South China Sea causing tug of war between US and China

Introduction

South China entails, as the best coastal lines in the world because of it is rich resources within the region. Additionally, the sea is used for trade, navigation, and exploitation energy richly resources such as gas and oil from the sea. The activities at the Sea region make the use of the sea important and favorable for use for many people in the region. Besides, other states such as Malaysia, Indonesia, Philippines’, Taiwan and Vietnam have shown interest in the use and exploitation of the resources creating debate and unending development of policies that tend to control the use of the sea by China authorities in the region. The need to exploit and use the resources has generated heated debate and development of policies that work towards the protection of the resources by China authorities in the region. The commitment of China towards the use of the resources has formed differences and tension among other states influenced by the presence of resources and economic potential of the resources at the coastal region of the South Sea (William & David, 2016). The paper discusses a thesis question on china’s government commitment to peace that does not reflect it is policies and actions in association with the China Sea Spratly Island from 2016 to 2017, thus leading to the following question. What’s behind Beijing’s drive to control the South China Sea and will there be a price to pay to gain control of it. This therefore makes the paper to analyze China’s commitment to peace, which does not match up with the actions or policies taken into the protection of the China Sea Spratly Island in the years 2016 and 2017. Additionally, evaluation of the situation revolves around. In addition, the increased sense of security taken by china through dominating maritime approaches along the coast line and securing Sea lanes in the open pacific sea. This analytical research paper will therefore argue that China’s claim to almost 90% of the South China Sea is part of a grand strategy to 1) increasing the country’s sense of security by dominating the maritime approaches to its long coast, and securing sea lanes to the open Pacific. 2) overcoming long standing historical grievances. Finally, 3) becoming a super power to rival the US, a goal that Chinese leaders have always been determined to meet.

 

II Concept definition

Concepts and Methodology

The concept of South Sea as one of the resourceful and useful sections of China’s powerful tool revolves around concepts such as nationalism and balance of power as argued by Morton (2016). The strategy to protect resources in the southern sea includes:

The actions that China citizens take as members of a nation with the objective of sustaining political sovereignty as suggested by McDevitt (2014)

On the other hand, balance of power concept definition revolves around a weaker nation that seeks to increase its powers as a way of countering a stronger power.  Ideas such as the nature of disputes (De Castro, 2016), legal basics that maintain exploration and Chinese claims of owing South Sea in China incorporates important concepts of definition in the paper (Rustandi, 2016).

Most countries have also show their interests in taking over the South China Sea, due to its rich resources. This move is therefore threatening the world peace, since most countries are at the verge of war in order to win over the Sea. China, which is the powerful country as compared to its competitors, is likely to wage a war against the USA, since the USA is likely to interfere with the actions of China.

Research methodology

The methodology of the research involves qualitative aspects that evaluate historical description, logical inference and theoretical analysis that focus on China’s involvement and protection abilities of the valuables found in the Southern region of the Sea. The methodology incorporates introduction, arguments and a conclusion based on the thesis question. Some of the academic sources that I will include Mingjiang, L (2013). In addition, the methodology also looks at the arguments and reactions of the countries involved, thus coming up with concrete reasons as to why the South China Sea is currently experiencing different issues. Chinese Debates South Sea Policy: Implications for Future Developments. RSIS Working Paper No. 239. Pp. 1-21.

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).

Research design

The research design focuses on the thesis question, which is the China’s commitment to peace that does not reflect the policies and actions taken in the protection of South Sea. The design of the research maintains a structural combination of objective investigations on the concepts of definition and methodologies that answers the thesis question and intensive research on the thesis statement. Additionally, the design of the research maintains logical ideas on the influence of Chinese contribution from the values found in the Sea that tends to pose threats to the countries borders at the South Sea. Besides, the use of relevant case studies and influence of the neighboring countries contributes as key features that give insights on the Chinese participation to protect the Sea border and prevent the existence of the USA at the boarder as China tends to become the super powers though the use of the available resources at the Sea. The design focuses on some of the problems that have contributed to the Protection Sea. Therefore, the influence of other neighboring states such as Taiwan, Vietnam, Brunei and Philippines’ in the Sea in competing for jurisdiction and territorial aspects with the exploitation of reserves such as gas and oil is highlighted in the paper.

Literature review

The literature review focuses on ten academic sources that talk about China’s policies and actions on the protection of the resources found in the Southern region of the Sea.  The section incorporates a literature review table that summarizes the ideas and concepts related to China’s action in the protection of the Sea from other neighboring countries as a way of pursuing power in the world and overcoming the America.

            The interest that other states have shown towards the resources available in the Sea has resulted in disputes and lack of peace, especially originated from the China. China facilitates and establish disputes because of their interest in using and exploitation the resources as a way of assembling to power and developing more resources for Chinese people and neglecting other states neighboring the Sea. Countries such as Indonesia, Malaysia, and Taiwan have had unrest and heated disputes with China to enable them to become relevant and use the available resources at sea. Additionally, China has caused tension towards other neighboring states bordering the Sea because of preventive measures and development of policies that do not represent the fair use of the Sea. The ideas and concepts that China has risen towards the importance of the Sea has favored only China state and hence contributing to unfair presentation and need for equal distribution of resources from the Sea. The troubled waters of South Sea have become the world’s interest from super power countries affecting the position of America in the world because of the potential and available resources noticed in the region especially in the years 2016 and 2017. Additionally, tension continues to build at the South Sea because of China's influence on development and implementation of strict policies on maritime frameworks that represent security, peace, and stability with the intension of protecting the resources available at the Sea region. The development and implementation of the resources have resulted in heated disputes and lack of peace despite China claims of peace and stability in the region. The building up of strong security forces and stability at the border against other states by China has resulted into disputed negotiations and the need for war to enable for shared use of the available resources at found in the Southern side of the territorial waters found in China.

Negative Impacts of the Disputes

            China’s commitment to peace does not reflect the policies and actions that have been developed and implemented with the association to sea Spratly Island found in the South Sea. The challenges that other states have noticed and raised to Chinese government have failed because of the manipulations’ of regulations and legislations’ that allow for fair use of the Sea resources at the region by the Chinese government. The differences in ways of managing and handling the resources available at the Sea remain unanimous because of Chinese government influences to protect the sea resources as part of their national obligations and interest in becoming the world’s superpowers in the future.  Chinese government leaders have developed and maintained high maritime security and policies that prevent other countries and states neighboring the sea to enjoy the resources available at the Sea effectively. Disputed arguments with Chinese government officials over the sea use focuses on territorial sovereignty, maritime boundaries, and the responsibility of protecting the natural resources that are available within the region. However, the government of China has refused and created tension because of the above interests terming it impossible as they focus on utilizing the resources for themselves and becoming the world super powers. Japan and South Korea have become very aggressive between the years 2016 and 2017 as they wish to exploit the available resources present at the South Sea region. However, the government of China has constantly refused to heed to the plea of the neighboring states into the use of the resources terming it impossible and unnecessary to jealously guard the available resources at the South China Sea for themselves without any agreements to be made or negotiations into sharing the resources at the South Sea. Ironically, China has an advocate for peace in the use of resources from Sea that does not reflect the policies and actions established by the same China administration in their commitment to shared obligations in the exploitation of the available resources at the Sea. The presence of the Sea and it is rich resources, has generated debates and disputes with other states because of resources found in China, but instead the China administration has remained firm by protecting the Sea for their interest and focusing on developing globally and becoming the world’s super powers in the near future.

This is therefore likely to lead into a war between the US and China, simply because the country does not consider the interests of other countries. In addition, due to the efforts that China has been making in order to become a super power, it has not been considering the interests of other countries. The US on the other hand, is keen on making sure that China does not affect other countries negatively, in order to become the super power. The US may therefore look for possible ways of dealing with the issue, a move which may lead China into a very huge war with China. In a time when Russia is being issued with trade sanctions by the international communities, the US is likely to impose such sanctions on China, in order to further weaken its economy, hence being the super power.

Literature review

The academic resources used in the development and establishment of this paper while focusing on the research topic originate from articles, books, videos, presentations, daily publications and journals that give reliable information on China commitment to peace at the Sea region that does not reflect the policies and actions taken in protecting the sea from exploitation from other neighboring States boarding the sea.

Castro (2013) talks about disputes that are developed from Sea and influence of Australia’s institutions responsible with taking care of the environment discusses some of the disputes and challenges that Philippines’ face from the exploitation of the resources available at the South Sea in China. Castro explains some of the legal actions that the Philippines' have taken to allow for the exploitation of resources at the resources at the Spratly Islands to no avail. The book explains the role played by Captain Thomas Cloma in 1956 as he made discoveries of the Islands present at thee the South China Sea and called the Islands Kalayaan to mean freedom. Additionally, it important to note that Philippine has managed to occupy six Islands at the Spratlys and claimed ownership formally in the control of the Islands by the development and issuance of a Presidential Decress which enabled for the formation of Philippines’ Exclusive Economic Zone.

Additionally, Castro maintains that Philippines’ government has continued to strengthen legal considerations by the involvement of International bodies such that discuss national issues and Conventions of Laws of Sea and to boost up of legal claims in the use of Spratly Island and land features that have faced a major challenge by the China. On the other hand, the Chinese government has constantly fought the Philippines' through legal claims on reefs and banks, which have focused on the growth of naval prowess, and banking on coercive diplomacy.  The book gives insights on ways and claims of managing the Island privately by the Chinese government as a way of protecting resources and jealously guarding the interests. Legal claims from both the Philippines and the Chinese government has generated challenges on policies and exploitation of the resources preventing shared use of the resources at the South China Sea.

The article on South Sea illustrations and Assessment of the US Policy and Options for the Future by McDevitt (2014) explains the influence of policies and actions associated with the United States issues, which has taken to promote and allow for fair use of South China Sea resources. Additionally, the article has managed to give theoretical aspects based on additional policies which are supported by the United States might want to introduce and develop as a way of pursuing Sea interests across the globe. Moreover, the article gives detailed information on the current existing US policy that tend to enable for exploitation of available resources present at the South China Sea. Theoretical and ideological perceptions based on policies that the article tends to exploit allow for heated debates on the recognition of policies, which allow for the exploitation of use of the available resources at the South China Sea despite China’s great influence.

Besides, in the article McDevitt recommends and provides numerous policies that tend to give approaches on how to generate stable, peaceful and non-confrontational laws which tend to abide by the laws and regulations of environmental concerns that need to be used in the South China Sea. Additionally, the insights of the article on policies provide more procedures and processes relevant in handling various stakeholders to allow for regulations which not only favors China but also the neighboring states and stakeholders interested in the South China Sea presence. The article recognizes US influences through the presentation of policies, which contribute to fair sharing and environmental concerns necessary in the management, and provision of stable and peaceful environmental laws and policies.

Mingjiang (2013) discusses Chinese Debates on Sea Policy and Implications for Future Developments by recognizing the maritime institutional reforms relevant in handling the issues presented for the concerning Sea. Mingjiang argues that the introduction of issues that explain relevance of maritime framework and security policies assists in handling issues related to Sea through a fair presentation. Theoretical perceptions of the need to intensify efforts on some of the neglected maritime space provide information on ways of concepts that Chinese government tends to establish to realize fair use of the South China Sea to a majority of people. However, maritime policies and frameworks formed by the China government affect the use of South China Sea selfishly to the Chinese government. Frameworks of Maritime policies contribute to a new leadership aspects that need to be implemented in the China to allow for exploitation of resources that favors the Chinese government only.

The article contributes and manages different aspects that are required in maritime policies associated to the China administration needs to form and implement as a way of promoting evolving policies on maritime territorial elements as a way of solving disputes in the management of South China Sea. Theoretical concerns and aspects that the Beijing government tends to influence the management of South China Sea is addressed through the article to promote proper handling of China maritime territorial disputes and formation of strong leadership responsibilities that allow for the exploitative use of South China Sea resources. Therefore, Mingjiang maintains that new leadership, maritime territorial disputes, and policies allow for the exploitative use of the resources in available in the Sea that favors the China administration.

Morton (2016) discussions on China’s Ambitions with the presence of the Sea and possible legitimate Maritime order on International Affairs explains the possible expansion of personal interest and developmental of policies to assists in guarding the resources available in Sea.  The Journal explains some of the leading tensions noted by America has facilitated as a spiral movement that affects littoral concerns in the management of South Sea resources especially the valuables’ found from the East of Asia. Evaluations of concerns of possible maritime policies explain ambitions and aspects that enable for legitimate processes, which promote fair use of resources and exploitative abilities. South China Sea resources have generated debates on ways of handling conditions favorable through conventional analysis that accepts resource exploitation. Clear and concise recognition of the available resources found at the Sea promotes and establishes more conventional approaches that promote legitimate maritime orders to allow for possible secure of boarders and use of resources privately at the South China Sea. Therefore, China’s ambition into controlling and managing the resources is based on the development and recognition of aspects that are relevant in handling conflicts in major regions and neighboring states to allow for the legitimate use of the resources available at the South China Sea effectively (Wu, 2016).

Morton maintains that international affairs on maritime resource exploitation need to focus on the establishment of more and legitimate policies by conventional ways to allow for inclusivity that prevents any incidences of conflicts and disputes on the resource use. The article tends to focus more on China’s ambition to broaden maritime orders and transformations. However, it contributes to effective understanding by recognizing that exploitation of resources through Chinese government must be legitimate and focused on growth and establishment of fair resource use of South China Sea while incorporating relevant policies of maritime ambitions.

The Journal that discussed aspects which determine rights and affiliations’ of sea resources while focusing on Challenges and Policies Responses by Ningbo (2016) explains some of the important Sea policies and theory that focuses on maintenance. The Journal explains and illustrates some of the important aspects that relevant in handling important aspects that discuss the presence of Sea resources. Additionally, some of the challenges and policies that might affect effective operations at the Sea are also discussed to promote effective exploitation as well as enabling other states to have economic values from the presence of Sea. Moreover, the journal explains various issues that relevant in managing and handling aspects of control required in ocean management and how it brings great influence to the elements of fall and rise of states. Researchers have taken keen interests into issues related to Sea power control theory in the management of South China Sea need to consider the importance of other states and the roles they play to enable participation in the allocation of resources are used effectively in the region. Exploitation of resources and the presence rights and interests in ways of handling South China Sea resources need to consider the available policies and challenges that might develop in the process of promoting exploitation and utilization of resources(Lanteigne, 2016). The article maintains and recognizes some of the important duties and responsibilities that maritime interests and rights promote through international standings and responsibilities to allow for economic prosperity and growth in various sections of South China Sea resource use and other states.

The challenges and policies that Ningbo evaluates in the journal evaluate the possible presence of national security issues and features that explain aspects of political considerations that influence international standings and promotion of maritime power especially in the Sea region that is almost three million kilometer.

Rustandi (2016) discusses the influence of the Sea Presence that generates Dispute and Chances of the involvement of the ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations) body that enhances its Policies to achieve Resolution. The book as written by Rustandi exploits insights on the current disputes associated with Sea knowledge in the management of resources in the available. Rustandi tends to focus on the disputes while analyzing some of the important elements and opportunities that the Association of Southeast Asian Nations has into achieving policies and some important resolutions into the management valuables’ found from the sea. The long-standing disputes that might be existing on China's influence of the South China Sea contributes to long resolutions and debates on how to handle the disputes while focusing on the achieving peaceful settlement procedures.

The solving of South China Sea disputes through dialogues, and commitment and associations do not show important resolutions as suggested by Rustandi but instead, requires a more powerful system that will handle the disputes effectively.

In the article, Back to Future and East Sea South China Studies by Valencia (2012) explains some important insights into dispute ownership depending on jurisdictions, islands, and maritime boundaries. Additionally, Valencia explains some of the important aspects that need to be implemented in the handling both the living and non-living marine resources especially in the East China Sea regions. The theoretical aspects of the article focus on China and Japan relations that need to be reviewed to allow for healthy and historical factors into the use of the Sea resources. Additionally, the article tends to expand the important information on cultural factors that contributed to World War II and the need to promote nationalism through vital incorporation o governance aspects. National aspects that promote and establish solutions for disputes are discussed through the journal to give insightful abilities to the management of resources in the South China Sea.

Valencia insists in the creation of associations from the States found from East of China Sea that establish laws and allow for the exploration of resources as a way of solving disputes that have developed between japan and the neighboring country China relations through cultural considerations and affiliations’.

Sterling-Folker, (2013) in the article Making Sense of International Relations Theory explains the importance of China's involvement in international relations that assists in managing disputes and challenges. Sterling insists in the article explains some important considerations that need to be established to promote and enable solutions for that solve issues of the Sea.

Sarkesian, Sam, John Allen Williams, and Stephen Cohen in the publication of the US National Security, Policymakers, Processes, and Politics. Boulder 2013, explain some legal standards that need to be maintained as part of solving the disputes at the South China Sea effectively.

On the other hand, it would be wrong for the US, to intervene in the situation, as this might be due to the fear of China dominating the world and becoming a super power. An international body which is nonpartisan, is therefore supposed to deal with this issue, hence enable the world to remain at peace.

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

 

Roy, (2016) explains the real frustrations that are affiliated to conflict resolution in the South Sea and ways of bringing prospects into examination to bring peace from the opposing States.

Roy explains some important information on the need to resolve disputes and bring resolutions and peace in East Asia.

McDevitt, M. (2014) Sea: evaluates issues related to policy and how to promote future maritime frameworks that is equitable.

McDevitt is well acquainted to issues that discuss policies and Options that the US government wishes to incorporate in the South China Sea

Mingjiang, L (2013). Chinese Debates on issues related to policy frameworks: Implications for Future Developments. RSIS Working Paper No. 239. Pp. 1-21.

Mingjiang insists on debates of the South Sea that allow for future developments

Morton, K. (2016). China's ambition with the presence of the Sea: is a legitimate maritime order possible. International Affairs, 92(4), 909-940.

Morton explains some important ambitions that need to be taken by the South China Sea as part of legitimate maritime order possibilities

Ningbo, W. (2016) discussions on the kind of rights and part of interests: Challenges and Policy   Responses. Australian Journal of Maritime and Ocean Affairs Vol. 8, Iss. 4. pp. 1-27.

Ningbo explains important elements of associated with the interests and responsibilities of Sea issues. Besides, explains of policies and challenges of Maritime Affairs are explained in the Journal

Rustandi, C. A. (2016). The South Sea Dispute and explanations’ on possible interaction of ASEAN to enhance its policies to achieve resolution.

Rustandi maintains that the presence of the Sea dispute need to involve associations’ for instance ASEAN that enhances policies to achieve possible resolutions’

Valencia, M. J. (2014). The East China Sea Disputes: History, Status, and Ways Forward. Asian Perspective, 38(2), 183-218.

Valencia insists on solving disputes of China and the South Sea by looking into historical and status considerations of political aspects related to Sea aspects

 

Legal basis for rights and jurisdictions of South China Sea

China claims to have legal rights and jurisdictions in the use of South China Sea because of the land that is it seems to be under their territorial boundaries. The idea of legal rights has made them develop the need to exploit the troubled waters as part of their natural resources because of the surrounding Island that the waters cover (Ranero et al.2016). However, the notion has been challenged by various people and states that surround the water covers in the region. The law has clear jurisdictions and obligations of how the waters need to be used by the surrounding states and the expectations of the members in the region which China has complicated by developing legal standards and separated ideas and concepts of the use of water by other states. Laws such as the economic zones within the coastal states have established jurisdictions that give a fair treatment of 200 nautical miles distance of the Seawater from the main territory.

The legal basis and rights of territorial water have been changed and challenged by the China government by increasing the sense of security through dominating maritime approaches along the coast line and securing Sea lanes in the open Pacific sea. The development of maritime security legal rights and jurisdictions does not reflect the kind of peace that the other states would love to be implemented in the region to allow for fair participation in resource utilization by the neighboring states that border the territorial waters of South China Sea. The differences and establishment of more maritime security laws by China do not bring peace and stability in the region as other nations would like to allow for the sharing of the resources in the region (Sarkesian et al. 2013). China insists on legal rights and jurisdictions that allow for maritime responsibilities that take care of their interests rather than the other states in that border the Territorial waters of the region. Moreover, the legal rights and jurisdictions on the use of South China Sea resources have been established and implemented by the Chinese government through recognizing Nationalism ideas. One of the nationalism concepts and ideas that Chinese government has established as a way protecting legal rights and jurisdictions of the troubled waters include the attitude of China citizens to take different aspects in legal understanding as a way of exercising there national identify through protecting the South China Sea (Goh et al. 2016). The Chinese people do not want other nations to take part in resource exploitation of Sea valuables as a way of nationalism, which causes conflicts and heated debates on how to handle issues related to the presence of resources in the region.

The ASEAN states that need to take part in the protection and establishment of South China Sea resources have developed disputes and claimed China’s interest in creating stipulated distance. Additionally, Mingjiang (2013) argues that China has developed mixed experiences in the use of the Sea resources by establishing power status to allow for domination against other countries in the region. The need to develop more power and dominate over the ownership of the Sea has caused tension and legal aspects in ways of handling resources by other states in the region especially members of the ASEAN (Barckhausen et al.2014). Additionally, through research mixed reactions in ways of handling legal and jurisdictions of resources that are found in the sea have created more debated on China's interest to seek Power from the United States and become the word known super powers in the future. China has become interested in ruling over other territories through Nationalism and establishment of security maritime legal standards attracting more tension and conflicts from other states that are also interested in the exploiting the resources available in South China Sea (Sterling, 2013).

The features of the islands present within the South Sea has developed more debate and conventions as it is labeled as part of the human habitat. The legal aspects and jurisdictions of South China Sea have influenced other states interest into handling the waters and promoting trade activities as part of the human habitat. However, china’s perceptions on Nationalism towards the sea have facilitated actions of China citizens as members of a nation with the objective of sustaining political sovereignty.

Political sovereignty in as part of Chinese obligations in the protection of the Sea has established more resistance and conflicts from the neighboring countries in the use of the South China Sea waters. Additionally, in 2016, China government vowed to ensure that the sovereignty of South China waters would be maintained as their right to allow for resource protection. Besides, the idea of political sovereignty by China in the protection of South China Sea has facilitated the country to allow air defense zone to take charge in protecting the sea as part of legal jurisdictions (William & David, 2016). However, disputes have developed more from other states because of recent rejection of Chinese government from obeying international tribunal ruling as part of claims that the resources were only part of china's energy-rich waters. China’s ability to deploy air defense zones in the management of the territorial waters has degraded legal and jurisdictions’ aspects that other countries have claimed to allow for shared resource use in the region. Legal battles in the use of South China Sea resources has prompted China to declare the permanent court of arbitration as an external force that does not preach peace but instead interested in sovereign rights of the Philippines’ and hence endangering fishing, oil projects and ships and several activities that take place in the region as part of economical development. Alford et al. (2015) argue that China has refused to owner legal participation or incorporations that allow for sharing of resources at the South Sea because of the selfish interests of political sovereignty.

There exist 150 geographical features out of 40 that the South China Sea offers and requires categorization as part of Spratly Island benefits according to legal and jurisdictions’ considerations that Chinese government has refused to Owner. The neighboring states have been denied the opportunity to exploit the resources of South China Sea as part of the law. The ignorance of the laws and jurisdictions present explicitly claim that China or any other state is ignorant of the provision.  The need to take all the resources in the region without considering other nations has resulted in disputes’ and challenges in ways of handling the resources available while sharing important elements. 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 (Sarkesian et al. 2013).  May nations have influenced and promoted divided opinions on ways of handling the resources which the Chinese government has brushed away because of their interest in becoming super powers and handling the benefits of the Sea as part of personal property. Many researchers, therefore, argue that for China to protect the waters and territories without conflict with the neighbors, there must be proper international laws (Hughes, 2014). The efforts of some people to participate in enacting laws and rules that protect the use of the resources by all the nations has failed because of political sovereignty and Nationalism aspects which do not give the opportunity to use the resources effectively. 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 does not have rights to undertake unilateral exploitation.

China’s Great Power aspirations

China’s interest in becoming a super power and superseding the States has generated debates and disputes on the use of South China Sea resources (Samuels, 2013). China has developed more interest in ways of handling and balancing power by implementing strategies that revolve around a weaker nation that seeks to increase it is powers as a way of countering a stronger power.  Ideas such as the nature of disputes, legal basics that maintain exploration and China claims of the South Sea has resulted in resistance and competition in ways of promoting standards to become the world super powers.

The Southern region of the Sea is estimated to occupy an area of around 3.5 million square kilometers, which extends and hence promoting and influencing their interest into becoming one of the world’s super powers by handling South China Sea resources independently.  The interest of China to become the worlds’ super powers has contributed to claims of taking over Taiwan Strait to the Eastern end of Singapore (Valencia, 2012) through grabbing resources available in the South China Sea. Disputes in the area primarily concern the territorial sovereignty over the two groups dominant in the Highland. One of the groups 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 (Valencia, 2012) 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. However, China has failed to observe some of the fundamental requirements, which have facilitated continuous crises in the region (Barckhausen et al.2014). 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. The disputes of the nations on how to use the natural valuables found in the Sea has contributed to challenges and legal aspects to claim the Island since China aims to be the super powers by the use of the resources.

Dispute resolutions on how to handle valuables found the from the Sea require effective development and practical presentation of international laws especially maritime to allow for effective resource use prevention of disputes from the neighboring states boarding the Sea. According to (Valencia, 2012), 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 other claims of the disputes occur between certain states because of the support in China’s policies and actions that tend to guard presentation of Sea resources (Gallagher, 2014). 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. Different states have different interests towards the use of the availability of the resources in the Sea promoting disputes and possible occurrence of war. 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 (Valencia, 2012). 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.

This is therefore one of the main factors which is likely to lead China into very many problems with the US, since the country will not allow any other country to be a super power. A move which is likely to lead to a war between China and the US, since the US, will be looking for possible ways of crippling China, hence limiting it from being a super power. Moreover, they country may also be issued with trade sanctions, a move which would therefore see China’s economy collapsing.

Western influences contributing to the problems of the Sea

The problem at the Southern Sea has been influenced by the interest of other western countries because of the need to recognize the resources present at sea. The influence of other countries interested in resources available in the Sea has resulted into disputes of the Sea affiliated to China and Vietnam as well as between China and Philippines have even raised wider issues about the claims of Sea.  The nations influence how claiming bigger shares and hence generating war and conflicts while forcing China to develop policies and actions that do not necessarily contribute to peace distribute resources. According to (McDevitt, 2014), 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 (McDevitt, 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.

Different nations have established legal jurisdictions and laws that do not favor China to use the resources available at the South China Sea. According to (Rustandi, 2016), 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.  The LOS Convention has influenced the possibility of China developing or participating any legal rights that make them the owners of South China Sea. 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)”. The differences and lack of agreement on the already set rules associated to Sea resources facilitate and influence resource use present at the South Sea. 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.  The dashed lines do not represent permanent ownership of the territorial boundaries of South China Sea, and hence China needs to allow for legal rights participation into the determination of resource allocation. 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. (McDevitt, 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.

Therefore, western countries such Vietnam and Philippines’ generate a lot of controversies on the available resources present at the South China Sea. The influence of Western countries has promoted and attracted China to implement policies and actions that that tend to protect the resources available in the Southern region of the Sea for their use. China pushes away the ideas and concepts of other Western countries to protect and maintain legal rights of maritime responsibilities to emerge as the super powers and protection of Nationalism aspects and balance of power in the resource use available in the region (Franke et al.2014).

Conclusion

China’s actions and policies in the protection of Spratly Island do not reflect the peace required at the South China Sea. Legal and jurisdictions aspects implemented by the China government especially maritime security policies at the territorial borders of South China Sea display personal interest in the available resources present at the region. 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.  Lack of a reflection that shows peace at the Sea in the years 2016 and 2017 has attracted debates and disputes on China interest in the use of the resources available at the Sea and need to become the Super powers in the future by superseding America. Also, the actions that it takes are contrary to the claims that it is committed to peace. Researchers in the year 2016 and 2017 have 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. The main aim in the urge to develop maritime zones and securing territorial boundaries is affiliated with interest into handling the resources as an individual country and later becoming the worlds’ super powers in the future.

 Surprisingly, China has rubbished International laws even vowed to protect the South China Sea by deploying air defense forces in the region to prevent any interference from the neighboring states from accessing any resources in the Sea since 2016 up to the current time. 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.  China claims to reflect on peace on the use of the available resources at the Sea but instead develops and implements policies and actions that do not show peace in the handling processes of the territorial resources and waters of South China Sea. However, this law is not clear which has resulted in top disputes as every country seeks to exploit and taking advantage of the sea areas, has attracted international disputes and challenges in ways of handling maritime security policies and actions because of the incorporation of aspects such as Nationalism and political sovereignty in the use of the resources in the region. 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 to seek interventions’ and bring back sanity in the region since the year 2016 to 2017. One of the concerns by these international countries is the influence of China actions that tend to influence and threaten the ability to enable navigation and over a flight that later will influence trade and ability to allow for international relations. China pretends to have taken action and policies in promoting peace in the use of the resources and aspects related to international laws. While China has taken measures to show commitment to peace with the neighbors, there exist numerous challenges that still need significant dispute resolution due to sovereignty on the Islands. The challenge of forming relevant policies and laws has attracted disputes that have even forced the United States to develop policies and actions that allow for equal maritime access which China has refused to conform to secretly since 2016 to 2017. The United States has the intension of promoting opportunities that 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. The intension of China’s interest to become the worlds’ super powers has influenced the implementation of procedures associated with maritime policies and actions in the South China Sea.

Reference 

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.

Hughes, L. (2014). Examining the Sino-Indian Maritime Competition: Part 3–China goes to sea. Strategic Analysis Paper.

Lanteigne, M. (2016). The South China Sea after" Philippines v. China": Summer of Our Discontent?.

McDevitt, M. (2014). The South China Sea: Assessing US Policy and Options for the Future. CNA Occasional Paper). Arlington, VA: Center for Naval Analysis.

Mingjiang, L (2013). Chinese Debates of South China Sea Policy: Implications for Future Developments. RSIS Working Paper No. 239. Pp. 1-21.

Morton, K. (2016). China's ambition in the South China Sea: is a legitimate maritime order possible?. International Affairs, 92(4), 909-940.

Rustandi, C. A. (2016). The South China Sea Dispute: Opportunities for ASEAN to enhance its policies in order to achieve resolution.

Samuels, M. (2013). Contest for the South China Sea. Routledge.

 Sarkesian, Sam C., John Allen Williams, and Stephen J. Cohen. US National Security(2013): Policymakers, Processes and Politics. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers.

Sterling-Folker, J. (2013). Making Sense of International Relations Theory. Lynne Rienner Publishers, Inc. Boulder, Colorado

Wu, S. (2016). Maritime security in the South China Sea: Regional implications and international cooperation. Routledge.