Case Analysis: South China Sea

Territorial Disputes

Submitted to: Ms. Zonaina Sampayan

Instructor

Submitted by: Romeo Antonio

Angela Amaquin
Cristine Era Alcano
Johncyn Bangonon
Darel Jay Baloloy
Lavy Joyce Buntay
Students

Introduction
 Only in the 19th century, when the European practice of allocating all

above-water lands among states with complete sovereignty was introduced,

does the history of sovereignty conflicts in the South China Sea truly begin.

But as the current dispute's parties frequently base their arguments on

antiquated artifacts and records, it's equally important to note a few remarks

regarding past times. Historically, navigation has been the South China Sea's

primary purpose. For almost two millennia, ships of all sizes have navigated

its coastlines. The ships have called at ports governed by numerous states

and dynasties and have their origins in a wide range of nations.

One of the most vital strategic waterways in globally is the South China

Sea (SCS). Natural resources including oil, gas, and aquatic ecosystems can

be found there, and it serves as a vital trade route connecting countries in

Asia and beyond. Yet, the SCS remains one of the most disputable areas in

the world due to the conflicting territorial claims made by multiple nations.

The South China Sea disputes are the primary cause of tension regarding

global affairs because of the complexity of these claims as well as political,

armed forces, and financial factors. This analysis looks at the dispute's

history, key participants, challenges, and potential solutions to reduce

tensions in the area.

Background of the Dispute

Many nations encircle the South China Sea, and each has claimed portions of

the islands, reefs, and waterways within the region. Scarborough Shoal, the

Paracel Islands, and the Spratly Islands are the focal points of the main

territorial disputes. Because of its fishing resources, underwater oil and gas

deposits, and position as one of the world's busiest marine commerce routes,

the area has significant economic value. The following nations have

overlapping claims in the dispute:

 China: The “Nine-Dash Line,” a historical reference to maps from the

1940s, is the foundation of China’s claim. China claims sovereignty

over around 90% of the South China Sea, including its islands and

other features. China has been especially active in the area,

establishing infrastructure on disputed features like the Spratly Islands,

deploying military forces, and creating artificial islands.

 Vietnam: Both the Spratly and Paracel Islands are claimed by Vietnam.

China took the islands from Vietnam in 1974, making the Paracels

issue more controversial. Vietnam asserts historical rights to the

islands that go back thousands of years.

 Philippines: The Scarborough Shoal is located within the Philippines'

Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), and it is one of numerous islands in

the Spratly Islands. When China's "Nine-Dash Line" was declared to

have no legal foundation under international law by the Permanent

 Court of Arbitration in 2016, the Philippines won. China is still claiming

its territory despite this verdict.

 Malaysia: Parts of the Spratly Islands are claimed by Malaysia, with

particular emphasis on the region surrounding the southern section of

the archipelago. Due to its past exploration of the region and its

closeness to the mainland, Malaysia has developed its claims.

 Brunei: Though its claims are more restricted, Brunei claims

ownership of some Spratly Islands and the waters inside its Exclusive

Economic Zone.

 Taiwan: Based on its understanding of Chinese history, Taiwan claims

sovereignty over the whole South China Sea, including the Paracel and

Spratly Islands. As a result, Taiwan's claims are consistent with those of

China.

Key Stakeholders

External powers, especially the United States, and claimant nations are the

main parties involved in the South China Sea conflicts.

 China: China is the region's most powerful nation and the one that

makes the strongest claims. It claims historical and strategic

justifications for its militarization of manmade islands and its desire to

 increase its power in the area. According to the Chinese government,

the issue is one of territorial integrity and national sovereignty.

 Vietnam: Vietnam, which is among the most outspoken opponents of

China's operations, emphasizes its historical claims to the Spratly

Islands and the Paracel Islands. Keeping its territorial integrity and

safeguarding its access to marine resources are major national security

concerns for Vietnam.

 Philippines: In context of the Permanent Court of Arbitration's 2016

decision, the Philippines has taken the lead in opposing China's broad

claims. The Philippines still must strike a balance between maintaining

its territorial claims and engaging China economically, even with the

favourable ruling.

 Malaysia: Protecting its maritime borders and gaining access to the

area's possible oil and gas resources are the two main goals of

Malaysia's involvement in the conflict. Malaysia has mostly followed a

diplomatic approach, emphasizing regional economic cooperation.

 Brunei: With a comparatively minor claim in the area, Brunei's key

priorities are preserving regional peace and protecting its EEZ. Even

though its claims are more modest, Brunei is still a significant player in

regional diplomacy.

 United States: Despite not being a claimant, the United States is

heavily involved in the conflict because of its strategic interest in

 preserving freedom of navigation in international waters and its

security obligations to regional allies like the Philippines. To contest

China's broad claims and uphold international maritime law, the United

States frequently carries out freedom of navigation operations

(FONOPs) in the South China Sea.

 ASEAN: There are multiple claimant states that are part of the

Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), a regional

organization. Because its members have different interests, ASEAN has

been unable to put up a united front in its diplomatic attempts to

mediate the conflicts.

Challenges

The disputes in the South China Sea pose several difficult problems:

 Geopolitical Tensions: The conflict is primarily driven by the battle

between China and the United States for regional dominance. The

United States and its allies oppose China's efforts to increase its

military might in the area and to extend its authority over the South

China Sea, seeing these moves as a danger to both international law

and regional stability.

 Legal and Normative Ambiguities: A framework for resolving

marine disputes is provided by the United Nations Convention on the

Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), however its interpretation is controversial.

The difficulties of applying international law to a highly politicized

 matter are demonstrated by China's rejection of the 2016 PCA verdict,

which declared its historical claims to be invalid.

 Environmental Degradation: China has seriously harmed the

environment by militarizing reefs and building artificial islands. Local

economy and marine biodiversity depend on the region's coral reefs,

which have been badly damaged or lost. Efforts to conserve marine life

and fish sustainably are also at risk.

 Resource Competition: Natural gas, oil, and fisheries are among the

abundant resources found in the South China Sea. Conflicts overfishing

rights, resource exploration, and extraction have resulted from

competing for these resources. Furthermore, to establish their rights to

ocean resources, several states have turned to unilateral measures like

infrastructure construction and drilling.

 Internal Divisions within ASEAN: The South China Sea issues have

been difficult for ASEAN, which seeks to promote regional cooperation

and peace, to have a unified stand on. Due to member states'

divergent perspectives on China and the territorial sovereignty

question, ASEAN's capacity for productive negotiations is weakened.

Potential Solutions
Several potential solutions could address the ongoing tensions in the South

China Sea:

 Diplomatic Negotiations: De-escalating tensions requires a

persistent emphasis on diplomatic avenues. A framework for handling

the conflicts and lowering the risk of conflict may be established via

the creation of a legally binding Code of Conduct (COC) for the South

China Sea, which is being negotiated between China and ASEAN

 Multilateral Engagement: International courts like the International

Court of Justice (ICJ) and the United Nations could arbitrate the conflict

and persuade nations to operate by international law. Finding common

ground on maritime rights and security through multilateral

conversation between claimants and external parties could foster

confidence.

 Joint Resource Development: The establishment of shared resource

development zones, where nations work together to exploit fisheries,

oil, and gas, is one possible solution. Although it would take a lot of

political will, this would ease tensions over resource ownership and

establish a foundation for collaboration.

 Freedom of Navigation and Regional Security Framework:

Global trade routes would stay open if freedom of passage were

guaranteed, especially for military and commercial ships. Furthermore,

creating a regional security structure with participation from all

 important parties may offer a crisis management platform and stop

military escalation.

 Environmental Protection Agreements: Sustainable practices in

the South China Sea may be encouraged by addressing environmental

issues through international agreements. Nations could decide to put

emphasis on conservation measures and restrict activities that damage

marine ecosystems.

Conclusion

One of the most complicated and unstable geopolitical crises is still the

territorial disputes in the South China Sea. Finding a long-term solution is

difficult due to the conflicting claims, which are motivated by economic

interests, national pride, and global rivalry. Nonetheless, there is a chance to

ease tensions and promote regional cooperation through diplomatic

engagement, multilateral cooperation, and adherence to international law. To

maintain peace and stability in the South China Sea, which is essential for

the participating nations as well as for global safety and trade, the

international community—in particular, stakeholders like the US, ASEAN, and

China—must cooperate.
 References

ASEAN. (2002). Declaration on the conduct of parties in the South

China Sea. Association of Southeast Asian Nations.

International Crisis Group (ICG). (2020). Dangerous waters:

China’s claims in the South China Sea. International Crisis Group.

Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA). (2016). The South China

Sea arbitration (The Republic of the Philippines v. The People’s

Republic of China).

Scott, D. (2019). China's rise in the South China Sea: The strategic

implications. Asian Security, 15(2), 145–169.

Tønnesson, S. (2002). Why are the disputes in the South China Sea

so Intractable? A historical approach. Asian Journal of Social

Science, 30(3), 570-601.

United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).

(1982). United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.

United States Department of State. (2021). Fact sheet on the

South China Sea. U.S. Department of State.