SOUTH CHINA SEA: TROUBLED WATERS | Deep Analysis

The Straits of Malacca and the Strait of Hormuz, despite their troubled waters, stand as vital maritime corridors linking the Indian Ocean to the South China Sea and the Persian Gulf to the Gulf of Oman and the Arabian Sea. These strategic routes are essential for global energy markets, facilitating the transport of oil and gas shipments between key regions. Both these straits play a pivotal role in ensuring the uninterrupted flow of energy resources worldwide.

In contrast, the Suez Canal in Egypt and the Panama Canal provide crucial shortcuts for global trade. The Suez Canal, connecting Europe to Asia, significantly reduces travel times for ships compared to navigating around Africa. In 2019, nearly 19,000 vessels carrying a staggering 1 billion tons of cargo traversed the Suez Canal, showcasing its immense importance to global trade. However, recent events, such as the Suez Canal blockage caused by a Taiwanese container ship, highlighted the canal’s vulnerability to disruption, despite ongoing expansion efforts initiated by the Egyptian government in 2015.

Similarly, the Panama Canal provides a vital shortcut for ships traveling between the Pacific and Atlantic oceans, particularly benefiting vessels sailing between the east and west coasts of the U.S. This shortcut saves over 8,000 nautical miles and more than 21 days in travel time. In 2019, the Panama Canal facilitated the transportation of approximately 252 million tons of goods, generating over $2.6 billion in tolls.

Let us delve into South China Sea troubled waters.

South China Sea

Coming to the South China Sea via Malacca strait, the region is a strategically vital body of water in Southeast Asia, and serves as a crucial maritime route for global trade, with about one-third of the world’s shipping passing through its waters. Rich in natural resources like oil and gas reserves and home to important fisheries, the region is significant with respect to economic value.

However, the South China Sea is also a contemporary geopolitical hotspot due to overlapping territorial claims by multiple countries. China’s assertion of historical claims to most of the sea, demarcated by the controversial “new ten dash line,” conflicts with the claims of neighboring countries and this is a bone of contention between the claimant states and China. Moreover, China’s construction of artificial islands and military installations in disputed areas raises concerns about sovereignty, freedom of navigation, and potential military confrontations. The region’s geopolitical significance extends beyond territorial disputes, influencing broader power dynamics in Asia and shaping alliances and partnerships among regional and global powers.

Ongoing Conflicts in Region:

The troubled waters of The South China Sea have become a hotbed of conflict, with several nations laying claim to its strategic locations and abundant natural resources. While all the bordering nations lay claims to parts of South China Sea, primarily the conflict centers around the sovereignty of various island groups, notably the Spratly Islands.

The vast sea is not just about territorial claims; it’s also about the wealth beneath its waves. It is estimated to hold 11 billion barrels of untapped oil and 190 trillion cubic feet of natural gas. Claimant states have their eye on these untapped riches.

In the meanwhile, China’s growing assertiveness in the South China Sea has emerged as a major concern. This assertiveness has escalated tensions, especially with Southeast Asian states like the Philippines, and Vietnam. China insists that international law prohibits foreign militaries from conducting intelligence-gathering activities within its Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). However, the United States and other claimant countries counter this stance. They argue that the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) guarantees them freedom of navigation through the high seas. Furthermore, they maintain that they are not obligated to notify claimants of their military activities.

Historical Background of Territorial Claims

The historical background of territorial claims in the South China Sea is complex and dates back centuries. Here’s a brief exploration:

1. Historical Records:

Historical documents reveal a rich tale of interaction with the South China Sea, with numerous empires, kingdoms, and indigenous communities having traversed and settled in its waters over the centuries. For instance, the Han Dynasty, which ruled China from 206 BC to 220 AD, is known to have asserted sovereignty over sections of the sea. They established their control over various islands and facilitated maritime trade, enhancing their influence and economic power.

Similarly, the Ming Dynasty, which reigned from 1368 to 1644, also staked claims in the South China Sea. They not only controlled several islands but also promoted extensive maritime trade, which played a significant role in the prosperity and cultural exchange during that era. The voyages of the famous explorer Zheng He, under the patronage of the Ming Dynasty, are a testament to the strategic importance of the South China Sea in fostering international trade and diplomacy since the ancient times. These historical instances provide a glimpse into the long-standing significance of the South China Sea.

2. Historical Maps and Texts:

Chinese historical documents, including maps and written texts, frequently illustrate various islands and geographical features within the South China Sea as integral parts of China’s territory. These territorial claims were not arbitrary but were rooted in historical expeditions, established trade routes, and sporadic administrative oversight.

For instance, ancient Chinese maps often included detailed depictions of the South China Sea islands, indicating their recognition and assertion of these territories. These maps served as crucial evidence of China’s historical claims over the region.

Occasionally, China also exercised administrative control over parts of the South China Sea. This control was often manifested in the form of naval patrols, collection of tribute from other regional powers, and the establishment of military outposts on strategic islands.

3. Colonial Period:

The colonial period marked a significant chapter in the history of the South China Sea. During this era, several European powers, notably Spain, the Netherlands, and France, staked their claims and established a presence on some islands in the South China Sea. Spain, under its vast and powerful empire, extended its influence to parts of the South China Sea. The Spanish East Indies, which included the Philippines and other Pacific islands, were a testament to Spain’s colonial reach in the region.

The Dutch, known for their maritime prowess, also made their mark in the South China Sea. The Dutch East Indies, now modern-day Indonesia, was a significant Dutch colony that included territories in the South China Sea. France, through its colony of French Indochina, which encompassed present-day Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia, also had a stake in the South China Sea. The French claimed several islands in the region.

However, the presence of these European colonial powers was relatively limited compared to their vast global empires. Their claims in the South China Sea often overlapped with China’s historical assertions, leading to complex territorial disputes that echo into the present day.

4. Modern Territorial Disputes:

In the aftermath of World War II and the dissolution of colonial rule, the South China Sea became the stage for a new era of territorial disputes. Two primary actors in these modern disputes are the Republic of China (Taiwan) and the People’s Republic of China. Both nations inherited historical claims to the region, carrying forward the legacy of their predecessors.

One of the most significant of these inherited claims is the “dash line” assertion. This claim, which is depicted as a demarcation line consisting of nine dashes on Chinese maps, encompasses the majority of the South China Sea. It includes numerous islands and key waterways, making it a point of contention with other nations in the region.

The “nine-dash line” assertion is based on historical maps and maritime records, which, according to China, provide evidence of their historical rights over the region. However, this claim has been a subject of international dispute and has been challenged by several countries, including the Philippines, Vietnam, and Malaysia.

These modern territorial disputes in the South China Sea are not just about land and sea but also about national pride and strategic advantage. As these disputes continue to unfold, they shape the geopolitical landscape of the region and have significant implications for international law and global peace.

5. Post-Colonial Claims:

In the post-colonial era, the South China Sea became a focal point of territorial assertions by several Southeast Asian nations. Countries including Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia, and Brunei began to stake their claims, asserting sovereignty over various islands, reefs, and waters within the South China Sea.

Vietnam, for instance, has been particularly assertive in claiming parts of the Paracel and Spratly Islands, citing historical evidence and international law. These claims have often brought it into direct conflict with China, leading to several naval standoffs.

The Philippines, on the other hand, has laid claim to parts of the Spratly Islands and the Scarborough Shoal. The country has even taken its dispute with China to the Permanent Court of Arbitration, resulting in a landmark ruling in 2016 that rejected China’s “nine-dash line” claim.

Malaysia and Brunei, while less vocal, have also asserted their rights over parts of the South China Sea. Malaysia claims a number of islands as part of its continental shelf, while Brunei claims an exclusive economic zone off its coast.

6. Legal Frameworks:

The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), often referred to as the “constitution of the oceans,” provides a crucial legal framework for addressing maritime disputes worldwide, including those in the contentious South China Sea region.

Enforced since 1994, UNCLOS sets the legal parameters for all activities in the oceans and seas. It highlights the rights and obligations of nations regarding oceanic resources, offering guidelines for commercial enterprises, environmental protection, and the governance of marine resources. In the context of the South China Sea, UNCLOS plays a pivotal role. It provides the legal basis for defining maritime zones, including territorial seas, exclusive economic zones (EEZs), and continental shelves, which are central to the disputes in the region.

However, the application of UNCLOS in resolving the South China Sea disputes has been fraught with challenges. Not all claimant states have ratified UNCLOS, creating hurdle in its universal application. For instance, while China ratified UNCLOS in 1996, it has made reservations about certain dispute settlement procedures provided in the convention.

The Arbitral Tribunal issued a final award on the South China Sea arbitration case brought against China by the Philippines in 2016. This award has been considered as providing a legal background for the maritime activities taken by various countries in the South China Sea.

Furthermore, the Philippines has gradually confirmed the value of the Award. In his speech to the annual meeting of the United Nations General Assembly in September 2020, Former President Rodrigo Duterte stated that “the Award is now part of international law, beyond compromise and beyond the reach of passing governments to dilute, diminish or abandon.”

Inspite of these developments, China consistently moves away from its designated UNCLOS boundaries, encroaching upon the coastlines and maritime activities of neighboring island nations in the region. This has led to increased tensions, especially with Southeast Asian claimant states.

7. Contemporary Tensions:

The troubled waters of South China Sea stand as a crucial conduit for more than $3 trillion in annual ship-borne commerce and ranks among the world’s most significant trade routes. However, recent decades have seen escalating tensions in this region, largely fueled by China’s assertive initiatives. China’s ambitious projects, including the construction of artificial islands and military installations, have significantly reshaped the area’s geopolitical dynamics.

China’s transformation of reefs in the Spratly Islands into fortified artificial islands, complete with military-grade airfields and advanced surveillance capabilities, has not only enhanced its military presence, but also enabled it to exert greater control over the contested waters. These actions have raised concerns among other claimant states, including Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia, and Brunei, as well as the broader international community.

Tensions with the Philippines:

Incidents such as the dramatic standoff between China and the Philippines, where the Philippines accused China’s coastguard of obstructing a Philippine resupply mission, further increase tensions and strain relations between nations in the region. Additionally, collisions between Chinese and Philippine coast guard vessels have resulted in injuries to the Filipino crew members, add volatility in the atmosphere.

In response to China’s actions, the United States and the Philippines are regularly conducting joint military exercises, including simulated combat scenarios, in and around the disputed South China Sea. These exercises, involving thousands of military personnel and supported by international allies like Australia and Japan highlights the deepening defense ties between the US and the Philippines in the wake of growing concerns over China’s assertiveness.

Indonesia’s Challenges:

Beyond Philippines, Indonesia has also experienced tensions with China, particularly concerning fishing rights around the Natuna Islands. Encounters between Indonesian fishermen and foreign vessels, including those from Vietnam, China, and the Philippines, have led to disputes over resources. Additionally, Chinese coast guard vessels’ frequent presence in the area has heightened tensions, requiring a continuous Indonesian coast guard presence.

Further complicating the situation, China’s demand for Indonesia to halt drilling for oil and natural gas near the Natuna Islands, asserting the area as “Chinese territory,” has been met with Indonesian defiance. Here, the Natuna Islands serving as a focal point of contention between Indonesia and China.

Vietnam’s Approach:

Vietnam, like the Philippines, contests China’s expansive claims in the South China Sea. Vietnam’s reliance on the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) for dispute resolution contrasts with the Philippines’ reliance on US support. While recent agreements between China and Vietnam aimed at resolving maritime disputes show diplomatic efforts, confrontations between Chinese and Vietnamese vessels persist. In a recent incident, Chinese and Vietnamese vessels confronted each other multiple times as a Chinese research ship conducted activities within Hanoi’s Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), likely conducting a survey.

Malaysia’s Response:

Similarly, Malaysia, another claimant in the South China Sea disputes, maintains a low-key approach to intrusions into its maritime territory to avoid jeopardizing economic ties with China.

A recent patrol by a Chinese vessel in Malaysian waters has highlighted Malaysia’s subdued response to such intrusions, reflecting a strategic low-profile approach. Analysts warn that adopting a more assertive stance could jeopardize Malaysia’s trade and economic interests, potentially leading to tensions in the disputed sea. This approach, while pragmatic, points towards balancing between economic interests and territorial sovereignty. It should also be noted that Malaysia has enhanced security ties and diversified foreign investment to reduce its economic reliance on China.

The prevailing tensions in the South China Sea serve to highlight the inherently volatile nature of the disputes in the region. As these circumstances persist and develop, the imperative for a peaceful and diplomatic resolution becomes more pressing.

Additionally, the international community has expressed apprehensions regarding China’s conduct in the South China Sea. Of particular concern is the potential impact of China’s expansive territorial claims on the principle of freedom of navigation, a fundamental tenet enshrined in international maritime law. Given the South China Sea’s significance as a crucial global trade route, any disruption to freedom of navigation could carry deep economic ramifications on a global scale.

Past disputes and their Impact on Regional Stability

Historically, minor skirmishes often precede larger conflicts, a pattern evident in the annals of history. Within the South China Sea, numerous localized conflicts have punctuated its history, leaving a lasting legacy of tension and distrust among neighboring nations.

The 1988 Johnson South Reef Skirmish serves as a poignant example, wherein the Chinese navy sank three Vietnamese vessels. Subsequent confrontations, such as the 1996 standoff between Chinese and Philippine navy ships in the Spratly Islands, exemplify the region’s volatility. The 2011 Reed Bank Incident, characterized by skirmishes following Manila’s protest against Chinese naval incursions, and the subsequent two-month standoff at Scarborough Shoal in 2012, are clear examples.

In 2014, tensions escalated when Chinese and Vietnamese coast guard vessels collided amid China’s attempts to establish an oil rig in disputed waters near the Paracel Islands. Similarly, the 2019 Sovereign Waters Dispute between China and Vietnam, wherein China obstructed Vietnamese support vessels from accessing a drilling platform within Vietnam’s sovereign waters, exemplified the persistent friction.

Collectively, these incidents have not only damaged trust among the countries involved but have also sparked an arms race as each nation tries to beef up its maritime capabilities. This has only worsened tensions and made it more likely for misunderstandings to occur.

Economic significance of the South China Sea

The South China Sea, spanning approximately 4 million square kilometers, holds significant economic and geopolitical importance. Economically, it serves as a vital maritime route, facilitating an estimated one-third of global shipping, equivalent to $3.4 trillion in trade in 2016, constituting about 21% of global trade. Additionally, the sea boasts abundant resources, including fisheries contributing 12% of the global catch, and reserves of eleven billion barrels of oil and 190 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, crucial for the economies of adjacent nations.

The region is also a strategic arena for China and the United States, both asserting their interests. Recent maritime confrontations involve not only China and its Southeast Asian neighbors, particularly Vietnam and Malaysia, but also the US and Australia.

A Peaceful Path Forward for the South China Sea

The South China Sea is currently embroiled in territorial disputes that pose a significant risk of escalating into a major conflict, potentially impacting both ASEAN nations and the global economy due to China’s substantial economic influence. Given this critical situation, it is essential for the involved nations to prioritize the development of conflict resolution mechanisms without requiring third-party intervention.

Confidence-Building Measures (CBMs) are crucial strategies in the context of the South China Sea disputes. They aim to reduce fear and suspicion among nations by promoting predictability in behavior. For instance, notifying parties before entering contested waters can prevent misunderstandings and accidental clashes, thus fostering a climate of trust and cooperation.

Adherence to international law, particularly the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), provides a legal framework for managing maritime disputes. Upholding UNCLOS is essential for ensuring peaceful navigation along this vital maritime route.

Diplomatic dialogues play a significant role in facilitating peaceful dispute resolution. For example, China and Southeast Asian nations have agreed to conclude a nonaggression pact within three years to prevent territorial disputes from escalating into major conflicts.

International bodies like the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) can be instrumental in resolving disputes. The arbitration between the Philippines and China before the PCA demonstrates the potential efficacy of such mechanisms in dispute resolution.

Regional cooperation is key to achieving peaceful resolutions. The consensus between the Philippines and China on the peaceful resolution of disputes, based on the Declaration on the Code of Conduct of the Parties in the South China Sea, exemplifies the importance of regional cooperation.

Fundamentally, respecting the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all involved countries is vital for maintaining peace and stability in the region amidst the South China Sea disputes.