Editor's note: Yu Minna is a lecturer at the Ocean University of China (OUC) Law School and research fellow at the OUC's Institute of Marine Development. The article reflects the author's opinions and not necessarily the views of CGTN.
On August 25, the China Institute for Marine Development Strategy under the Ministry of Natural Resources released the "Legal Assessment of the United States' 'freedom of navigation.'" Based on international law, the report conducted a comprehensive evaluation and thorough examination of the U.S. Freedom of Navigation Program and its related operations, exposing the unlawful nature, irrationality, and double standards of the U.S.-style freedom of navigation.
The United States claims that the purpose of its Freedom of Navigation Program is to challenge other countries' "excessive maritime claims" and safeguard its right to navigate in "international waters" beyond any state's territorial sea. However, the U.S.-style freedom of navigation is not the freedom of navigation under the law of the sea. It lacks any legal foundation in both the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and customary international law. In essence, it functions as an operational tool of Washington's global and regional maritime strategies, amounting to a concrete deployment of power projection. At the operational level, it violates the fundamental principle prohibiting the threat or use of force, thereby undermining peace and stability in the global maritime order.
Whether a country's maritime claim is "excessive" should be determined in accordance with international legal rules, including UNCLOS, rather than by the unilateral will and interest of the United States alone. The summary of the "Fiscal Year 2024 Freedom of Navigation Operations Report," released by the U.S. Department of Defense on August 11, 2025, continues to regard the issue of innocent passage of warships in territorial seas as the top challenge to its Freedom of Navigation Program, explicitly listing China, Vietnam, Croatia, Estonia, Yemen and other countries as challengers. In response, China's "Legal Assessment" reviews the international negotiations and treaty-making history of the innocent passage regime under UNCLOS, surveys current state practices concerning the right of innocent passage for warships, and notes that at least 44 countries worldwide require prior notification or approval for foreign warships to enter their territorial seas. This reveals that the U.S. assertion that "foreign warships do not need prior notification or approval to enter territorial seas" is not an established rule of international law, and that its corresponding actions lack a basis in international law.
The term "international waters," as unilaterally asserted by the United States, is not a recognized concept in international law. It is merely an informal expression created and used unilaterally by the U.S. and does not conform to the modern law of the sea's division of marine spaces or its definition of the legal status of maritime zones. UNCLOS categorizes global oceans into areas under the jurisdiction of coastal states – territorial sea, contiguous zone, exclusive economic zone and continental shelf – and areas beyond national jurisdiction: high seas and the international seabed area. It also provides specific rules for the legal status and passage regimes of certain special maritime zones, such as archipelagic waters and straits used for international navigation. The U.S. notion of "international waters" has no basis either in UNCLOS or in customary international law. By using "international waters" to refer to all maritime areas beyond the territorial sea and promoting unrestricted freedom of navigation and overflight, the U.S. clearly departs from and conflicts with the modern law of the sea regime.
The summary of the U.S. Fiscal Year 2024 Freedom of Navigation Operations Report specifically identifies China's claim of historic rights in the South China Sea as an "excessive maritime claim" – the only such claim singled out as requiring repeated and prioritized challenges and for a coordinated response with U.S. allies and partners.
UNCLOS forms the foundation of the law of the sea, but it does not encompass all of it. As stated in the preamble of UNCLOS, matters not regulated by UNCLOS continue to be governed by the rules and principles of general international law.
The concept of historic rights is widely recognized in international law. UNCLOS itself makes multiple references to historical bays or titles, and international jurisprudence has also taken historic rights into account and affirmed their relevance in matters such as maritime boundary delimitation. Moreover, China's claim of historic rights in the South China Sea is supported by substantial historical evidence.
Therefore, China's historical rights in the South China Sea are protected under international law. The existence of maritime disputes does not diminish the legitimacy of China's claim, nor should it be mischaracterized as an "excessive maritime claim."
For a long time, China has been committed to building the South China Sea into a sea of peace, friendship and cooperation. It has actively addressed South China Sea issues through peaceful means such as negotiations and consultations. While asserting sovereignty and sovereign rights over the islands, reefs, and waters of the South China Sea, China has never restricted the rights of navigation and overflight enjoyed by foreign vessels and aircraft in accordance with international law.
According to the 2024 Report on Navigation and Overflight in the South China Sea, regional and extra-regional countries collectively record over 20,000 annual ship-days of surface naval presence, conduct more than 30,000 military aircraft sorties, and carry out hundreds of large-scale drills and thousands of other exercises. Each year, the U.S. Navy sustains approximately 1,600 ship-days of surface vessel presence and an undisclosed number of submarine (combat vessel) deployments in the South China Sea, along with more than 3,000 ship-days of auxiliary vessel operations. In total, the U.S. Air Force, Navy, Marine Corps and Army conduct approximately 8,000 aircraft sorties annually in the region, including reconnaissance, transport, refueling, fighter and bomber missions.
These figures demonstrate that the South China Sea is the most open sea in the world, with China never restricting or interfering with lawful navigation and overflight activities by any state. However, in the face of activities that violate international law or infringe upon national sovereignty and sovereign rights, China reserves the right to take necessary measures to safeguard its legitimate interests.
"Freedom of navigation," as claimed by the United States, far extends far beyond the meaning of freedom of navigation under the law of the sea. Its purpose is to uphold the U.S. unilateral assertions of freedom of navigation for warships and freedom of military presence at sea. In essence, it represents an attempt to challenge the sovereignty and sovereign rights of other states through armed deterrence, violating the UN Charter's prohibition on the threat or use of force. Such actions are highly likely to provoke maritime confrontation and escalate regional risks.