6月4日在新加坡舉行的香格里拉對話會上，美國防長卡特在其主旨演講中公然指責中國“在南海採取了範圍廣泛、毫無先例的行動”，使得“中國孤立了自己”，並警告中國“如果繼續下去的話”，會導致“中國建立起自我孤立的長城”。儘管卡特在演講中37次提及“有原則”（principled），以顯示美國對國際法原則和規則的重視，然而在國際海洋法律秩序中，“自我孤立”的不是中國，而是美國。美國“自我孤立”於以1982年《聯合國海洋法公約》為基礎的當代國際海洋法律秩序之外。

首先，美國以世界唯一超級大國自居，至今拒絕簽署、批准《公約》。至2014年10月10日為止，全世界有157個國家簽署了《公約》，166個國家和國際組織批准或加入了《公約》。美國是全世界極少數沒有批准《公約》的國家之一，而且是唯一的大國。美國國務卿克里深知美國處於孤立、尷尬的境地，因此他在近日接受香港鳳凰衛視記者的獨家採訪時，對於“美國不是《公約》簽署國”的問題表示“美國沒有批准《公約》，但美國是簽署國”。然而，根據國際條約法及《公約》，一個國家要成為《公約》締約國或當事國並受其約束，須經其國內法律程序批准，光在《公約》文本上簽字還不算。美國至今尚未簽署、批准《公約》。美國簽署但未批准1994年《關於執行1982年12月10日聯合國海洋法公約第十一部分的協定》。因此，美國也不是該《協定》的締約國。美國簽署並批准了1995年《執行1982年12月10日聯合國海洋法公約有關養護和管理跨界魚類種群和高度洄遊魚類種群的規定的協定》。然而，不屬於《公約》締約國的國家也可以批准或加入本協定。也就是說，屬於1995年協定的締約國未必是《公約》締約國。總之，美國不是《公約》的簽署國或締約國。

其次，美國選擇性利用《公約》，從事大量違反《公約》的活動。對於具體國際條約的態度，美國歷來根據其國家利益來決定取捨，奉行鮮明的實用主義和雙重標準。美國往往積極主動發起或參與國際規則的制定，以便掌握主導權，使得國際規則有利於美國。但如果對美國不利，美國要麼不批准，要麼尋求改變規則，否則就走向單邊主義。這在美國對《聯合國海洋法公約》的態度上表現得淋漓盡致。美國聲稱，《公約》反映了國際習慣法，美國雖然不批准，但遵守《公約》。在鳳凰衛視的專訪中，克里強調美國政府執行並遵守《公約》。然而，在實踐中美國選擇性利用《公約》， 有利就用，不利則棄。美國還一直以非締約國身份，干涉《公約》締約國相關的海洋立法、領海基線設定及海域、海洋權益主張，甚至為此使用武力或武力威脅。

美國自1979年起實施所謂的“自由航行計劃”，派艦機挑戰世界各國“過度的海洋主張”，針對幾十個國家和地區進行上百次的軍事宣示行動。 然而，美國卻將世界16個主要海上通道視為其必須控制的，這顯然違反了《公約》規定的航行自由原則及有關的制度。1983年底至1984年初，美國派人在尼加拉瓜的幾個港口附近佈雷，範圍包括尼加拉瓜的內水和領海，嚴重威脅尼加拉瓜的安全和航行，並造成了重大的事故和損失。1984年4月尼加拉瓜為此訴諸國際法院。11月國際法院作出對此案有管轄權的初步判決後，美國憤然退出訴訟程序。結案後，美國官員將國際法院作出的有利於尼加拉瓜的判決書當眾撕毀。這些事實說明，美國很鄙視國際法及國際司法機構。

自2010年美國“重返亞太”後，西太平洋地區成為其實施“亞太再平衡”戰略的重要舞台，而中國與鄰國的海洋爭端是其主要抓手。美國介入南海，糾集其盟國及夥伴遏制中國，企圖主宰亞太，維持世界霸主地位。2014年12月5日，美國國務院發表《海洋界限——中國在南中國海的海洋主張》，詆毀中國南海九段線及相關權益主張的合法性，其支持菲律賓的仲裁請求，並對南海仲裁案仲裁庭施加影響和壓力的意圖十分明顯。美國密切配合南海仲裁進程，多次派艦機闖入南海有關島礁12海裏海域實行所謂的“航行自由”行動。在仲裁庭即將作出最終裁決之際，美國號召其“地區及全球夥伴”採取措施，“支持以規則為基礎的亞太秩序。”卡特的上述言論，正如中央軍委國際軍事合作辦公室主任關友飛所言，目的“是想孤立中國，是想讓本地區的各國都把中國作為孤立的對象”。美國拉攏盟友對中國施壓，逼迫中國接受並執行其幕後操縱的南海仲裁裁決的意圖暴露無遺。

作為《公約》的締約國，中國積極履約，嚴格按照《公約》的規定處理海洋事務，包括南海問題。中國與東盟國家一直在《公約》、《南海各方行為宣言》及一系列有關的地區及雙邊框架下，按照“雙軌思路”進行南海問題的磋商與合作。中國設立30億元南海合作基金，倡導成立亞投行，共建海上絲綢之路，提倡“亞洲命運共同體”，惠及南海地區及世界各有關國家。至今，全世界已有數十個國家明確表態支持中國關於南海問題及南海仲裁案的原則立場。孤立於國際海洋法律秩序之外的美國想孤立中國，到頭來只會“自我孤立”。

At the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore on June 4, US Defense Secretary Ash Carter openly accused China of taking extensive, unprecedented moves that “isolate” itself, and warned that by continuing doing that, China would erect a “Great Wall of self-isolation”. Although Carter used the word “principle” 37 times in his speech to emphasize the weight the US places on the rules and norms of international law, it was the US, not China, that is engaging in “self isolation” in international maritime legal order. The US has isolated itself from the contemporary international maritime legal order based on the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).

First, taking advantage of its status as the sole superpower of the present-day world, the US has refused to sign and ratify the UNCLOS. By Oct. 10, 2014, 157 countries had signed it, while 166 countries and international organizations had ratified or joined it. The US is one of the few countries that have not ratified it — and the only major country that has not done so. US State Secretary John Kerry is keenly aware of his country's lonely, embarrassing position. In a recent exclusive interview with Phoenix TV, responding to a question involving the US' failure to participate in the UNCLOS, Kerry said the US has not ratified it, but is a “signatory”. However, according to international law on conventions, and the UNCLOS, in order to be a signatory, be a party to, and subject itself to an international convention, a country must ratify it through domestic legal procedure. Merely signing on the text of the document does not legally count.The US also signed but has not ratified the 1994 Agreement Relating to the Implementation of Part XI of the Dec. 10, 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. Therefore is it not a formal signatory to this agreement, either. The US signed and ratified the 1995 Agreement for the Implementation of the Provision of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of Dec. 10, 1982 relating to the Conservation and Management of Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks. But countries that are not signatories to the UNCLOS could also ratify and participate in that agreement, without necessarily being signatories to the UNCLOS itself. To sum it up, the US is not a signatory or a contracting party to the UNCLOS.

Second, the US has selectively utilized the UNCLOS, and has engaged in a lot of activities in violation of it. The US has demonstrated undisguised pragmatism and double standards regarding its attitude to specific international treaties, and either emphasizes or ignores them based on its own national interests. The US usually actively initiates or participates in the making of international norms, so as to take the initiative and make international rules conducive to US interests. The US would either disapprove, or seek to change rules that it deems undesirable, or simply resort to unilateralism. The US attitude to the UNCLOS is a perfect case in point. The US claimed that the UNCLOS mirrors customary international law, and so although it has not ratified it, the US abides by it. In the Phoenix TV interview, Kerry stated the US government implements and follows the UNCLOS. In practice, however, the US has selectively used the UNCLOS when it serves US purposes, ignoring it when it doesn't. The US has always, in its non-signatory capacity, interfered with UNCLOS signatory countries' maritime legislation, territorial sea baseline demarcations, as well as claims to maritime territory, and maritime rights and interests, even resorting to force or threat of force.

The US has conducted so-called “freedom of navigation operations” against dozens of countries and regions since 1979, sending military ships or planes to challenge other countries' “excess maritime claims”. Yet it considers 16 major maritime passageways in the world as under US control, which is obviously in violation of the rules of freedom of navigation as stipulated by the UNCLOS. From late 1983 to early 1984, the US laid mines near several main ports of Nicaragua, in both inland waters and territorial sea, seriously threatening Nicaraguan security and navigation. Nicaragua brought the issue to the International Court of Justice in April 1984. The US angrily withdrew from legal proceedings when the court decided in November that it had jurisdiction over the case. After the case was closed, US officials tore the court's verdict, which was in favor of Nicaragua, to shreds in public. Such facts indicate US contempt of international law and international institutions of justice.

Since the US began to “rebalance” to the Asia-Pacific in 2010, the West Pacific has become the main stage for its new strategy, China's maritime disputes with some neighboring countries, therefore, have been its main handle. Stepping into the South China Sea, the US has rallied its allies and “partners” to contain China, attempting to dominate the Asia-Pacific and retain its global hegemony. On Dec. 5, 2014, the US State Department published Limits in the Seas – China: Maritime Claims in the South China Sea, vilifying the legitimacy of China's nine-dashed line in the South China Sea as well as its corresponding claims to rights and interests, in an evident attempt to support the Philippines' request for arbitration, and exert influence and mount pressure on the arbitration tribunal. Closely in step with the South China Sea arbitration, the US has repeatedly dispatched military ships and planes to conduct “freedom of navigation/overflight operations” within 12 miles of Chinese features in the South China Sea. In anticipation of a final ruling by the tribunal, the US has called on its partners in the region and around the world to take measures to “support rules-based order in the Asia-Pacific”. Just as Guan Youfei, director of the Central Military Commission Office of International Military Cooperation, said, Carter's aforementioned remarks were aimed at isolating China, and making every country in the region isolate China. The US attempt to rope in allies to mount pressure on China, and force China to accept and implement the South China Sea arbitration it has manipulated from behind the scenes is now in broad daylight.

As a signatory to the UNCLOS, China has been actively implementing it, and handling maritime affairs, including the South China Sea issue, in strict accordance with its stipulations. China has been consulting and cooperating with ASEAN nations on the South China Sea issue following the “dual track” approach under corresponding regional and bilateral frameworks of the UNCLOS and the Declaration on the Code of Conduct on the South China Sea. China has set up the 3-billion-yuan South China Sea Cooperation Fund, advocated establishment of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, proposed to jointly build the Maritime Silk Road, and put forward the concept of “Asian Community of Shared Destiny”, benefiting the South China Sea area as well as all related countries in the world. By now, dozens of countries have made explicit statements supporting China's principled stances on the South China Sea issue and the Philippine-initiated arbitration. The US, which has maintained a lonely existence beyond the international maritime legal order, will eventually isolate itself by attempting to isolate China.

(The Authors: Wang Hanling, director of the Center for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, research fellow of the South China Sea Research Center at Nanjing University; Peng Sixiang and Zheng Yaran, graduate students at the Department of Law of the CASS Graduate School.)