Originally Posted by
kiwi grey
From the Chinese viewpoint, UNCLOS doesn't apply.
Taiwan is part of China, so the Taiwan Strait is from the PRC's point of view an internal Chinese waterway.
That's their story and they're sticking to it.
Suggest then that UNCLOS be sent to the PRC'ians with Article 3 highlighted in dayglo.
PRC'ia can argue the toss as they may wish, they don't have a legal leg to stand on; they do have the might of arms as an aggressor and non-compliant nation to the UNCLOS.
If the water between the Glorious paradise of China, and the perfidious Taiwanese, sitting atop their rather beautiful isle, was less than 24.0nm, then they could bitch 'n moan and complain. But it ain't.
Presumably if that argument had merit, the shipping that goes in 'n out of Taipei
Kaohsiung port, Anping, Keelung, Su-ao, Taipei port, Mailiao port, Hualien, Taichung... would be needing dip clearance from the PRC's.
It's a good shot, but it is a long bow to draw, and would get up the USN's nose pretty quickly.
A point that is occasionally missed by Russia at least is that Article 19 defines Innocent Passage “Passage is innocent so long as it is not prejudicial to the peace, good order or security of the coastal State.” When Russia drives a fleet into Japanese territorial waters and hovers there, they are being naughty. “Innocent passage” implies two prerequisites: that passage be “innocent,” i.e., "not of such a nature as to affect the security or welfare of the coastal state"; and that “passage” only may be exercised, to the "exclusion of such acts as “hovering” or anchoring in the territorial seas".
The USN conducts its FONOPS to ensure the letter of the law of
UNCLOS is applied, except when they are driving a sub around the 'oggin without a valid navplot, and have to replace their divots, but, hey, stuff happens.
China doesn't try to declare itself an archipelagic state... it has a bit of a problem unless it ditches mainland "China" from the moniker "China".
