History and sovereignty of the South China Sea

Let's start with the January 1974 legal opinion of the British Foreign Office, which not only stated that the Spratly Islands belonged to China, but also concluded on the basis of a Chinese-style historical title that the islands had been a place for Chinese citizens to fish and collect guano since ancient times. This raises the fundamental question of the method of presenting archival material, whose concept of international law determines which archival material is relevant? Is it the dominant Western positivist view in international tribunals, or is it the Chinese view, which is based on historic rights and their use? Obviously, it was the use and economic activity of these islands that convinced the British that they belonged to China. These islands are the basis of economic life, which refers to the life of citizens rather than the formal acts of national jurisdiction. It is clear that it is theoretically impossible to convince modern international tribunals to admit the latter as legally meaningful evidence. British counsel cites the results of a survey on the history of China's economic activities in Nanhai Zhudao: "Based on U.S. sources...... The islands...... Since ancient times, Chinese fishermen have visited every year.They fish in the surrounding waters and inhabit the island irregularly. This is confirmed by the records of our Colonial Department (since 1891). The islands are visited every year by Chinese sampans that fish for sea turtles. There is no evidence that we believed that the Spratly Islands belonged to China in the seventies of the nineteenth century, or that China protested against our activities at that time...... It seems that China has taken advantage of all the appropriate occasions to protest...... It is almost certain that China has not allowed its claims to be weakened by the statute of limitations since the thirties of the twentieth century. I think it is likely that these islands were already under Chinese sovereignty in the thirties of the twentieth century, or that they belonged to China long before 1877, or that Chinese ownership was resurrected when British claims died out naturally. ”