scholarly journals China’s Crisis Bargaining in the South China Sea Dispute (2010-2013)

2014 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 103
Author(s):  
Eryan Ramadhani
Keyword(s):  
South China Sea ◽  
South China ◽  
Southeast Asian ◽  
The South China Sea ◽  
Territorial Dispute ◽  
Positive Signal ◽  
The South ◽  
Crisis Bargaining ◽  
China Sea ◽  
Negative Signal

As one of China’s most intricate territorial dispute, the South China Sea dispute has sufficiently consumed significant amount of Chinese leaders’ attention in Beijing. This paper reveals that China exerts signaling strategy in its crisis bargaining over the South China Sea dispute. This strategy contains reassurance as positive signal through offering negotiation and appearing self-restraint and of negative signal by means of escalatory acts and verbal threats. China’s crisis bargaining in the South China Sea dispute aims to preserve crisis stability: a stabilized condition after escalation in which neither further escalation nor near-distant resolution is in order. From the yearly basis analysis in the four-year span study, China’s longing for crisis stability fits into its conduct in crisis bargaining with Southeast Asian states.

scholarly journals Managing Territorial Disputes in Southeast Asia: Is There more than the South China Sea?

2017 ◽  
Vol 36 (3) ◽  
pp. 35-61
Author(s):  
Nicole Jenne
Keyword(s):  
South China Sea ◽  
Conflict Management ◽  
South China ◽  
Southeast Asian ◽  
The South China Sea ◽  
Territorial Disputes ◽  
The South ◽  
Territorial Conflict ◽  
China Sea ◽  
Territorial Conflicts

The conflicts in the South China Sea have come to dominate debates on Southeast Asian security and specifically on how boundary disputes have been managed within the region. Yet, the case is not necessarily exemplary for the way Southeast Asian countries have dealt with territorial disputes generally. The article gathers three common perceptions about conflict management that are strongly informed by the South China Sea case, but have lesser relevance when looking at other territorial conflicts in the region. I offer a critical reading of the who, why, and how of territorial conflict management and provide tentative guidelines on what to expect in the future.

scholarly journals «China-Vietnam-India» format in the South-China sea in the context of regional security

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 354-371
Author(s):  
Tatyana I. Ponka ◽  
Nikita S. Kuklin ◽  
Ivan R. Dubrovsky
Keyword(s):  
South China Sea ◽  
South China ◽  
The South China Sea ◽  
Regional Security ◽  
Territorial Dispute ◽  
The South ◽  
China Sea ◽  
Military Presence ◽  
Energy Plane

This article is devoted to the role of the territorial dispute in the South China sea in relations between China, Vietnam and India in the regional subsystem of Southeast Asia. The regional space under consideration is characterized by high economic dynamism and active integration processes, including participation of non-regional actors. Particular importance is attached to the positions of the three States on fundamental aspects that have a destructive impact on the development of regional processes. Attention is paid to the conceptualization of the policy of the three States in the waters of this sea. Following consideration of the problems the authors conclude that the intersection of the interests of the three countries in this sea threatens to exacerbate the fragility of the political and strategic landscape of the regional subsystem, registration open, but citizenries order on the space of the SCS. The article notes that the confrontational tone in relations between China, Vietnam and India brings with it many threats, in particular the clash of state interests in the energy plane, the arms race between the three nuclear powers (USA, India, China), which was accompanied by increased military presence of non-regional player (USA) in the region, complicated by territorial and historical conflicts.

The Tragedy of the Southeast Asian Commons

2014 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 33-49 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Harvey Divino Gamas
Keyword(s):  
South China Sea ◽  
Political Culture ◽  
South China ◽  
Code Of Conduct ◽  
Southeast Asian ◽  
The South China Sea ◽  
Collective Decision Making ◽  
The South ◽  
China Sea ◽  
Cosmic Order

The South China Sea disputes have proven to be the most divisive issue in ASEAN. The collective decision-making of the ten member states towards the issue remains ineffective and this has often been attributed to their disunity. However, disunity in the ASEAN maritime commons is symptomatic of the underlying political culture in Southeast Asia. Using Lucian Pye’s analysis of power as ritual in Southeast Asian political culture, we can surmise that the disjuncture between the hopes for a definitive Code of Conduct and the resulting lack of consensus in the 2012 biannual ASEAN summit chaired by Cambodia concretised ritualism. This paper’s analysis focuses on how intra-ASEAN disagreement in resolving the South China Sea maritime dispute was compounded by Cambodia’s 2012 ASEAN chairmanship. It revealed that power as ritual reduces ASEAN integration into a temple in support of the secularised version of the cosmic order and thus tolerating its lack of pragmatic utility and efficiency.

scholarly journals The PRC’s Approach Towards the South China Sea Territorial Dispute and Russia’s Foreign Policy

2021 ◽  
Vol 65 (2) ◽  
pp. 5-15
Author(s):  
A. Dikarev ◽  
A. Lukin
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
South China Sea ◽  
South China ◽  
The South China Sea ◽  
Asia Pacific ◽  
Territorial Dispute ◽  
The South ◽  
Strategic Partner ◽  
China Sea ◽  
Asean Member

Territorial dispute in the South China Sea (SCS) which involves China and several ASEAN member-states has recently become one of the major threats to international security in Southeast Asia leading to continuous political tensions in the region. It may result not only in a split within ASEAN but also in drawing the non-regional powers into conflict. U.S.A. as the most important of such powers tries to use the existing tensions for strengthening its influence in the region and its stance in confrontation with China. While Moscow has recently made efforts to intensify its presence in Asia, it still does not see the South China Sea region as a foreign policy priority. Generally, it sticks to neutrality on the issue of sovereignty over the disputed islands. At the same time, Russia’s approach to the SCS problem can be characterised by a limited shift towards strengthening support of Beijing’s position. Acting this way Russia wishes to support a strategic partner in order to win its stronger cooperation on other vital issues, such as the problem of Crimea or the US sanctions. This rapprochement should be understood against the background of general international situation characterised by the growing Sino-US confrontation, worsening of relations between Russia and the West, as well as some tendencies in the Asia-Pacific such as the emergence of the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue and the introduction of the concept of the “Indo-Pacific” by Washington and its allies which are seen in both Moscow and Beijing as hostile. Despite the numerous political difficulties and legal problems concerning the SCS, the mutual understanding between Russia and China during the last two decades has been strengthening while both countries were confronted by similar threats and challenges. This naturally pushes the positions of Russia and China closer to each other. Acknowledgements. This article was funded by MGIMO-University, project number 1921-01-02.

scholarly journals The US Rebalance and Southeast Asia

Asian Survey ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 55 (3) ◽  
pp. 572-595 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sheldon W. Simon
Keyword(s):  
South China Sea ◽  
Southeast Asia ◽  
South China ◽  
Southeast Asian ◽  
The South China Sea ◽  
Military Assistance ◽  
The South ◽  
China Sea ◽  
Us Military ◽  
The Us

This article assesses Southeast Asian views of the US “rebalance,” examining reactions to US military deployments, military assistance to partners, and support for Southeast Asian diplomacy on South China Sea conflicts. Although not ostensibly designed to contain China, the rebalance provides Southeast Asia with hedging options against more assertive PRC actions in the South China Sea.

Island-Building in the South China Sea: Legality and Limits

2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 76-90 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tara DAVENPORT
Keyword(s):  
South China Sea ◽  
South China ◽  
The Philippines ◽  
Southeast Asian ◽  
The South China Sea ◽  
The South ◽  
China Sea ◽  
Spratly Islands ◽  
Building Activities ◽  
Legal Constraints

AbstractAll the claimants in the South China Sea disputes have engaged in various degrees of island-building on many of the geographic features in the Spratly Islands. However, as noted by the Tribunal in the South China Sea Arbitration, none has been on the scale of Chinese island-building on the features which it occupies, which escalated after the Philippines initiated arbitral proceedings in 2013. While the most important aspect of the Award is that it clarified the extent of the respective maritime rights of China and the Philippines in the South China Sea, the Tribunal’s rulings on the reclamation and island-building activities of China are equally significant. To this end, this paper will examine the findings of the Tribunal on the legality of China’s island-building activities as well as legal constraints on such activities (if any). Last, it will explore the implications of these findings for the Southeast Asian claimants and island-building and fortification of the features that they occupy.

scholarly journals Duterte’s Pivot to China, and Prospects for Settling the South China Sea Disputes

2018 ◽  
Vol 40 (2) ◽  
pp. 319-337 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bruno Hendler
Keyword(s):  
South China Sea ◽  
South China ◽  
The Philippines ◽  
The South China Sea ◽  
Territorial Dispute ◽  
The South ◽  
Acceptable Result ◽  
China Sea ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Suitable Framework

Abstract This article proposes a theoretical framework for understanding Filipino president Rodrigo Duterte’s celebrated ‘pivot to China.’ It begins by discussing the model of asymmetric relations as a suitable framework for understanding relations between highly unequal states, and the concept of dual structural asymmetry as a means of theorising the triangular relations among the Philippines, the USA and China since the end of the Cold War. Next, it presents various economic and political indicators of the shift in Filipino foreign policy under Duterte. It goes on to propose a theoretical model for identifying the linkages between elements of political economy and international security from the perspective of Brantly Womack’s theory of asymmetry. Lastly, it presents three scenarios for resolving the territorial dispute in the South China Sea (SCS) between the Philippines and China: two with maximum gains for one country only, and a third with an acceptable result for both countries as a product of mutual concessions.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document