Chinese scholars and researchers have several times opposed their government’s “perverse” and groundless policy on the “nine-dash line”, also known as the U-shaped line.

Most recently, a Chinese scholar with the pen name Li Woteng wrote an article titled “ The nine-dash line- keep or eliminate” on Sina, the largest internet forum in China. The article has received a wide support from readers and has been re-posted on many personal websites including that of famous Chinese scholar Li Linghua.

Li Linghua wrote in a preface “Mr. Li Woteng’s article is worthy of appreciation.  Our country unilaterally intended to impose the “nine-dash line” on a large part of the 200- square mile- exclusive economic zone defined by the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea and this has caused a series of conflicts and disputes. In an increasingly integrated global economy, our country needs to seriously consider Mr. Li’s proposal and promptly eliminate this “traditional” line to pave the way for resolving the East Sea dispute”.

Here is Li Woteng’s article:

“For the international scholar circle, the key issue in the East Sea is not the sovereignty of islands, but the “nine-dash line”, which should be resolved first to ensure peace in the East Sea. The elimination of the “nine-dash line” is of both theoretical and practical importance. Here is some analysis of the issue:

First, setting up the “nine-dash line” is baseless. All parties in the East Sea have arguments for their sovereignty over islands, but only China’s “nine-dash line” has no basis. In 1936, Bai Mei Chu drew the dashed line during China’s reconstruction without any justification. He wrote “those were the places that our fishermen earned their livelihood and they obviously belong to our sovereignty”.

There is no evidence that people conducted any investigation before drawing that line. So we can say that the line was drawn subjectively.

The “nine-dash line” was officially drawn on the Chinese map when the second map of the East Sea was drawn (at that time, it had 11 dashes). Since then, the “nine-dash line” has had no definition, no one knows what it is, and the government hasn’t got any explanation. There’s an assumption that an official in charge of home affairs Zheng Si Yue drew it on the map arbitrarily”.

Second, the “nine-dash line” is not the sea territory line of China and lacks any legal basis.

China has talked about the “nine-dash line”, but it has never clarified what the “nine-dash line” is. It is ridiculous that the “nine-dash line” has been on the Chinese map for more than 60 years, but Chinese experts still argue about it. The Chinese government has neither declared its opinions nor issued a document or a definition about the “nine-dash line”.

The 9-dash line has been adjusted several times on Chinese maps. The adjustment includes the omission of 2 dashes within the Tonkin Gulf (making the 11-dash line under Chinese Nationalist Party rule the 9-dash line of today) and some other minor changes. This suggests there is no clear legal origin for the 9-dash line. Legally, the 9-dash line does not define China’s territorial waters. The 1992 Law on the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone of the People's Republic of China stipulated that China’s waters extend 12 nautical miles from the baseline. The 1996 Declaration on the Baseline of the Territorial Sea defined the Shisha archipelago (known in Vietnam as the Hoang Sa archipelago) as the baseline. So the waters 12 nautical miles out from this baseline do not belong to China but still are contained within the 9-dash line.

This proves that the 9-dash line is not China’s sea demarcation line. Chinese experts on maritime law have said the 9-dash line is neither a territorial line nor an indication of China’s territory. It just refers to islands claimed by China. So deletion of the line creates no legal difficulty.

This analysis by author Li Woteng from the perspective of history and national legacy was posted on China’s Sina online forum.