Background Information
China has long asserted its claims to sovereignty over the South China Sea, a region comprising of the sea’s islands, waters, and surrounding resources and natural gas deposits. The area encompasses more than 3,000,000 square kilometres of the Pacific Ocean, and is a major thoroughfare for international shipping, meaning it is an attractive resource with important geopolitical and economic implications. The legal validity of China’s claim over the contested area has been subject to a long-standing dispute between the nation and other Southeast Asian states.
Historically, China has had numerous royal decrees and edicts asserting its sovereignty in the region since at least the Han dynasty in the 2nd century BC. Moreover, the Chinese government has widely acknowledged the nine-dash line as the border marker of its claim, which was formalised in 1947.
Scope of the Dispute
China’s expansive claim has been contested by the other Southeast Asian countries that lay partial or full claim to parts of the South China Sea. These countries include Vietnam, Brunei, the Philippines, Malaysia, and Taiwan.
The dispute turns on whether or not the nine-dash line creates a binding legal boundary for Chinese control over the contested region. In 2016, an international tribunal based in the Hague published its ruling that China had no historic title over the waters, and therefore could not claim that the nine-dash line provided it with a legal boundary. This upset the existing balance of power in the region and gave further cause to the ongoing debate.
Data
China’s overarching claim to the region is based on the 1947 publication of its official map, which used a nine-dash line as the boundary marker for its claim. To date, Beijing has never defined the dots to explain the limits of its claim – and so the scope of the region it seeks remains uncertain.
The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) sets out the range of maritime rights each nation has over its territorial waters. These include an exclusive economic zone (EEZ), which extends to 200 nautical miles from the mainland and provides countries with exclusive rights to natural resources. Thus an EEZ does not conflict with China’s claim, and it is in fact eligible for an EEZ.
Expert Perspectives
The debate has been difficult to resolve due to the nature of the maritime law and its ambiguity – a point not lost on both scholars and commentators.
In a 2013 article in the Georgetown International Environmental Law Review, Professor Melina Stathopoulou addressed China’s claims to the South China Sea, suggesting that although its nine-dash line is a “clear assertion of maritime claims”, its legal authority over the seas and islands “remains largely unresolved”.
Konstantinos Koliopoulos, an International Security Analyst, on the other hand, arguing in favour of the nine-dash’s effectiveness, suggested that the “traditional forms of public international law [like UNCLOS] have showed themselves, again and again, to be inadequate for solving this particular dispute”.
Own Insights and Analysis
From a legal perspective, there are various shades of grey when looking at the debate – with neither side able to definitively prove or disprove the other’s claims.
It is undeniable that China’s vast economic and military presence in the region gives them a strong edge in any dispute. This has the potential to unbalance existing agreements and alliances, particularly between the nations of Southeast Asia, and those of the international community at larger.
Going forward, a holistic strategy that takes into account not just the potential legal and historical ramifications of the nine-dash line, but also the power dynamics of states in the region is necessary to achieve a just – and lasting – resolution.
Environmental Impact
China’s claim to the South China Sea has had attendant environmental implications. The region is home to almost 600 species of fish and 300 types of coral, meaning it is a highly biodiverse area that has acted as an important source of livelihood for generations of locals.
The industrialisation of the waters for gas and oil extraction – which has been made possible due to Chinese presence in the region – has caused an alarming decline in the marine biological diversity of the area. With depleted fish stocks and rising levels of pollution, the local populations have largely lost their access to a major source of protein.
Geopolitical Implications
The dispute over the South China Sea affects a web of allies and adversaries in the greater region, and beyond. This has the potential to destabilise geopolitical strategy, particularly if the conflict continues unresolved.
The relationships between China and the United States, and between China and the ASEAN nations have a direct bearing on how the scenario plays out. For instance, a stronger US presence in the area could lead to a stronger stance taken by the majority of the ASEAN states in favour of their own territorial claims.
Online and in international media, the US-China rivalry has been a major point of contention, while diplomatic disagreements over the South China Sea are likely to be ongoing without a definitive resolution in sight.
Security Consequences
The ideological and military power struggle between China and the United States has been exacerbated by the presence of multiple navies and air forces in contested waters. The significance of the area in terms of power projection makes it a strategically-important location for management and control by the opposite powers.
In recent years, military tensions have grown exponentially in the region with vessels from China and other states engaging in close encounters – and in some cases, physical confrontation – due to the conflicting interpretations of maritime laws in the area.
Political Fallout
The ever-questionable legality of China’s nine-dash line has been a major point of contention in international politics and law. Some countries, such as the US and Japan, have all but discarded the line, while others accept China’s right to the region – but only to an extent.
Meanwhile, China’s neighbours in the region are trying to find a diplomatic solution to the dispute, one which does not necessarily involve complete adherence to the nine-dash line. This comes with the risk of furthering instability in the region and straining relationships between states – particularly if there is a breakdown of dialogue and trust.
Human Impact
The human cost of the South China Sea dispute has been felt on both sides. In mainland China, increasing nationalism surrounding the dispute has been used to legitimise further military investments, while in the affected Southeast Asian states, the locals have borne the brunt of the conflict.
With the waters being contested and patrolled by different military vessels, fishing boats and ships carrying goods are routinely being stopped, creating an unnecessary disruption to transnational trade.
In addition, much of the local population of the region still rely on fishing as a way of providing sustenance and income to their families, making them particularly vulnerable to restrictions due to the presence of naval ships and security personnel.
Tourism Impact
The presence of multiple states has changed the tourism landscape of the region. In particular, the area has lost much of its charm as a result of increased militarisation and restricted access to certain areas.
The Philippines, for instance, has three islands on the disputed nine-dash line – which are off-limits to the public owing to naval presence in the area.
This has had cascading effects on tourist revenue for the country – with the number of visits in the past decade falling significantly despite the potential of the area.
Economic Implications
The South China Sea dispute has far-reaching implications for the global economy – with both sides risking their trade relations if no resolution is found in the near future.
China, in particular, has the most to lose, as the lower level of control that other states operating in the region would have would reduce its ability to guard the exploited marine life and resources.
Similarly, the Philippines being a major exporter of seafood has seen its exports suffer due to the dispute – with exports dropping by 5.8 percent in 2019, leading to an overall economic slowdown in the nation. A renewed focus on alternate industries and resources is now needed for the Filipino economy to recuperate.
