	Introduction

On July 12, 2016, an arbitral tribunal constituted under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) is expected to issue a ruling, known as a final "award," in a case between the Philippines and the People's Republic of China (PRC or China). In the case, the Philippines, a U.S. ally, seeks primarily to clarify some of the two countries' potential maritime rights in the South China Sea under UNCLOS, the 1982 Convention that establishes multilateral rules governing the rights of nations over the seas. The United States is not party to the Convention. The Philippines and China are both parties to UNCLOS and accepted its compulsory dispute settlement provisions when they ratified the convention. China, however, has declined to participate in the arbitral tribunal's proceedings. The case has been closely watched for the implications it may have for the tensions between the Philippines and China over their maritime disputes in the South China Sea, for the overlapping claims of China and other governments to maritime rights, for U.S.-China relations, and for international law more broadly. The tribunal's ruling will be legally binding only for the two parties to the dispute—the Philippines and China. U.S. officials have argued, however, that it could help clarify issues relevant to the claims of all the governments contesting territory in the sea—Brunei, China, Malaysia, the Philippines, Taiwan, and Vietnam. Such clarification could help claimants restart conversations about how to manage the sea in ways that lessen the chances for maritime incidents, protect the sea's role as a conduit for as much as $5 trillion in annual commercial shipping, and allow for joint exploitation of fishing stocks and hydrocarbons. Some observers argue that if China refuses to comply with the award, it could risk deepening regional tensions and harming the authority of UNCLOS as an institution and of international law more broadly. Statements Relating to the Arbitration

Obama Administration officials have made several statements supporting the Philippines' right to bring the case and emphasizing that the tribunal's award will be binding on both parties. In the 114 th Congress, S.Res. 183 (Schatz) and S. 2865 (Cardin) call on parties to implement the tribunal's ruling. S.Res. 370 (Cardin) urges the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) to develop a common approach to reaffirm the ruling. All three bills are pending in the Senate. The 15 submissions cover four broad areas: the legality under UNCLOS of China's ambiguous so-called nine-dash line claim in the South China Sea; the maritime entitlements generated under UNCLOS by specific geographic features, most of them controlled by China; the legality of China's alleged harassment of Philippines vessels; and China's alleged violations of an UNCLOS provision requiring parties to protect the marine environment. Many analysts see a potential ruling on the "legal effect" of China's so-called nine-dash line claim to be the most significant aspect of the case, although a ruling on the issue is not assured. The two Philippine submissions related to it are among those on which the tribunal decided to defer consideration of its jurisdiction. Possible Responses by the United States

Like the government of China, the Obama Administration has worked hard to line up international support for its position on the arbitration proceedings. They might include, but are not necessarily limited to: 
reiterating calls for the governments of the member states of ASEAN and the government of China to reach early conclusion of a meaningful Code of Conduct (CoC), providing agreed rules of the road for actions in the sea; taking actions that demonstrate the U.S. position on international maritime rights, including conducting Freedom of Navigation Operations (FONOPS) near features covered in the tribunal's award; supporting pressure on China in UNCLOS bodies by, for example, arguing to the International Seabed Authority that China's refusal to honor the tribunal's ruling should disqualify China from being able to proceed with its deep seabed mining applications for sites in the Indian Ocean; or scheduling Senate advice and consent on ratification of UNCLOS.
On July 12, 2016, an arbitral tribunal constituted under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) is expected to issue a ruling in a case between the Philippines and the People's Republic of China (PRC or China). The Philippines, a U.S. ally, initiated the case in January 2013 under the convention's compulsory dispute settlement provisions, seeking primarily to clarify the two countries' potential maritime rights in the South China Sea. The Philippines and China are both parties to UNCLOS. The United States has a policy of operating consistent with the convention, but has not ratified it and is not a party to it. China argues that the tribunal lacks legal jurisdiction to rule in the case. It has declined to participate in the proceedings and has said that it will not accept the tribunal's final award in the case.
The arbitration case has been closely watched for the implications it may have for the tensions between the Philippines and China over their maritime disputes in the South China Sea, for the overlapping claims of China and other governments to maritime rights, for U.S.-China relations, and for international law more broadly. The award will be legally binding only for the two parties to the dispute—the Philippines and China. Some observers argue, however, that it could help clarify issues relevant to the claims of all the governments contesting territory in the sea—Brunei, China, Malaysia, the Philippines, Taiwan, and Vietnam. The U.S. government has suggested that such clarification could help claimants restart conversations about how to manage the sea in ways that lessen the chances for maritime incidents, protect the sea's role as a conduit for as much as $5 trillion in annual commercial shipping, and allow for joint exploitation of fishing stocks and hydrocarbons. If China follows through on its pledge not to accept the ruling, however, some observers warn that its stance could deepen regional tensions and undermine the authority of UNCLOS as an institution and of international law more broadly.
Obama Administration officials have made several statements supporting the Philippines' right to bring the case and emphasizing the binding nature of the tribunal's award. In the 114th Congress, S.Res. 183 (Schatz) and S. 2865 (Cardin) call on the parties to implement the tribunal's ruling, and S.Res. 370 (Cardin) urges the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) to develop a common approach to reaffirm the ruling. All three bills are pending in the Senate.
The Philippines' case consists of 15 submissions covering four broad areas. Those four areas are the legality under UNCLOS of China's ambiguous so-called nine-dash line claim in the South China Sea; the maritime entitlements generated under UNCLOS by specific geographic features, most of them controlled by China; the legality of China's alleged harassment of Philippines vessels; and China's alleged violations of an UNCLOS provision requiring parties to protect the marine environment. Many analysts see a potential ruling on the legal status of China's nine-dash line claim to be the most significant aspect of the case, although a ruling on the issue is not assured. The two Philippine submissions related to it are among eight on which the tribunal decided in 2015 to defer consideration of whether it has jurisdiction to rule.
China has worked to line up international support for its position on the arbitration case. It could choose to escalate its actions in the South China Sea after the ruling. Beijing has also held out the possibility that "there will be no incident at all" if new Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte would agree to set aside the ruling. Analysts expect the United States to continue to encourage its allies and partners to support the ruling. Other potential options for U.S. responses following the ruling include reiterating calls for the governments of China and the Association of Southeast Nations to reach early agreement on a meaningful Code of Conduct, conducting additional Freedom of Navigation Operations (FONOPS) near features covered in the tribunal's award, supporting pressure on China in UNCLOS bodies, and scheduling Senate advice and consent to the Administration on ratification of UNCLOS.