Introduction

 South China Sea is one of the busiest international sea lanes in the world. Some of the most common activities in the sea include trade, navigation, exploration, and exploitation of the natural resources such as natural gas, fish stocks, and oil. However, other states are particularly interested in these resources like Malaysia, Taiwan, Indonesia, Philippines, and Vietnam among others (Yang, 2016). These interest from several states have resulted in disputes between them that have triggered the South China Sea to be labeled troubled waters.  Issues related to South China Sea disputes have resulted to broader implications for the maritime security, stability, peace, and security in this region. Many regulations and legislations have been put in place to curb these challenges to no avail. Researchers have found that the conflicting countries have centered their interests mainly in the territorial sovereignty, maritime boundaries, and the right to exploit the natural resources that are available in the region. For example, Japan and South Korea are very aggressive as they seek to exploit the resources available in the area. In his research, (Tseng, 2017) found that such issues have resulted in numerous conflicts with China as it seeks to develop globally and become a super power. Many countries are therefore in the battle to win over the area, thus making the international community, to see it as a move which is likely to wage a war between China and the USA. This paper is therefore going to look at the issues surrounding the South China Sea, in order to come with the reason as to why most countries want to invade the area, and what implications it has on the world.

 

South China Sea Nature of Disputes

 

South China Sea is an area of around 3.5 million square kilometers which extends. from Taiwan Strait to the Eastern end of Singapore (Yang, 2016), Disputes in the area primarily concern the territorial sovereignty over the two groups dominant in the Highland. One of the group is the Paracel Islands while the second group is the Spratly Islands which are claimed almost wholly by China. It should be noted that to solve the issue there is a need for better laws in the area. Although China tried to enact the necessary legislations to ensure peace prevails in the area, the challenge has persisted to date (Tseng, 2017) noted that there is a problem of the State that claims to have better sovereignty and is governed by the customary international laws. Some of the issues and principles are governed and set out by the international courts as well as tribunals (Wray, 2015). However, China has failed to observe some of the fundamental requirements which have facilitated continuous crises in the region. In the same regard, there is a challenge of dynamic laws that are progressive enough to ensure that the Sea matters are handled in a manner unlikely to bring disputes. China therefore seems to be looking for ways through which it can be able to benefit fully from the resources, without considering the effects that it may have in the world. This could therefore mean, that the US might wage a war against China, a move which is likely to lead into the third world war. Russia is currently under the ban by the EU, and it cannot therefore be able to trade with EU member countries, a move which is likely to make the country to support China in case the US wages a war against China.

According to (Tseng, 2017), it is important for the international courts and tribunals to take into account numerous occurrences that impact on the issue resulting in disputes. It has been established that others claim some of the disputes that occur between certain states. For example, some conflicts occurred over the Scarborough Shoal, and although it is not within the Paracels as well as the Spratly, it is claimed by Taiwan, Philippines, and China. Such an occurrence indicates the level of intensity of the territorial issues that have brought or facilitated disputes. China wants to claim particular Islands by showing certain interests in all the disputed areas (Poling, Nguyen & Hiebert, 2015). Although there are legal frameworks that try to assist countries from engaging in such conflicts, there have not been fully embraced by China. This is contrary to the commitment they have claimed to show regarding South China Sea issues. Also, another challenge exists when resolving these disputes in the international tribunals as the court may only seek to evaluate the evidence that is given by both parties. Although the law is clear that occupying a particular Island does not guarantee superior title under the international law, it has proven very hard to enforce the same as countries are afraid of interfering with other country matters. This has been the case even in Chinese South Sea.

 

Legal Basis for the Right to Explore

 

According to (Beckman & Koh, 2014), one of the reasons that South China Sea disputes are very complicated is the general perception that if a country is entitled to a particular Island, then it has all the rights to exploit the natural resources in as well as under the waters that surround the Island. However, the LOS Convention has different provisions of the same. According to the law, there is a clear outline of the obligations and jurisdictions of states within the region and what is expected from them. The convention outlines that Coastal States are entitled to the exclusive economic zone (EEZ) for a distance of 200 nautical miles from the mainland territory. However, all the four ASEAN States that are part of the South China Sea disputes claim the stipulated distance. The challenge that was noted by (Beckman & Koh, 2014)) in his research is the fact that China is the more powerful country meaning that it is dominant compared to the rest. Also, the research established that as China seeks to outdo the US in becoming a superpower, they must rule over more territories. However, this will result in more conflicts within the region.

According to the research by (Beckman & Koh, 2014), there is a big problem regarding the features of the Islands that make the categorization as an Island under the LOS Convention rather than the features that show the area as just a land capable for human habitation. It is widely estimated that less than 40 of the total 150 geographical features that require such a categorization are not present in Spratly Islands (Beckman & Koh, 2014). Such flaws have resulted in challenges which are exploited by China to dominate over the rest in the region. The law that is present cannot explicitly claim that China or any other state is ignorant of the provision. Although China has enacted laws and claims to be committed to ensuring no disputes with the territorial neighbors, there is a big challenge for implementation of the same when the international law is not clear. Many researchers, therefore, argue that for China to protect the waters and territories without conflict with the neighbors, there must be proper international laws. However, as long as the concession blocks are within the EEZ as measured by the mainland coasts, the problem is going to persist. This is because the blocks are in areas where China claims to have sovereign rights and jurisdiction meaning other countries do not have rights to undertake unilateral exploitation.

 

Chinese Claims

 

The disputes in the South China Sea between China and Vietnam as well as between China and Philippines have even raised wider issues about the claims by China of the South China Sea. According to, there is a problem over what China claims in the area. The findings showed a conflicting elaboration of the Chinese interests between the rights as well as jurisdiction over the maritime zones or the rights and jurisdictions over the natural resources in the waters surrounding the disputed areas. This brought the issue of the infamous nine-dashed lines that was published by China in the year 1948. Some of these issues that are very dominant in the area show a position where China has a territorial problem as shown by the PRC government that brought the issue into the international arena in 2009 (Beckman & Koh, 2014). The diplomatic note that was sent to the secretary-general of UN shows insights of Chinese intents of asserting jurisdiction and rights in all the territorial waters that are inside the nine dashed lines. This is clearly demonstrated by the fact that Chinese vessels have interfered with the Vietnamese activities for exploration in the area. In fact, both Vietnam and Philippines claims that Chinese activities are not consistent. This implies that even though China might be showing commitment towards maintaining peace in the region, there is a challenge of international arbitration.

According to (Poling, Nguyen & Hiebert, 2015), China has no legal basis for the rights and jurisdiction for the waters inside the nine dashed lines under the LOS Convection or even the international arbitration. However, such claims have brought significant disagreements within the region since the nine dashed lines are within the region measured from the Island, “The re-introduction of interdisciplinary concerns straddling law and history illustrates that the historical dimension, which has long been neglected, is an emerging concern that poses looming dangers that may unexpectedly (Beckman & Koh, 2014)” One of the notable problems in the area according to the research is the fact that China has not claimed any sovereignty to the waters or claimed that the dashed lines indicate a boundary. Such controversies imply that China can still exploit the neighbors without legal basis or evidence of China humiliating the position for others. Another issue that has brought problems is the historic rights that China claims to have. This has made the country to continue exploiting the waters and territories far from the disputed Islands particularly towards the coast of Vietnam. Although any law cannot bind such claims, they can be evaluated in the claims of sovereignty concerning the dashed lines. Also, China does not seem to limit the allegation on the maritime zones that are measured from the Islands. (Beckman & Koh, 2014) argued that this is constrained by the Chinese domestic policy which is not clear on the position regarding the South China Sea territories. While many researchers seek to understand the plausible claims raised by other members, China feels it has a stronger bargaining over the other ASEAN claimants.

 

                                                       Conclusion

 

Although China has claimed a commitment to peace with the neighbors in the South China Sea, it has shown little commitment for the same in its arbitrations. Also, the actions that it takes are contrary to the claims that it is committed to peace. (Roy, 2016) noted that the country seeks to have a dominant approach to the maritime zones; hence, it seeks to secure all the territories that are bound within the waters adjacent to the coast. One of the challenges that cannot be disputed easily is the fact that people have an obligation towards waters and resources as defined by the international law. However, this law is not clear which has resulted in top disputes as every country seeks to exploit and take advantage of the sea areas. Another aspect that is notable in many pieces of research is the fact that China is determined to become a super power and the rival USA hence, they have to exploit many more resources within and without their borders and territory. In fact, the concerns for the countries due to these disputes have attracted the USA and other countries who seek to intervene and bring back sanity in the region. One of the concerns by these international countries is the fear that Chinese actions threaten the freedom of navigation and overflight. While China has taken measures to show commitment to peace with the neighbors, there is still significant disputes due to sovereignty on the Islands. (Roy, 2016) noted that these disputes have even provided the United States an opportunity to strengthen its relations with the ASEAN countries. However, this has not made China formulate progressive laws or take actionable decisions towards ensuring peace within the South China Sea.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Literature Review Summary Table

 

 

question	answer
	Yes	no
Does China has a legal basis for the rights and jurisdiction for the waters inside the nine dashed lines	Beckman & Koh, 2014 Wray, 2015 Yang, 2016 Parameswaran, 2016	Roy, 2016 Poling, Nguyen & Hiebert, 2015 Tseng, 2017 Baumert, 2016
Is China’s great power aspirations a contributing factor	Roy, 2016 Poling, Nguyen & Hiebert, 2015 Wray, 2015 Yang, 2016	Beckman & Koh, 2014 Tseng, 2017 Parameswaran, 2016 Baumert, 2016
Does China feel its national security is threatened	Roy, 2016 Beckman & Koh, 2014 Tseng, 2017 Parameswaran, 2016	Poling, Nguyen & Hiebert, 2015 Wray, 2015 Baumert, 2016 Yang, 2016
Does western influences contribute to the problem in the South China Sea	Roy, 2016 Beckman & Koh, 2014 Tseng, 2017 Yang, 2016	Baumert, 2016 Poling, Nguyen & Hiebert, 2015 Parameswaran, 2016 Wray, 2015

 

 

                                                    References

Yang Razali, Kassim. 2016. South China Sea Disputes, The: Flashpoints, Turning Points And Trajectories. New Jersey: World Scientific, 2016. Discovery eBooks, EBSCOhost (accessed May 2, 2017).

Tseng, Hui-Yi Katherine. 2017. Rethinking South China Sea Disputes : The Untold Dimensions and Great Expectations. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge, 2017. Discovery eBooks, EBSCOhost (accessed May 2, 2017).

Roy, Nalanda. 2016. The South China Sea Disputes : Past, Present, and Future. Lanham: Lexington Books, 2016. Discovery eBooks, EBSCOhost (accessed May 2, 2017).

Jayakumar, S., Beckman, R. C., & Koh, T. (2014). The South China Sea Disputes and Law of the Sea. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.

Poling, G. B., Nguyen, P., & Hiebert, M. (2015). Examining the South China Sea Disputes : Papers From the Fifth Annual CSIS South China Sea Conference. Washington, DC: Center for Strategic & International Studies.

Parameswaran, P. (2016). Malaysia's approach to the South China Sea dispute after the arbitral tribunal's ruling. Contemporary Southeast Asia, (3), 375.

Wray, L. (2015). China's maritime and territorial claims to the South China Sea: A focus on the key centres of gravity driving the South China Sea disputes. Journal Of The Australian Institute Of Professional Intelligence Officers, 23(2), 3.

Baumert, K. A. (2016). The South China Sea Disputes and Law of the Sea null [reviews]. American Journal Of International Law, (1), 152.