Traditional realist international relations theory distinguishes “Political Dispute” from “Legal Dispute,” and maintains that the former is non-justiciable. When ‘Political Dispute’ acquires state consent and enters into the international legal procedures, judges should take into account the logic of international politics and prudential judicial decisions so as to leave some room for political/diplomatic settlements of such disputes in the future. As regards the settlements of international disputes, China has not used such labels as “Political Dispute” or “Legal Dispute,” but in practice China abides by the non-justiciability doctrine and its extended principles for “Political Dispute.” The South China Sea dispute between China and the Philippines is one typical “Political Dispute.” Therefore, it is necessary not only to prove the illegality of the appeals filed by the Philippine and the awards rendered by the Arbitral Tribunal, but also to disclose their unorthodox nature from the perspective of international politics.