Southeast Asia: The South China Sea Dispute

 Southeast Asia:

The South China Sea Dispute*

Student’s Name

Student’s Affiliation

Word count = 825

Southeast Asia: The South China Sea Dispute

The South China Sea is the geographic commons of the navigable rimland of Southeast Asia. The sea is 3.5 million square Kilometers and has underlying bedrock that contains natural gas and oil deposits. The natural gas and oil deposits are estimated to be equal to Mexico’s deposits by the US estimates and second to Saudi Arabia’s deposits by the Chinese estimates. The sea also hosts lucrative fisheries, and almost 80 percent of China’s crude imports are transported through the route. It is estimated that global trade worth 5 trillion US dollars passes through the South China Sea every year (Ba, 2011: 273). Generally, the sea is the most strategically crucial water body. The benefits associated with this sea have led to global connections through territorial disputes. South China Sea disputes are both maritime and island claims involving several sovereign nations that surround the sea. The disputing nations include Brunei, Taiwan (Republic of China), Indonesia, Vietnam, Malaysia, Philippines, and lastly, the People’s Republic of China (PRC). On the contrary, most non-claiming countries want the waterway to remain international waters. The disputes on this sea include the nine-dash line, the Spratly Islands dispute, and the Scarborough Shoal dispute.

The first global connection in the South China Sea is the nine-dash line. The nine-dash line region is claimed by the People’s Republic of China (PRC). PRC overlaps the exclusive economic area claims by Indonesia, the Philippines, Vietnam, Taiwan, and Malaysia, and it covers most of the South China Sea (Mincai, 2014: 4). The nine-dash line runs from the Chinese mainland as far as 2000 kilometers, occupying few hundred kilometers of Vietnam, Malaysia, and the Philippines. The Chinese leaders have maintained that they own most of the features and land that are within the line. The nine-dash line conflict began when it first appeared on the map of China in 1947 as the eleven-dash line. At this time, the initial Republic of China had its navy take control over the Sea islands that the Japanese had occupied during World War II. In 1949, after the formation of the PRC, Kuomintang forces went to Taiwan, and the communist government took the sole legitimate China representation.

Consequently, the communist government inherited all the region’s maritime claims. The nine-dash line is the basis of China’s “historical rights” claim since Taipei and Beijing did not have sufficient control over the whole area that occupied over 2 million square kilometers. Brunei, Malaysia and the Philippines root their claim on their geographical proximity to the sea. Vietnam’s claim lies in its ongoing administration of the area. Vietnam covers the most significant number of reefs and islands of Spratly.

The second global connection in South East Asia is the Spratly Islands dispute. The territorial dispute is between Taiwan, China, Malaysia, Vietnam, and the Philippines (Hongzhou Zhang & Bateman, 2017: 290). The Spratly Islands consist of a group of islands that have maritime features such as cays, banks, and reefs. The dispute includes the employment of techniques of military pressure and diplomatic stalemates. All the nations involved apart from Brunei, occupy some of the maritime features on this sea. The Spratly Islands have both strategic and economic benefits. The islands have largely unexplored natural gas and oil reserves, it is a busy area for commercial shipping traffic and is a productive place for world fishing. In the case where the claims are recognized, the surrounding countries will have an extended continental shelf. The Spratly is close to major maritime trade routes that lead to Northern Asia. Therefore, the surrounding countries have added the positional advantage of monitoring the maritime activities of the South China Sea and basing and projecting military forces.

The final global connection to be discussed in this paper is the Scarborough Shoal dispute. The Scarborough Shoal is a region claimed by the Republic of China (Taiwan), followed by the Philippines and the People’s Republic of China (PRC). The shoal was initially monitored and administered by the Philippines (Yu, 2016: 217). During the Scarborough Shoal standoff that happened in 2012, the administration was taken over by China when they sent invading warships into the shoal. The Philippines expected the United States to step in for them during the invasion and defend their territory since the two countries have a Mutual Defense Treaty. However, the United States chose to step aside from the tension of the two countries and used verbal protests against China. The result of this standoff is that it led to strained relationships among the three countries. The United States was termed an unreliable ally after this standoff. Consequently, the expansionist techniques of China in the Asia-Pacific area were solidified.

To sum up, the global connections in the South China Sea involved seven different sovereign states claiming different regions of the sea. The disputes were channeled by the desire to gain both economic and strategic benefits from the region. The disputes represent global connections that link the participants. Some of the nations involved were positively affected by the disputes, and others were negatively affected. For instance, the administration of the Scarborough Shoal was taken by the PRC from the Philippines.

References

Ba, A. D. 2011. Staking Claims and Making Waves in the South China Sea: How Troubled Are the Waters? Contemporary Southeast Asia: A Journal of International & Strategic Affairs, 33(3), 269–291.

Hongzhou Zhang, & Bateman, S. 2017. Fishing Militia, the Securitization of Fishery and the South China Sea Dispute. Contemporary Southeast Asia: A Journal of International & Strategic Affairs, 39(2), 288–314.

Mincai, Y. 2014. China’s Responses to the Compulsory Arbitration on the South China Sea Dispute: Legal Effects and Policy Options. Ocean Development & International Law, 45(1), 1–16.

Yu, M. 2016. The South China Sea dispute and the Philippines Arbitration Tribunal: China’s policy options. Australian Journal of International Affairs, 70(3), 215–234