The South China Sea channels a third of the world’s shipping and is rich with fisheries, oil and gas deposits. It is also one of the most disputed areas in Southeast Asia and there have been scuffles between countries in recent years. Seven sovereign states, namely Brunei, China, Taiwan, Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines and Vietnam, have been contending over territory within the region of the South China Sea for centuries. Examples of these territorial clashes include claims in the maritime boundary in the Gulf of Tonkin as well as in maritime boundaries off the coasts of Vietnam, Philippines, Malaysia and Brunei. Of course, the argument also involves overlapping claims among the various island chains of the South China Sea basin, including the Spratly Islands and the Paracel Islands, of which have contributed to the intensifying strains between several countries lately.
Personally, I believe that there are several factors as to why so many countries are fighting relentlessly for sovereignty over the two island groups (as depicted in news reports in recent months). Firstly, it is believed that the region around the Spratlys and Paracels is sitting atop vast oil and gas deposits. However, as there has been little detailed exploration of the area, estimates are largely extrapolated from the mineral wealth of the neighbouring area. This approximation ranges from 28 billion barrels to 213 billion barrels, which are figures the U.S. Geological Survey (28 m.) and the Chinese officials (213 m.) have given respectively. Secondly, the abundant fishing prospects within the region are another incentive. In 1988, the South China Sea is believed to be accounted for 8% of world fishing catches, a figure that has grown since then. Combined wit...
... middle of paper ...
...d set of guidelines for determining national autonomy over territory in the face of competing factual claims. Governments are unwilling to “lose” boundary disputes since they might lose out on economic, political and/or social gains. As such, I believe that these conflicts can only be resolved by reaching a compromise that will benefit the various parties involved. Examples of such approaches include: joint management and exploitation of contested or shared resources (mineral/oil reserves or fishery stocks etc.), joint regulation, or cooperative sharing, of contested and/or shared resources (grazing rights and/or water supplies etc.), negotiated access to the sea for landlocked states or through territorial waters for neighboring states and/or commitments to respect the cultural, historical, or social heritage, as well as political autonomy of national minorities.
In the book Red Star Over the Pacific: China’s Rise and the Challenge of U.S. Maritime Strategy, the authors discuss their interpretation of Chinese strategy as it relates to the U.S. maritime power in the Western Pacific. Dr. Yoshihara and Dr. Holmes postulate that Chinese strategists have studied Alfred Thayer Mahan’s theories of sea power. He further expounds on “China’s ability to harness such power against others or to nullify the overbearing power adversaries hold in important sea areas.”1 The book continues by presenting an argument that Chinese strategist use a combination of Mahan and Mao Zedong to cover the strategic and operational levels of war for the ultimate purpose of building maritime power in order to build a great nation. This may be one explanation for current Chinese strategy, but is there another, possibly more practical explanation? This paper will present an alternate, more practical approach to today’s Chinese strategy. Contrary to a Mahanian approach, China bases its strategy on the practical needs of a great nation undergoing a ‘peaceful development’ supported by concepts from the Chinese military classics. In essence, the development of Chinese Anti-Access/Area-Denial (A2/AD) and maritime capabilities comes as a result of the need to maintain social harmony and safeguard national interests, not in order to develop command at sea as Mahan theorizes.
The Takeshima/Dokdo Island, also known as the Liancourt Rocks by other nations, is an island that is located 215km away from mainland Korea while and is also located 250km away from Japan and has been a very well known cause for Japan and Korea to fight over. The two countries have been arguing against one another trying to declare that the island actually belongs to them, rather than trying to find peaceful talks of resolving such an issue. Such dispute did not occur in recent years, but has been going on for decades, from the Japanese declaring annexation in the early 1900s until today, where the current Korean president does not feel there i...
Thomas Wright’s “The Fall of the Unipolar Concert” describes the decline of U.S. global power to other states like Russia and China. It claims that these countries have been initiating revisionist and power balancing measures that threaten U.S. global hegemony. Russia brings back a light red scare by annexing Crimea to stop the expansion of the European Union and NATO, building up its military capabilities, and executing special military operations (Wright, 8). China has strengthen its claims on the South China Sea through aggressive marine operations which have created tensions with Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia, Brunei and the United States. China has station and intimidated the surrounding countries where they claim as their economic exclusion zones while blocking the U.S.’s freedom to navigate the waters.
Krasner, Stephen D.. Power, the state, and sovereignty: essays on international relations. London: Routledge, 2009. Print.
Second, they desire to see no territorial changes that do not accord with the freely expressed wishes of the peoples concerned;
Thus, international organizations must actively ensure the rights of impoverished indigenous “states within states”: The right to “exchange equitably” (Rose 234) as autonomous states with nation states is the basis for the new politically explosive global phenomenon (Neisen 1) of indigenous sovereignty and cultural autonomy.
The first interpretation of sovereignty that is examined by Flanagan views sovereignty in an international sense. Sovereignty for these leaders means gaining more international power and acceptance. Flanagan argues that major international bodies such as the United Nations will be accepting such an attempt at sovereignty (71). As the second largest country in the world the geographical constraints on uniting Aboriginal people living across the country plays a significant factor. Flanagan also points to the diversity within this group; there are over six hundred bands across the ten provinces in Canada in more than 2,200 reserves. Compounding the geographical constraints facing their unity, Aboriginal bands in Canada often differ from each other significantly in their culture including language religion/customs (Flanagan 71). Many Aboriginal people now choose to live off reserve which further complicates their unity (Flanagan 73). Flanagan highlights that as many small bodies they would not be able to survive in the competition of the international community. Current international governance is extremely complex and Flanagan argues it is unlikely for poor isolated people to succeed (73). One united aboriginal voice is also highly unlikely according to Flanagan; having been freed of one power most bands would not choose to become conne...
It is important to recognize Indigenous people’s right to self-determination and self-governance because it involves the state’s obligation to protect the rights of all its people. The government has a legal obligation to consult with Aboriginal groups when it involves activities that interfere with their treaty rights. Academic critics of Aboriginal rights and Indigenous self-government, such as Tom Flanageans, have argued that Europeans used individual title to property as a method to “dismantle indigenous communities” by separating the land from collective ownership to individual property (Coates, 2008, p.12). The depth of concern on these issues should not be underestimated since it involves fundamental concepts of fairness and equality within the justice
When China Ruled the Seas: The reassure fleet of the dragon throne, (1405-1433) by Louise Levathes
The presumption is that a state jurisdiction is territorial and if each State has jurisdiction over its own territory, consequently, other States do not have jurisdiction over those affairs in line with the international law principles of non-intervention and sovereign equality of States . In fact, territorial jurisdiction is universally recognized. However, as Ryngaert points out, jurisdiction is not only linked with sovereign and is no exclusively of domestic concern (Ryngaert, p. 7), making reference to the “extra-territorial
Due to the presence of natural resources a country may be subjected to Geopolitical fights and
Given these sets of circumstances, china, Taiwan and United States have much to gain and even more to lose if an armed conflict erupts in the Taiwan Strait. All three countries have political, economic, and national security issues involved and united states and china are both in competition economic...
The belief of a nation running their own state is a right for most of us. However, this is only a new conviction. The right for one to sovereign their own nation has come due with hard work. Illicit imperialism has stricken humanity for numerous years. Due to the aspiration of power certain nations today do not self-govern their own state. But why would there be a desire for this power? Some of the main items include natural resources, increased assets, and military expansion. Ideally this is great if this is voluntary external rule, but when it’s no longer voluntary this is when the boundary has been crossed. This is why every nation should have control over their own state if they desire.
...t state autonomy cannot be restricted by anything but the community (state) itself. As one might assume, it follows from these differing standpoints that the way each theory view intervention, etc., will be in opposition. (Steve Smith, The Globalisation of World Politics: An Introduction to International Relations p. 173A)
Before we delve deeper into this topic, it is imperative to properly provide a definition of sovereignty and lay down some foundation on this topic. There are four different definitions of sovereignty – international legal sovereignty, Westphalia sovereignty, domestic sovereignty and interdependence sovereignty. International legal sovereignty deals with “the practices associated with mutual recognition, usually between territorial entities that have formal juridical independence” (Krasner 4). The main definition of sovereignty that this paper will use is the ...