One:
China has spent nearly $1 billion on an ultra-deepwater rig that appears intended to explore disputed areas of the South China Sea, one of Asia's most volatile hotspots and where the United States is strengthening ties with Beijing's rival claimants.
And two:
China on Thursday "vehemently opposed" a Vietnamese law asserting sovereignty over islands in disputed waters, the latest escalation in tensions over the resource-rich South China Sea.
The row comes days after an easing in a months-long stand-off between China and the Philippines, but shows the persistent cycle of territorial frictions triggered by what some see as Beijing's growing assertiveness in the area.
As China attempts to connect the dots of land in the South China Sea to create seamless Chinese territory, advocates of the law of the sea treaty shouldn't be allowed to imply that our signing of the treaty will prevent such disputes or help solve them.
Not that I'm saying that China has no legitimate claims or that all of China's neighbors' claims are valid. But China's claim to all of it and their conclusions about what that means are not legitimate and not in our interests.
And the treaty we have not ratified simply does not apply to these little dots of land and the disputes over who owns them.
I just don't understand why the UN law of the sea is so important to our interests.
