In July 2016, an Arbitral Tribunal handed down its award in the South China Sea dispute between the Philippines and China. In addition to considering the legal status of the controversial nine-dash line, the Tribunal also provided the first judicial interpretation of Article 121 of the LOSC, thereby shedding light on what maritime features may be regarded as islands and not rocks within the meaning of that article, and therefore entitled to an exclusive economic zone (EEZ) and continental shelf. This article considers the decision reached by the Tribunal, and the views expressed in the literature, applying them to an analysis that attempts to answer whether the Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands (sovereignty over which is disputed by China and Japan) in the East China Sea would qualify as islands, and thus entitled to an EEZ and as a continental shelf, or as rocks and therefore not so entitled.

中文翻译：

---

钓鱼岛/尖阁诸岛应归为岛礁还是岩礁？从南海仲裁裁决看

2016年7月，仲裁庭就中菲南海争端作出裁决。除了考虑有争议的九段线的法律地位外，仲裁庭还提供了《海洋法公约》第 121 条的第一个司法解释，从而阐明了哪些海地可以被视为岛屿而非岩石。条，因此享有专属经济区 (EEZ) 和大陆架。本文考虑了仲裁庭的裁决和文献中表达的观点，将其应用于试图回答东海钓鱼岛/尖阁列岛（中日有争议的主权）是否会被有资格作为岛屿，因此有权享有专属经济区和大陆架，