How South China Sea dispute can be resolved?

A Brief of South China Sea Dispute

The South China Sea covers about 3.5 million square kilometers and boasts over 200 islands, reefs, shoals, and submerged features, making it a significant area for regional and global interests. It holds vast natural resources like fish, oil, gas, and minerals, facilitating international trade worth over $3 trillion annually.

With its wealth of resources, the South China Sea is increasingly viewed as a potential flashpoint for future conflicts. China, Taiwan, the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia, and Brunei each stake claims to parts of the region, particularly the Paracels, Spratlys, and Scarborough Shoal.

Numerous proposals have been suggested to address the complexities of the South China Sea dispute. These include setting aside sovereignty disputes for joint resource development, negotiating a code of conduct (COC) between ASEAN and China to prevent conflicts, third-party arbitration or adjudication of disputes, establishing a Track Two Tribunal for non-governmental examination of evidence, and enhancing confidence-building measures and crisis management mechanisms among claimants. Moreover, fostering regional cooperation and integration across trade, development, environment, and health sectors is seen as crucial for building trust and reducing tensions.

Each proposal reflects the intricate nature of the issue and the need for diverse approaches to find resolution.

Contesting nations and their claims

China

China asserts control over the majority of the South China Sea, citing a historical map from 1947 known as the “nine-dash line.” This claim includes territories like the Paracel and Spratly islands, which China argues are historically its own. China has reinforced its claims through the construction of artificial islands, deployment of military assets, and patrols, citing national security and sovereignty.

Neighboring countries including Vietnam, the Philippines, Taiwan, Malaysia, and Brunei dispute China’s claims, citing inconsistencies with international law, especially UNCLOS. They assert their own historical, legal, and factual bases for claims.

In 2016, an arbitration tribunal ruled in favor of the Philippines against China’s claims, deeming them unlawful and in violation of Philippine rights. China rejected the ruling and abstained from the arbitration process.

The United States, while not a claimant, has interests in the South China Sea, such as freedom of navigation and regional security. It opposes China’s claims and conducts operations to support allies and challenge what it sees as China’s excessive claims.

Efforts to manage the dispute through dialogue, confidence-building measures, and a code of conduct have been slow and limited. The South China Sea remains a hotspot of contention with unresolved disputes.

Vietnam

Vietnam asserts sovereignty over the Paracel and Spratly islands, including surrounding waters, seabed, and subsoil within its exclusive economic zone (EEZ) and continental shelf, as defined by UNCLOS. Its claims are supported by historical evidence dating back to the 17th century, demonstrating continuous presence and administration.

Vietnam actively reinforces its claims through infrastructure development, surveys, and military deployments, notably occupying 21 features in the Spratlys, the most among claimants. Despite seeking international support through agreements with countries like the US, Japan, and India, tensions persist with China, which disputes Vietnam’s assertions through its nine-dash line claim and has occupied the Paracels since 1974.

Clashes between China and Vietnam, such as the 1974 Battle of the Paracels, 1988 Johnson South Reef Skirmish, and 2014 Haiyang Shiyou 981 oil rig standoff, highlight ongoing tensions. Vietnam also faces challenges from other claimants like the Philippines, Malaysia, and Taiwan. While seeking resolution through bilateral and multilateral discussions, progress remains slow amid disputes.

Philippines

The Philippines asserts sovereignty over the Kalayaan Island Group (KIG) within the Spratly Islands, as well as the surrounding waters, seabed, and subsoil within its exclusive economic zone (EEZ) and continental shelf, as per UNCLOS. Anchoring its claims in historical evidence dating back to the 1950s, the Philippines maintains it discovered and has occupied the KIG.

To reinforce its claims, the Philippines has undertaken measures such as infrastructure development and military presence, including occupying nine features in the Spratlys, notably Thitu (Pag-asa). Seeking international backing, the Philippines filed a case against China in 2013 under UNCLOS arbitration. In 2016, the tribunal ruled in favor of the Philippines, deeming China’s nine-dash line claim unlawful.

However, China disputes the Philippines’ claims, asserting almost the entire South China Sea based on its nine-dash line. Tensions have led to clashes, including the 2012 Scarborough Shoal standoff, the 2014 Ayungin Shoal incident, and the 2021 Whitsun Reef situation. Challenges from other claimants like Vietnam, Malaysia, and Taiwan, with overlapping claims, add to the complexities. Despite efforts to resolve disputes, progress has been limited.

Indonesia, Malaysia, and Brunei

Indonesia, Malaysia, and Brunei each have distinct stances on the South China Sea disputes. Indonesia, while not claiming the islands, disputes China’s nine-dash line near the Natuna Islands, part of its EEZ. Malaysia asserts its rights over a portion of the Spratly Islands, grounding its claim on historical evidence dating back to the 1970s, and opposes infringements, particularly by China. Malaysia has occupied five features in the Spratlys and seeks international support, including through ASEAN discussions. Brunei claims sovereignty over part of the Spratly Islands, engaging in international cooperation but refraining from occupation or force deployment.

Both Malaysia and Brunei face disputes from China, which contests much of the South China Sea based on the nine-dash line. They also encounter challenges from other claimants like the Philippines, Vietnam, and Taiwan. Despite dialogue efforts, progress in resolving disputes remains gradual and constrained.

United States in the picture, FONOPS

The United States plays a pivotal role in the South China Sea, driven by interests in maintaining freedom of navigation, supporting trade, and ensuring regional security. Through Freedom of Navigation Operations (FONOPs), the US challenges excessive maritime claims inconsistent with international law, particularly UNCLOS, which it views as customary international law.

Since 1979, FONOPs have been a key tool for the US, gaining significant attention since 2015 with China’s construction of artificial islands and military installations in the Spratly Islands. These operations target claims made by countries such as China, Taiwan, Vietnam, Malaysia, and the Philippines regarding innocent passage, straight baselines, and territorial sea limits.

In fiscal years 2019 and 2020, the US intensified its FONOPs in the South China Sea, challenging restrictions imposed by claimant states like China. Notably, the USS John S. McCain’s passage near the Paracel Islands in February 2021 contested territorial sea limitations set by China, Taiwan, and Vietnam.

China vehemently opposes these FONOPs, accusing the US of violating its sovereignty and regional security, and disturbing peace and stability in the area. In response, China deploys coast guard and naval vessels to monitor and warn US ships, occasionally engaging in maneuvers to impede or intimidate them.

The US asserts that its FONOPs are lawful operations aimed at safeguarding the rights and freedoms of all states under international law. It urges China and other claimants to adhere to UNCLOS and the 2016 arbitration ruling, which refuted China’s expansive nine-dash line claim. Despite tensions, the US remains committed to ensuring freedom of navigation and bolstering stability in the South China Sea.

Tensions persist in the South China Sea as each claimant tries to assert its sovereignty, with conflicting historical, legal, and factual grounds contributing to the complex geopolitical landscape.

Solutions to resolve the South China Sea Dispute

While there’s no easy resolution to the South China Sea dispute, several steps could ease tensions and foster cooperation among involved parties:

1. Respecting International Law: Adherence to international law, particularly UNCLOS, can provide a framework for resolving disputes peacefully and defining maritime rights and obligations.
2. Implementing Arbitration Rulings: Parties could uphold the 2016 arbitration ruling that invalidated China’s nine-dash line claim, clarifying legal status and facilitating resolution efforts.
3. Negotiating a Code of Conduct: Crafting a binding Code of Conduct between China and ASEAN nations could establish rules for managing disputes and preventing conflicts.
4. Enhancing Dialogue: Increasing dialogue and confidence-building measures, like joint patrols and crisis management mechanisms, can foster mutual understanding and trust among claimants.
5. Pursuing Joint Development: Collaborative efforts for resource development and conservation in the South China Sea, based on principles of mutual benefit, can mitigate tensions over resource exploitation.
6. Involving Stakeholders: Engaging stakeholders such as the United States, Japan, Australia, and the EU, which have interests in regional security and freedom of navigation, can broaden support for peaceful resolution efforts.

1. The concept of Global commons in letter and spirit

The concept of global commons in letter and spirit means that the South China Sea should be treated as a shared resource that belongs to all nations and peoples and that its use and management should be based on the principles of equity, sustainability, and cooperation. Many scholars and analysts endorse this idea as a means to address disputes and tensions in the area. Nevertheless, China has dismissed this notion and insists on its sovereignty over the majority of the South China Sea, delineated by its contentious nine-dash line, a claim unsupported by international legal standards.

2. Adherence to UNCLOS

Adherence to UNCLOS entails resolving the South China Sea disputes in line with the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. This treaty delineates the rights and responsibilities of coastal and maritime states across different sea zones, including the territorial sea, exclusive economic zone (EEZ), and continental shelf. UNCLOS additionally offers avenues for peaceful resolution of disputes, such as arbitration and conciliation. In 2016, an arbitral tribunal constituted under UNCLOS ruled in favor of the Philippines, invalidating China’s assertions and actions in the South China Sea. However, China declined to acknowledge or adhere to the tribunal’s decision.

3. Pragmatic rather than confrontational approach

A pragmatic, non-confrontational approach to the South China Sea disputes advocates for dialogue and collaboration over military aggression and coercion. This strategy seeks to mitigate tensions, prevent escalation, and foster trust and confidence among the concerned parties. Some examples of this approach include the 2002 Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea (DOC), ongoing discussions regarding a Code of Conduct in the South China Sea (COC), and joint maritime and air patrols undertaken by select ASEAN nations and their allies.

4. CBM’s

Confidence-building measures (CBMs) in the South China Sea disputes refer to initiatives undertaken by involved parties to foster mutual understanding, reduce mistrust and mitigate the risk of miscalculation and conflict. Examples of CBMs include setting up hotlines, exchanging information, notifying about military exercises, adhering to rules of conduct, and engaging in joint activities.

5. A joint Forum of the littoral states

A joint forum of the littoral states means a platform for dialogue and cooperation among the countries that border the South China Sea, namely China, Taiwan, Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia, Brunei, Indonesia, and Singapore. Such a forum could facilitate discussions on shared interests and challenges, coordinate policies and actions, and foster regional stability and prosperity. However, the establishment of such a forum faces obstacles, including differing positions and interests among the littoral states, a deficit of mutual trust and goodwill, and the influence of external powers.

6. Regular talks and emerging contacts to thwart misunderstandings

Regular talks and emerging contacts to thwart misunderstandings mean the frequent and timely communication and interaction among the parties involved in the South China Sea disputes to clarify their intentions, address their concerns, and resolve their differences. These engagements could occur across political, diplomatic, military, and civil society levels, utilizing diverse channels including bilateral, multilateral, and track two discussions. Such dialogues aid in preventing or managing incidents, reducing tensions, and promoting cooperation.

7. Efforts for joint maritime patrols

Initiatives for joint maritime patrols entail coordinated and collaborative efforts among the stakeholders engaged in the South China Sea disputes to monitor and protect the maritime domain in the area. These patrols could include the participation of naval, coast guard, or civilian vessels and aircraft, serving various purposes like law enforcement, search and rescue, disaster relief, environmental protection, and fisheries management. By enhancing maritime security, deterring illegal activities, and showcasing goodwill and cooperation, such patrols contribute to regional stability.

8. Open use of media to make things transparent

The transparent utilization of media involves employing diverse platforms and sources to disseminate precise and credible information and analysis regarding the South China Sea disputes to both the public and the international community. Such media could include traditional outlets like newspapers, magazines, radio, and television, as well as newer forms such as websites, blogs, podcasts, and social media. By raising awareness, educating, and informing audiences about South China Sea issues and developments, transparent media practices help counter misinformation, propaganda, and bias.

End Note

To sum up, the South China Sea dispute remains a complex and challenging issue with far-reaching implications for regional security, stability, and cooperation. The competing territorial and maritime claims among multiple nations, coupled with strategic interests and historical grievances, contribute to the intricate nature of the dispute.

Efforts to address the dispute through dialogue, legal mechanisms, and confidence-building measures have yielded limited progress amidst persistent tensions and occasional confrontations. However, the principles of international law, respect for UNCLOS, pragmatic diplomacy, and cooperative engagement offer avenues for constructive dialogue and peaceful resolution.

As regional and international stakeholders continue to navigate the complexities of the South China Sea, fostering trust, promoting transparency, and prioritizing cooperation remain essential for building a foundation of stability and prosperity in the region. Through sustained dialogue and concerted efforts, stakeholders can work towards managing disputes, enhancing maritime security, and safeguarding the shared interests of all parties involved.

Ultimately, a commitment to mutual respect, adherence to established norms, and a spirit of cooperation will be pivotal in charting a path towards a peaceful and sustainable resolution of the South China Sea dispute, ensuring stability and prosperity for generations to come.