The complex disputes over islands, rocks and reefs in the South China Sea involve six countries: China, Taiwan, Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia and Brunei. They have a long history, with their origins in the interruption of traditional practices by European and Japanese colonialism, and compounded by the post-WWII conflicts in Southeast Asia. These disputes are among the most vexing issues in the region.
Despite this backstory the tensions associated with contestation have waxed and waned. The current spike in geopolitical temperature dates back to 2009, and in particular to China’s issuing of the decidedly ambiguous “dashed line” map. This map can now be found in passports, on inflight magazines and in every school book in the country. Since then, China has begun to take steps to defend what it portrays as its rights in the sea. Disputed features have been built upon and now boast 3 km runways and deep water ports. Sansha island in the Paracels, population 1200, has city status. And while Beijing is not the only country occupying or building on disputed features, its activities are the most widespread and destabilizing.
Yet in spite of its many activities, it is not clear precisely what it is that China wants. We can see plainly its methods of advancing its interests on a daily basis, but just what its larger strategic objective may be is uncertain. This is perhaps most obvious in the case of the dashed line map - it was presented accompanying a note in which China asserted its “indisputable” sovereignty over the islands and the adjacent waters of the Sea. But it lacked specificity about what the dashes meant, where, precisely on the map the lines are located or indeed what meaning they held.
This ambiguity is, in part, deliberate. It provides diplomatic leeway to manage events; it sows confusion in the minds of those who have a stake (however large or small) in the dispute; and, of course, it papers over the fact that Beijing may not be entirely set in its own mind as to what it wants to achieve. But this lack of clarity makes managing the dispute extremely difficult and the process of negotiating some kind of settlement acceptable to all virtually impossible.
There are ultimately three main things that China appears to seek. First, as with all the claimant states, China is a net energy importer. The Sea is thought to be rich in oil and gas, and China wants not only the economic benefit that comes from having sovereign rights over hydrocarbon reserves but also the security of supply that it would entail. Equally, the South China Sea is a significant fishery and as a country which consumes growing volumes of protein this is highly prized.
China also desires security for its maritime approaches. The country is dependent for its economic prosperity on trade flows – energy and commodities inbound and finished goods going to market. But this goes beyond protecting shipping lanes; in the nineteenth century China was brought low by foreign forces that tore the country apart and humiliated its people, at least so goes the Party’s nationalist mythology. The Party’s claim to legitimacy depends on its ability to protect China and it follows from this that it must secure the means through which others approach China. The South China Sea is, in many respects, the country’s front door and it does not want that door to be vulnerable.
Read more at National Interest
Click here for updated South China Sea news
- The Hague's South China Sea Ruling: Implications for East Asian Security[29/11/2016 00:00]
- China's Shiny New Air Bases in the South China Sea[28/11/2016 00:00]
- China's 'One Belt One Road' Is a Big Deal. So What Is the Role for Beijing's Military?[21/11/2016 10:30]
- Next Stop South China Sea? China’s 1st Aircraft Carrier ‘Ready for Combat’[15/11/2016 00:00]
- Follow the Fish: Considering Options in the South China Sea[07/11/2016 00:00]
- Post-election, will the US have an Asia policy?[05/11/2016 00:00]
- How World War III Could Start [03/11/2016 00:00]
- Duterte’s Uncertain China Gamble[03/11/2016 00:00]
- Sun Tzu Explains China’s Shaping Operations in the South China Sea[01/11/2016 00:00]
- Tangled up in the blue of the South China Sea[28/10/2016 00:00]
- Asean's South China Sea conundrum[25/10/2016 00:00]
- How the Next US President Should Handle the South China Sea[17/10/2016 00:00]
- Down and Duterte: Shakeup in the South China Sea[17/10/2016 00:00]
- Beijing seeks new ways to assert South China Sea authority[12/10/2016 00:00]
- Could China build the world’s smallest nuclear power plant and send it to the South China Sea?[11/10/2016 00:00]
- A path for dispute resolution in the South China Sea[07/10/2016 00:00]
- The South China Sea Showdown: What Should America (and the Region) Do About It?[05/10/2016 00:00]
- Navy Chief Pushes for ‘Compromise’ to Stop ‘Problematic’ Actions in South China Sea[03/10/2016 00:00]
- U.S. Air Force and Navy May Challenge China in the South China Sea[29/09/2016 00:00]
- France Unveils Its Defense Strategy in the South China Sea and Beyond[27/09/2016 00:00]