The South China Sea Dispute: A Complex Tangle of Claims and Hedging of Claimant’s States
Keywords:
SCS, Philippines, Vietnam, Spratly, Paracel, Strategic HedgingAbstract
This paper is based on the argument that the dispute is between China, the Philippines, and Vietnam in the South China Sea. This study explores the stance of China, Vietnam, and the Philippines to save their national interest over this issue. The paper highlights the answers to the core interest of China in the South China Sea, the stances of Vietnam and the Philippines, and the hedging of all these states. Furthermore, research sheds light on the strategic significance of this region. To find out answers to these questions the research has employed qualitative methodology within the post-positivist paradigm. The basic lens of Strategic Hedging theory has applied during this research. The core finding of this research is that SCS is a complex dispute over the sovereignty of all these claimant states that puts potential threats and security implications for trade routes passing through these disputed waters as well as serious security threats among the claimants in the region.
Downloads
References
Alnuaimi, M. Analyzing the Current Relationship Between the UAE and China: Strategic Hedging or Diversification of Partners? Master’s thesis, Khalifa University, Abu Dhabi, 2020.
Banlaoi, Rommel C. “The Philippines and the South China Sea Dispute: Duterte’s Hedging Approach with China and the United States.” In Security, Strategy, and Military Dynamics in the South China Sea, 117–134. Bristol: Bristol University Press, 2021.
Beckley, Michael J. “The Emerging Military Balance in East Asia: How China's Neighbors Can Check Chinese Naval Expansion.” International Security 42, no. 2 (2017): 78–119.
“Challenges and Opportunities for Cooperation on Blue Economy Between Portuguese-Speaking Small Island Developing States and the Greater Bay Area Under the Belt and Road Initiative.” Greater Bay Area and CSIS on Blue Economy, 78.
Bommakanti, Kartikeya. “India and China’s Space and Naval Capabilities: A Comparative Analysis.” ORF Occasional Paper 160 (2018): 1–55.
Burch, Evan J. The Geopolitics of Power: Understanding China’s Militarization of the South China Sea. 2019.
Chung, Chien-Peng. “Drawing the U-Shaped Line: China’s Claim in the South China Sea, 1946–1974.” Modern China 42, no. 1 (2016): 38–72.
De Castro, Renato Cruz. “Fostering Military Diplomacy with America’s Bilateral Allies: The Philippine Policy of Linking Spokes Together.” International Studies in the Asia-Pacific Transition (2018): 219–254.
———. “The 21st-Century Philippine-US Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement (EDCA): The Philippines’ Policy in Facilitating the Obama Administration’s Strategic Pivot to Asia.” The Korean Journal of Defense Analysis 26, no. 4 (2014): 427–446.
Dirmeikis, Auguste. US Role in Conflict Resolution: The Case of South China Sea Territorial Disputes. Master’s thesis, Vytautas Magnus University, 2018.
Forsyth, Ian C. A Tale of Two Conflicts: The East and South China Seas Disputes and the Risk of War. Singapore: S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies, 2015.
Garver, John W. “China's Push Through the South China Sea: The Interaction of Bureaucratic and National Interests.” The China Quarterly 132 (1992): 999–1028.
Glaser, Charles L. “A US-China Grand Bargain? The Hard Choice Between Military Competition and Accommodation.” International Security 39, no. 4 (2015): 49–90.
Goh, Evelyn. “Great Powers and Hierarchical Order in Southeast Asia: Analyzing Regional Security Strategies.” International Security 32, no. 3 (2007): 113–157.
Gupta, Rajesh. “Emerging Demographic and Talent-Pool Challenges: Implications for Outsourcing to India.” Management and Labor Studies 35, no. 2 (2010): 267–287.
Jonell, Tobias N., et al. “Controls on Erosion Patterns and Sediment Transport in a Monsoonal, Tectonically Quiescent Drainage, Song Gianh, Central Vietnam.” Earth Surface Processes and Landforms 29 (2017): 659–683.
Kao, Szu-feng. “Scarborough Shoal Dispute, China's Assertiveness, and Taiwan's South China Sea Policy.” International Journal of China Studies 5, no. 1 (2014): 153.
Kraska, James. “The Exclusive Economic Zone and Food Security for Developing Coastal States in the South China Sea.” In Building a Normative Order in the South China Sea, 116–131. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2019.
Lawrence, Susan V., et al. “US-China Relations.” Congressional Research Service Report 30, no. 1 (2021): 1–86.
Le Hong, Hiep. “Vietnam's Hedging Strategy Against China Since Normalization.” Contemporary Southeast Asia 33, no. 3 (2013): 333–368.
Lee, Wei-chin. “Taiwan, the South China Sea Dispute, and the 2016 Arbitration Decision.” Journal of Chinese Political Science 22 (2017): 229–250.
Leu, George-Yuh. “Why Hedging Is Not Easily Attainable—Taiwan's Strategic Policy Options Amidst US-China Competition.” In The Strategic Options of Middle Powers in the Asia-Pacific, 233–255. London: Routledge, 2022.
Liu, Quang. “Comparison of Hedging Strategies Between Vietnam and the Philippines Amid the US-China Strategic Competition.” International Journal of Strategic Studies and Public Administration 2, no. 2 (2024): 31–42.
Loi, Duong Huu, et al. “The 28 July 2015 Rapid Landslide at Ha Long City, Quang Ninh, Vietnam.” Landslides 14 (2017): 1207–1215.
Martinson, Ryan D. “Counter-Intervention in an Age of Naval Reform.” In Modernizing the People’s Liberation Army, 60–86. London: Routledge, 2024.
Medeiros, Evan S. “Strategic Hedging and the Future of Asia-Pacific Stability.” The Washington Quarterly 29, no. 1 (2005): 145–167.
Mitchell, Sara M. “Clashes at Sea: Explaining the Onset, Militarization, and Resolution of Diplomatic Maritime Claims.” In Security Studies in a New Era of Maritime Competition, 59–92. London: Routledge, 2023.
Nguyen, Huong Thi, and Umut Turksen. “Divestment of State-Owned Enterprises and Competition in Oil & Gas Sectors in Vietnam.” Vietnam Journal of Legal Studies 1, no. 1 (2020): 1–32.
O'Rourke, Ronald, et al. “US-China Strategic Competition in South and East China Seas: Background and Issues for Congress.” Congressional Research Service Report 31, nos. 2–3 (2022): 99–294.
Panda, Jagannath P. “China as a Revisionist Power in Indo-Pacific and India’s Perception: A Power-Partner Contention.” Journal of Contemporary China 30, no. 127 (2021): 1–17.
Pedrozo, Raul P. “Vietnam's Indisputable Sovereignty Over the Paracel Islands.” Pacific Forum Maritime Defense (2023): 197–216.
Peng, Ningthoujam, et al. “Managing the South China Sea Dispute: Multilateral and Bilateral Approaches.” Journal of Strategic Studies 53, no. 1 (2022): 37–59.
Quyet, Nguyen Hong. “Chinese Strategy in the South China Sea: A Growing Quest for Vital Economic and Strategic Interests.” World Affairs 186, no. 3 (2023): 687–716.
Rossi, Christopher R. “Treaty of Tordesillas Syndrome: Sovereignty Ad Absurdum and the South China Sea Arbitration.” Chicago International Law Journal 50 (2017): 231.
Saleem, Omar. “The Spratly Islands Dispute: China Defines the New Millennium.” American University International Law Review 15 (1999): 527.
Seo, Young-Jae. “Power Shift, the South China Sea Dispute, and the Role of International Law.” Modern Journal of International Law 45, no. 1 (2024): 93–154.
Stanley, John J. “Global Trade, Control of the Sea, and the US & China: The Tensions Between Economic and Security Policies.” Southeast Asian Current International Law Journal 26 (2016): 245.
Storey, Ian. The South China Sea Dispute: How Geopolitics Impedes Dispute Resolution and Conflict Management. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, 2014.
———. “Japan’s Maritime Security Interests in Southeast Asia and the South China Sea Dispute.” Pacific Affairs 65, no. 2 (2013): 135–156.
Tessman, Brock, and Wolfe, William. “Great Powers and Strategic Hedging: The Case of Chinese Energy Security Strategy.” International Security Review 13, no. 2 (2011): 214–240.
Tu, Dang Cong, and Hien Thi Thu Nguyen. “Understanding the US–Vietnam Security Relationship, 2011–2017.” The Korean Journal of Defense Analysis 31, no. 1 (2019): 121–144.
Tyler, Sean R. “Competing Claims in the South China Sea.” Asian Law Journal 56 (2024).
Yetiv, Steve A., and Chunbo Lu. “China, Global Energy, and the Middle East.” The Middle East Journal 61, no. 2 (2007): 199–218.
Zhang, Haibin. “Fisheries Cooperation in the South China Sea: Evaluating the Options.” Marine Policy 89 (2018): 67–76.
Zhong, Huan, et al. “South China Sea: Its Importance for Shipping, Trade, Energy, and Fisheries.” Journal of Marine Studies 2, no. 1 (2017): 9–24.
Downloads
Published
Data Availability Statement
Data sharing not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analyzed during the current study.
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Nabel Akram, Komal Tariq, Muhammad Adeel Akram, Iqra Mustafa (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
