This is the view of Carla Freeman, director of the Foreign Policy Institute, The Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS).

Speaking at a dialogue entitled “South China Sea: A Way Forward” here today, Freeman said that though the International Law of the Sea provides a clear guide as to how to manage maritime resources, after its implementation, it has to some extent become a golden apple of discord as countries have ended up making overlapping claims.

She said that tensions heated after China submitted its nine-dash line – a map showing extensive claims to the South China Sea.

“The map was China’s response to the Malaysia-Vietnam joint submission to the Commission on the Limits to the Continental Shelf (CLCS) in May, 2009 to abide by the deadline set by the UN,” she said.

“The piling of claims on the Continental Shelf after the deadline is why tensions intensified.”

She explained that while the International Law of the Sea provided clarity on rights and entitlements over what was in the territorial seas, it was never designed to be a tool to resolve sovereignty issues.

“Countries need to find a diplomatic means of resolving these issues themselves through negotiations and such.”

The International Law of the Sea, sometimes called the Constitution of the Oceans, clarifies the entitlements and responsibilities of countries with respect to the use of the oceans.

The law has been ratified by 60 countries, excluding the United States, but the US still abides by the law as a customary law.