WPS: Geographical Reality or Geopolitical Construct?

In addressing sensitive, complex, and multifaceted issues such as the South China Sea (SCS) dispute, which involves multiple claimant states, government policies must be grounded in objective facts. Distorted narratives or the manipulation of information and facts can only serve to weaken the country’s position and credibility on the global stage.

On whether the “West Philippine Sea (WPS) exists under international law or is recognized by the wider international community, the answer is no. There is NO legal entity or officially recognized geopolitical term called “WPS” in international law regarding the SCS dispute.

WPS is a domestic designation used by the Philippines to refer to portions of the SCS within its Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). The term WPS was officially adopted by the Philippine government in 2012 under Executive Order No. 29 issued by then-President Benigno Aquino III. It is purely a Philippine invention but not internationally recognized. It reinforces the Philippines’ “claims” but does not change the international legal status of the disputed waters of the SCS.

Also, it is not an internationally recognized term in official global maritime nomenclature. Other claimants, like China, Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei, and international entities, do not recognize “WPS.” The wider ASEAN and the broad international community do not recognize the term “WPS” and continue to use “SCS.” Even the 2013 Arbitral Tribunal did not use the term “WPS ” to refer to the country’s claim in the SCS. The tribunal used the internationally recognized term “SCS” throughout its proceedings and its final ruling on July 12, 2016.

While the tribunal’s ruling affirmed certain aspects of the Philippines’ claims, such as the affirmation of the Philippines’ EEZ rights in specific maritime areas, it adhered to neutral and widely accepted terminology to maintain an impartial legal perspective. This distinction reflects that even the tribunal avoided politically charged terms and focused on the legal interpretation of UNCLOS provisions relevant to the SCS dispute.

As far as the cartographic and navigational standards are concerned, WPS does not exist on maps. Internationally published nautical charts and legal maritime boundaries still refer to the area as the SCS. Even official maps of the International Hydrographic Organization (IHO) and global maritime authorities do not use “WPS.”

Note that IHO is an intergovernmental organization that focuses on ensuring the world’s seas, oceans, and navigable waters are properly surveyed and charted. It is a United Nations (UN) recognized observer organization. However, the IHO operates independently and is not a UN agency.

Conclusion

Indeed, there should not be confusion between domestic policy and international law. The Philippines uses the term WPS domestically, but its legal weight is limited within the Philippine context and jurisdiction. It is mainly used for domestic, political, strategic, and geopolitical purposes, particularly in asserting the country’s claim in the disputed SCS.

Source: The Lobbyist
https://www.thelobbyist.biz/perspectives/article-details/prime%20insight/wps-geographical-reality-or-geopolitical-construct

Prof. Anna Rosario Malindog-Uy

Prof. Anna Rosario Malindog-Uy is a Ph.D. Candidate at the Institute of South-South Cooperation and Development (ISSCAD), Peking University, Beijing, China. Currently, she is a Senior Researcher of the South China Sea Probing Initiative (SCSPI) and a Senior Research Fellow of the Global Governance Institution (GGI). Prof. Anna Uy taught Political Science, International Relations, Development Studies, European Studies, Southeast Asia, and China Studies. She is a researcher-writer, academic, and consultant on a wide array of issues. She has worked as a consultant with the Asian Development Bank (ADB) and other local and international NGOs.