It is unlikely that the decision by The Hague on the Philippines case will settle all of these matters. That said, one can envision a path forward, beginning with an immediate freeze on all activities in the disputed territories. That would lower tensions, allowing everyone to take a deep breath.

The once anticipated expansive maritime entitlements of numerous small maritime features have now been determined to possess nothing greater than a 12 nautical mile territorial sea. Now, all of the claimants in the South China Sea should be able to step back and reassess how they view the region both diplomatically and peacefully.

As China’s commercial and security interests expand, the Chinese Navy, like its US counterpart, may also wish to conduct more passages through international sea lanes, even if they are in the territorial sea of other countries. Anti-piracy cooperation off the coast of Somalia is an example that could prove to show a path to compromise without harming either country’s security goals.

The author argues that China should work to bring the Code of Conduct it has been discussing with ASEAN to a conclusion and continue to engage concerned states in dialogue. He also cautions that Washington must be careful not to inadvertently contribute to the militarization of the region.

Following an international tribunal's announcement of its ruling on the South China Sea disputes between the Philippines and China, Chinese scholar Shen Dingli argues the Permanent Court of Arbitration overreached to consider a case which is about sovereignty in nature, adding the ruling runs counter to what an international convention is all about - respecting the rule of law while contributing to reconciliation.

The US “freedom of navigation” operations are nothing but an exercise of double standards and selective enforcement, as evidenced by the uneven treatment of Japan and China. The operations’ real purpose is to ensure American interests. The professed aim of upholding international law or UNCLOS is just a façade.

Manilla’s arbitration requests in the South China Sea concern the standing of “historic rights”; the status of certain land features in these waters and the maritime entitlements they are capable of generating; and the lawfulness of certain Chinese land reclamation and law enforcement actions. Likely neither Beijing nor Manilla will walk away dejected, however.

Without strict maritime law to monitor fishing activities in common waters, over exploitation and diplomatic wrangling can ensue. The Philippines and China can adopt informal mechanisms, which can even serve as the bedrock for more robust cooperation.

In the South China Sea dispute, the US position has been inconsistent with itself and with norms of international law, breeding misunderstanding and suspicion. The result has raised the political temperature in the region, and could lead to undesirable results for all parties.

The U.S. State Department released a study of China’s “nine-dash line” in December, analyzing the legal basis in maritime law. Sourabh Gupta critiques this analysis, stating that as long as China limits these activities to traditional fishing - not resource development or marine scientific research – and exercises them on a non-exclusive basis, the nine-dash line as a perimeter of China’s is not inconsistent with international law.