6月4日在新加坡举行的香格里拉对话会上，美国防长卡特在其主旨演讲中公然指责中国“在南海采取了范围广泛、毫无先例的行动”，使得“中国孤立了自己”，并警告中国“如果继续下去的话”，会导致“中国建立起自我孤立的长城”。尽管卡特在演讲中37次提及“有原则”（principled），以显示美国对国际法原则和规则的重视，然而在国际海洋法律秩序中，“自我孤立”的不是中国，而是美国。美国“自我孤立”于以1982年《联合国海洋法公约》为基础的当代国际海洋法律秩序之外。

首先，美国以世界唯一超级大国自居，至今拒绝签署、批准《公约》。至2014年10月10日为止，全世界有157个国家签署了《公约》，166个国家和国际组织批准或加入了《公约》。美国是全世界极少数没有批准《公约》的国家之一，而且是唯一的大国。美国国务卿克里深知美国处于孤立、尴尬的境地，因此他在近日接受香港凤凰卫视记者的独家采访时，对于“美国不是《公约》签署国”的问题表示“美国没有批准《公约》，但美国是签署国”。然而，根据国际条约法及《公约》，一个国家要成为《公约》缔约国或当事国并受其约束，须经其国内法律程序批准，光在《公约》文本上签字还不算。美国至今尚未签署、批准《公约》。美国签署但未批准1994年《关于执行1982年12月10日联合国海洋法公约第十一部分的协定》。因此，美国也不是该《协定》的缔约国。美国签署并批准了1995年《执行1982年12月10日联合国海洋法公约有关养护和管理跨界鱼类种群和高度洄游鱼类种群的规定的协定》。然而，不属于《公约》缔约国的国家也可以批准或加入本协定。也就是说，属于1995年协定的缔约国未必是《公约》缔约国。总之，美国不是《公约》的签署国或缔约国。

其次，美国选择性利用《公约》，从事大量违反《公约》的活动。对于具体国际条约的态度，美国历来根据其国家利益来决定取舍，奉行鲜明的实用主义和双重标准。美国往往积极主动发起或参与国际规则的制定，以便掌握主导权，使得国际规则有利于美国。但如果对美国不利，美国要么不批准，要么寻求改变规则，否则就走向单边主义。这在美国对《联合国海洋法公约》的态度上表现得淋漓尽致。美国声称，《公约》反映了国际习惯法，美国虽然不批准，但遵守《公约》。在凤凰卫视的专访中，克里强调美国政府执行并遵守《公约》。然而，在实践中美国选择性利用《公约》， 有利就用，不利则弃。美国还一直以非缔约国身份，干涉《公约》缔约国相关的海洋立法、领海基线设定及海域、海洋权益主张，甚至为此使用武力或武力威胁。

美国自1979年起实施所谓的“自由航行计划”，派舰机挑战世界各国“过度的海洋主张”，针对几十个国家和地区进行上百次的军事宣示行动。 然而，美国却将世界16个主要海上通道视为其必须控制的，这显然违反了《公约》规定的航行自由原则及有关的制度。1983年底至1984年初，美国派人在尼加拉瓜的几个港口附近布雷，范围包括尼加拉瓜的内水和领海，严重威胁尼加拉瓜的安全和航行，并造成了重大的事故和损失。1984年4月尼加拉瓜为此诉诸国际法院。11月国际法院作出对此案有管辖权的初步判决后，美国愤然退出诉讼程序。结案后，美国官员将国际法院作出的有利于尼加拉瓜的判决书当众撕毁。这些事实说明，美国很鄙视国际法及国际司法机构。

自2010年美国“重返亚太”后，西太平洋地区成为其实施“亚太再平衡”战略的重要舞台，而中国与邻国的海洋争端是其主要抓手。美国介入南海，纠集其盟国及伙伴遏制中国，企图主宰亚太，维持世界霸主地位。2014年12月5日，美国国务院发表《海洋界限——中国在南中国海的海洋主张》，诋毁中国南海九段线及相关权益主张的合法性，其支持菲律宾的仲裁请求，并对南海仲裁案仲裁庭施加影响和压力的意图十分明显。美国密切配合南海仲裁进程，多次派舰机闯入南海有关岛礁12海里海域实行所谓的“航行自由”行动。在仲裁庭即将作出最终裁决之际，美国号召其“地区及全球伙伴”采取措施，“支持以规则为基础的亚太秩序。”卡特的上述言论，正如中央军委国际军事合作办公室主任关友飞所言，目的“是想孤立中国，是想让本地区的各国都把中国作为孤立的对象”。美国拉拢盟友对中国施压，逼迫中国接受并执行其幕后操纵的南海仲裁裁决的意图暴露无遗。

作为《公约》的缔约国，中国积极履约，严格按照《公约》的规定处理海洋事务，包括南海问题。中国与东盟国家一直在《公约》、《南海各方行为宣言》及一系列有关的地区及双边框架下，按照“双轨思路”进行南海问题的磋商与合作。中国设立30亿元南海合作基金，倡导成立亚投行，共建海上丝绸之路，提倡“亚洲命运共同体”，惠及南海地区及世界各有关国家。至今，全世界已有数十个国家明确表态支持中国关于南海问题及南海仲裁案的原则立场。孤立于国际海洋法律秩序之外的美国想孤立中国，到头来只会“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.)