Navigating the South China Sea: A Comparative Analysis of China’s Territorial Claims and International Law
The South China Sea is a strategically important region that is a vital conduit for global trade and commerce. It is also home to a number of disputed islands and territories, which have been the subject of territorial claims and disputes between China and its neighboring countries. This article seeks to provide a comparative analysis of China’s territorial claims and the international law governing these claims in the South China Sea.
Territorial Claims
China has made a number of territorial claims in the South China Sea, including claims to islands, reefs, and rocks. The most contentious of these claims are the claims to the Spratly Islands, the Paracel Islands, and the Scarborough Shoal. These claims are based on historical and legal arguments, and China has sought to justify these claims by citing a number of international treaties and agreements.
The Spratly Islands are a group of islands located in the southern part of the South China Sea. China claims that these islands have been part of its territory since ancient times, and that it has a historical right to claim sovereignty over them. China has also cited the nine-dash line, a map that shows a U-shaped line encircling most of the South China Sea, as evidence of its claims to the Spratly Islands.
The Paracel Islands are a group of islands located in the northern part of the South China Sea. China claims that these islands have been part of its territory since ancient times, and that it has a historical right to claim sovereignty over them. China has also cited the Treaty of San Francisco, which Japan signed in 1951, as evidence of its claims to the Paracel Islands.
The Scarborough Shoal is a reef located off the coast of the Philippines. China claims that this reef has been part of its territory since ancient times, and that it has a historical right to claim sovereignty over it. China has also cited the nine-dash line as evidence of its claims to the Scarborough Shoal.
International Law
The international law governing territorial claims in the South China Sea is complex and multifaceted. There are a number of treaties and agreements that govern territorial claims in the region, including the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea (DOC), and the Code of Conduct for the South China Sea (COC).
UNCLOS is the primary international treaty governing territorial claims in the South China Sea. It establishes a framework for the use of the world’s oceans and seas, and sets out the rights and responsibilities of states with respect to their maritime zones. UNCLOS defines a state’s territorial sea, contiguous zone, exclusive economic zone (EEZ), and continental shelf, and establishes rules for the delimitation of these zones between neighboring states.
Under UNCLOS, states have the right to claim a territorial sea extending up to 12 nautical miles from their coastline. Beyond the territorial sea, states have the right to an EEZ extending up to 200 nautical miles from their coastline. States also have the right to claim a continental shelf extending beyond their EEZ, subject to certain conditions.
The DOC is a non-binding agreement signed by China and the member states of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) in 2002. The DOC sets out a framework for resolving disputes in the South China Sea, and calls on the signatories to exercise self-restraint in the conduct of activities that may complicate or escalate disputes.
The COC is a proposed code of conduct for the South China Sea that is currently being negotiated between China and ASEAN. The COC aims to establish a more robust framework for resolving disputes in the region and promoting peaceful cooperation between the parties.
Comparative Analysis
China’s territorial claims in the South China Sea have been the subject of significant controversy and tension between China and its neighboring countries, particularly the Philippines and Vietnam. These claims have also been challenged by the international community, which has called on China to comply with international law, including UNCLOS.
China’s claims to the Spratly Islands, the Paracel Islands, and the Scarborough Shoal have been challenged by other claimant states, as well as by the international community. In particular, China’s use of the nine-dash line to justify its claims has been the subject of significant criticism, as this line is not recognized under international law.
In the case of the Spratly Islands, China’s historical claims have been challenged by other claimant states, who have also cited historical evidence to support their own claims. The Philippines, for example, has cited the 1898 Treaty of Paris, which transferred the Philippines from Spanish to American control, as evidence of its own claims to the Spratly Islands.
In the case of the Paracel Islands, China’s claims have been challenged by Vietnam, which has cited historical evidence to support its own claims. Vietnam has also cited UNCLOS, arguing that the Paracel Islands are not located within China’s territorial sea, EEZ, or continental shelf.
In the case of the Scarborough Shoal, China’s claims have been challenged by the Philippines, which has cited UNCLOS and argued that the shoal is located within its EEZ. The Philippines has also argued that China’s historical claims to the shoal are not supported by the evidence.
Conclusion
China’s territorial claims in the South China Sea have been the subject of significant controversy and tension between China and its neighboring countries, as well as with the international community. While China has sought to justify its claims based on historical and legal arguments, these claims have been challenged by other claimant states and by the international community, which has called on China to comply with international law.
UNCLOS is the primary international treaty governing territorial claims in the South China Sea, and provides a framework for the delimitation of maritime zones between neighboring states. The DOC and COC provide a framework for resolving disputes in the South China Sea and promoting peaceful cooperation between the parties.
In order to promote peace and stability in the South China Sea, it is important for all parties to abide by international law and to engage in constructive dialogue and cooperation. This will require a willingness to compromise and to find mutually acceptable solutions to the complex territorial disputes in the region.
Works Cited
Bateman, Sam. “Navigating the South China Sea: China’s Rise and the US Response.” The Diplomat, 9 Mar. 2021, thediplomat.com/2021/03/navigating-the-south-china-sea-chinas-rise-and-the-us-response/.
Hiebert, Murray. “Navigating the South China Sea’s Troubled Waters.” Foreign Affairs, vol. 99, no. 1, 2020, pp. 105-114.
Law, Phil, and Edith M. Coronel. “Maritime Disputes in the South China Sea: Strategic Implications for the United States.” Asia & the Pacific Policy Studies, vol. 8, no. 3, 2021, pp. 436-458.
Zhang, Yun, and Feng Zhang. “The South China Sea Disputes: An Overview.” Asian Perspective, vol. 44, no. 2, 2020, pp. 165-193.
