The Limits of Maritime Law

  • Senan Fox


This chapter explains the central components to the contrasting legal stances adopted by China and South Korea with regards to Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs) and continental shelf rights. Because maritime law is often referred to by both parties, certain basics of maritime law need to be understood when examining this topic. Their claims include China’s natural prolongation of ‘its’ continental shelf and South Korea’s more internationally accepted median line solution with the submerged feature located well within Seoul’s EEZ. These claims overlap, and Socotra Rock rests within the overlapping area. The crux of the dispute is thus not territorial, but rather one concerning the right to exercise jurisdictional authority while also protecting against ‘foreign’ intervention. These also tie directly into national and regional security concerns, making it important to clarify where international legal practice tends to stand on these questions of equidistance, proportionality, natural prolongation, jurisdiction, and freedom of navigation.


Maritime law Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs) Continental shelf rights 


  1. Amer, Ramses and Li Jianwei. “Maritime Delimitation in the Gulf of Tonkin is Too Important to be Ignored.” ChinaUSFocus, 29/05/2015.
  2. Charney, Jonathan I. “Progress in International Maritime Boundary Delimitation Law,” American Journal of International Law 88, no. 2 (1994): 227–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. China demands S. Korea stop hoisting sunken ship near Ieodo (27/07/2011), Yonhap News Agency.
  4. Cohen, Jerome A. and Jon M. Van Dyke. “Finding its Sea Legs.” South China Morning Post, 26/10/2010.
  5. Fisher, Richard Jr. “South China Sea Competition: China Contemplates More Mischief,” International Assessment and Strategy Center, 28/06/ 2009.
  6. Flenniken, Lauren. “Claiming Ieodo Rock: Maritime boundary disputes remain deadlocked between South Korea and China.” Jeju Weekly, 14/08/2011.
  7. Hsiung, James C. “Sea Power, Law of the Sea, and a Sino-Japanese East China Sea ‘Resource War.’” In China and Japan at Odds: Deciphering the Perpetual Conflict, edited by James C. Hsiung, 133–154. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. International Court of Justice. “North Sea Continental Shelf Cases: Denmark/Federal Judgement of 20 February 1969”.
  9. Ji, Guoxing. “Maritime Jurisdiction in The Three China Seas: Options for Equitable Settlement.” Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation, Policy Paper 19 (1995).
  10. Jung, Sung-ki. “S. Korea to Ask China to Rectify Claim Over Ieodo.” Korea Times, 08/08/2008.
  11. Kang, Byeong-Cheol. “Ieodo, Okinotorishima and International Politics,” Journal of Peace Studies 14, no.2 (2013): 99–118.
  12. Kang, Hyun-kyung. “Lee says Ieodo not territorial dispute.” Korea Times, 12/03/2012.
  13. Kim, Ji-hyun. “China informed Seoul of air defense zone.” Korea Herald, 25/11/2013.
  14. Kim, Se-jeong. “Ieodo seminar explores Korea’s new frontier.” Korea Times, 30/06/2011.
  15. Kim, Young-jin. “Why Ieodo matters.” Korea Times, 18/09/2012.
  16. Lee, Jae-min. “Equitable share of maritime zone.” Korea Herald, 29/12/2015.
  17. Legault, Leonard and Blair Hankey. (1993) “Method, Oppositeness and Adjacency, and Proportionality in Maritime Boundary Delimitation,” 203–242 in Charney, J.I. and Alexander, L.M. (eds.) International Maritime Boundaries, Vol. I, Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff. (1996).Google Scholar
  18. Pan, Junwu. Toward a New Framework for Peaceful Settlement of China’s Territorial and Boundary Disputes. Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 2009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Park, Choon-Ho. “Maritime Claims in the China Seas: Current State Practices,” San Diego Law Review 18, no. 3 (April 1981): 443–454.Google Scholar
  20. Shin, Hae-in. “China demanded S. Korea stop activities near Ieodo.” Korea Herald, 27/07/2011.
  21. United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, Montego Bay, Jamaica, 16 November 1994, United Nations Treaty Series, vol. 1833.
  22. Van Dyke, Jon M. “The Republic of Korea’s Maritime Boundaries,” Honolulu, Hawaii: William S. Richardson School of Law, University of Hawaii at Manoa, 2003.
  23. Van Dyke, Jon M. “Ieodo.” Maritime Boundary Disputes in the East China Sea (conference), Seoul, South Korea, 30/06/2011–01/07/2011.Google Scholar
  24. Zastrow, Mark. “Yellow Sea talks raise hopes for marine science,” Nature 528 (15 December 2015). 1.19027CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Zhao, Quansheng. “China’s Northeast Water Frontiers, East China Sea Disputes and Co-Management Approach.” In: Hao, Yufan, and Bill K. P. Chou (eds.), China’s Policies on its Borderlands and the International Implications. Singapore: World Scientific Publishing, 2011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Zou, Keyuan. “China’s Exclusive Economic Zones and Continental Shelf: Developments, Problems, and Prospects,” Marine Policy 25, no. 1 (2000): 71–81.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Senan Fox
    • 1
  1. 1.Kanazawa UniversityKanazawaJapan

Personalised recommendations