The Sino Philippine South China Sea Conflict

In the recent years, there is a conflict of territory between countries that caught the global attention. It’s about the ownership of several small islands in the South China Sea. Six primary countries are competing for its ownership. Each of them claimed the right to have these islands. The territory conflict supposed to engage only the competitors. However, at this time the whole world is

When it comes to the political profile, seven different countries have competing maritime claims (mostly over the Spratly and Paracel Islands), some of which become even more complicated as some overlap with other nations’ Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZ). Despite the “intraregional distrust, deeply rooted historical issues, and rapidly increasing military spending” in the region surrounding the South China Sea, one expert argues that “not only has the conflict not escalated into a serious military conflict; it has, in fact, been mitigated… in fact, a more stable peace has developed.” (Costlow, 2012, p.6).

China has used historical claims to justify its territorial usurpations in the South China Sea. China’s territorial claims are causing conflict in the region as Beijing seeks to control more area of the South China Sea, with one such example being the declaration of Chinese control out to the “Nine dashed line.” Additionally, it is only in the last one hundred or so years that China has

The writer believes the United States should act urgently against China due to recent and past events. The only U.S. action mentioned was to cancel China’s invitation to the Rim-of-the-Pacific (RIMPAC) naval exercise. The writer went on to identify reasons why he thinks this cancellation should happen as soon as possible. He cites the near collision of aircrafts from the two nations and the seven new artificial islands built by China, regardless of U.S. opposition, as points to support his position. He offered a different perspective by pointing out U.S. warships and aircrafts are still able to operate in the South China Sea in spite of China’s ill intent. I am unconvinced the writer sufficiently supported his claim and call to action. The lack of substantial, logical evidence in support of his position and the presence of a logical fallacy, allowed for a great deal of guessing and speculation as to the true intent of the article.

The current situation in the East South China Sea is of great importance to the United States’ strategic and economic interests in the region. The destabilization of the region will have adverse effects around the world and could lead to a major military conflict between many nations. The nation of China has been expanding their territorial lines farther and farther into the South China Sea and it has led to Vietnam, Taiwan and the Philippians expand theirs as well, these expanding territorial lines and large military presents of China and the United States have created a fear of conflict. These expansions are due to natural rich resources the waters have to offer and the greater strategic advantage that

Thus, the area holds significant economic importance for Asia and the Pacific which is at risk with mounting tensions and aggressive territorial claims in the South China Sea. “Additionally, in regards to the legitimacy of the conflict, The Permanent Court of Arbitration, which serves as a arbitral tribunal to solve disputes in the international community in accordance with the UN and international law, ruled China’s “nine-dash line” claims in the South China Sea, its occupation of Mischief Reef, its denial of access to Scarborough Shoal, its island building in the Spratly’s, and its harassment of others in the Philippine exclusive economic zone (EEZ) as illegitimate actions.” (Vuyling) Thus, the legality of China’s expansion and claims to the territory furthers the problem to entail U.S to intervene as under the U.S. Freedom of the Seas Program such actions goes against international law and disrupt free naval activities in the area.

Since September 2015, China has begun to increase the arming of the islands in the South China Sea on the islands that China claims belongs to them. The claiming of the Paracel Islands and the Spratly Islands by China are creating panic for its neighbors, Vietnam, Malaysia, Taiwan, and the Philippines. Because, China is ignoring the claims the nations have on the Islands in the South China Sea. Most recently, China has made a political decision to deploy missiles on Woody Island in the South China Sea, an island that is very close to the Philippines and Taiwan. China claims that the island belongs only to China and no one else, but there are Vietnamese, Philippine, and Taiwanese claims on the islands in the South China Sea as well that China is ignoring that is creating unrest in the South China Sea.

Japan and People’s Republic of China have been in a long dispute over a group of islands off the coast of Taiwan. This dispute over the islands has cause a confusion on the actual names, though to the western world they are known as the Pinnacle Islands. Under Japan’s claim of ownership they are known as Senkaku Islands, Senkaku is a rough translation from the English name for the islands, while under the claim of China they are known as the Diaoyu Islands, Diaoyu means “to fish” in Chinese. The islands themselves set very close to the east of China’s mainland and west of Japan’s Okinawa Island. For this current event paper I will include the actors of this conflict with a brief history of the conflict from the view point of each actor, what interest each actor possess that causes claims to this islands difficult, what each actor hope to get out of the islands, what strategies and policies that have been or are taking place to help, in some cases not help, settle this dispute, and what institutions attempt to bring to the negotiation table to ease the tension.

Meanwhile in southern part of its territory several maritime dispute disputes began to attract China’s attention. During early decade of 1990s, China had just ratified United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea 1982 (UNCLOS 1982) in 1992. The ratification is going to allow China to claim 200 nautical miles as its exclusive economic zone (EEZ) and could exploit oil and gas located in South China Sea basin. Beside that, the growing tension because of Taiwan’s independence in 1990 had significantly altered China focus to the South and modernization its military force. Geopolitical nature of the potential maritime conflict in the south had forced China to modernize its naval power (Storey 2008: 115).

In the past, China seized both the Paracels and the Spratlys by force and with its growing military strength, it is undoubtable that Beijing will finally takeover the Senkaku. China is also building artificial islands on reefs and atolls near the Philippines, having airstrips ready to deal with the hugest military planes. It’s lack of respect over neighboring countries’s territory and exclusive economic zone and violent actions like ramming Vietnamese fishing ships could be a test for its influence and power to prepare for further conflicts; and an assessment of other countries’ reaction and strength.

International Law does not support China’s claims. The principle of “effective occupation” was established by the Permanent Court of Arbitration in the Island of Palmas in 1928. Effective occupation “entails an ability and intention to exercise continuous and uninterrupted jurisdiction, which is distinguished from conquest.” China has occupied the Paracel Islands, an archipelago of thirty islands between China and Vietnam, but it has not occupied the Spratly Islands, an archipelago off the coasts of the Philippines and Malaysia. It once occupied nine islands between 1988 and 1992, but the islands are now occupied by various other claimants. China’s claims are also disputed by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. Under UNCLOS, claims to resources are based on exclusive economic zones and continental shelves. China’s claims far surpass its exclusive economic zones and continental shelves, overlapping with the legal claims of other ASEAN states. China’s claims rely on historical interests, which carries no weight under international law.

Despite she fact she acknowledges that both countries can gain from cooperation in security, energy, economic issues; U.S.’s self-interests comes first. As China advocates for more international involvement, open market policies, territorial assurance from the U.S., the U.S. on the other hand strives to maintain its position in global leadership and interest because it still considers China as a threat, trying to seize China to prevent it from gaining excessive international power. In the following, I will first analyze the similarities and differences between the two speeches, point out U.S. and China’s problematic intentions that cause diplomatic challenges, and argue about why it is crucial for the U.S. to keep interfere with China’s diplomatic situations. To defend my position, I will examine China and the U.S.’s take on the South China Sea dispute, which has risen up to be a major flashpoint for conflicts in Asia after the Cold War.

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.

THE South China Sea conundrum has risen to the pinnacle of regional security priorities. It has generated a veritable fountain of government pronouncements, propaganda, and biased analyses. Some of these conflate information with misinformation.

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.