Disputes in the South China Sea, Freedom of navigation operations, Paracel Islands, Spratly Islands
Disputes in the South China Sea involve
maritime as well as island claims among various states within this region
including People's Republic of China, Brunei, Malaysia, Indonesia, Vietnam, and
Philippines. The US is also a competing party as an extra-regional state. The
involvement of these states shows the importance of the South China Sea which
is rich in energy sources, fisheries, and strategic transport routes.
According to an estimate, global trade of
over 3.37 trillion dollars is carried out through the routes that pass through
this region. This volume accounts for about one-third of the total global
maritime trade. Moreover, 80% of Chinese energy imports and about 40% of the
total trade of China passes through the South China Sea (ChinaPower, 2020). Thus, the South China Sea is
of great importance for China as well as other claimants. The disputes in the
Sea involve reefs, islands, banks, and other features such as Paracel Islands,
Spratly Islands, Scarborough Shoal, and many other boundary regions in Gulf of
Tonkin (Keck, 2014).
Historical accounts refer to the French
control on some features of the South China Sea regions during the 1930s. Japan
also used many islands in the South China Sea during World War II and asserted
that it got control of them when no one had claimed them. Japan had to withdraw
its control after the Treaty of San Francisco in 1951. But, this treaty could
not specify the islands' new status. Meanwhile, the People's Republic of China
got control of many of these regions by making claims during negotiations of
1951 treaty and "First Taiwan Strait Crisis" in 1958 (Morley & Nishihara, 1997).
Beijing’s position on South China Sea regions
is that the banks, islands, shoals, and surrounding waters of Nansha, Xisha,
Zongsha, as well as Dongsha archipelagos are the indisputable parts of Chinese
historical territory. Whereas, Malaysia, Brunei, Vietnam, Taiwan, and the
Philippines also have overlapping claims in this region. But, China considers
all these claims invalid. China believes that all these territorial features
are historical and ancestral properties of China passed down by previous
generations. China argues that its activities in the South China Sea started about
2000 years ago.
Moreover, China claims that it was the first country to discover, name,
and explore the resources of the South China Sea. China also claims that maps
of these islands were even published in Qing and Ming dynasties. Chinese
authorities also argue that territorial claims of other claimants did not include
the marine features in the dashed-line region until the 1970s. Thus, China
considers the claims of other countries recent and politically motivated (Institute for Security and Development Policy, 2016).
Whereas, the US, as an extra-regional state
in the region, also has eyes on the trade routes and resources of the South
China Sea. US insists to implement the centrality of international law to
address this issue. The official stance of the US demands all the claimants to
stop the use of force in order to resolve the sovereignty disputes. The US also
believes in freedom of navigation that allows unimpeded navigation for private,
commercial, and military aircraft and vessel within the area. Moreover, the US
also emphasizes that all maritime entitlements to the South China Sea's waters
should be on the basis of international law (McDevitt,
2014).
China disagrees with the opinion of the US
regarding "high seas freedom" that involve peaceful military and
commercial movements in the exclusive economic zone of coastal regions. These
disagreements have resulted in many serious incidents including mid-air
collision between US surveillance aircraft (EP-3) and Chinese navy intercepting
fighter in 2001. Recently, a close intercept of P-8 maritime patrol aircraft of
the US navy also caused another diplomatic issue.
Since 2013, China resorted to the building of
island in Paracel Islands and Spratly Islands region. These actions were
condemned at the international level (McDevitt,
2014). After 2015, the US and other countries including France and the
UK started conducting freedom of navigation operations in these regions. Moreover,
Arbitration tribunal under UNCLOS ("United Nations Convention on the Law
of the Sea) also ruled against the claims of China in the Philippines vs China
case. China and Taiwan refused to recognize the tribunal and insisted to
resolve the matter through bilateral dialogue.
Furthermore, China showed its lead in the sovereignty
dispute by entering non-military ships into the waters where other countries
have claims. This allowed China to flex its muscle without diplomatic losses.
But, pushbacks from the Philippines and Malaysia kept China from extending its
control on the whole South China Sea. Moreover, most of the Southeast Asian
states still expect that the US will keep Beijing in check, if needed, by
moving its military ships into the sea.
China
and10-member South East Asian Nations' association (including 4 maritime
claimants of the region) are due to restart the dialogue process in order to
conclude some code of conduct that can help avert any mishap in future. The
chances of the clash between two world powers i.e. the US and China will also
decrease if the claimants sign some code of conduct with the consent of China.
Moreover, China may work with claimants economically to ease the
tensions. For example, China has already been financing in the field of infrastructure
construction in the Philippines. Philippines' administration also agreed to
work on joint oil and gas development projects in the region. China is also
willing to develop such relations with other regional claimants in the South
China Sea region. Thus, if the regional powers agree to a common point, it can help
reduce the interference of extra-regional forces in the South China Sea region.
Sources
ChinaPower. (2020). How Much
Trade Transits the South China Sea?. Retrieved 12 September 2020, from https://chinapower.csis.org/much-trade-transits-south-china-sea/
Institute for Security and
Development Policy. (2016). Understanding China’s Position on the South China
Sea Disputes. Retrieved 12 September 2020, from https://isdp.eu/publication/understanding-chinas-position-south-china-sea-disputes/
Keck, Z. (2014). China’s
Newest Maritime Dispute. Retrieved 12 September 2020, from https://thediplomat.com/2014/03/chinas-newest-maritime-dispute/
McDevitt, M. (2014). The
South China Sea: Assessing US Policy and Options for the Future. CNA
Occasional Paper, 1-92.
Morley, J. W., &
Nishihara, M. (Eds.). (1997). Vietnam joins the world. ME Sharpe.
Comments
Post a Comment