The Hague Court stated that Beijing has no sovereign rights in the South China Sea

The ruling of the court in The Hague, on the territorial dispute the sovereignty of the sea overlooking the coast of the Philippines, to which aspires China, is bound, as well as becoming a precedent in the case law of international law, also a potential factor of aggravation of the situation of that scenario and other analogues. The Hague Court ruled that sovereignty claimed by Beijing, on some islands in the South China Sea, is not supported by any legal basis. Marine space in question is considered by many a real sea motorway, important for the transport of goods, and then adi high strategic value, contains gas and oil fields and, also, is of water of economic interest for the the fisheries sector. The fact that Chinese boats, as well as other states, have historically operated in the waters in question, does not constitute evidence of the exclusive control of the waters, as claimed by Beijing. Indeed, China has had an interfering behavior when these areas were Spanish colonies, and has damaged the coral reef with the illegal construction of artificial islands, an operation that was not in their rights and constitutes an abuse. This conduct has, therefore, constituted a flagrant violation of the sovereignty of the Philippine land rights with respect to its full availability of the exclusive economic zone and continental shelf. This judgment as well as legal has an undeniable political value, because it denies, by the judgment in favor of Manila, to China its claims as a regional and global power, and creates a precedent not irrelevant on all other disputes that Beijing leads with other Asian nations, such as South Korea, Japan, Vietnam and Malaysia, about the alleged sovereignty of some islands and sea portions, which Beijing claims to take in these countries, including through aggressive tactics involving unsafe use of the armed forces. For China, this ruling is, at the diplomatic level, a severe defeat, as shown by the reaction of the government in Beijing, which was quick to not recognize the jurisdiction of the Hague Court and then to define as unfounded and nothing his decision . Also the statements of the Chinese Defense Ministry, have been expressed in this regard, stressing that the government agency will do everything to preserve the unity and sovereignty of the country, suggesting implicitly, that the judgment subject areas are considered as an integral part of China's territory. It is an attitude that is designed to raise the tension around the dispute, which puts China in a position almost of defense, which could be followed by the demonstration of military force in the country, able to lead to a growing dangerous, capable of open more international crisis areas; It will be crucial to see the developments of this scenario, considering unavoidable direct engagement of the United States, which consider the Asian seas the central theater of its foreign policy, including support function to the many allies involved in disputes with China. For now, Beijing has limited itself to counter the ruling with legal arguments, saying that the body territorial disputes are not subject to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and that this Convention has been violated by the Philippines, which has prevented China to choose the way the management of litigation, as well as established by the bilateral agreements. Beijing also argues that these differences had to be the subject of negotiations between the two parties and not subject to a judge. However these arguments appear weak in front of an international opinion, which precisely because of this ruling, will tend to make it grow diplomatic pressure to stop China in its efforts to maritime expansion. In fact, even though the Hague Court does not have coercive instruments able to enforce the judgment, the judgment issued will lead to a secure diplomatic reaction, waiting only a legal argument capable of supporting a concrete contrast mode. To be protagonists will then international structures and diplomatic bodies, to be able to prevent the dispute from being shifted to a plan, including potential ones, military; what to ward off the imminent dangers, but also to anticipate and avoid future litigation of this type. China, if it really aspires to become a superpower, will have to seek alternative ways to establish themselves as such, and, first of all, you will have to accept the verdict of international bodies such as the Hague Court, showing a world stature, and not only from small power regional.