabah as the consulate, so as not to look at the Philippines's perspective of "dilution" its sovereignty of SabahBecause that is equivalent to admitting Malaysia's sovereignty over Sabah.But a dozen years ago, a group of Philippine militants who claimed to be descendants of Sulu Sudan invaded Sabah. When a fierce battle with the Malaysian armed forces, the Philippines had no solid support for armed elements.
Frankly speaking, I don't want to defend Malaysia's sovereignty on Sabah again here.On the contrary, as an observer who has a strong interest in international law and international relations in the near future, I can understand why the two countries need to publicly clarify their positions about Sabah.Because if the dispute hopes to strengthen the sovereignty of a territory in the international law, it must often and continue to perform some actions to display sovereignty.These actions must be at least symbolic.Under the current circumstances, Ma Fei chose to use legal and diplomatic methods, rather than directly confrontation to carry out these "necessary" actions, which is actually gratifying.
The sovereign dispute about Sabah is a long -term dispute between Ma Fei, and it should not be resolved in the short term.The two countries can see forests in the overall bilateral relations, not just individual trees, they are indeed lucky.In other words, the two countries are not addicted to Sabah's sovereignty disputes, but are focusing on bilateral relations.
Sabah is undoubtedly important, especially for Sabah people like me.In fact, the conflict of Mafi during the submission of the dispute was close to Malaysian Foreign Minister's visit to Manila to prove the toughness of bilateral relations between the two countries.Although there is no doubt that the two countries have a profound difference on the issue of territorial sovereignty in Sabah, at least they are honest and straightforward, and in a peaceful and blunt way, their diplomatic positions are placed on the desktop.
In my opinion, the importance of Sabah should be the center of the long-term neglected Wenyin Mafi East Asia Growth Zone (BIMP-EAGA).If Sabah is so important in Ma Fei's eyes, the two countries should work together to take the lead in developing other areas of Sabah and BIMP-EAGA (such as southern Philippines), so that this often forgotten Southeast Asian corner can catch up with more developed areas. In the end,It becomes more peaceful and prosperous.This will bring great benefits to Sabah and neighboring areas.
The author is a senior researcher at the Singapore International Affairs Society (Research Institute)
Chief Counselor of the Malaysian Pacific Research Center
