China's Dangerous Game

Reasons given for this decision by the U.S. government was that it would provide a useful military location and would allow the United States to reap benefits and money from the land’s natural resources (Lapsansky). The problem with this argument though comes from the one hole that our government overlooked. The many years battle that we spent that we spent claiming Philippines; we spent great sums of money and dispensed many lives just for the

Ecuador’s actions are not exclusive and have been seen before on the international level. In the past, certain costal states have staked a claim much wider than the customary limit (Slomanson 308). The majority of these cases were put forth by “lesser-developed nations with significant fishing or seabed resources adjacent to their coasts-while lacking the superior technology possessed by developed nations to take advantages of these resources” (Slomanson 308). Ecuador has used as justification the claim that fishing resources act as the primary source of exports and national wealth. In 1952, the same year that Ecuador claimed a 200-mile territorial sea, two other South American countries, Chile and Peru, also adopted this stance.

The U.S. should not have annexed the Philippines for the reason that the United States knew the Filipinos wanted to be an independent nation when we aided them to win in the Spanish American war. The Spanish American war was fought in 1898. It was an American victory that enabled the U.S. to become a major economic and world power. Battles were fought everywhere from the Philippine to Cuba and to show the world that the United States won’t be taken down easily. With the provided documentation that advocates the U.S. should not have annexed and make the Philippine part of the United States territory are annexing Philippine goes against what the United States stood for as a nation, It was not economically the right choices and it went against

Since their purchase by the Japanese government from their private owners in September 2012, the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands have been a topic of protest and discontent in the East China Sea and its surrounding area. While current conflicts have arisen because of skirmishes with patrol boats and sightings of Chinese drones flying over the islands, disputes over sovereignty of the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands have existed since the cession of Chinese territory in the Treaty of Shimonoseki following China’s defeat in the Sino-Japanese War. Original ownership of the islands was never officially settled between China and Japan, but after the establishment of several more international treaties in the twentieth century, jurisdiction over the islands became unclear and practically undeterminable. While conflicts were set aside during the latter half of the twentieth century in order to improve Sino-Japanese relationships, the purchase of the islands and military activity renewed tensions between the two nations. Present-day territorial disputes over the sovereignty of the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands are a result of the multiple cessions and reversions of control in twentieth century treaty laws between China and Japan.

Following the War of 1812, the United States established itself as a world power and proved its capability to protect needy nations. After the French Revolution, nations realized the importance of balancing power and recognized the dangerousness of one nation holding excessive power. (Stanley Chodorow, MacGregor Knox, Conrad Schirokauer, Joseph Strayer, Hans Gatzke 1969) For years, America held the policy of isolationism and only intervened in other countries’ affairs if necessary. Despite strained relations in the past, diplomatic relations with China began in 1979. (Andrew J. Nathan, Columbia University 2009) Last year, an American battleship entered the South China Sea, inspecting Chinese activities. As an ally and nation known to keep the

Germany, Japan, and Russia already have spheres of influence in China. These countries were trying to force the United States out of Asia. In the map we looked at as a class, there were numerous countries who had influence in the Chinese markets. By taking Manila Harbour the United States would open a gateway to gaining influence in the markets that other countries are beginning to dominate. The costs of taking the Philippines in its entirety would drown all the benefits gained from establishing a greater sphere of influence and would put us in a worse position than we were before. As Carl Schurz puts it, “. . . If American diplomacy, having, after our successful war, the decisive voice in regard to those islands, is not skillful enough to bring about such results in the final settlement, it would certainly not be skillful enough to handle the more thorny problems which it would surely have to deal with in case all those islands should pass into our full possession.” By choosing to take only Manila the United States could keep out of war and continue to spread our spheres of

China sees the island as a breakaway province - which it has threatened to take back by force if necessary.

As of today, China has expanded and built over seven artificial islands in the South China Sea since 2014. The South China Sea has recently come to be a major problem in Asia as issues have risen over who has rights of passage and claims in this area. The Chinese of recent have been making territorial claims in the South China Sea that are in areas of free passage for many other Asian countries and the United States. In October 2015, a U.S. guided missile destroyer encountered one of the artificial islands and China’s response was that it would “take any measure” to maintain its security in “their territory”. The Chinese have been questioned in the Permanent Court of Arbitration by the Philippines after claiming rights to historical locations in the South China Sea, which violates sovereign rights of the Philippines, yet China responded to this outcome with refusal and has continued to advance itself in the territory causing huge disputes with its neighboring countries as freedom of navigation has been compromised through China’s actions.. In order to guarantee resolution and maintain the freedom of navigation aspect of international law there needs to be a foreign policy put in place that puts more United States military in the South China Sea with support from disputing countries like Japan and the Philippines as a way to make the issue multilateral and law abiding.

In July 2013, Wenweipo - the pro-PRC Chinese-language newspaper published an article titled “Six Wars China is sure to fight in the next 50 years”. According to this article, after unification of Taiwan (year 2020 to 2025), China will take the second war: Reconquest of Spratly Islands (year 2025 to 2030) and “China will send the ultimatum to countries surrounding the Islands with the deadline of 2028. The countries having disputes on the sovereignty of Islands can negotiate with China on preserving their shares of investments in these Islands by giving up”. In 1999, two Chinese military colonels – authors of the book namely “Unlimited War” suggested using an “unlimited war” to solve the disputing in the South China Sea. These authors said that, to avoid a war does not mean that not using military force and a conflict is indispensable. However, there is one more important thing that to control the intensities of conflict that. It is necessary to conduct some special activities to prove the sovereignty of China in the disputing Spratly Islands but do not let this activities increase to the total war. These things prove that the potential war between Vietnam and China in the future could be come true.

From an international relations perspective, the Taiwan Strait, one of the most likely conflict zones in the Asia-Pacific region, has been dubbed the “Balkan Peninsula of the East.” The status of Taiwan has been one of the most intricate issues in international relations arena for the past decades. The Taiwan question is essentially an extension of the “two Chinas” problem, which creates a dilemma for accommodating

The dispute over the South China Sea denotes the process of power rebalancing while China rising as a hegemony in East Asia. China craves for more resources and power and decides to effectuate that by controlling more maritime territory. This act impelled the United State to align with the Philippines to balance with China. In a realism world, U.S. has adequate reason to intervene for fear for China becoming too strong a power.

The territorial and maritime disputes over the South China Sea (SCS) have been ongoing for decades. The disputes have been considered to be one the fiercest-contested in Asia. The South China Sea is an enclosed sea surrounded by several different states. China, the Philippines, Vietnam, Brunei, Taiwan, and Malaysia all surrounded the South China Sea. The main cause of tension in this dispute is because China claims to have “historical sovereignty” over all of the South China Sea. Associations of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) have come up with different discussions and suggestions on how to end the disputes with favorable conditions for all contending states. They use the principles of the United Nation Convention of the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and form the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea (DOC). The states surrounding the South China Sea possess 12 nautical miles territorial sea and 200 nautical miles exclusive economic zones (EEZs). Thus, the South China Sea is not only international waters, instead, it is also overlapping exclusive economic zones. According to UNCLOS, disputes over exclusive economic zones must be resolved through negotiations by the contending states. Many of these contending Southeast Asian states have negotiated their maritime boundaries, however, China fails to comply. China claims that it owns all of the South China Sea, and therefore, has no need to

In order to better understand the dispute of these islands and this body of water, geography plays a role considering the area sea is located to borders on many different regions. According Chmillier-Gendreau (2000), the south-west of the Indian Ocean, the sea connects with the Straits of Malacca and Singapore. To the north-east, the sea connects with the Sea of Japan and the Strait of Korea. The position of this body of water is interconnected with many other bodies of waters which coincide with many countries. The islands residing in the middle of this sea therefore lies in the middle of many different countries. The two islands, Spratly and Paracel Islands lie in the middle of the maritime zone. Since it is in the middle, no neighboring country is really physically connected to these islands by geography (Chemillier-Gendreau, 2000, p. 16). Despite that fact, China and Vietnam both claim sovereignty over these islands based on historical and

The United States is currently entangled with China over the Spratly Islands in the South China Sea. The location of these islands is approximately 500 miles from the Chinese mainland and also has islands claimed by numerous countries including China, the Philippines, Malaysia, Vietnam and Taiwan. These ownership of these islands is in question ever since March of 2012 when 21 Vietnamese fishermen were detained by the Chinese due while fishing near the islands, with the Chinese claiming that they had entered Chinese waters. In addition to suddenly enforcing the waters and territory as exclusively theirs, the Chinese have also begun creating artificial islands on top of existing reefs. While some of these countries have also partaken in island expansion, none have done so at the rate of the Chinese. China has managed to build massive infrastructure on 3,000 acres on the top of existing reefs in a matter of two years. What took Vietnam four years to complete only took the Chinese slightly over one year.

In the Western Pacific, the South China Sea is a global crossroads that holds strategic importance for many nations world wide. The South China Sea stretches from the Taiwan and Luzon Straits in the north to Indonesia and the Strait of Malacca in the south with Vietnam on the west and the Philippines and Borneo on the east. In total size, the South China Sea surpasses the Mediterranean Sea. However, unlike this Near-Eastern comparator, territorial disputes and conflicting claims threaten the movement of global trade through the South China Sea, thus unbalancing regional stability in the Asia-Pacific. Claimants include the bordering coastal countries of the People’s Republic of China (PRC), the Republic of China (a.k.a. Taiwan), the