Tap any paragraph to write a margin note. Your notes collect in the Desk below the text and file under cases with @. The side-by-side margin rail opens on a larger screen.

Code · BILL · 117th Congress · H.R. 4521 (EAS) — 112 HR 4521 EAS: United States Innovation and Competition Act of 2021 · Sec. 3230

Sec. 3230. Statement of policy on maritime freedom of operations in international waterways and airspace of the Indo-Pacific and on artificial land features in the South China Sea

752 words·~3 min read·/bill/117/hr/4521/eas/section-3230·

A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.

Congress— condemns coercive and threatening actions or the use of force to impede freedom of operations in international airspace by military or civilian aircraft, to alter the status quo, or to destabilize the Indo-Pacific region; urges the Government of the People’s Republic of China to refrain from implementing the declared East China Sea Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ), or an ADIZ in the South China Sea, which is contrary to freedom of overflight in international airspace, and to refrain from taking similar provocative actions elsewhere in the Indo-Pacific region; reaffirms that the 2016 Permanent Court of Arbitration decision is final and legally binding on both parties and that the People’s Republic of China’s claims to offshore resources across most of the South China Sea are unlawful; and condemns the People’s Republic of China for failing to abide by the 2016 Permanent Court of Arbitration ruling, despite the PRC’s obligations as a state party to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.
It shall be the policy of the United States to— reaffirm its commitment and support for allies and partners in the Indo-Pacific region, including longstanding United States policy regarding Article V of the United States-Philippines Mutual Defense Treaty and reaffirm its position that Article V of the United States-Japan Mutual Defense Treaty applies to the Japanese-administered Senkaku Islands; oppose claims that impinge on the rights, freedoms, and lawful use of the sea, or the airspace above it, that belong to all nations, and oppose the militarization of new and reclaimed land features in the South China Sea; continue certain policies with respect to the PRC claims in the South China Sea, namely— that PRC claims in the South China Sea, including to offshore resources across most of the South China Sea, are unlawful; that the PRC cannot lawfully assert a maritime claim vis-à-vis the Philippines in areas that the Permanent Court of Arbitration found to be in the Philippines’ Exclusive Economic Zone
(EEZ)or on its continental shelf; to reject any PRC claim to waters beyond a 12 nautical mile territorial sea derived from islands it claims in the Spratly Islands; and that the PRC has no lawful territorial or maritime claim to James Shoal; urge all parties to refrain from engaging in destabilizing activities, including illegal occupation or efforts to unlawfully assert administration over disputed claims; ensure that disputes are managed without intimidation, coercion, or force; call on all claimants to clarify or adjust claims in accordance with international law; uphold the principle that territorial and maritime claims, including territorial waters or territorial seas, must be derived from land features and otherwise comport with international law; oppose the imposition of new fishing regulations covering disputed areas in the South China Sea, regulations which have raised tensions in the region; support an effective Code of Conduct, if that Code of Conduct reflects the interests of Southeast Asian claimant states and does not serve as a vehicle for the People’s Republic of China to advance its unlawful maritime claims; reaffirm that an existing body of international rules and guidelines, including the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea, done at London October 12, 1972 (COLREGs), is sufficient to ensure the safety of navigation between the United States Armed Forces and the forces of other countries, including the People’s Republic of China; support the development of regional institutions and bodies, including the ASEAN Regional Forum, the ASEAN Defense Minister’s Meeting Plus, the East Asia Summit, and the expanded ASEAN Maritime Forum, to build practical cooperation in the region and reinforce the role of international law; encourage the deepening of partnerships with other countries in the region for maritime domain awareness and capacity building, as well as efforts by the United States Government to explore the development of appropriate multilateral mechanisms for a common operating picture in the South China Sea among Southeast Asian countries that would serve to help countries avoid destabilizing behavior and deter risky and dangerous activities; oppose actions by any country to prevent any other country from exercising its sovereign rights to the resources of the exclusive economic zone
(EEZ)and continental shelf by making claims to those areas in the South China Sea that have no support in international law; and assure the continuity of operations by the United States in the Indo-Pacific region, including, when appropriate, in cooperation with partners and allies, to reaffirm the principle of freedom of operations in international waters and airspace in accordance with established principles and practices of international law.
★   the supreme law of the land   ★
Don't Tread on Me
E Pluribus Unum — out of many, one

"If you don't know your rights, you don't have any."

Marginalia · a citizen's law index
A research desk, not legal advice. Always read the cited source before relying on a summary.
Questions or an issue? support@self-law.org
disclaimerMarginalia is a research index, not a law firm. Nothing on this site is legal, tax, or financial advice and no attorney–client relationship is formed by using it. Statutes, regulations, and case law change; summaries, search results, AI output, and member posts may be incomplete, out of date, or wrong. Any interpretation drawn from material on this site should be validated by a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction before you act on it.