Hacker News Reader

This recent ruling is absurd in that it redefines the concept of island. For example, the largest island in South China Sea, Taiping Island, which has natural fresh water, and is continuously populated by Taiwan since WWII, is no longer considered an island. If this ruling is to be followed, many countries claims on islands all over the planet would be null and void, including some of USA's.

View on HN

I'm no international law lawyer, and didn't really look too much into the details of the "ruling", which I think, as any law, would be pointless unless there's enforcement (by whom?). It just baffles me that an article about the "history" of something didn't mention one of the first questions regarding the history of anything: where does it come from? It's not that hard to look up, it's right there in the first sentence on wikipedia....

You are misreading the ruling. It doesn't say that Itu Aba (Taiping Island) isn't an island. What it says is that Itu Aba is a maritime feature that "cannot sustain human habitation or an economic life of their own". Every high-tide elevation of this sort is referred to as "rock" in UNCLOS.

Being a "rock" here doesn't mean it's not an island; it simply means the maritime feature concerned -- should it be an island, an islet, a reef or whatever -- is not entitled to the full rights (i.e. having an exclusive economic zone and a continental shelf) of a full-fledged island. The concept of "rock" here is not a geological one but a legal one.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com