(This story originally appeared in on Jul 14, 2016)

NEW DELHI: The South China Sea award, which demolished China's historical claims regarding the "nine-dash line", could have implications for the India-China territorial dispute in Arunachal Pradesh It's not merely in the seas that China claims historical sovereignty. Arunachal, particularly Tawang , has been claimed by China as southern Tibet. That "claim" has been at the heart of the dispute between China and India.China analyst Claude Arpi said, "For the first time, an international verdict has rebutted one of China's numerous claims. This could be important for India".In crystal clear language, the most important part of the tribunal's award is the unequivocal quashing of Chinese claims on the famed "nine-dash line"."The tribunal concluded that, to the extent China had historic (sic) rights to resources in the waters of the South China Sea, such rights were extinguished to the extent they were incompatible with the exclusive economic zones provided for in the (UN) convention... Tribunal concluded that there was no legal basis for China to claim historic (sic) rights to resources within the sea areas falling within the 'nine-dash line'," the United Nations tribunal said.Srikanth Kondapalli, a professor in Chinese Studies at JNU, said, "China's historical claims don't apply to Arunachal. India has never bought this historical argument on Tibet." Since 2010, India has stopped supporting the one-China policy.Kondapalli said, in 1914, the Simla Conference, which resulted in the MacMahon Line, was initialled by Chen Yifan from the nationalist government. While the document was not expanded into a treaty later, according to international law, he said, initialling implies freezing of negotiations. So, Kondapalli said, the historical argument cannot be extended to cover Arunachal Pradesh, which can, at best be described as a semi-legal case. This could give India more ammunition to fight the stapled visas issue with China.Experts believe, while China will not back down from its aggressive stand, the verdict from The Hague means other nations will interpret this as support for their claims too.