BEIJING has furiously rejected an international tribunal ruling Tuesday that rendered its claims in the South China Sea invalid and dealt a devastating diplomatic blow to its ambitions in the resource-rich region.

China asserts sovereignty over almost all of the strategically vital waters, despite rival claims from its Southeast Asian neighbours, most notably the Philippines.

But last night a UN-backed tribunal in The Hague — the Permanent Court of Arbitration — ruled that China has no historic rights to the area.

Manila — which had lodged the suit against Beijing — welcomed the decision, as China, having boycotted the proceedings, said it “neither accepts nor recognises” the ruling.

“The award is null and void and has no binding force,” China’s foreign ministry said in a statement published by Xinhua.

President Xi Jinping said the islands have been Chinese territory since ancient times and Beijing will not accept any action based on the decision, according to the official Xinhua news agency.

The Asian giant’s Ambassador to the Netherlands Wu Ken was meanwhile quoted by Xinhua as saying “today is ‘black Tuesday for The Hague” and that “the ruling “dishonours international law”.

BISHOP URGES COMPLIANCE

China would face serious reputation costs if it ignores the international court ruling on the South China Sea, Foreign Minister Julie Bishop warned this morning.

Ms Bishop told ABC radio China’s reputation would suffer as a result, insisting relations with the international community were crucial to its rise as a super power.

“To ignore it would be a serious international transgression,” she said.

Commentary: we do not claim an inch of land not belong to us, won’t give up anything is ours https://t.co/JC1moUt0pT pic.twitter.com/0I0Pt1jofS — People's Daily,China (@PDChina) July 12, 2016

Ms Bishop said it was an important test case for how the region could manage disputes peacefully and called on both China and The Philippines to respect the ruling.

“It is final and legally binding on both of them.”

Ms Bishop said she expected to speak with international counterparts in coming days and expected the ruling to be discussed at the upcoming ASEAN and East Asia Summit meetings in mid-July. She said Australian ships and aircraft would continue to exercise freedom of navigation rights in the region.

‘ARMED FORCES’ WILL SAFEGUARD CLAIM: CHINA

The court on Tuesday night ruled that the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea superseded China’s 69-year-old claim to roughly 85 per cent of the disputed territory.

China boycotted the hearing, disputing the court’s jurisdiction to hear the case.

Even before the ruling was handed down, China rejected the decision.

“No matter what kind of ruling is to be made, Chinese armed forces will firmly safeguard national sovereignty, security and maritime interests and rights, firmly uphold regional peace and stability, and deal with all kinds of threats and challenges,” China’s Defence Ministry said in a statement shortly before the ruling was made public.

China’s claims, which include waters approaching neighbouring countries, are based on a vaguely defined “nine-dash-line” found on a 1940s Chinese map.

The row has embroiled the United States, which has deployed aircraft carriers and a host of other vessels to assert freedom of navigation in the waters — through which one-third of the global oil trade passes.

China says that its fishermen have visited the area for centuries, but the PCA tribunal said that under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), Beijing had no exclusive control of it.

Any historic rights were “extinguished” when it signed up to UNCLOS, it said, and there was “no legal basis for China to claim historic rights to resources within the sea areas falling within the ‘nine-dash line’,” it said.

Crucially, it ruled that none of the Spratlys, a chain of outcrops in the south of the sea, were “islands” under the meaning of UNCLOS, and thus whoever had sovereignty over them — an issue it did not address — was not entitled to 200-nautical-mile exclusive economic zones (EEZs) of their own.

Some sea areas were therefore definitely in the Philippines’ EEZ, it said, as they were “not overlapped by any possible entitlement of China”.

China had violated the Philippines’ sovereign rights in its EEZ and the artificial islands Beijing has been furiously building in recent years — reshaping the area in an effort to bolster its claim — have inflicted severe environmental damage, it added.

What is China up to in the South China Sea? Despite competing claims and rising tensions, China insists it maintains territorial sovereignty over the South China Sea.

‘BRANDED AS AN OUTLAW’

The damning decision was “as unfavourable to China as it can be”, said Yanmei Xie, China analyst for the International Crisis Group.

The award by the five-member panel — chaired by a Ghanaian -- “overwhelmingly favours the Philippines — a huge win,” said M. Taylor Fravel of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

China has consistently said the tribunal does not have jurisdiction on the issue and Xinhua reported the ruling under the headline: “Law-abusing tribunal issues ill-founded award”.

In Washington, the State Department said the ruling was an “important contribution” to resolving regional disputes and should be seen as “final and legally binding”.

#BREAKING: China says it has historic rights in South China Sea pic.twitter.com/BPbbQG7PKe — China Xinhua News (@XHNews) July 12, 2016

China is a permanent member of the UN Security Council and has been seeking a greater role on the global diplomatic stage, and will not want to be seen as a violator of international law.

But how the decision could be enforced remains open to question, Richard Heydarian, a political analyst at De La Salle University in Manila, told AFP.

Xinhua cited Foreign Minister Wang Yi as saying China would remain committed to peaceful settlement of disputes through consultation and negotiation.

TOUGH REACTION

Beijing has held naval drills between the Paracels and the southern Chinese island of Hainan in recent days, while US Pacific Command said on Twitter that the aircraft carrier USS Ronald Reagan had launched flight operations to support “security, stability” in the South China Sea.

Bonnie Glaser of the Centre for Strategic and International Studies told AFP: “I expect a very tough reaction from China since it has lost on almost every point.”

China could choose to withdraw from UNCLOS, or begin building on Scarborough Shoal, which it seized from the Philippines in 2012 — which Washington would view as a provocation.Beijing could also declare an air defence identification zone over the South China Sea, claiming the right to interrogate aircraft passing through the airspace, or try to remove a ship grounded by Manila on Second Thomas Shoal for use as a base.

The Philippines, which had lodged the suit in 2013, welcomed the “milestone decision”, and foreign secretary Perfecto Yasay said: “We call on all those concerned to exercise restraint and sobriety.” Nationalist demonstrations are not rare in China, sometimes apparently with the tacit backing of authorities, and the Philippine embassy in Beijing has warned its citizens to beware of personal “threats”.

Chinese police sealed off the street where the mission stands.

SOUTH CHINA SEA EXPLAINED

What’s there and who’s disputing it?

It’s mostly empty, and hundreds of the small islands, islets and rocks are not naturally able to support human settlement. Significant chains include the Paracels in the north, and the Spratlys in the south. But everyone surrounding the sea — Vietnam, Malaysia, the Philippines, tiny Brunei, Taiwan and, most significantly, China — lay claim to some part of it.

If there’s nothing there, why is there any dispute?

Scientists believe that the seabed could contain unexploited oil, gas and minerals, which would be a boon to any country that can establish their claims to the region’s waters, especially in resource-hungry Asia. It’s also home to abundant fisheries that feed growing populations.

But the sea’s key value is strategic. Shipping lanes vital to world trade pass through it, carrying everything from raw materials to finished products, as well as enormous quantities of oil.

Beijing views the South China Sea as its own backyard, a place where it is entitled to free, uninterrupted rein and where its growing navy should be able to operate unhampered.

How are these disputes playing out?

For years, claimants have been building up the tiny reefs and islets to bolster their claims to ownership. China’s land-reclamation program has been particularly aggressive.

Satellite pictures now show inhabited islands where there was once only submerged coral and many have multiple facilities, including some with runways long enough for huge planes.

Beijing insists its intent is peaceful but the US and others suspect China is trying to assert its sovereignty claims and say that it could pose threats to the free passage of ships.

Washington says the waters are international and regularly sends its warships there on so-called “Freedom of Navigation” missions.

China says these missions are provocations and warns the US not to interfere. It regularly stages its own exercises in the area as a show of force.

Is the tribunal’s finding legally binding?

A five-member tribunal of maritime affairs experts in The Hague issued its ruling, after a bitter dispute between Beijing and the Philippines continued, in a closely-watched cased that risks ratcheting up tensions in Southeast Asia.

The tribunal set up by the Permanent Court of Arbitration is allowed to arbitrate on matters of international law, including the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).

It has the power to make a decision that cannot be appealed.

However the tribunal and the PCA have no means to enforce the verdict, with compliance left to the parties concerned.

Manila and its allies — including the United States — say China will nevertheless be bound by the ruling.

But Beijing has said from the start that the tribunal is invalid and gas boycotted its proceedings.