Skip to main content

2018 | OriginalPaper | Buchkapitel

2. Chinese Assertive Actions in the South China Sea

verfasst von : Richard Q. Turcsányi

Erschienen in: Chinese Assertiveness in the South China Sea

Verlag: Springer International Publishing

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

The South China Sea (SCS) has become one of the most problematic spots of international politics, and it has been mentioned as a possible trigger to a large-scale world conflict, the critical tipping point in the geopolitics of the Asia-Pacific region, and the place where global economy meets geopolitics. This diagnosis is the direct result of the high importance of the area for the global economy combined with the complex situation of overlapping territorial claims between six directly involved actors.
The assertive China discourse developed as a reaction to the allegedly changed behaviour of China in the period of 2009–2010. However, it is argued here that the narrative was exaggerated at the time. While the SCS is most often mentioned as the area where Chinese foreign policy indeed was supposed to become more assertive, the individual events in the SCS show only policy adjustments at most. Moreover, the Chinese actions and reactions were not entirely disproportionate when compared to the moves of the other countries. Still, China started to defend its claims more actively. Even though these claims have not been adjusted for decades, the level of activity with which China decided to impose them and also react to other countries’ moves was growing.
In the period of 2011–2016, however, China did become assertive in its behaviour. Altogether five cases of Chinese assertiveness in this period were identified: the cable-cutting incidents in 2011; the Scarborough Shoal stand-off in 2012; the Second Thomas Shoal stand-off, which has been running since 2013; the oil rig incident in 2014; and the land reclamation, construction, and militarization of the outposts taking place since 2014. These five events will be further analysed in subsequent chapters to establish their driving forces.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Fußnoten
1
For the map of the area, see BBC (2015b).
 
2
The term “Taiwan” is used throughout the book to label the territory controlled by the government of the Republic of China on Taiwan. The term “China” will be used to label the administered territory and government of the People’s Republic of China, also called Mainland China. This does not suggest any position on the status of Taiwan and its relation with the PRC.
 
3
For the map see Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative (2016a).
 
4
The claims of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and the Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan are largely identical. This, however, does not necessarily mean that the two actors interpret their respective claims and act in the same way. Taiwan has repeatedly rejected cooperation with China in upholding its claims in the SCS but also in the East China Sea with regard to the Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands.
 
5
For the map of claims, see, for instance, The Economist (2012).
 
6
Fravel (2011); for more on Chinese historical rights see Wu (2013, pp. 15–39). For the historical counterargument, see, for example, Hayton (2014).
 
7
For the map of occupation outposts of the claimant countries in the Spratly Islands (the Paracel Islands are all occupied by China since 1988), see Austin (2016).
 
8
Storey (2013b, pp. 20–47). According to another count, Vietnam controls 21 features, the Philippines 9, China 7, Malaysia 5 and Taiwan 1; see Vuving (2016).
 
9
This conclusion differs with the one of Jerdén (see pages 71–72), who believes the submission constitutes a policy adjustment. It is argued here that since this event was unique (driven by the upcoming deadline and the submissions of other countries), China’s behaviour in this case cannot be compared to any of the previous situations. But since the Chinese reaction was entirely in line with its longstanding policy, there is no policy change.
 
10
See Table 2.1 for summary of the relevant events, their labelling, and argumentation.
 
11
It might be suggested that the scope and nature of the Chinese claims are already inappropriate. The tentative position about the legal strength of the Chinese argumentation was presented in the previous section. It is not the goal of this book to present an exhaustive legal analysis of the claims.
 
12
Interestingly, the Philippines did not officially decommission the vessel, which might be an important issue considering its alliance with the USA.
 
13
For the Chinese media’s perception of Vietnam and the Philippines see Abb (2016).
 
14
Carl Thayer suggests a legal difference between the two terms; see Thayer (2015).
 
15
See Table 2.2 for summary of assertive events, their labelling, and argumentation.
 
16
China consistently opposes what it calls the ‘internationalization’ of the dispute and the third party mediation, and it sticks to its principle of resolving the issue bilaterally. See, for example, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of China (2015c, e).
 
Literatur
Zurück zum Zitat Abb, P. (2016). Punish the Philippines, forgive Vietnam? The South China Sea disputes in the eyes of Chinese experts. In E. Fels & V.-M. Vu (Eds.), Power politics in Asia’s contested waters. Territorial disputes in the South China Sea and a rising China. New York: Springer. Abb, P. (2016). Punish the Philippines, forgive Vietnam? The South China Sea disputes in the eyes of Chinese experts. In E. Fels & V.-M. Vu (Eds.), Power politics in Asia’s contested waters. Territorial disputes in the South China Sea and a rising China. New York: Springer.
Zurück zum Zitat Bader, J. A. (2013). Obama and China’s rise: An insider’s account of America’s Asia strategy. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press. Bader, J. A. (2013). Obama and China’s rise: An insider’s account of America’s Asia strategy. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
Zurück zum Zitat Beckman, R. C. (2009). Legal regimes for cooperation in the South China Sea. In S. Bateman & R. Emmers (Eds.), Security and international politics in the South China Sea. London: Routledge. Beckman, R. C. (2009). Legal regimes for cooperation in the South China Sea. In S. Bateman & R. Emmers (Eds.), Security and international politics in the South China Sea. London: Routledge.
Zurück zum Zitat Buszynski, L. (2012). The South China Sea: Oil, maritime claims, and U.S.—China strategic rivalry. The Washington Quarterly, 35(2), 139–156.CrossRef Buszynski, L. (2012). The South China Sea: Oil, maritime claims, and U.S.—China strategic rivalry. The Washington Quarterly, 35(2), 139–156.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Djalal, H. (2009). The South China Sea. The long road towards peace and cooperation. In S. Bateman & R. Emmers (Eds.), Security and international politics in the South China Sea. London: Routledge. Djalal, H. (2009). The South China Sea. The long road towards peace and cooperation. In S. Bateman & R. Emmers (Eds.), Security and international politics in the South China Sea. London: Routledge.
Zurück zum Zitat Fravel, M. T. (2011). China’s strategy in the South China Sea. Contemporary Southeast Asia, 33(3), 292–319.CrossRef Fravel, M. T. (2011). China’s strategy in the South China Sea. Contemporary Southeast Asia, 33(3), 292–319.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Goldman, J. (2013). President Aquino’s second half: Minimum credible defense in contested waters? China Brief, 13(13). Washington, DC: Jamestown Foundation. Goldman, J. (2013). President Aquino’s second half: Minimum credible defense in contested waters? China Brief, 13(13). Washington, DC: Jamestown Foundation.
Zurück zum Zitat Hayton, B. (2014). The South China Sea. The struggle for power in Asia. New Haven and London: Yale University Press. Hayton, B. (2014). The South China Sea. The struggle for power in Asia. New Haven and London: Yale University Press.
Zurück zum Zitat Huntington, S. (2011). The clash of civilizations and the remaking of world order. New York: Simon & Schuster. Huntington, S. (2011). The clash of civilizations and the remaking of world order. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Zurück zum Zitat Jerdén, B. (2014). The assertive China narrative: Why it is wrong and how so many still bought into it. The Chinese Journal of International Politics, 7(1), 47–88.CrossRef Jerdén, B. (2014). The assertive China narrative: Why it is wrong and how so many still bought into it. The Chinese Journal of International Politics, 7(1), 47–88.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Johnston, A. I. (2013, Spring). How new and assertive is China’s new assertiveness? International Security, 37(4), 7–48.CrossRef Johnston, A. I. (2013, Spring). How new and assertive is China’s new assertiveness? International Security, 37(4), 7–48.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Kirchberger, S. (2015). Assessing China’s naval power. Technological innovation, economic constraints, and strategic implications. Berlin: Springer.CrossRef Kirchberger, S. (2015). Assessing China’s naval power. Technological innovation, economic constraints, and strategic implications. Berlin: Springer.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Shelden, S. D. (2013). Conflict and diplomacy in South China Sea. The view from Washington. Asian Survey, 52, 995–1018. Shelden, S. D. (2013). Conflict and diplomacy in South China Sea. The view from Washington. Asian Survey, 52, 995–1018.
Zurück zum Zitat Shofield, C. (2009). Dangerous ground. A geopolitical overview of the South China Sea. In S. Baterman & R. Emmers (Eds.), Security and International Politics in the South China Sea. Towards a Cooperative Management Regime. London: Routledge. Shofield, C. (2009). Dangerous ground. A geopolitical overview of the South China Sea. In S. Baterman & R. Emmers (Eds.), Security and International Politics in the South China Sea. Towards a Cooperative Management Regime. London: Routledge.
Zurück zum Zitat Storey, I. (2013b). The South China Sea dispute: Background, recent development and future prognosis. In P. Andělová & M. Strašáková (Eds.), South China Sea dispute in international relations. Prague: Metropolitan University Prague Press. Storey, I. (2013b). The South China Sea dispute: Background, recent development and future prognosis. In P. Andělová & M. Strašáková (Eds.), South China Sea dispute in international relations. Prague: Metropolitan University Prague Press.
Zurück zum Zitat Thayer, C. A. ( 2011). Security cooperation in the South China Sea: An assessment of recent trends. In The South China Sea Reader, First Manila conference on the South China Sea: Toward a region of peace, cooperation, and progress. http://www.ndcp.edu.ph/SCSNSR.pdf Thayer, C. A. ( 2011). Security cooperation in the South China Sea: An assessment of recent trends. In The South China Sea Reader, First Manila conference on the South China Sea: Toward a region of peace, cooperation, and progress. http://​www.​ndcp.​edu.​ph/​SCSNSR.​pdf
Zurück zum Zitat Till, G. (2009). The South China Sea dispute: An international history. In S. Bateman & R. Emmers (Eds.), Security and international politics in the South China Sea. Towards a cooperative management regime. New York: Routledge. Till, G. (2009). The South China Sea dispute: An international history. In S. Bateman & R. Emmers (Eds.), Security and international politics in the South China Sea. Towards a cooperative management regime. New York: Routledge.
Zurück zum Zitat Turcsányi, R. (2013b). The chessboard of South China Sea: Game modelling of the dispute dynamics. In M. Majer & R. Ondrejcsák (Eds.), Panorama of global security environment 2012. Bratislava: CENAA. Turcsányi, R. (2013b). The chessboard of South China Sea: Game modelling of the dispute dynamics. In M. Majer & R. Ondrejcsák (Eds.), Panorama of global security environment 2012. Bratislava: CENAA.
Zurück zum Zitat Turcsányi, Q. R. (2016). Contradiction of strategic goals as a major constrain of Chinese power in the South China Sea. In E. Fels & V. Truong (Eds.), Power politics in Asia’s contested waters. Territorial disputes in the South China Sea and a rising China. New York: Springer. Turcsányi, Q. R. (2016). Contradiction of strategic goals as a major constrain of Chinese power in the South China Sea. In E. Fels & V. Truong (Eds.), Power politics in Asia’s contested waters. Territorial disputes in the South China Sea and a rising China. New York: Springer.
Zurück zum Zitat Wu, S. (2013). Solving disputes for regional cooperation and development in the South China Sea. A Chinese perspective. Cambridge: Chandos Publishing.CrossRef Wu, S. (2013). Solving disputes for regional cooperation and development in the South China Sea. A Chinese perspective. Cambridge: Chandos Publishing.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Yoshihara, T. (2012). China’s vision of its seascape: The first island chain and Chinese seapower. Asian Politics and Policy, 4(3), 293–314.CrossRef Yoshihara, T. (2012). China’s vision of its seascape: The first island chain and Chinese seapower. Asian Politics and Policy, 4(3), 293–314.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Yoshihara, T., & Holmes, J. R. (2011). Can China defend a “core interest” in the South China Sea? The Washington Quarterly, 34(2), 45–59.CrossRef Yoshihara, T., & Holmes, J. R. (2011). Can China defend a “core interest” in the South China Sea? The Washington Quarterly, 34(2), 45–59.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Zachrisen, O. O. (2015). China’s political use of economic ties in territorial disputes. A comparative case study of Japan’s and the Philippines’ reactions. Master’s Thesis, Norwegian University of Science and Technology. Zachrisen, O. O. (2015). China’s political use of economic ties in territorial disputes. A comparative case study of Japan’s and the Philippines’ reactions. Master’s Thesis, Norwegian University of Science and Technology.
Metadaten
Titel
Chinese Assertive Actions in the South China Sea
verfasst von
Richard Q. Turcsányi
Copyright-Jahr
2018
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-67648-7_2

Premium Partner