Analysis Of The Maritime Demarcation Between China And South Korea On International Law

Since 1990s, China and South Korea have consulted on maritime demarcation for more than ten rounds. On December 22nd 2015, these two countries claimed to open negotiations about boundary delimitation, which focused on the EEZ and continental shelf boundary in the Yellow Sea and northern part of the East China Sea, as well as solutions to the jurisdiction of reefs. About the demarcation in Yellow Sea, China insists on the equitable principle and taking silt line into consideration, which can be regarded as the principle of continental nature extension; While in Korea’s opinion, the equidistance line should be adopted, for these two countries are on the opposite direction of the same continental shelf. Regarding the East China Sea, the dispute of jurisdiction on Socotra Rock and outer continental shelf need to be solved. China puts more importance on fishery rights on the Yellow Sea and north East China Sea. As a result, the settlement of jurisdiction on Socotra Rock is very hopeful. We can judge that the key of outer continental shelf demarcation among China, South Korea and Japan is on whether Okinawa Trough cuts off this continental shelf or not. Both China and Korea say yes to this question and the geographic reality also supports their opinions.Equitable solution is the ultimate aim of maritime demarcation. With the guidance of this aim, both the Equitable principle and the equidistance can be applied to maritime boundary demarcation, provided two countries come to an agreement. Besides the demarcation principles, relevant circumstances like, single maritime boundary, China-Korea Fishery Agreement, the proportion between EEZ area and coastline, base point and straight base line, will also directly influence the final maritime boundary. Firstly, because the institutional features of continental shelf and EEZ are different from each other, single maritime boundary will not appear outside of 200 sea miles. Secondly, China-Korea Fishery Agreement is nothing but a temporary fishery management and it may have limited effects on the final boundary. Then, test of the proportion between EEZ area and coastline is the last step of the 3-step delimitation method. However, up to now no quantitative criteria for the ratio has been established. Lastly, the starting location of maritime demarcation is affected by the base point position and the length of the straight base line. Actually, many countries select some acceptable base points to avoid conflicts rather than their base points announced. Another important fact is that the prospect for mineral resources development in the zone cannot be overlooked during their negotiations. Considering all the relevant factors above, it is likely that the maritime demarcation will be taken under the guidance of the equitable principle. China-Korea Fishery Agreement and the existing base points may play small parts in the process, while much importance will be put on the potential mineral resources. And the 3-step delimitation method established by the International Court of Justice will be adopted to delimit a single maritime boundary for the two countries.Compared to the condition of Yellow Sea and north East China Sea, the outer continental shelf demarcation is more difficult. Considering this condition, it is essential to establish joint development zone in this East Sea area. Through investigating the Compulsory Joint Venture Model, Supra-National Joint Authority Model and Single State Managing Model, we find that only the Compulsory Joint Venture Model can apply to the reality of East China Sea. Actually, existing Japan-ROK cooperative development just conforms to this kind of model.