Background
China has a long-term claim over the South China Sea (SCS), dating back more than two thousand years. It claims that it has ‘historic rights’ in the SCS based on its long-term occupation and use of the area, its fishing activities and its maritime navigation. China’s claim is based on the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), which grants coastal states exclusive rights over the resources within their exclusive economic zones (EEZs). China’s EEZ in the SCS is based on a “nine-dash line” map, which includes territory claimed by several other countries in the region, including Brunei, Malaysia, the Philippines, Taiwan and Vietnam.
Arguments
The Chinese government argues that its claim to the SCS is based on historical evidence and is consistent with international law. It cites documents from China’s imperial and modern governments, as well as maps showing claims prior to the establishment of UNCLOS, as evidence of its historic rights. The Chinese government also argues that its claim is consistent with UNCLOS, as it gives China exclusive rights over the resources within its EEZ. China contends that other countries have infringed upon its rights by exploiting the natural resources within its EEZ without permission.
Counterarguments
The other countries in the region claim that China’s claim to the SCS is illegal and violates UNCLOS. They argue that the “nine-dash line” map violates the UNCLOS principle of “equity and mutual respect,” which limits the EEZ of a coastal state to the area within 200 nautical miles of its coast. They also argue that China’s claim undermines their own EEZs and their own right to exploit the resources within them. In addition, they contend that China has been engaging in unilateral and aggressive activities, such as dredging and land reclamation, in the SCS in violation of international law.
Economic Considerations
The SCS is a strategically and economically important area. It is one of the busiest commercial shipping routes in the world and is rich in natural resources. It is estimated to contain vast amounts of oil and gas reserves and is a major fishing ground. All of these factors give rise to economic considerations in the dispute.
The Chinese government argues that its claim to the SCS is necessary to protect its economic interests. It claims that it needs to be able to manage and protect the resources within its EEZ and to ensure its access to these resources for its growing economy.
Others argue that China’s claim is motivated by economic opportunism. They point out that Chinese activities in the SCS, such as land reclamation, have been aimed at exploiting the natural resources of the area for commercial gain.
Reactions in the Region
The dispute over the SCS has been a source of tension in the region. Countries in the region have reacted to the dispute in different ways.
The Philippines has been the most vocal critic of China’s claims. It has taken the dispute to the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA), which ruled in its favor in 2016. The Philippines has repeatedly called on China to respect the court’s ruling.
Malaysia, Vietnam, Brunei and Taiwan have also expressed their concerns over China’s activities in the SCS. Malaysia and Vietnam have also taken steps to assert their claims in the SCS, but they have been less publicly vocal in their criticism of China.
Responses from the US and other countries
The US has been the most outspoken non-regional critic of China’s actions in the SCS. It has accused China of illegally claiming “sovereignty over virtually the entire South China Sea” and of behaving “aggressively” in the region. The US also regularly conducts “freedom of navigation” exercises in the SCS, in which it challenges China’s territorial claims by sending military ships and aircraft close to its islands and bases in the region.
Other countries, such as Australia, Canada, India and Japan, have also expressed concerns about China’s actions in the SCS. They have called for China to respect the ruling of the PCA and to comply with international law.
Analysis
The dispute over the SCS has been a source of tension in the region for decades. China claims sovereignty over the SCS based on its historical rights, while the other countries in the region contest this claim. The US and other non-regional countries have also been outspoken critics of China’s activities in the SCS.
China’s claim over the SCS has a significant economic component as well as a legal one. The area is rich in natural resources and is an important shipping route. The Chinese government argues that its claim is necessary to protect its economic interests, while others argue that its activities are motivated by economic opportunism.
Regional Political and Military Strategies
The disputes over the SCS have led to an increase in regional tensions and dispute resolution strategies. The countries in the region have adopted a variety of strategies to assert their claims in the SCS. The Philippines has been the most vocal critic of China’s actions, and it has taken its dispute to the PCA. Malaysia and Vietnam have also taken steps to assert their claims in the SCS, but they have been less publicly vocal in their criticism of China.
The US has also taken an active role in contesting China’s actions in the SCS. It has accused China of illegally claiming “sovereignty over virtually the entire South China Sea” and has challenged its claims through regular “freedom of navigation” exercises. It has also sought to strengthen its alliances with other countries in the region such as Australia, Canada and Japan.
Strategic Economic Relationships
The dispute over the SCS has also had an impact on economic relationships in the region. China has been engaging in a strategy of economic engagement with other countries in the region in an effort to strengthen its position in the dispute. The Chinese government has sought to use economic ties such as investment and trade deals to secure access to and control over the resources of the SCS.
At the same time, the US has sought to use economic might to encourage other countries to oppose China’s actions in the SCS. It has lobbied for regional countries to reject Chinese investment and to look for alternatives to Chinese-funded infrastructure projects. It has also sought to strengthen its own economic ties to the region.
International Law and Diplomacy
The dispute over the SCS has also had an impact on international law and diplomacy. The UNCLOS has been a major source of contention in the dispute, as the countries involved have sought to use it to support their claims. China has argued that its claim is consistent with UNCLOS, while other countries contend that it violates the convention.
The PCA has played a significant role in resolving the dispute. In 2016, it ruled in favor of the Philippines’ claim that China had violated its sovereign rights in the SCS. The ruling has been largely ignored by China, but the Philippines and other countries in the region have called on China to comply with it.
The dispute has also prompted international diplomatic initiatives. In 2018, China, the Philippines, Malaysia and Vietnam agreed to a “Code of Conduct” for the SCS, in which they committed to resolving their disputes peacefully and to avoiding escalation of tensions. Meanwhile, the US and other non-regional countries have continued to criticize China’s actions in the region.
