scholarly journals Island territorial disputes and China’s ‘Shelving Disputes and Pursuing Joint Development’ policy

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 37-54
Author(s):  
Tao Yu ◽  
Bingyao Li

‘Shelving Disputes and Pursuing Joint Development’ (SDPJD) has for decades been China’s premier policy for resolving territorial disputes, especially those regarding islands. SDPJD is, however, commonly understood to be tripartite policy, in which ‘shelving disputes’ and ‘pursuing joint development’ are made conditional upon the principle of ‘sovereignty belongs to China’. Although SDPJD aims to peacefully settle China’s island territorial disputes in the East China Sea (Diaoyu Islands) and the South China Sea (Spratly Islands), the policy has not been particularly successful in practice. This is in part because, whereas ‘shelving disputes’ and ‘pursuing joint development’ are cooperative in nature, ‘sovereignty belongs to China’ is inherently confrontational. The prominence granted to ‘sovereignty belongs to China’ is linked to outmoded understanding of the concept of sovereignty and the tendency for Chinese scholars and officials to regard island territorial disputes as the zero-sum games. This paper argues that SDPJD’s success is dependent upon separating ‘sovereignty belongs to China’ from ‘shelving disputes’ and ‘pursuing joint development’ and perhaps abandoning the former principle entirely. China should pursue non-confrontation resolution to island territorial pursuits, especially in the contexts of efforts to develop a peaceful and cooperative 21st-Century Maritime Silk Road.

2011 ◽  
Vol 40 (2) ◽  
pp. 165-193 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andy Yee

This article systematically compares maritime territorial disputes in the East and South China Seas. It draws on the bargaining model of war and hegemonic stability theory to track the record of conflicts and shifts in the relative power balances of the claimants, leading to the conclusion that certainty and stability have improved in the South China Sea, with the converse happening in the East China Sea. To enrich the models, this article also considers social factors (constructivism) and arrives at the same conclusion. This calls for a differentiated methodological approach if we are to devise strategies to mediate and resolve these disputes.


2014 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 193-243 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert C. Beckman ◽  
Clive H. Schofield

In the face of seemingly intractable territorial and maritime disputes in the South China Sea, the article examines how the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (losc), sets out what maritime claims States can make in the South China Sea and how it establishes a framework that will enable States to either negotiate maritime boundary agreements or negotiate joint development arrangements (jdas) in areas of overlapping maritime claims. It provides an avenue whereby the maritime claims of the claimants can be brought into line with international law, potentially allowing for meaningful discussions on cooperation and maritime joint development based on areas of overlapping maritime claims defined on the basis of the losc.


2016 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Wishnu Mahendra Wiswayana

In recent years situation on the South China Sea facing an escalationcondition, especially affected from China maritime activities. That conditionemerged when China put South China Sea territory at China's official map,which called 9/10/11 dashed line or u-shaped line. This paper addresses theIndonesian Government respond about territorial disputes with China'sofficial map on Natuna. The U-shaped line at China's official map actuallybecame challenges for Global Maritime Axis idea and Indonesia foreignpolicy under Jokowi-JK administration.Keyword: Global Maritime Axis, South China Sea, Foreign Policy


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document