|
Abstract Coastal states are entitled to certain sovereign rights and jurisdictions in the EEZ according to the UNCLOS, which also prescribes the freedom of navigation for non-coastal states. Theoretically, there is no substantial conflict between the jurisdiction of coastal states to ensure maritime security and the freedom of navigation of noncoastal states. Nevertheless, for the maintenances of its maritime hegemony, the US implements the Freedom of Navigation (FON) program in China's EEZ actively and arbitrarily, which threats the maritime security and freedom of navigation in the EEZ concerned. Jurisprudential study of the relationship between maritime security and freedom of navigation indicates the freedom of navigation in the waters beyond the high sea is not absolute and its relativity or restrictions emanate from the international obligations to take into account the security of coastal states. The comparative study of the freedom of navigation of different categories of ships as well as the freedom in different marine zones demonstrates that the freedom of warship in the EEZ should not prejudice the security of coastal states, especially the nontraditional security of the sea. The Sino-US conflicts in the USNS Impeccable and American Unmanned Underwater Vehicle（UUV）incidents in the SCS are the expressions of the US cost imposition strategy against China. The empirical analysis of such conflicts suggests that the freedom of US warships in China's EEZ and their related activities therein should be subject to the jurisdiction of the coastal state for the purpose of maritime security.
|
|
|
|
|
|
