How Much Can a Rock Get?

HowMuchCanaRockGet?———AReflectionfromtheOkinotorishimaRocks

Guifang(Julia)XUE*

* Guifang(Julia)Xue,Director/Professor/Ph.D.,InstitutefortheLawoftheSea,OceanUniversityofChina.Theviewsexpressedinthispaperarenotrepresentingthatofanygovernmentagencies.E-mail:[email protected].

Abstract:ThepaperexaminestheOkinotorishimaRocksandtheirentitle-mentingeneratingextendedjurisdictionalzones,togetherwithissuesaggrava-tedbyJapan’sexcessivenationalclaims.BasedontheOkinotorishimaRocks,

Japanclaimsa200nauticalmileExclusiveEconomicZone(EEZ)andanex-tendedcontinentalshelf(ECS).Thepracticehascauseddisagreementandconcernsfromtheinternationalcommunity.

ThepaperstartswithabriefintroductionontheOkinotorishimaRocksandthemaritimezoneclaimscomposedbyJapanbasedonthetinyrocksa-gainsttheislandregimeenvisagedintheUnitedNationsConventionontheLawoftheSea(UNCLOS).ThisisfollowedbyageneralreviewoftheJapa-neseattemptstopromotetheOkinotorishimaRocksintolegalislands(simpli-fiedas“islandisation”)soastosupportitsnationalclaimsofmultiplepurpo-ses.ThepapercontinueswithanillustrationoftheJapaneseviewsandargu-mentsinmaintainingitsclaimandislandisationpracticeovertheOkinotorishi-maRocks.ThepaperraisessomeofthekeyquestionsassociatedwiththeJap-aneseislandisationattempts.Theseincludewhetherornotrocksaredistin-guishablefromislandsbasedontheexistinginternationallaw.HowshouldtheUNCLOSbeimplementedandhowshouldtheconcernsoftheinternationalcommunityberespected? HowwilltheCommissionontheLimitsoftheCon-tinentalShelfaccomplishitsrolewithanapplicabledecision? Afteryearsofheavy,deliberateexpansion,aretheOkinotorishimaRocksstillnaturalrocksorman-madeartificialstructures?

ThepaperconcludesthattheOkinotorishimaRocksdonotqualifyaslegal

1HowMuchCanaRockGet?

ChinaOceansLawReview (2011Number1)

islands,andarenotentitledtoextendedjurisdictionalzones.Moreover,whatJapanhasconstructedaroundtherockshaschangedtheirnaturalstatusandtheexpandedconcretestructureshaveturnedtherocksintoartificialislandsorartificialstructureswhichdeserveonlya500-metersafetyzone.

Meanwhile,thepaperpointsouttheprofoundimplicationsandfar-reac-hingimpactreflectedfromtheJapaneseclaimsbasedontheOkinotorishimaRocks.TherushbystatestomakeECSsubmissionshascreatedarealcrisisforinternationallawandthedeepseabedregime.Theinternationalcommunityasawholeshouldworktogethertodealwiththiscrisis.

KeyWords:Rocks;Islands;Okinotorishima;Japan;Extendedcontinentalshelf

Ⅰ.Introduction:Japan’sClaimsonOkinotorishimaRocksandtheRegimeofIslands

JapansignedtheUnitedNationsConventionontheLawoftheSea(UN-CLOS)on7February1983andratifiediton20June1996.①Afteryearsofpreparation,Japanmadeasubmission(theSubmission)on12November2008totheCommissionontheLimitsoftheContinentalShelf(hereinafterreferredtoasCLCS)regardingtheouterlimitofitscontinentalshelves,whichwerecalculatedas740,000squarekilometers,orabouttwicethesizeofitslandter-ritory(378,000).②

AccordingtotheJapaneseExecutiveSummarycontainingallchartsandcoordinates,sevenregionsareincluded,namely,SouthernKyushu-PalauRidgeRegion(KPR),Minami-Io ToIsland Region (MIT),Minami-ToriShima(MTS),MogiSeamountRegion(MGS),OgasawaraPlateauRegion(OGP),

2

①

②

TheUNCLOSwassignedonDecember10,1982andenteredintoforceonNovember16,1994.Foralistofratifications,athttp://www.un.org/Depts/los/reference_files/chron-ological_lists_of_ratifications.htm#,30December2010.160StatesandtheEuropeanU-nionhadratifiedoraccededtotheUNCLOS.TheConventionenteredintoforceforJapanon20July1996.RegardingtheworkoftheCLCS,seeitswebsiteathttp://www.un.org/Depts/los/clcs_new/clcs_home.htm.Japanwasthe13thcountrytosubmitthedataandinformationtotheCLCSinNovember2008.TheCommissionbeganitsexaminationofJapan’ssubmis-sionatthemeetinginAugust2009,athttp://www.sof.or.jp/en/activities/index1.php,20June2011.

SouthernOki-DaitoRidgeRegion(ODR),andShikokuBasinRegion(SKB).①

Theextendedcontinentalshelf(ECS)claimsofKPR,MIT,andSKBarebasedonacoupleofRockscalledOkinotorishima,ormoreprecisely,theOkinotorish-imaRocks.②Thissubmissionhasintensifieddiscussionsandconcernsfromtheinternationalcommunity.

Sincetheearly1980s,Japanhasbeenputtingenormouseffortsintotheis-landisationoftheOkinotorishimaRocks,andhasclaimedanExclusiveEco-nomicZone(EEZ)aroundtheserocksupto200nmfromalldirectionsande-venrecentlyclaimedanextendedcontinentalshelfbeyond200nm.③ThroughthisSubmission,JapanexpectstoconfirmitsEEZclaimsof430,000squarekilometersinadditionto1,550squarekilometersofterritorialsea,andanECSinthreeregionsbasedontheOkinotorishimaRocks.④ThefarthestareasbasedontheOkinotorishimaRocksextendupto550nauticalmiles,togetherwithrightstoenforceonmaritimeactivitiesandresourceswithintheclaimedzones.

ItmayberecalledthattheregimeofislandsisestablishedbyArticle121oftheUNCLOS.⑤Inthisarticle,Paragraph1repeatsthedefinitionofanis-landprovidedinArticle10ofthe1958ConventionontheTerritorialSeaandContiguousZone.Italsosetsforththeprimarycriteriaofan“island”,namely,

itmustbeanaturalfeature,anareaofland,surroundedbywater,andabovewaterathightide.Italsodisqualifiesartificialislandsandlow-tideeleva-


①

②

③

④

⑤

FortheExecutiveSummaryofJapan’sSubmission,athttp://www.un.org/Depts/los/clcs_new/submissions_files/jpn08/jpn_execsummary.pdf,20June2011.“Shima”inJapanesemeans“island”,butJapancalledit“OkinotorishimaIslands”initsSubmission.Tomatchthisexpression,“OkinotorishimaRocks”isadoptedinthispaper.OPRF,ResearchReportontheOkinotorishimaRevivalandRelatedIssues,2008(Japa-nese),athttp://www.sof.or.jp/jp/report/pdf/200903_ISBN978-4-88404-216-5.pdf,20June2011.YukieYoshikawa,Okinotorishima:JusttheTipoftheIceberg,HarvardAsianQuarter-ly,Vol.9,No.4,2005,athttp://asiaquarterly.com/2006/02/03/ii-131/,15January2011.Article121readsinfull:(1)Anislandisanaturallyformedareaofland,surroundedbywater,whichisabovewaterathightide.(2)Exceptasprovidedforinparagraph3,theterritorialsea,thecontiguouszone,theexclusiveeconomiczoneandthecontinentalshelfofanislandaredeterminedinaccordancewiththeprovisionsofthisConventionapplicabletootherlandterritory.(3)Rockswhichcannotsustainhumanhabitationoreconomiclifeoftheirownshallhavenoexclusiveeconomiczoneorcontinentalshelf.SeeTheUnitedNationsConventionontheLawoftheSea,10December1982,1833U.N.T.S.3.


tions.①

Paragraph2reflectsthe“landdominatesthesea”principleandconfirmsthesametreatmentofislandascontinentallandterritoryregardingitsmari-timezones,namely,territorialsea,contiguouszone,EEZ,andcontinentalshelf.ThesezonesaretobedeterminedinaccordancewiththeUNCLOSandinthesamemannerasapplicabletolandterritory.

Paragraph3isacriticalpartoftheArticle.Itexcludes“rocks”which“cannotsustainhumanhabitationoreconomiclifeoftheirown”fromapplica-tioninthedeterminationofEEZandECSjurisdiction.ThemainpurposeofArticle121(3)istoguaranteethattheregimeofislandsinparagraphs1and2isnotapplicabletotinyrocksandisletsonthebasisthattheyareessentiallydifferentintermsofthenaturalconditionsnecessaryforsupportingnormalhu-manlife.Inthisrespect,theUNCLOSdifferentiatesbetween“islands”and“rocks”.②

Havingunderstoodtheprovisionanditsconnotations,JapantriedinvaintodeleteArticle121(3)duringthenegotiationoftheUNCLOS.③ToadjustthedisadvantagedstatusofOkinotorishimaasrocks,Japanhasventuredtoworkoverdecadesinturningthemintoislands.WhatJapanhasachievedfromthesetinyrocksisbeyondevaluationatthepresentstage.However,itisworthnotingtheimpactofitsislandisationandexcessiveEEZandECSclaimsonStatePractice.

Ⅱ.OkinotorishimaRocksandtheJapaneseIslandisationAttempts

TheOkinotorishimaRockshavecometointernationalattentionsincethe1980s,anddiscussionshavefocusedonthesubjectoflegalstatusandtheweightaccordedtomaritimezones.Abriefintroductionisprovidedbelow.

4

①

②

③

SeeCenterforOceanLawandPolicy,UniversityofVirginiaSchoolofLaw,UnitedNa-tionsConventionontheLawoftheSea1982,aCommentary,Vol.Ⅲ,TheHague:Marti-nusNijhoff,1995,p.338.SeeCenterforOceanLawandPolicy,UniversityofVirginiaSchoolofLaw,UnitedNa-tionsConventionontheLawoftheSea1982,aCommentary,Vol.Ⅲ,TheHague:Marti-nusNijhoff,1995,p.338.SeeCenterforOceanLawandPolicy,UniversityofVirginiaSchoolofLaw,UnitedNa-tionsConventionontheLawoftheSea1982,aCommentary,Vol.Ⅲ,TheHague:Marti-nusNijhoff,1995,p.337.

A.TheOkinotorishimaRocks

Okinotorishima(“沖ノ鳥島:おきのとりしま”inJapanese),locatedinthewesternPacificOcean,1,740kilometersfromtheJapanesemainland,consistsof5atollreefsthatwereoriginallycalled“PareceVela”byaSpanishsailorin1565,as“itlookslikeasail”.①Itwaslatercalled“DouglasReef”afteraBritishnavigatorWilliamDouglasin1789.②ItislocatedontheKyushu-PalauRidgeinthePhilippineSeaatthecoordinatesof20°25′N136°05′E/20.417,

136.083.③Itis534kilometersSEofOkiDaitō,567kilometersWSWofMina-miIwoJimaoftheOgasawaraIslandsor1,740kilometerssouthofTokyo,Ja-pan.④

NoofficialrecordexistsinJapanaboutOkinotorishimapriorto1888.In1922and1925,Japaninvestigatedtheareaandconfirmedin1931thatnoothercountrieshadclaimsandthusdeclaredthereefsitsterritory.⑤Administrative-ly,JapanplaceditunderthejurisdictionoftheTokyoMetropolisaspartoftheOgasawaraIslands,andgaveitanewJapanesenameOkinotorishima(“remote


①

②

③

④

⑤

SeeWikipedia,athttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Okinotorishima,16March2011.SeeWikipedia,athttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Okinotorishima,16February2011.Both“PareceVela”and“DouglassReef”arestillusedtoday.Forrelevantpapersonthisaccount,seeYann-hueiSong,Okinotorishima:A“Rock”oran“Island”? RecentMaritimeBoundaryControversybetweenJapanandTaiwan/China,inSeoug-YongHongandJonM.VanDykeed.,MaritimeBoundaryDisputes,SettlementProcesses,andtheLawoftheSea,Leiden:MartinusNijhoffPublishers,2009;J.I.CHAR-NEY,RocksthatcannotSustainHumanHabitation,AmericanJournalofInternationalLaw,Vol.93,1999,pp.863~878.SeeWikipedia,athttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Okinotorishima,16February2011.Both“PareceVela”and“DouglassReef”arestillusedtoday.SongisoftheviewthatitwasdebatableJapanclaimedtheOkinotorishimacoralreefsun-deritssovereigntyfromtheinternationallawviewpointintheearly1930s.SeeYann-hueiSong,Okinotorishima:A“Rock”oran“Island”? RecentMaritimeBoundaryControversybetweenJapanandTaiwan/China,inSeoug-YongHongandJonM.VanDykeed.,Mari-timeBoundaryDisputes,SettlementProcesses,andtheLawoftheSea,Leiden:MartinusNijhoffPublishers,2009;Moreover,accordingtoParagraph8ofthePotsdamProclama-tion,Japan’ssovereigntywaslimitedtotheislandsofHonshu,Hokkaido,Kyushu,andShikoku.Thus,JapanesesovereigntyovertheOkinotorishimaiscontroversialandques-tionable.Fordetails,see“PotsdamDeclaration(UnitedStates,China,UnitedKingdom):AStatementofTermsfortheUnconditionalSurrenderofJapan,26July1945”,athttp://pwencycl.kgbudge.com/P/o/Potsdam_Declaration.htm,20June2011.


birdislands”or“thesouthernmostislandsofJapan”).①

Therocksareinthewesternpartofa3to4.6meter-deeplagoonsurroun-dedbyasubmergedcoralreef,andextend4.5kilometerseast-westand1.7kilometersnorth-south,withanareaofroughly5squarekilometerswithintherimofthereef,mostofwhicharesubmergedevenatlowtide.②Thefringingreefispear-shapedinaneast-westdirectionwithitsgreatestwidthattheeast-ernend.Asmallboatchannelintothelagoonwasmadeinthesouthwest,a-bout15meterswideand6metersdeep,250meterssoutheastoftherocks.

Typhoonsanderosionareconstantthreatstothereef’sexistence.Afewdecadesago,therewereaboutfivevisibleprotrusions.Nowadays,onlytwoti-nyindividualrocksmaybetraceable,namely:Higashikojima(EasternExposedRock,Japancallsit“EasternIslet”)andKitakojima(NorthernExposedRock,

Japancallsit“NorthernIslet”)locatedsomewhattotheWest.③Athightide,

theEasternExposedRockisroughlythesizeofatwinbedandpokesjust16centimetersoutoftheocean,andtheNorthernExposedRockislessthanasmallbedroomonly6centimetersabovewater.④Fromsatelliteimages,thetwooriginalrocksappearcompletelyartificial,withnotraceofthetwonaturalrocksthatstillappearedonphotographsof1987.

6

①

②

③

④

YukieYoshikawa,Okinotorishima:JusttheTipoftheIceberg,HarvardAsianQuarter-ly,Vol.9,No.4,2005,athttp://asiaquarterly.com/2006/02/03/ii-131/,9February2011.SeeWikipedia,athttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Okinotorishima,18February2011.SeeYann-hueiSong,Okinotorishima:A“Rock”oran“Island”?RecentMaritimeBounda-ryControversybetweenJapanandTaiwan/China,inSeoug-YongHongandJonM.VanDykeed.,MaritimeBoundaryDisputes,SettlementProcesses,andtheLawoftheSea,Leiden:MartinusNijhoffPublishers,2009;SeealsoMartinFackler,AReeforaRock?QuestionPutsJapanInaHardPlaceToClaimDisputedWaters,CharityTriestoFindUseForOkinotoriShima,WallStreetJournal,16February2005,p.A1.ItisnotclearwhenJapanchangedthenameofthoserocks:inthe“PortraitofOkinotorishima”(ht-tp://www.nodaland.com/okitori/okitori.php)updatedthelasttimein2003,the“East-ernExposedRock”and“NorthernExposedRock”werestillused,butsince2005,the“EasternIslet”and“NorthernIslet”havebeenusedinrelevantdiscussionsanddocu-ments.Itisassumedthatthenameswerechangedin2004.SeeYann-hueiSong,Okinotorishima:A“Rock”oran“Island”?RecentMaritimeBounda-ryControversybetweenJapanandTaiwan/China,inSeoug-YongHongandJonM.VanDykeed.,MaritimeBoundaryDisputes,SettlementProcesses,andtheLawoftheSea,Leiden:MartinusNijhoffPublishers,2009.

B.Japan’sIslandisationAttempts

TostoptherocksfromdisappearingandtokeepthemabovewateratalltimesandtousethemtoextendtothemaximumofitsEEZandcontinentalshelf,JapanhastriedwithgreatefforttomaketheOkinotorishimaRocksmeettheminimumcriteriaofan“island”inlegalterms.TheJapaneseattemptsinthisaccountcanbedividedintothreeperiods(forspecificdetails,seetheatta-chedAnnex1:Okinotorishima:HistoryandEvents).

Startingfromthediscoveryoftherockstothelate1970s,Japanclaimeditssovereigntyovertherocksandmadesomeinitialexplorationonthenatureandpotentialutilizationoftherocks,includingtheconstructionofaNavalBase.①Inpost-WorldWarII,JapanlostitssovereigntyovertherockstotheUnitedStatesbutregaineditinthelate1960s.②ThisenabledJapantocontin-ueitsinvestigationoftherocks.

TherocksdidnotattractmuchattentionintheJapanesegovernmentuntilthelate1970swhencoastalStatesstartedtoclaimtheirEEZs.Japanextendeditsfisheriesjurisdictioninthesurroundingwatersoftherocksupto200nmfromtheterritorialseabaselinesinaccordancewithitsLawonProvisionalMeasuresRelatingtotheFishingZonethatwentintoforceon1July1977.③

Thefishingzonecoversanareaofapproximately400,000squarekilometers,anareaconsiderablylargerthanthetotallandofthecountry.④ThisstimulatedJapaneseenthusiasmoverthegaingeneratedbythelittlerocks.Theactional-sosignifiedthesecondperiodofJapan’sislandisationactionstill2004.

In1983,JapansignedtheUNCLOS,concludedinthepreviousyear,which


①

②

③

④

TheconstructionoftheNavalBasestartedin1939,butwasinterruptedin1941bytheoutbreakofWorldWarⅡ.Asitseemedinappropriatetoopenlybuildamilitaryfacilityintheinternationalclimateatthattime,thegovernmentdecidedtorefertothebaseexter-nallyas“alighthouseandameteorologicalobservationsite.”SeeWikipedia,athttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Okinotorishima,18February2011.AndrewL,Silverstein,Okinotorishima:ArtificialPreservationofaSpeckofSovereignty,BrooklynJournalofInternationalLaw,Vol.12,No.1,2009,pp.409~432,p.410.SeeKiyofumiNakauchiandLawoftheSeaInstitute,Japan,Emergy(sic)MeasuresforProtectingthe“Oki-no-tori-Shima”Islandfrom WavesinJapan’sOceanAffairs—OceanRegime,PolicyandDevelopment,September1989.SeeKiyofumiNakauchiandLawoftheSeaInstitute,Japan,Emergy(sic)MeasuresforProtectingthe“Oki-no-tori-Shima”Islandfrom WavesinJapan’sOceanAffairs—OceanRegime,PolicyandDevelopment,September1989.


establishedtheEEZregime.BasedonitspossessionofOkinotorishima,JapancouldtransferitsformerfishingzonetoanEEZofthesamesize.However,themostseriousissuetheJapanesegovernmentfearedwasthattherockscouldsubmergeandnotlieabovesealevel.Thiswoulddefeatexclusivejurisdictionrelatednotonlytoa200nmEEZinwatersaroundthem,butalsoacontinentalshelfclaimbeyond200nm.Since1987,theJapanesegovernment,representedbyvariousgovernmentalagenciesandscientificinstitutions,undertookemer-gencymeasuresleadingtoparticularlynoticeableislandisationmovements.

In1987,thesealevelrisetheory wasemployedandevidencesweresought,andaproposalwasraisedtobuildconstructionstopreventthephysicalerosionoftherockfromsubmersiontherebykeepingtherocksabovewaterformakingmaritimeclaims.Inthesameyear,theJapanesegovernmentlaunchedanembankmentbuildingproject.

During1987-1993,thegovernmentofTokyoandlatertheCentralGov-ernmentbuiltsteelbreakwatersandconcretewallsof50metersindiameter,

andtheoriginalrocks(HigashikojimaandKitakojima)werecompletelycov-eredbyartificialconcretestructurestostoptheerosion.①In1998,acoveringcostingeightbillionyenwasplacedontheeasternexposedrock.

In1988,Japan’sMarineScienceandTechnologyCentererectedamarineinvestigationfacility,aplatformonstiltslocatedintheshallowpartofthela-goon,whichappearedasarectangleof100metersby50meters.②Theplat-formsupportsahelicopterlandingpadandalarge,three-storybuildingforma-rineinvestigationsaswellasameteorologicalstation.

On8February2002,JapanmodifieditsCoastLawadoptedon12May1956.③AccordingtoArticle37(2),theCentralGovernmenttookoverthead-ministrationtasksfortheartificialstructure.From2004onwards,thethirdpe-riodofnationalislandisationeffortsstartedinamuchenhancedmannerwithmorecomprehensiveefforts.Repairworkontheembankmentwasapprovedwithsignificantfundingandaseriesofresearchandobservationprojectsbeganontherocksandtheirsurroundingwaters.④

8

①

②

③

④

In1925,therewerestillfiveabove-waterrocks,whichhaveerodedsince.SeeWikipedia,athttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Okinotorishima,5March2011.In1925,therewerestillfiveabove-waterrocks,whichhaveerodedsince.SeeWikipedia,athttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Okinotorishima,5March2011.Athttp://law.e-gov.go.jp/htmldata/S31/S31HO101.html(Japanese),5March2011.YukieYoshikawa,Okinotorishima:JusttheTipoftheIceberg,HarvardAsianQuarter-ly,Vol.9,No.4,2005,athttp://asiaquarterly.com/2006/02/03/ii-131/,5March2011.

In2004,the22nd OceanForumorganizedbytheOceanPolicyResearchFoundation(OPRF)washeldfocusingonthestatusandregenerationofOki-notorishima.①Areportwassubsequentlyissuedontherehabilitationoftherocksandanelectronicbaselinecoordinatewassetup.②Since2004,confer-encesonOkinotorishimarelatedissueshavebeenarrangedbytheOPRFasregularforums.③

InNovember2004andMarch2005,theNipponFoundationdispatchedamissiontoinvestigatehowtoutilizeOkinotorishimaandthesurroundingEEZ,

andmissionmembersincludedexpertsinthefieldsoftheinternationallaw,

coralreefecologyandconstruction.④Thesuggestionsinthereportinclude:tobuildalighthousesoastoaddthenameOkinotorishimainthechartsaroundtheglobeandtoenhanceitspresence;toexpandthesizeoftherocksbycoralbreedingandvariousotherwaystodevelopanartificialreef;tobuildanocean-thermalenergyconservationpowerplanttoattractfish,whichwassaidtobethefirstsuchexperimentintheworld:⑤toexploremineralresourcesinthead-jacentseabed;tobuildsocialinfrastructuresuchasaportandhousesforhu-manhabitation,marinestudies,anddevelopment;andtopromotesightseeing.⑥

In2005,asecondmissionwasconductedbytheNipponFoundationfocusingonfeasibilitystudiesonthemostpromisingfieldsofmarineengineering,powergeneration,andlighthousebuilding.⑦

StimulatedbytheeffortsandresearchoutcomesoftheNipponFoundationandOPRF,Japaneseofficialsandpoliticianshavesuccessfullyattractedmore


①

②

③

④

⑤

⑥

⑦

Athttp://www.sof.org.jp/jp/forum/22/php,6March2011.HajimeKayane,Submergedatollsandtheirregeneration-TerritorialpreservationofislandstatesinthePacificOceanandislandsalongtheJapaneseborder,Newsletter,No.99,2004,OPRF,athttp://www.sof.or.jp/en/news/51-100/99_1.php#01,20June2011.FormoredetailsonOPRF,athttp://www.sof.or.jp/en/index.php,20June2011;foractivityreports,seeOPRF,athttp://www.sof.or.jp/en/report/index.php,20June2011.NipponFoundation,TheReportonPromotingEconomicActivitiesinOkinotorishima(Japanese),2005,athttp://nippon.zaidan.info/seikabutsu/2004/00009/contents/0001.htm,16March2011.ShintaroIshihara’swebsite:http://www.citymayors.com/mayors/tokyo_mayor.html,16March2011.NipponFoundation,TheReportonUtilizationofOkinotorishima(Japanese),2005,atht-tp://nippon.zaidan.info/seikabutsu/2004/00004/mokuji.htm,16March2011.NipponFoundation,TheReportonPromotingEconomicActivitiesinOkinotorishima(Japanese),2005,athttp://nippon.zaidan.info/seikabutsu/2004/00009/contents/0001.htm,17March2011.


attentionfromtheCentralGovernmentaltotherocks.①In2005,theCentralGovernmentdecidedtobuildalighthouse,②installeda330millionyenradarsystemforround-the-clocksurveillancetodetectvesselsapproachingOkinoto-rishima,③repairedtheheliport,andsetupanofficialaddressplateatthe“is-land”reading“1Okinotori,OgasawaraVillage,Tokyo”.④Despiteprotestsbyenvironmentalists,GovernorIshiharaofTokyodecidedtobuildapowersta-tion.⑤Fishingexpeditionswerealsosenttodemonstratetheexistenceof“eco-nomiclife”ontherocks.⑥On16March2007,alightbeaconwasinstalledbyJapan’sCoastGuardandstartedoperation;later,thebeaconwasplottedonahydrographicchart.OkinotorishimahasbecomeanintermittentrallyingpointforJapanesenationalists,andahot-buttonpoliticalissueinJapan.⑦

Inadditiontotheconcreteprotectionactions,JapanlaunchedaseriesofcampaignstoraisepublicawarenessonthesignificanceofOkinortorishima.⑧

Sucheffortsincludetheproductionofapublic-orientedmovie“Okinotorishi-ma:MiraculousIslands”.⑨ The70-minutemoviewasreleasedinDecember2007andwasmadewidelyavailableincinemas,libraries,informationcentersetc.

InJanuary2010,theJapanesegovernmentduringaregularDietsessionsubmittedanewbillfortheprotectionofJapan’ssouthernmostOkinotoricoastlinetopreservetheirEEZclaimsandinterest.InMay2010,Japanadopt-

01

①

②

③

④

⑤

⑥

⑦

⑧

⑨

MartinFackler,AReeforaRock? QuestionPutsJapaninaHardPlace;ToClaimDispu-tedWaters,CharityTriestoFindUseforOkinotoriShima,WallStreetJournal,16Feb-ruary2005.JapanplanstoputlighthouseondisputedPacificisle,KyodoNews,24August2005.JapantoestablishsurveillancesystemonOkinotoriIsland,BritishBroadcastingCorpora-tion,16May2005.JapansetsupaddressplateoncontroversialreefinPacific,XinhuaNewsAgency,20June2005.May2005GovernorVisitsOkinotoriIslands,athttp://www.sensenfukoku.net/mail-magazine/no36.html,18March2011.SeealsothepaperwrittenbyGovernorIshihara,StrategicSignificanceofOkinotorishima,athttp://www.sankei.co.jp/,6June2005.BoatreturnsafterfishingneardisputedOkinotoriIsland,KyodoNews,19April2005.YukieYoshikawa,Okinotorishima:JusttheTipoftheIceberg,HarvardAsianQuarter-ly,Vol.9,No.4,2005,athttp://asiaquarterly.com/2006/02/03/ii-131/,19 March2011.SeePRFoceanforumsandrelevantactivities,athttp://www.sof.or.jp/en/index.php,19March2011.Athttp://www.metro.tokyo.jp/ENGLISH/TOPICS/2005/index.htm,20June2011.ThemovieconsistsofsixpartscoveringbasicallyeveryaspectofOkinotorishima,suchaslocation,history,weather,marineenvironment,resources,significance,andprotectionef-forts.

edtheLawfortheReservationofLowTideLineandMaintenanceofFootholdFacilities.①Throughthispieceofnationallegislation,theprotectionofOkino-torishimarocksisexpectedtobefurtherenhancedtonewrecordlevels.

C.IncentivesofJapan’sOkinotorishimaIslandisation

JapanhasbeeninvestingmoneyonthedevelopmentoftheOkinotorishimaRockssince1932withsomeintervals,including85billionyen(approximately740millionUSdollars)inbuildingandmaintainingaresidenceattheobserva-tionsite.In1987,Japanencasedthereefswith$280millionworthofconcretetopreventthemfrombeingcompletelywashedawayandcoveredthesmalleronewith$50millionUSDtitaniumnettoshielditfromdebristhrownupbytheoceanwaves.

In2005,Japanallocated10millionyenforthelighthouseandobservationsite.Thefollowingyearanother$7.55milliondollarswasinvestedforthere-generationofcoralreefsand340millionyenforJapan’sCoastGuardtoinstallasolar-poweredbeacon.Since2007,Japanhasexpandedthelargescaleregen-erationofcoralreefsandusedsand-creatingelectrodestosaveOkinotorishi-ma.②Accordingtoamediareporton9April2008,theJapaneseGovernmentplannedtoinvest770millionyenoverthreeyearstofarmthecoralreefaroundOkinotorishima.Along-termplanisbeingcarriedouttomakefulluseoftherocks.

In2010,theJapanesegovernmentdevelopedaplanforOkinotorishimareefmanagementandmaintenance.Thisplanaimstoupgradethebankmain-tenancefromannualvisualinspectiontomoreeffectivemeasurestoensurethesurvivaloftheconcretestructuresfromharshnaturalconditionssuchasero-sion,typhoonsandwaves.③


①

②

③

ThisisanabbreviatednameoftheLaw.Itsfullnameis:“Lawconcerningpreservationoflowtidelineandmaintenanceandothersoffootholdfacilitiesforprotectionandpromotionofutilizationoftheexclusiveeconomiczoneandthecontinentalshelf”.See“JapanenactslawtopreserveJapan’sEEZ”(JapanToday,Kyodo,26 May2010);OPRF MARINTMonthlyReport(May2010),DietenactslawtopreserveJapan’sEEZ,athttp://www.japantoday.com/category/politics/view/diet-enacts-law-to-preserve-japans-eez,p.12,20June2011.Governmentwillusesand-creatingelectrodestosaveOkinotorishima,athttp://www.japanprobe.com/2008/09/21/government-will-use-sand-creating-electrodes-to-save-okinotorishima/,20March2011.Athttp://news.sina.com.cn/w/2010-05-19/082117532724s.shtml,20March2011.


Mostrecently,JapanannouncedinJanuary2011anewplantoallocate750billionyenoversixyearstobuildaporttofurtherreinforceitsmaritimeclaimsontheOkinotorishimaRocks.Theyalsoplantouseitasabasetoconductma-rineresourcesurveysandtoengageinothereconomicactivities.①

Thequestionthatmightbeaskedis:whataretheincentivesforJapantoinvestsuchheavyfundingontheseremoteandtinyrocks?TheanswermaylieinthefactthattheOkinotorishimaRockscarryenormoussignificancetoJapaninmanyaspects.Forexample,themostobviousbenefittoJapanisthattheserocksareamajorboosttoJapan’soffshoreresourcepotential.Intheresourcefield,Japanpossessesstate-of-arttechnology,andhasagoodreasontoexpectresourcesfromitsoceanandseas,especiallymarinenaturalresources,livingandnon-living,tosustainitsnationaleconomicdevelopment.Theseabeda-roundtheOkinotorishimaRocksissaidtobepotentiallyrichinoilandhasal-readybeenfoundtoberichinmanganesenodulesandrareminerals.

Fromanationalsecuritypointofview,Okinotorishimaalsohasgreatweight.SittingintheMid-centralPacificOceanwithaperfectgeographicallo-cation,thesetinyrocksmayserveasanunsinkableaircraftcarrier.Thisfunc-tionhighlightstheirstrategicvalueandmilitarypotentialasavitalenhance-menttoJapan’sabilitytocontrolthePacificOceanandthenavigationalactivi-ties.②

ThemostsignificantandfundamentaloftherolesOkinotorishimacouldplayfallintothecategoryofgeneratingsubstantialjurisdictionalwatersundersovereignty,sovereignrightsandjurisdictionstemmingfromestablishinganEEZandECSaroundtherocks.③IntheageoftheUNCLOS,smallsolitaryislandsintheseasdistantfromthemainlandcanmakestatesintomajorseapowersduetotheentitlementofmaritimezones.④ThisisparticularlythecasewithJapanandtheOkinotorishimaRocks.Withouttheserocks,Japanwouldhavetoretreatitsterritorialseatoitssouthern-mosttipofMinami-IoTo-shi-

21

①

②

③

④

SeeGusLubin,ChinaStunnedasJapanMakesShockIslandAnnouncementinKeyEco-nomicZone,athttp://www.businessinsider.com/chinese-angered-by-japan-island-grab-2010-1,7January2010.SeealsoJapanistobuildbaseattheOkinotorishima(Chinese),athttp://junshi.daqi.com/slide/2735790.html#t,20June2011.MartinFackler,AReeforaRock?QuestionPutsJapaninaHardPlacetoClaimDisputedWaters,CharityTriestoFindUseforOkinotoriShima,WallStreetJournal,16February2005,p.A1.SeeArticles55and77oftheUNCLOS.YasuhikoKagami,EnvironmentalPolicyforDesertIslands:Beyond“IslandorRock?”,inOPRF,ResearchReportontheOkinotorishimaRevivalandRelatedIssues,2008,p.109.

ma,andsufferalossof1,550squarekilometersofterritorialseaandsover-eigntyoverthewatercolumn,seabedandairspace.Japan’sEEZwouldbepushedbacktoeitherMinami-IwoJima,anislandalmost400milestotheNE,

ortoOkiDaitojima,anotherislandaboutthesamedistancetotheNW,andsufferalossof430,000squarekilometersofEEZ,①plusanECSclaiminthreeregions.

Fromeconomic,political,andsocialperspectives,itisalsoapparentthatJapancouldbenefitimmenselyfromsuchan“islandisation”effort.Toachievethebenefits,JapanisdeterminedtoholdtheOkinotorishimaRocksandtoes-tablisheffectivecontroloverthesurroundingwatersthrougheconomicactivi-ties.

Ⅲ.JapaneseViewsontheOkinotorishimaClaimsandIslandisationPractice

JapanhasmaintaineditsclaimsbasedontheOkinotorishimarocksandis-landisationpractice.Ononehand,itclaimsfirmlytheislandstatusoftherocks;ontheotherhand,itpavesitswaywithconcreteactionstowardenablingtherockstosatisfythecriteriaofalegalisland.Meanwhile,JapanesescholarshaveconductedthoroughandcomprehensiveresearchonOkinotorishimaintherecentdecadestojustifynationalclaimsandpractices.Someevolvingviewsre-presenttheoreticalsupportandreflectJapan’smotivationanddeterminationo-veritsislandisationeffort.

A.ToAssert“Island”StatusoftheOkinotorishimaRocks

RegardingthelegalstatusofOkinotorishima,theJapaneseviewsarebyandlargeconcentratedona “self-constructedbelief”thattheserocksare“islands”underArticle121(1)andfitintheislandcriteriainArticle121(1),

thatis,“anaturallyformedareaofland”,“surroundedbywater”,“abovewater


① YukieYoshikawa,Okinotorishima:JusttheTipoftheIceberg,HarvardAsianQuarter-ly,Vol.9,No.4,2005,athttp://asiaquarterly.com/2006/02/03/ii-131/,19 March2011.


athightide”.①Moreover,JapanholdsthepositionthatasanArticle121(1)is-land,itshouldnotberestrictedbyArticle121(3).Basedonsuchlogic,Okino-torishimaistherefore“qualified”and“entitled”toitsextendedmaritimezonesincludingEEZandcontinentalshelf.②

Still,viewsaredividedwithinthispanelregardingthe“island”statusofOkinotorishima.TadaoKuribayashi,alawprofessorofToyoeiwaUniversityinTokyo,arguesinpartthatrocksandreefsdifferincompositionandstructure.HebelievesthatonlyrocksthatcannotbeinhabitedorhavenoeconomiclifehavenoclaimsforEEZorcontinentalshelf,andthattheintentofArticle121(3)wasgearedtowardtheformer.③ Headdsthatcoralreefsandrocks(ob-jectsconsistingofhardcontinentalsoil)aredifferent,④thustheclaimthatOkinotorishimaisnotanisletbutrocksdoesnotmakesense.ProfessorKuribayashiinsiststhattheJapaneseclaimisjustifiableasthereisnodefini-tionofa“rock”ininternationallaw,andacountrycanclaimitsownEEZorcontinentalshelfbasedonitspossessionofcoralreefs.⑤

AnotherJapanesescholar,KentaroSerita,arguesthataccordingtothePreambleoftheUNCLOS,mattersnotregulatedbytheConventioncontinue

41

①

②

③

④

⑤

TheOpenReporttotheConstructionCommitteeoftheHouseofRepresentativesofJa-panbyOshimaShotaro,DirectoroftheEconomicBureau,MinistryofForeignAffairson16April1999,athttp://www.shugiin.go.jp/index.nsf/htm/index_kaigiroku.htm,20June2011.CitedfromAkesatoNakayama,IslandDefinitionandRelatedIssuesinInter-nationalLawp.34,inOPRF,ResearchReportontheOkinotorishimaRevivalandRelatedIssues,2008,pp.26~38.TheOpenReporttotheConstructionCommitteeoftheHouseofRepresentativesofJa-panbyOshimaShotaro,DirectoroftheEconomicBureau,MinistryofForeignAffairson16April1999,athttp://www.shugiin.go.jp/index.nsf/htm/index_kaigiroku.htm,20June2011.CitedfromAkesatoNakayama,IslandDefinitionandRelatedIssuesinInter-nationalLawp.34,inOPRF,ResearchReportontheOkinotorishimaRevivalandRelatedIssues,2008,pp.26~38.YukieYoshikawa,Okinotorishima:JusttheTipoftheIceberg,HarvardAsianQuarter-ly,Vol.9,No.4,2005,athttp://asiaquarterly.com/2006/02/03/ii-131/,19 March2011.AccordingtoKazuhikoFujita,UniversityoftheRyukyus,“Reefislands,generallylow-ly-ing,flat,smallislandsformedonreefflatsofatolls,arelargelycomposedofunconsolidat-edbioclasticsandsandgravels.Thus,theislandsarehighlysubjecttoinundation,coastalerosion,catastrophicstorms,andothercoastalhazards.SeeKazuhikoFujita,Enhancingforaminiferalsandproductivityforthemaintenanceofreefislands,inOPRF,ResearchRe-portontheOkinotorishimaRevivalandRelatedIssues,2008,p.97.TadaoKuribayashi,ThepositionofOkinotorishimaininternationallaw,inNipponFoun-dation,ReportonPromotingEconomicActivitiesinOkinotorishima,athttp://www.nippon-foundation.or.jp/eng/maritime/programsseas.html,20June2011.

tobegovernedbytherulesandprinciplesofgeneralinternationallaw.Hebe-lievesthatthe200nmfishingzoneispartofcustomaryinternationallaw,andthusOkinotorishimaisentitledtohavea200nmfishingzone.①HeaddsthattheactionsJapanadoptedtowardsOkinotorishimathroughitsnationallegisla-tionsincetheentryintoforceoftheUNCLOShaveneverbeenprotestedbyanycountry.HeconcludesthatthisfactsupportstheJapanesepositionthattheEEZofOkinotorishimashouldbemaintained.②

BasedonthetwoOkinotorishimarocks,JapanhasclaimednotonlyanEEZupto200nmtoalldirections,butalsoanECSattheSKB,MIT,andKPRregionsbasedonthenaturalprolongationprinciple.AccordingtotheprovisionofUNCLOSArt.76.1,“[t]hecontinentalshelfofacoastalStatecomprisestheseabedandsubsoilofthesubmarineareasthatextendbeyonditsterritorialseathroughoutthenaturalprolongationofitslandterritory(emphasisadded)totheouteredgeofthecontinentalmargin… ”.

InasimilarfashiontoitsargumentaboutitsEEZclaimonOkinotorishi-ma,JapanassertsthenaturalprolongationprincipletoclaimitsoutermostECSbasedontherocks.ThisisreflectedinParagraph2ofSection6.2oftheExec-utiveSummaryofJapan’sSubmissionthattheKyushu-PalauRidgeformspartofthenaturalprolongationofJapan’slandmass(emphasisadded)“represen-tedbyOkinotorishimaIsland”(so-called!).③InsteadofadmittingthefactthatthesubmissionareasextendingdowntheridgetowardsPalauwasonthebasisofthenaturalprolongationofOkinotorishimaitself,JapanistryingtogivetheimpressionthatitisthenaturalprolongationofJapanasawhole.Suchacont-entionisassociatedwithobviousproblems,mostnotably,theremotenatureoftheseabedinquestionfromthenearestJapanesemainland/mainislandterrito-ry.

B.ToFacilitatetheConditionoftheOkinotorishimaRockstoSustainHumanHabitationorEconomicLife

Inadditiontotheargumentsmadeoverthelegalstatusandgeographical


①

②

③

KentaroSerita,Japan’sTerritory(Japanese),C HUOKORON-SHINSYA,INC,2002,pp.182~189,pp.224~245.KentaroSerita,Japan’sTerritory(Japanese),C HUOKORON-SHINSYA,INC,2002,pp.182~189,pp.224~245.SeetheExecutiveSummaryofJapan’sSubmission,athttp://www.un.org/Depts/los/clcs_new/submissions_files/jpn08/jpn_execsummary.pdf,20June2011.


positionoftheOkinotorishimaRockstosupportitsclaimtoEEZandECS,Ja-panassertstherocksmaintainaneconomiclifeoftheirown.

AJapanesescholarbelievestheinterpretationandapplicationofArticle121(3)isproblematicandcriticizesitasfollows:

“If‘rockswhichcansustainhumanhabitationoreconomiclifeoftheirown’issetastheconditionfordesignationofanislandwithoutactuallyrequi-ringsuchhabitationinpractice,thentherearegroundsfortheinterpretationthatthepossibilityofmeetingtheconditionaloneissufficient.Ifsuchisthecase,theconditionitselfwillevolvealongwithprogressinscienceandtechnol-ogy,leadingtouncertaintyintherequirementstobemet.”①

ThisparagraphactuallyindicatestheunsaidtruthofhowJapanhasbeencreatingtheconditionthroughevolvingscienceandtechnologytokeepOkino-torishimafrombeingregardedasArticle121(3)rocks.

Toprovidesupportforitsclaimsandnationalislandisationattempts,Japa-nesescholarshavealsosearchedgloballyforrelevantpracticesasevidence.Oneobservationreportsaboutothercountriessendingsignalstoshowthatscattereddesertislandsare(orwillbe)ableto“sustainhumanhabitationore-conomiclifeoftheirown”②.Thesesignalsincludepermanentpostingofsmallmilitaryforcesormeteorologicalobservationstationstaff,etc.,constructionoflighthousesandothernavigationalaids,fishingactivities,andinrecentyears,

andestablishmentofprotectedareastoreserveecosystemsorbiodiversityintheoceanssurroundingislands.③ RecentexamplesemployedbythisscholarweretheUSestablishmentin2006ofthethenworld’slargestmarineprotectedarea(Papahānaumokuākea MarineNationalMonument)aroundthenorth-westernHawaiianIslandswheretheUShashadanEEZaround10uninhabitedislandssincethe1970s.④Asecondexamplecitedwasanew MarineNational

61

①

②

③

④

HiroshiTerashima,TheNeedforaComprehensiveStudyontheProblemsofIslandsandManagementofTheirSurroundingWaters,inOPRF,ResearchReportontheOkinotorish-imaRevivalandRelatedIssues,2008,p.113.YasuhikoKagami,EnvironmentalPolicyforDesertIslands:Beyond“IslandorRock?”,inOPRF,ResearchReportontheOkinotorishimaRevivalandRelatedIssues,2008,p.109.YasuhikoKagami,EnvironmentalPolicyforDesertIslands:Beyond“IslandorRock?”,inOPRF,ResearchReportontheOkinotorishimaRevivalandRelatedIssues,2008,p.109.AccordingtoanAmericanexpertinthelawoftheseathose“shouldnothaveEEZ”inlightofUNCLOSArticle121.SeeYasuhikoKagami,EnvironmentalPolicyforDesertIslands:Beyond“IslandorRock?”,inOPRF,ResearchReportontheOkinotorishimaRe-vivalandRelatedIssues,2008,p.109.

MonumentsestablishedinJanuary2009aroundremoteislandsinthePacificOcean.①

ThisJapanesescholarobservedthatenvironmentalmeasuressuchases-tablishingmarineprotectedareasarounddesertislandsareimplementednotonlybytheUS,butalsobyFrance,Australia,Kiribati,andothercountries.Hebelievesthatthesepracticeswouldhaveapositivesignificancefororimpactonthe“IslandorRock”dispute,inthat“desertislandswillnotbepositionedasabasisforenclosingthesea,butasbasesforpositiveoceanmanagementforsus-tainabledevelopment.”②

Thesepracticesmaybeexpectedtocastnewlightonmanagementofdes-ertislands.However,thekeypointthisscholarforgottomentionisthatJapanisindeedaforemostpioneerwithpracticesthathavesetanexampleofclaimingextendedmaritimezonesoverrocks.

Asidefromlookingforevidencefrom othercountries,otherJapanesescholarshavetriedtojustifyJapan’sclaimsandnationalpracticebynewdevel-opmentsofinternationallawandStatePractice.HiroshiTerashima,theExec-utiveDirectorofOPRF,arguedtoapproachtheArticle121(3)andOkinotor-ishimaissuefromtheoverallframeworkandspiritoftheUNCLOSforcom-prehensivemanagementoftheocean.③ HeindicatedthatdiscussionsontheEEZandthecontinentalshelffocusprimarilyoncoastalStates’rights,ratherthanontheirresponsibilitiesandobligationstomanagecoastalareasinEEZsandcontinentalshelves.RecentyearshaveseenalargeshiftfromtheemphasisgiventomarinepollutionresponsesatthetimetheUNCLOSwasdrafted,i.e.toconservationofmarinebiodiversityandotherissues,suchastopromoteeco-system-basedmanagementandmarinespatialmanagementofoceanareasa-roundislands.

ProfessorKuribayashirecommendednottotalkaboutwhetherornotsmallislandsaretobeaccordedEEZsandcontinentalshelves,buttoconsidertheproblemfromtheperspectiveofwhoshouldmanagetheoceanareasaroundislandsandhowthemanagementistobecarriedout.Further,hearguedthatit


①

②

③

YasuhikoKagami,EnvironmentalPolicyforDesertIslands:Beyond“IslandorRock?”,inOPRF,ResearchReportontheOkinotorishimaRevivalandRelatedIssues,2008,p.109.YasuhikoKagami,EnvironmentalPolicyforDesertIslands:Beyond“IslandorRock?”,inOPRF,ResearchReportontheOkinotorishimaRevivalandRelatedIssues,2008,p.109.HiroshiTerashima,TheNeedforaComprehensiveStudyontheProblemsofIslandsandManagementoftheirSurroundingWaters,inOPRF,ResearchReportontheOkinotorishi-maRevivalandRelatedIssues,2008,p.114.


isadvisabletoclarifyandreevaluatethinkingaboutislandsandthemanage-mentoftheirsurroundingwaters.HecalledonStatesnotonlytoaddressthequestionofhowfartheexerciseofjurisdictionalrightsbysmallislandsoverresourcesintheirsurroundingwatersisappropriateindistributingthecommonheritageofmankind,butalsotoanswerthequestionofwhoisthemostappro-priateentitytofulfilltheobligationsandresponsibilitiesforprotectingthere-sourcesintheoceanareasaroundsmallislands,e.g.inprotectingandconser-vingthemarineenvironment.①HealsohopesforJapantomakeitscontribu-tiontotheadaptivedevelopmentoftheUNCLOSregimeofislands.②

SuchviewsandargumentsconfirmtheJapaneseislandisationactionsto-wardstheOkinotorishimaRocksanditsgenerationofjurisdictionalzones.Atthesametime,theseviewshavealsoencouragedJapantostrayfurtherawayfromtheUNCLOSregime.

Ⅳ.QuestionstoPonder

TheaforementionedJapaneseviewssuggestthatwhatJapanhasdoneistopromotetheconservationandprotectionofmarineresourcesandenvironmentthroughecosystem-basedmanagementaroundtheserocks.Butquestionshavetobeasked,including:willtheseargumentsjustifytheJapaneseclaimanditsislandisationattempts? MayotherStates“doastheRomansdo”withsimilarinsularfeatures? Whataretheimplicationsforsupportingexcessivenationalclaims? AsStatesmoveforwardwithexcessiveclaimsandislandisationinitia-tives,whatshouldbetheguidingprincipleininterpretationandimplementationoftheUNCLOS? WilltherebeapotentialdangerofunderminingtheUN-CLOSandfurtherencroachmentonthecommonheritageofmankind? Whoshoulddefendtheinterestsoftheinternationalcommunity,andhow? Thesequestionswillbedealtwithinthissection.

81

①

②

HiroshiTerashima,TheNeedforaComprehensiveStudyontheProblemsofIslandsandManagementofTheirSurroundingWaters,inOPRF,ResearchReportontheOkinotorish-imaRevivalandRelatedIssues,2008,p.114.SeeTadaoKuribayashi,ConcludingRemarks:ThePresentImplicationsregarding“IslandRegimefromthePerspectiveofInternationalLawoftheSeaOrder”,inOPRF,ResearchReportontheOkinotorishimaRevivalandRelatedIssues,2008,pp.83~84.

A.AreRocksDistinguishablefromIslands?

WhatJapancallsOkinotorishimaIsland,some1,740kilometerssouthofTokyo,ismerelyanatollthatcannotsustainhumanhabitationoreconomiclifeofitsown.JapanarguesOkinotorishimaareislands,notrocks.Isthisbecausethedifferencesbetweenrocksandislandsarenotdistinguishable?Thetruthis,

despitethefactthatnoobjectivestandardwasestablishedonhowtodistin-guishArticle121(1)islandsfromArticle121(3)rocks,theprovisionsofUN-CLOSArticle121areclearandexplicit.Incomparisonwiththe“island”definitionprovidedinArticle121(1),a

“rock”maybesimplifiedasa“naturallyformed”“areaofland”,“surroundedbywater”,“abovewaterathightide”;that“cannotsustainhumanhabitationoreconomiclifeofitsown”.Thisimpliesthefollowingfeatures:a“rock”isadis-advantagedtypeofisland;thesize(refersto“areaoftheland”abovewaterathightide)ofa“rock”isusuallysmall:①andlastly,a“rock”isgenerallynota-bletoprovidethenaturalconditionsnecessaryforsupportingnormalhumanlife.Infact,thelastfeatureisthedeterminerthatdifferentiatesrocksfromislands.Ifaninsularfeaturecannotfulfillthiscondition,itisonlyentitledtoaterritorialseaandacontiguouszone,butnotanEEZorcontinentalshelf.

Manyinternationallawexpertsbelievethatanislandmust:sustainandmaintainfreshwater,beabletogrowvegetationthatcansustainhumanhabi-tation,producesomematerialthatcanbeusedforhumanshelter,andbeabletosustainahumancommunity.②Someexpertssuggestthatanislandmustbeabletosustainatleastfiftypeople.③Indeed,food,freshwater,andlivingspace


①

②

③

Dr.Hodgson,ageographeroftheUSStateDepartment,proposedthata“rock”isanareaoflandlessthan0.001squaremiles,theareaoflandforan“islet”isbetween0.001-1squaremiles,theareaoflandforan“island”islargerthanonesquaremile.SeeRobert.D.Hodgson,Islands:NormalandSpecialCircumstances,inJohnKingGamble,Jr.andGi-ulioPontecorvoed.,LawoftheSea:TheEmergingRegimeoftheOceans,Cambridge,Massachusetts:BallingerPublishing,1974,p.148.Forrelevantdiscussionsonthisaccount,seeJoséLuisJesus,Rocks,New-bornIslands,SeaLevelRiseandMaritimeSpace,inJochenAbr.Frowein,KlausScharioth,IngoWinkel-mannandRüdigerWolfrumed.,VerhandelnfürdenFrieden-NegotiatingforPeace:LiberamicorumTonoEitel,2003,pp.587~592;Charney,Jonathan,RocksThatCannotSustainHumanHabitation,AmericanJournalofInternationalLaw,Vol.93,1999,pp.864~871.SeeInternationalSeabedAuthorityPressRelease,SB/15/10,p.3,para.18.


constitutetheveryfundamentalcriteriaforhumanhabitationonanisland.Withthesethreecriteria,theislandmaybeconsideredasbeingabletosustainhumanhabitation,nomatterhowlongitcan“sustain”,orifthe“sustaining”ofhabitationisonapermanentortemporarybasis.

Tomakethesecriteriamorecomprehensible,theIndonesianAmbassadorandleadinglawoftheseaexpert,HasjimDjalal,proposedthreespecificcrite-ria:first,whetherthereisfreshwaterontheislandorrocks;second,whetheritispossibletogrowfood;third,whetherthereismaterialtobuildhouses.Shouldallthreecriteriabemet,theinsularfeatureshallnotonlybearock,butalsoanislandableto“sustain”humanhabitationandreproduction;thatis,itisentitledtoitsownjurisdictionregardlessofitssize.Ifthethreeconditionsarenotmet,thefeatureisonlyentitledtoa12nmterritorialsea.①

“Theeconomiclifeoftheirown”criterionseemstoappealtotheideaoftherockhavingthecapacityorpotentialofbearinganindependent,thoughnotnecessarilyself-sufficient,economiclife.Thismightimplythepotentialorca-pacitytodevelopitsownsourcesofproduction,distributionandexchangeinawaythat,ifitweretohavehumanhabitation,itwouldconstituteamaterialba-sisthatwouldjustifytheexistenceanddevelopmentofastablehumanhabita-tionorcommunityontherock.②Itwouldseemthatthecriterionofeconomiclifeoftheirownismorethantheexistenceofagivenresourceorthepresenceofagiveninstallationofaneconomicnature,howeverimportantitmightbe.③

Ifanareaof“land”abovewaterathightide(nomatterwhatitiscalledbytradition)satisfieseitheroneofthetwocriteriato“sustainhumanhabitation”

oran“economiclifeofitsown”,itisentitledtoitsownEEZandcontinentalshelf.InthecaseofOkinotorishima,noneofthereefsislargethanonesquare

02

①

②

③

IanTownsend-Gault,PreventiveDiplomacyandPro-activityintheSouthChinaSea,Con-temporarySoutheastAsia,Vol.20,No.2,1998,p.179.SeeJoséLuisJesus,Rocks,New-bornIslands,SeaLevelRiseand MaritimeSpace,inJochenAbr.Frowein,KlausScharioth,IngoWinkelmannandRüdigerWolfrumed.,Ver-handelnfürdenFrieden-NegotiatingforPeace:Liberamicorum TonoEitel,2003,p.590.SeeJoséLuisJesus,Rocks,New-bornIslands,SeaLevelRiseand MaritimeSpace,inJochenAbr.Frowein,KlausScharioth,IngoWinkelmannandRüdigerWolfrumed.,Ver-handelnfürdenFrieden-NegotiatingforPeace:Liberamicorum TonoEitel,2003,p.590.

meterandthetotalareaislessthan10squaremeters.①Okinotorishimahasnofreshwater,norsoil;neitherdoesithaveanyvegetation.Moreimportantly,itssizeistoosmallto“sustainhumanhabitation”.Basedonitsnaturalcondi-tions,itcannotberegardedasanisland.

NoconsensushasbeenreachedontheinterpretationandapplicationofAr-ticle121.Thetreatmentofislands/rockshaslonggeneratedinternationallegaldebates,andStatePracticehasremainedsomewhatdiverse.Nonetheless,theunderstandingofinternationallawexpertsonthetextoftheUNCLOSprovi-sions,relevantjurisprudencebyinternationaljudicialandarbitralcourtsandStatePracticesareconsistentandidentical.Therearesignsofaconsistenttrendemergingand,attheleast,numerousexamplesexistwhichindicatehowislands/rocksshouldbetreated.NomatterhowArticle121isinterpreted,giv-enitssizeanduninhabitablenaturalconditions,theOkinotorishimacannotberecognizedasanislandoflegalnature.Japan’seffortsconfirmthatitistryingtoturnrocksintoislands.

B.HowshouldUNCLOSbeImplementedandInternationalCommunityConcernsbeRespected?

Article121(3)oftheUNCLOSexpresslydeniestherightofarocktosupportanEEZandacontinentalshelf.However,JapanstillclaimedanEEZto200nmandanadjoiningcontinentalshelfregionbeyond200nmusingtheOkinotorishimaRocksasabase-pointinitssubmission.Japan’sunilateralas-sertionis widely outofconformity withtheintention and purposeofUNCLOS’s“commonheritageofmankind”concept.Astheforemostadvocateof“thePrincipleoftheCommonHeritageofMankind”,AmbassadorArvidPardoofMaltapointedout,“[i]fa200milelimitofjurisdictioncouldbefoun-dedonthepossessionofuninhabited,remoteorverysmallislands,theeffec-tivenessofinternationaladministrationofoceanspacebeyondnationaljurisdic-tionwouldbegravelyimpaired.”②

In1988,havingnoticedtheJapaneseconstructionovertherocks,ProfessorJonVonDykeoftheUniversityofHawaiiexpressedhisviewinthefollowingterms:“Okinotorishima-whichconsistsoftwoerodingprotrusionsnolarger


①

②

Athttp://news.xinhuanet.com/world/2005-03/11/content_2681137.htm,2 April2011.UnitedNationsSea-BedCommittee,Doc.A/AC.138/SR.57,p.167.


thanking-sizebeds-certainlymeetsthedescriptionofanuninhabitablerockthatcannotsustaineconomiclifeofitsown.Itisnot,therefore,entitledtogeneratea200[nautical]-mileexclusiveeconomiczone.”①Hehasfurtheras-sertedthatitisimpossibletomake“aplausibleclaimthatOkinotorishouldbeabletogeneratea200[nautical]-milezone”.②ProfessorVonDykemadeitclearagainin2005.③

ProfessorVonDykehasalsosuggestedthatthesituationissimilartothefailedBritishattempttoclaimanEEZaroundRockall.Rockallisasmall,un-inhabited,rockyisletwithintheEEZoftheUnitedKingdom (UK)intheNorthAtlanticOcean.④Rockallisalmost200nmfromtheScottishcoast,25metersabovesealevelandmeasures624squaremeters.⑤In1977,theUKes-tablishedafishingzoneusingRockallasabasepointforanextensionof200nmbeyondtheislet.TheBritishclaimwasprotestedbyDenmark,IcelandandIreland.⑥TheUKeventuallyabandoneditsclaimafteritsaccessiontotheUNCLOSin1997.⑦

Nodoubt,thecaseofRockallhastheclosestsimilaritytotheOkinotorish-imasituationbuttheUKrationalewaspresentedonadifferentfooting.Arti-cle121(3)deniesthecapacityoftinyrockstogenerateunfairlyandinequita-blyhugemaritimeentitlementse.g.anEEZoracontinentalshelf,whichcould,inmostcases,impingeuponotherStatesmaritimespaceorontheInter-

22

①

②

③

④

⑤

⑥

⑦

SeeMartinFackler,AReeforaRock? QuestionPutsJapaninaHardPlacetoClaimDis-putedWaters,CharityTriestoFindUseforOkinotoriShima,WallStreetJournal,16February2005,p.A1.SpeckintheOceanMeetsLawoftheSea,NewYorkTimes,21January1988.MartinFackler,AReeforaRock?QuestionPutsJapaninaHardPlacetoClaimDisputedWaters,CharityTriestoFindUseforOkinotoriShima,WallStreetJournal,16February2005,p.A1.SeeEEZoftheUKandIrelandathttp://www.seaaroundus.org/eez/eez.aspx,20June2011.FordetailsonRockall,athttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rockall,20June2011.SeealsoJamesFisher,Rockall.London:GeoffreyBles,1956,pp.12~13.Athttp://www.opsi.gov.uk/SI/si1997/19971750.htm,20June2011.FortheFisheryLimitsOrder1997,StatutoryInstrument1997No.1750.TheForeignandCommonwealthSecretaryoftheUnitedKingdomexpressedinastate-mentthat“Rockallisnotavalidbasepointforsuchlimitsunderarticle121(3)”,andthenthelimitofthefisheryzonewasredefinedaccordinglythroughtheFisheryLimitsOrder1997.SeeAlexG.OudeElferink,ClarifyingArticle121(3)oftheLawoftheSeaConven-tion:theLimitsSetbytheNatureofInternationalLegalProcess,IBRUBoundaryandSecurityBulletin,Summer1998,p.59,p.66.Editors’note:seealsoD.Anderson,“IslandsandRocksintheModernLawoftheSea”inthepresentvolume.

nationalSeabedAreawhichisreservedfortheCommonHeritageofMan-kind.①

Since2004,asJapan’smaritimeneighbor,ChinahasconstantlyobjectedtoJapanesejurisdictionovermarinescientificresearcharoundtheOkinotorishimaRockswhereJapanhasclaimedthatithastherighttoprescribeandenforceju-risdictionoverthetworocksandsurroundingwatersupto200nm.②China’spositionisthatthelegalstatusofthesewatersishighseasandtraditionalfish-inggroundsforthefishersfromthemainlandofChina,Taiwan,andKorea.ChinafirmlyopposedtheJapaneseunilateralactionsandconsiderssuchactionsasaseriousviolationoftherightsofothercountries.③

ThedisputeregardingwhetherOkinotorishimaisarockoranislandhasescalatedandintensified.TheissuehascaughttheattentionoftherestoftheworldbecauseoftheJapanesesubmissionofitsproposedouterlimitofthecontinentalshelftotheCLCS,whichstimulatedapublicreactionfromChinaandKorea.

InFebruary2009,ChinaandSouthKorearespectivelysubmittedtotheSecretary-GeneraloftheUnitedNationsNoteVerbalescommentingontheis-sueoftheOkinotorishimaintheJapaneseSubmission.④BothChinaandSouthKoreaobjectedtoJapan’sclaimtoanEEZandECSbasedontheOkinotorishi-maRocks.⑤

Theinternationalcommunityhas,forthemostpart,avoidedinvolvementinthedispute.However,theSubmissionintensifiedthedisagreementandraisedconcernsintheinternationalcommunitysparkingvariedcomments.ConcernswerearticulatedaboutJapan’sdutynottoinfringeonthecommonspaceoftheinternationalcommunity.Ononeoccasion,Japanseemedtore-memberitsdutyanddeniedNewZealand’sclaimstotheAntarctic.WhenNew


①

②

③

④

⑤

UNDoc.A/CONF.62/122,7October1982.JapanhopestobuildlighthouseonatolldisputedwithChina,XinhuaNews,25August,2005.SeeJiaYuandLiMingjie,NottoaccepttheartificiallyconstructedOkinotori,athttp://news.sina.com.cn/c/2004-05-24/12103317063.shtml,20June2011.ForChina’sNote,athttp://www.un.org/Depts/los/clcs_new/submissions_files/jpn08/chn_6feb09_e.pdf;forKorea’s,athttp://www.un.org/Depts/los/clcs_new/submissions_files/jpn08/kor_27feb09.pdf.ForChina’sNote,athttp://www.un.org/Depts/los/clcs_new/submissions_files/jpn08/chn_6feb09_e.pdf;forKorea’s,athttp://www.un.org/Depts/los/clcs_new/submissions_files/jpn08/kor_27feb09.pdf.


ZealandmadeitsECSsubmissiontotheCLCS,①JapansentaNoteVerbaletotheUNconcerningNewZealand’sclaimstotheAntarcticregion.②Japanem-phasizedthatitdoesnotrecognizeanyState’s“claimtoterritorialsovereigntyintheAntarcticandconsequentlydoesnotrecognizeanyState’srightsoverorclaimstothewater,seabedandsubsoilofthesubmarineareasadjacenttothecontinentofAntarctica.”③

ViewshavealsobeenexpressedthattheOkinotorishimaRocksarenoten-titledtoanycontinentalshelf,andthatnoentitlementshouldbegrantedontheportionsrelatedtotheOkinotorishimaRocksinJapan’sSubmission.AfterJa-panmadeitsSubmissiontotheCLCSconcerningitsextendedcontinentalshelf,atthe15thSessionoftheInternationalSeabedAuthorityandatthe19th

MeetingoftheStatesPartiestotheUNCLOS(the19th Meeting),athoroughdiscussionensuedonrelevantissues.④ Atthesemeetings,seriousconcernswereexpressedbymanycountriesregardingthepossibleencroachmentontheinternationalseabedareabyusingarockasthebasepointforanextendedcon-tinentalshelf.⑤Inadditiontorelevantdiscussionsundercurrentitemsintheagenda,itwasalsodecidedatthe19th meetingtoconsidertheinclusionofasupplementaryitementitled“InternationalSeabedAreaasthecommonherit-

42

①

②

③

④

⑤

ForNewZealand’ssubmission,athttp://www.un.org/Depts/los/clcs_new/submissions_files/submission_nzl.htm,20June2011.ForJapan’snote,athttp://www.un.org/Depts/los/clcs_new/submissions_files/submis-sion_nzl.htm,28June2006.ThePermanentMissionofJapantotheUnitedNationspres-enteditscomplimentstotheSecretariatoftheUNwithreferencetothecircularCLCS.05.2006.LOS(ContinentalShelfNotification)dated21April2006,concerningthere-ceiptofthesubmissionmadebyNewZealandtotheCLCS.Japanconfirmstheimpor-tanceofkeepingharmonybetweentheAntarcticTreatyandtheUNCLOSandtherebyen-suringthecontinuingpeacefulcooperation,securityandstabilityintheAntarcticarea.Re-callingArticleIVoftheAntarcticTreaty,JapandoesnotrecognizeanyState’srightoforclaimtoterritorialsovereigntyintheAntarctic,andconsequentlydoesnotrecognizeanyState’srightsoverorclaimstothewater,seabedandsubsoilofthesubmarineareasadja-centtothecontinentofAntarctica.ForJapan’snote,athttp://www.un.org/Depts/los/clcs_new/submissions_files/submis-sion_nzl.htm,28June2006.The19thMeetingoftheStatesPartiestotheUNCLOS,SPLOS/L.60,22May2009,athttp://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/LTD/N09/346/55/PDF/N0934655.pdf,20June2011.SeealsoYuJia,LegalIssuesConcerningtheOki-no-Tori(Chinese),OceanDevelopmentandManagement,Vol.8(130),2009.The19thMeetingoftheStatesPartiestotheUNCLOS,SPLOS/L.60,22May2009,athttp://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/LTD/N09/346/55/PDF/N0934655.pdf,20June2011.SeealsoYuJia,LegalIssuesConcerningtheOki-no-Tori(Chinese),OceanDevelopmentandManagement,Vol.8(130),2009.

ageofthemankindandArticle121oftheUnitedNationsConventionontheLawoftheSea”inafuturemeeting.

TheEEZandECSpoliciesandStatepracticeareimportantforthefuture.Itisnotonlyamatterofeconomicsandhowoceanresourcescanbeexploitedfromthecontinentalshelf,butalsothelegalexistenceofthesovereignrightsofamaritimenation.Japan’sbidtoextenditscontinentalshelfbasedonrockswillnotbesupported.AsaStatePartytotheUNCLOS,JapanisobligatednottoviolatethelegalregimeoftheUNCLOS,andtorespectthedisagreementofitsmaritimeneighborsaswellastheconcernsoftheinternationalcommunity.

C.HowwillCLCSAccomplishItsRolewithApplicableRecommendations?

JapansubmittedtheinformationonthelimitsofitsECStotheCLCSon12November2008.①ThroughthisSubmission,Japansetanexampleofclai-minganEEZandanexcessivecontinentalshelfbasedonrocksinthevastPa-cificOcean.ConcernshavebeenvoicedaboutthefactthatJapanisusingtheCLCSasaforumtostrengthen,maintain,ordefenditsclaimsconcerninglegaltitlesofrocks/islands,andEEZs,continentalshelfandextendedcontinentalshelfthereof.ShouldJapan’ssubmissionbeconfirmedbytheCLCSaboutthelocationoftheouterlimitofJapan’scontinentalshelfinOkinotorishimaandJapan’sentitlementtolargeareasofcontinentalshelfbeyond200nm,Japanwouldhavejurisdictionoveranextra740,000squarekilometers,whichisa-bouttwicethesizeofitslandterritory.

DiscussionshavealsobeenvoicedabouttheapplicablerecommendationsoftheCLCS.AsaninternationalbodyestablishedbytheUNCLOS,theCLCSisneitherajudicialnorapoliticalbody.②ItgivestechnicaladviceandguidancetoStates,andoffersopinionsonthedataandanalysessubmittedbycoastalStatesonthebasisofthetechnicalandobjectivecriteriasetoutintheUNCLOS.Asof18January2011,therehavebeen59SubmissionsdeliveredtotheUnitedNa-


①

②

Athttp://www.un.org/Depts/los/clcs_new/submissions_files/submission_jpn.htm,20August2011.FordiscussionsonCLCS,seeTedL.McDorman,TheEntryintoForceofthe1982LOSConventionandtheArticle76OuterContinentalShelfRegime,InternationalJournalofMarineandCoastalLaw,Vol.101995,pp.165~187;TedL.McDorman,TheRoleoftheCommissionontheLimitsoftheContinentalShelf:A TechnicalBodyinaPoliticalWorld,InternationalJournalofMarineandCoastalLaw,Vol.17,2002,pp.301~324.


tionsfortheCLCStoconsider.①Meanwhile,asof19October2011,theCLCShasalsoreceived45PreliminaryInformationsubmissionsindicativeoftheout-erlimitsoftheextendedcontinentalshelf.②ThejoboftheCLCSistoconsiderthedocumentationsubmittedbythecoastalStateandtorecommendwheretheouterlimitsofthecontinentalshelfshouldlie.

Japan’sSubmissioncomplicatestheclearprovisionaboutislandregimesandtheauthorizationoftheCLCSintheUNCLOS.Thismayleadtoanin-fringementofthecompletenessoftheUNCLOSandanencroachmentontheInternationalSeabedArea.③TheCLCSwillhavetodealwithJapan’sSubmis-sionandalsothirdpartynotifications.④Asmentionedearlier,theNotesVerbalofChinaandSouthKoreasuggestedthattheCLCSshouldtakenoactionontheportionsrelatedtotheOkinotorishimaRocksinJapan’sSubmission.⑤

HowtheCLCSwillhandleJapan’sSubmissionregardingtheregionsgeneratedbasedontheOkinotorishimaRockscontinuestobeanissueofgeneralinterestaswellasasourceofconcernformany.

ToconsiderJapan’sSubmissionrequiresdefiningthelegalstatusofOki-notorishima,buttheCLCSisnotinapositionwithauthoritytodecideitslegalstatus.TocomplywiththeUNCLOSandnottoaffecttheCommonHeritageofMankind,itisadvisablefortheCLCSnottoconsiderthecontroversialpartsinJapan’sSubmission.TheOkinotorishimasituationwillbeanentréetoabroaderdiscussionontheroleoftheCLCSasregardsthesubmissionsandin-

62

①

②

③

④

⑤

Forsubmissions,athttp://www.un.org/Depts/los/clcs_new/commission_submissions.htm,20January2012.Athttp://www.un.org/Depts/los/clcs_new/commission_preliminary.htm,20June2011.TheCLCShasseenmanydifferentkindsofSubmissionsandthirdpartynotifications,cop-ingwithdifferentsituationsthatthecoastalStatesface.Amongthe59Submissions,22Submissionshavealreadyencounteredthecomments,oppositions,disapproval,orapprov-alsexpressedbyasmanyas58thirdpartynotifications.Among45PreliminaryInforma-tionSubmissions,fourpieceshavemetcommunicationsfromthirdStates,expressingdif-ferentideas,athttp://www.un.org/Depts/los/clcs_new/commission_submissions.htm,20June2011.Forrelevantdiscussions,seeMichaelSheng-tiGau,ThirdPartyInterventionintheCom-missionontheLimitsoftheContinentalShelfRegardingaSubmissionInvolvingaDis-pute,OceanDevelopmentandInternationalLaw,Vol.40,2009,pp.61~79.SeeParagraphs3-5ofthecommunicationofChina,Paragraphs4-6oftheKoreancom-municationtorespondtotheJapaneseSubmission.ForChina’sNote,athttp://www.un.org/Depts/los/clcs_new/submissions_files/jpn08/chn_6feb09_e.pdf;forKorea’s,atht-tp://www.un.org/Depts/los/clcs_new/submissions_files/jpn08/kor_27feb09.pdf,21May2011.

formationpresentedtoit.OnethingthatisclearisthattheCLCSshallnotbeusedtoinfringetheUNCLOS,ortoabuseitsownresponsibility.

D.AreOkinotorishimaStillNaturalRocksorArtificialStructures?

TheheartofthisOkinotorishimarock/islandissueiswhetherthefeaturecanbeusedasabasepointtoclaimanextendedjurisdictionalzone.AccordingtoArticle121,bothislandsandrockshavetobe“naturallyformed”.Concern-ingwhatis “naturallyformed”,twoviewsexist:thefirstviewcountsonwhetherornotthereisdeliberateconstruction,andinsiststhat“naturallyformed”means“nodeliberateconstruction”.①Thisviewmayseemabitex-treme.Thesecondviewtolerates“deliberateconstruction”butdifferentiatesthedecisiondependinguponthepurpose:②ifthedeliberateconstructionisfortheprotectionoftheareaofthe“land”,thelegalstatusofthe“land”remainsunaffected:③ifthedeliberateconstructionistoexpandthelandmassoftheare-a,thelegalstatusoftheoriginalandadditionalnew “land”willloseitslegalstatuscollectivelywithitsterritorialsea.④Internationallawscholarsseemtofavorthisview.⑤Inparticular,Diaz,Dubner,andParentpointedoutintheirpaperthattoprotecttheislandbyusingcoralandothermarinebiotechnologytobuilditupcreatesanartificialislandthatisnotentitledtoitsownmaritimezones.⑥


①

②

③

④

⑤

⑥

CliveR.Symmons,TheMaritimeZonesofIslandsinInternationalLaw,TheHague:MartinusNijhoff,1979,p.36.Athttp://www.seastead.org/localres,20June2011.SeeAndrewL,Silverstein,Okinotorishima:ArtificialPreservationofaSpeckofSover-eignty,BrooklynJournalofInternationalLaw,Vol.12,No.1,2009,pp.409~432.SeeDerek.W.Bowett,TheLegalRegimeofIslandsinInternationalLaw,NewYork:OceanaPublications,1979,p.122.SeeLeticiaDiaz,BarryHartDubner,andJasonParent,Whenisa“Rock”an“Island?”:AnotherUnilateralDeclarationDefies“Norms”ofInternationalLaw,MichiganStateJournalofInternationalLaw,Vol.15,2007,p.547.SeealsoYasuhikoKagami,Environ-mentalPolicyforDesertIslands:Beyond“IslandorRock?”,inOPRF,ResearchReportontheOkinotorishimaRevivalandRelatedIssues,2008,p.109.BinBinJiaisoftheviewthatifanislandcannotcontinueitsexistencewithoutaconcretestructureorartificialinstallation,itisnolongeranaturalisland,butanartificialisland,notentitledtoamaritimezonebuttoa500-metersafetyzone.SeeBinBinJia,APrelimina-ryStudyoftheProblemoftheIsleofKolbeinsey,NordicJournalofInternationalLaw,66,1997,p.313.SeealsoLeticiaDiaz,BarryHartDubnerandJasonParent,Whenisa“Rock”an “Island?”:AnotherUnilateralDeclarationDefies“Norms”ofInternationalLaw,MichiganStateJournalofInternationalLaw,Vol.15,2007,p.547.


InthecaseoftheOkinotorishimaRocks,iftheactionJapanhastakenissolelyfortheprotectionoftherocks,theywillcontinuetobenaturalrockswithanentitlementtoterritorialseaandcontiguouszone,butifJapan’spur-poseistoexpandthephysicalsizeoftherocks,thesituation willbedifferent.①

JapanrescuedOkinotorishimawithgreateffortstomakesuretherockswerenotcompletelywashedaway.Thiswasforthepurposeofenablingthemtogeneratevastmaritimezones.Tokeeptherocksafloatandtofulfillthecri-teriaofalegal“island”,Japanhascarriedoutambitiousprojectstoexpandthe“landmass”byartificiallyproducingeconomiclifethereandplanningtocreateaplacethatisactuallylivable.The“nationalconstruction”increasedtherocksmuchbeyondtheiroriginalshapes.Itspurposeisnotfortheprotectionoftherocks,butfor“expansionofitsterritory”.Giventhesizeoftherocks,yearsofheavy,deliberateexpansion,concreteencasingandbuildingfacilitieshavechangedthecharacteroftherocks.Ondetailedsatelliteimages,eachoftherocksappearsasacirclewithadiameterof50meters,butthesearemostlyar-tificialstructures.TheOkinotorishimaRockshavelosttheirnaturalcharac-ter.Instead,theyarean“artificiallyformedareaofland”or“artificiallycon-structedareaofland”.②

FollowingJapan’slogic,therescuingconstructionwasmeantto“expand”

therockstoenablethemto“sustainhumanhabitationoreconomiclifeofitsown”asanArticle121(1)island,andsubsequentlytogenerateextramaritimejurisdictionalzones.Actually,thisisanabusiveinterpretationoftheUNL-COS,whichaimsattheconformityoftherightsandinterestsofStatePartiesbasedontheexistingoceanorder.TheJapanesepracticeiscontrarytointerna-tionallawandtotheUNCLOSregime,asittriestomodifythenaturalfeaturesforthepurposeofenhancingclaimstojurisdictionalzonesthatshouldnotbelegitimatelygranted.

Shouldsuchlogicandpracticebepermittedandencouragedtoanyextent,

Statescouldrelyontheirnationalcapacityto“transform”anyinsularfeatures

82

①

②

Silversteinagreesthatartificialislandisnotentitledtoaterritorialsea,butheexcludedtheOkinotorishimaasaspecialcircumstance.SeeAndrewL,Silverstein,Okinotorishima:ArtificialPreservationofaSpeckofSovereignty,BrooklynJournalofInternationalLaw,Vol.12,No.1,2009,pp.429~430.SeeLeticiaDiaz,BarryHartDubner,andJasonParent,Whenisa“Rock”an“Island?”:AnotherUnilateralDeclarationDefies“Norms”ofInternationalLaw,MichiganStateJournalofInternationalLaw,Vol.15,2007,p.519.

suchassubmergedrocksandsandbarsintoislands,andthenclaimlargeareasofwatersandresourcestowhichtheyarenotentitled.ThistrendwouldleadtoirreversibledamagetotheauthorityoftheUNCLOS,andcertainlywouldresultinanewroundofcompetingclaimsandchaosintheworld’soceans.①

TheUNCLOSendeavorstoavoidsituationsofthiskindbycreatingaframe-workbasedoncustomaryinternationallawandacceptedStatePractice.JudgingbywhatJapanhasbeendoingwithgreatdetermination,itisun-

fortunatethattheresulthasturnedouttobethatJapan’sislandisationat-temptshavetransformedthelegalstatusofOkinotorishimafromArticle121(3)rocksintoartificialstructurestowhichthelawinArticle60applies.②The“Okinotorishima”havelosttheverybasicfeatureofrocksastheyhavebeentransformedintothe“Okinotorishimaartificialisland”or“Okinotorishimaar-tificialstructures”.Thusfromaninternationallawviewpoint,Japanisnoten-titledtoanymaritimezonesbutmerelya500-metersafetyzone.Japan’sex-pensiveeffortshavebeencounterproductivefromaUNCLOSpointofview.

Ⅴ.ConcludingRemarks

ItcanbearguedthattheislandregimeoftheUNCLOShastriggereden-duringsovereigntydisputesoverislands,complexitiesformaritimeclaims,dis-putesoverthelegalweightaccordedtoinsularfeatures,andaggressiveextend-edcontinentalshelfclaims.However,nocountryhassovigorouslytakenad-vantageoftheUNCLOSasJapanhastotheextremeinattemptingtoclaimlargeareasofjurisdictionalzonesbasedonrocks.

Accordingtointernationallaw,maritimefeaturescanbeaccordedmari-timezones,butnotallfeaturesareentitledtoanEEZandbeyond.TheOkino-torishima,whichareindeeduninhabited,isolatedrockslocatedinthePacificO-cean,cannotsustainhumanhabitationoreconomiclifeoftheirownatall.Athightide,thetworockscomposingtheOkinotorishimaarebarelyabovewateranditstotalareaislessthanonesixtiethofRockall.Thisistheclearestexam-pleoftherockprovidedforinArticle121(3)oftheUNCLOSwhichisnottogenerateanEEZorcontinentalshelf,nottomentionanextendedcontinental


①

②

SeeLeticiaDiaz,BarryHartDubner,andJasonParent,Whenisa“Rock”an“Island?”:AnotherUnilateralDeclarationDefies“Norms”ofInternationalLaw,MichiganStateJournalofInternationalLaw,Vol.15,2007,p.519,pp.519~555.SeeUNCLOSArticle60(4);(5);(8);(11);(147),Subpara.2(e);and259.


shelf.Temptedbythevastoceanspaceandabundantresourcestherein,Japan

hastriedtousesuchsmallreefrockstoclaimahuge200nmEEZinalldirec-tionsandevenacontinentalshelfbeyond200nm.Japanhasalsoputintoprac-ticeaseriesofmanmademeasurestoenabletheOkinotorishimaRockstosus-tainhumanhabitationoraneconomiclifeofitsownobviouslytoincreasethepossibilityforexpandingotherwiseunqualifiedmaritimejurisdictionalzones.Fromsatelliteimages,thetwooriginalrocksnowappearcompletelyartificial,

withnotraceofthetwonaturalrocks.NomatterhowhardtheJapanesehavetried,itisdoubtfulthattheJapa-

neseeffortcanbesuccessfulduetothefollowingfactors:first,theJapaneseis-landisationcampaignhasviolatedthestandardsandunderminedtheauthorityoftheUNCLOSframework;second,itsexcessiveclaimsencroachontheInter-nationalSeabedAreathatissetasidefortheinternationalcommunityasawhole;third,JapanhaschangedthelegalstatusoftheOkinotorishimaRocksfromnaturalrocksintoartificialstructures.NomatterhowJapantriestostretchtheword“rock”orhowittriestotwisttheword“island”,thehistoryoftheprovision,thewritingsofvariousscholars,andtheopinionoftheinter-nationalcommunitysquarelyplacetheJapaneseonthewrongside,legallyandmorally.

Aquestionable“island”mayratea12nmterritorialseabutafullentitle-mentisnotconsistentwiththeobjectandpurposeoftheUNCLOStolimitex-cessiveclaims.WithregardtothequestionablenaturalstatusofOkinotorishi-ma“artificialisland,installationorstructure”,a500-metersafetyzoneandex-clusivejurisdictionissufficient.

TheproblemwithJapan’sassertionovervastareasofwatersbasedonthenationalbuilding-upofartificialislandsaroundrocksisratherobvious.Itwouldbeanexampleofgreed,constitutingaprecedentonexpandedmaritimejurisdictionandofabusingtheUNCLOSandwouldseriouslyencroachupontheinternationalseabedarea.Yet,theprofoundimplicationsandfar-reachingimpactreflectedfromtheJapaneseclaimsisworthnoting.Ifeverystatedecid-edtomakethesametypeofexpansionasJapanhas,therewouldbenouseforinternationalruleoflawandthelegalsystemofordersetforthintheUN-CLOSwouldbemeaningless.TherewouldbearealcrisisbroughtalongbythesubmissionrushofECStotheinternationallawandInternationalSeabedArea.Theinternationalcommunityasawholeshouldworktogethertodealwiththiscrisis.

03

Annex1:Okinotorishima:HistoryandEvents

Year Events

1543UnconfirmedreportsclaimedthattheatollwasfirstsightedbytheSpanishshipSanJuanandnamedAbreOjos(“Openyoureyes,look!”inSpanish).

1565

Therockswererecordedas“PareceVela”(“lookslikeasail”inSpanish)bySpanishshipSanPedro.Afterthat,itwasnamed“EngelsRocks”byDutchshipEngelsand“DouglassReef”byBritishshipIphigenia.DouglassReefandPareceVelaarestillusedasalternativenamesforOkinotorishima.

1922TheJapaneseNavysurveillanceship“MANSHU”madeaninvestigationtotheatoll,andreportedthestatusofit.

1929OkinotorishimawasmarkedinhydrographicchartspublishedbyHydrogra-phicDepartmentofJapn.

1931TheJapaneseCabinetdeclareditJapaneseterritoryunderthejurisdictionoftheOgasawara-shichoofTokyoPrefecture,andnameditOkinotorishima.

1933Surveillanceship“KOSHU”investigatedtheislandsandfound4isletsinad-ditiontotheEasternIslet(Higashikojima)andNorthernIslet(Kitakojima).AhydrographicchartwasmadebytheHydrographicDepartment.

1938 Surveillanceship“SHINSHOMARU”investigatedthearea.

1939-1941Thesouthwestreefsoftheatollwereblastedtoopennewsearoutes.Alighthouseandameteorologicalobservationsitewerebuiltusing900concretecolumns.TheconstructionwasinterruptedbythestartofthePacificWar.

1952.4 TheUnitedStatestookovertheOgasawaraislands

1968.6 TheUnitedStatesreturnedtheislandstoJapan

1969 Surveillanceship“MEIYO”investigatedthearea.

1976

JapanAmateurRadioLeague(JARL)“DXPedition”setupanamateurradiostationbasedontheobservationsiteanddirectedradiowavesaroundthe

globefromOkinotorishima.Within78hours,theymadecommunicationwithabout9000otherradiostations.

1978 TokyoMetropolisfisheriesresearchship“Metropolis”investigatedthearea.

1982 SurveyshipAA“TAKUYO”investigatedthearea.

1984TwoisletsweremarkedinthetopographicalmappublishedbytheGeo-graphicalSurveyInstitute(GSI).

1987.9TheAgriculturalAquaticCommitteeofJapaneseDietheldthefirstmeetingonOkinotorishimaandtherisingsealevels.

1987.10 ItwasdesignatedasacoastalprotectedareabyTokyoMetropolis.



Renewaltable1

Year Events

1988JapanMarineScienceandTechnologyCenter (JAMSTEC)builtanun-mannedmarineinvestigationfacilitywhichitmaintained,followingmeteoro-logicalobservationuntil1991.

1988-1989TheformerMinistryofConstructionstartedtheprotectionprojectfortheEasternIsletandNorthernIslet

1990-1993TheformerMinistryofConstructionstartedabaseprojectfortheobserva-tionstation.

1993JAMSTECperformedmeteorologicalandmarinemeteorologicalobservationsattheworkingsite(continuingnow).

1998TheformerMinistryofConstructioninstalledatitaniummetallicnettocovertheEasternIslet.

1999

AccordingtotheamendedCoastalAct,themanagementwasputundertheNationalGovernment:theformerMinistryofConstruction:responsibleforbankprotection;theCoastOfficeoftheRiverBureauoftheMinistryofLand,Infrastructure,TransportandTourismandtheKeihinDepartmentofEngineeringAffairs:responsibleforprotectivemeasures;thedegreeofgener-alconcernisnothigh.

2004.9

“Eco-engineeringregenerationtechnologyhelpsimprovetheregenerationca-pacityofthedegradedcoralreefecosystem,contributestotheterritorypro-tectionofislandstatesinthePacificOcean,andavoidsthefloodingissues.”

HajimeKayanne(NewsletterNo.99,Sep.2004,OPRF)

2004.10“AssociationforOkinotorishimaResearch”wassetupbyOPRFandhelditsfirstmeeting.

2004.11

“ObservationGroupforEffectiveUtilizationofOkinotorishima”establishedbytheNipponFoundationtocentralizeexpertsofdifferentfieldstoinvesti-gatethestatusoftheareafromdifferentperspectives,anddiscussthepossi-bilityofeffectiveutilizationofthe“island”anditssurroundingwaters.

2004.12The22ndOceanForumwasheldbyOPRFwiththetheme“Currentstatusandregenerationof Okinotorishima”,speakers:Terashima HiroshiandHajimeKayanne.

2004TheMinistryofLand,Infrastructure,TransportandTourism (MLITT)in-stalledvideocamerasonsurveillancefacilities.

23

Renewaltable2

Year Events

2005.3

“InvestigationGroupforPromotingEconomicActivitiesofOkinotorishima”

fundedbyNipponFoundationtostrengthenandimproveeconomicactivitiesofOkinotorishima,investigateaquaticorganisms’proliferationstatusthatcanhelptheislandregenerationsuchascoral,andthestatusofislandbuildingandexpansion,setupabeacontoinsuremarinetraffic,andtoinvestigatethefeasibilityofpowergenerationbyusingoceanthermalenergyconversiontechnology.Also,accordingtothecontractbetweenMLITTandMinistryofAgriculture,ForestryandFisheriesofJapan,someproposalsweremadesuchastheassumptionthatcoralproliferationpromotestheexpansionofanis-land,andprotectionstrategiesandutilizationprogramsofOkinotorishimawerediscussedfromvariousperspectives.

2005.3

The25thOceanForumwasheldbyOPRFwiththethemeas“WiseuseofJapan’sexclusiveeconomiczones,submarinemineralresources,andOkinoto-rishima”,speakers:Yasuhiko Kakami,Takatoshi Matsuzawa,TomohikoFukushima.

2005.4 “RegenerationPlanofOkinotorishima”wasannouncedbyOPRF.

2005.6 GeographicalSurveyInstitute(GSI)setupanelectronicreferencepoint

2005OPRFreleased“RegenerationInvestigationandResearchonOkinotorishi-ma”:Analysisofboringcoretechnology;BasicecologicalinvestigationofForaminifera;Discussionofthelegalstatus

2005FisheriesAssociationofOgasawara-Shoto,TokyoMetropolisprovidedopera-tionalsupporttoOkinotorishima,releasedstripedmackerelfishfries,andin-vestigatedfishinggroundsinsurroundingseaarea.

2005 TheMLITTsetupoceanobservationradar.

2005-2006 TokyoMetropolisbuilttheInstructionalShipforFisheriesSurvey“KOYO”.

2006-2008

OPRFcarriedout“Investigationandresearchonmaintenanceandregenera-tionofOkinotorishima”:reorganizedandanalyzedtheinvestigationsonmain-tenanceandregenerationofOkinotorishima;Internationalcomparativestud-iesaboutislandsstatusandmanagementmethods;Outreachinvestigations;

EcologicalinvestigationsofPacificislandnations;Investigationsonmanage-mentimplementationofdifferentcountries;andOthers

2006-2008TheMinistryofAgriculture,ForestryandFisheriescarriedoutresearchon“TheDevelopmentoftheProliferationMethodsunderAbominableNaturalConditions”andthedevelopmentofthecoralproliferationtechnology.



Renewaltable3

Year Events

2006-

TokyoMetropoliscarriedouta“ProjecttoimprovetheutilizationofOkino-torishima”:toinvestigatefishingground;toconstructanartificialfloatingfishreefinmid-layerofdeepwater;tomakeapublic-orientedmovie“Okino-torishima:MiraculousIslands”(2008).

2007.3 ThelightbeaconbuiltbytheMLITTstartedworking.

2007.7The“BasicOceanLaw”wasputintoforce:Article26regulatesoffshoreis-landprotection.

2007.11 “OkinotorishimaForum2007”washeldinTokyoMetropolis.

2008

WhitePaperIIoftheMLITT:Chapter6“Constructasafeandpeacefulsoci-ety”,Section4:Crisismanagementandsafetyguaranteecountermeasure:

Para.4MarinerightsprotectionofJapan“(4)TheprotectionofOkinotor-ishima:Okinotorishimaislocatedatthesouthmostofourcountry’sterrito-ry,andisthemostimportantisland,basedonwhichwecanestablishover

400,000km2exclusiveeconomiczone.Itisimportanttoterritoryprotectionandutilization,anditisnecessarytodiscusswhetheritshouldbedirectlymanagedbythenationalgovernmentandwhethercompletemeasuresshouldbetakentomakethebestuseofit”.

*2008.11 “OkinotorishimaForum2008”washeldinTokyoMetropolis.

*2010.5JapanadoptedLawforReservationoftheLowTideLineandMaintenanceofFootholdFacilities.

*2011.1Aplanwasannouncedtobuildadeepwaterportinthenext6yearswith$10billionUSDollars.

Source:TranslatedfromOPRF,ResearchReportontheOkinotorishimaRevivalandRe-latedIssues,2008:http://www.sof.or.jp/jp/report/pdf/200903_ISBN978-4-88404-216-5.pdf.

Note:“*”:updatesofthisauthorfromothersourcescitedinthispaper.

(Editors:CAONi;CHENXiaoshuang)

43

How Much Can a Rock Get?

Documents

Transcript of How Much Can a Rock Get?