South China Sea Dispute Research Articles

China-ASEAN Approaches towards the South China Sea Disputes

The South China Sea (SCS) dispute has been a contentious issue in the Asia-Pacific region, with multiple claimants vying for territorial control and access to its abundant resources. This study examines the ASEAN approach towards the SCS dispute and China's soft power response from 2010 to 2022. The “Soft Power” theory of Joseph Nye has been adopted to analyze the ASEAN approach towards the SCS dispute and China’s response to influence the member states. Moreover, the Qualitative approach has been used for collection of data through primary and secondary data sources. John Scott's model of documentary analysis is used for data analysis. This study explores ASEAN's multilateral diplomacy, consensus-building mechanisms, and conflict resolution frameworks utilized to address the dispute. Additionally, it investigates China's deployment of soft power tools, such as economic investments, cultural exchanges, and diplomatic engagements, aimed at influencing the regional changing dynamics. The research findings shed light on the effectiveness of ASEAN's approach in managing the SCS dispute and evaluate China's soft power response within the context of its regional ambitions. Ultimately, this research offers insights into power dynamics and potential future developments within the SCS region.

Conflict in South China Sea Between China and Philippines

The South China Sea sovereignty dispute between China and the Philippines has been ongoing for decades, with tensions peaking after China took over Mischief Reef in 1995. The dispute involves overlapping claims over a strategic and resource-rich area, including oil, natural gas, and marine products. The method used in this research is library research, which is a method of collecting data through academic literature, journals, books, and relevant reference sources. The theory in this research is to explore International Conflict Theories & History of South China Sea. Which International Conflict Theories highlight the important role of conflict in driving social change, involves cross-border actors, and requires a comprehensive approach to prevention and resolution at the global level. The History of South China Sea covers important trade routes, countries' sovereignty claims, and centuries of geopolitical tensions due to economic and military interests. The South China Sea dispute involves multiple countries with overlapping territorial claims and resource interests. The conflict is fueled by huge economic potential, such as oil, gas and vital trade routes. Growing tensions, especially between China and the Philippines, require a careful diplomatic solution. To prevent a more dangerous escalation of the conflict, international cooperation is needed from each country involved as well as from outside to maintain and stabilize regional security in the South China Sea Region.

The Polarization of U.S. Alliances: Domestic Division and America’s Commitment to International Security

ABSTRACT Democracies are considered particularly reliable allies as their political elites are accountable to their voters and party, prohibiting them from reneging on alliance commitments. Yet heightened polarization in the U.S. raises questions about this political support system of U.S. alliances. Combining the literature on audience costs with research on polarization and U.S. foreign policy, this article theorizes how partisan and ideological polarization negatively affects U.S. commitment to security alliances. It is argued that partisan and ideological polarization among members of Congress prohibits American democracy from sending credible signals of resolve because it makes legislators prioritize party unity and ideological conviction over national security. Testing a set of hypotheses with an analysis of an original data set of co-sponsored legislation concerning the South China Sea dispute and the Russian annexation of Crimea reveals how partisan and ideological polarization in Congress undermine bipartisanship support of allies as well as contend the policy instruments necessary to support the alliance. The findings of this article further develop existing research on the implications of polarization for American democracy as it sheds light on the nature and drivers of polarization in Congress regarding U.S. alliance commitments.

Izražavanje nezadovoljstva zbog međunarodnih normi - rastavljanje kineske međunarodne diskurzivne strategije za protivljenje Sjedinjenim Državama u Južnom kineskom moru

This paper investigates these questions from the perspective of official Chinese discourses related to the South China Sea dispute. Beginning with the key assumption that what matters more to understanding how the Chinese view the international order is not what they say but how they say it, this article uses a mixed-method approach to critical discourse analysis in order to unpack the implicit meanings of official Chinese narratives. The quantitative analysis of these speeches reveals that emotions (humiliation, anger, and feelings of superiority) are important, along with the political use of history to create narratives aiming to legitimize China's desire to remove the United States from the management of Asia-Pacific issues. The paper will also show that while the Chinese discourse remains the same under all US administrations, the Chinese legal discourse has fluctuated as the dispute has evolved. Such findings provide a better understanding of Chinese political communication on international law and on the present international order.

Contemporary Sino-Indonesian Relations

Sino-Indonesian relations are characterised by a complex interplay of economic opportunities and geopolitical challenges, shaping both nations' roles in Southeast Asia. This study examines Indonesia’s engagement with China, particularly through its participation in the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and the Jakarta-Bandung High-Speed Rail project, as a strategy to address critical infrastructure deficits. While Chinese investments have driven industrial modernisation, issues such as cost overruns, project delays, debt dependency, and environmental risks pose significant concerns. Geopolitically, Indonesia’s strategic location in the Indo-Pacific positions it as a pivotal player amidst intensifying regional rivalries. Despite its non-claimant status in the South China Sea dispute, Chinese incursions into Indonesia’s Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) near the Natuna Islands have prompted Jakarta to adopt a more assertive defence policy. Using a qualitative approach and secondary data analysis, this study explores how Indonesia balances economic cooperation with the geopolitical complexities arising from China’s growing influence and the United States’ counterbalancing strategies in the Indo-Pacific. The findings reveal that while economic collaboration with China remains robust—particularly in trade, renewable energy, and electric vehicle manufacturing—Indonesia is increasingly diversifying partnerships and leveraging platforms like ASEAN and the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) to mitigate dependency risks. This study underscores the importance of pragmatic engagement, transparency, and trust-building to manage bilateral tensions while advancing mutual growth. Sino-Indonesian relations profoundly influence Southeast Asia’s economic and geopolitical landscape, making sustainable and equitable practices essential for regional stability and shared development.

Power, Norms, and Trust: Interrelated Factors Impacting ASEAN Management of South China Sea Disputes

Power, Norms, and Trust: Interrelated Factors Impacting ASEAN Management of South China Sea Disputes

Prisoner's Dilemma in the Rationalization of Indonesia's Foreign Policy in the South China Sea Dispute

China's nine-dash line claim in the South China Sea has posed a threat and instability in the regional area, including the waters of North Natuna. Indonesia's consistent foreign policy of remaining a neutral country changed under President Prabowo's leadership with the formation of a joint statement. The aim of this paper is to analyze which policy provides the greatest benefit to Indonesia using the Prisoner's Dilemma. The research method used is qualitative, with secondary data sources and descriptive analysis techniques. The conclusion shows that Indonesia’s highest score in interactions with China related to the South China Sea dispute is achieved by not cooperating, regardless of China's choices.

Dispute in the South China Sea beetwen America and China

The South China Sea dispute is one of the most complex and strategic geopolitical conflicts, involving rivalry between the United States and China, as well as a number of countries in the region. The strategic geographical position of the South China Sea as The strategic geographical position of the South China Sea as the world's main shipping lane, the wealth of natural resources such as oil and gas, and the overlapping claims over the exclusive economic zone (EEZ) make it an area with very high economic, political and military interests. From a political perspective, the conflict reflects a global power struggle, in which China is strengthening its claim through infrastructure development, military modernization, and an aggressive foreign policy under the leadership of Xi Jinping. under the leadership of Xi Jinping. On the other hand, the United States, along with strategic alliances such as the Quad, seeks to contain China's expansion by increasing its military presence in the Indo-Pacific region. This rivalry is exacerbated by regional dynamics involving ASEAN countries, as well as the struggle for global influence between the two major powers. This research analyzes the main factors influencing the escalation of the South China Sea dispute, including the role of geopolitics in the disputes, including their geopolitical, economic and military roles, and their implications for regional stability and the global balance of power. The study provides a comprehensive insight into a conflict that not only affects the main actors, but also the international security architecture. also to the international security architecture.

Jurisprudential Analysis of Historical Rights in the South China Sea Dispute

This paper explores the legal basis and legitimacy of China’s claimed historical rights in the South China Sea dispute. By reviewing the principles and precedents of international law regarding historical rights, and combining rich historical evidence, it is argued that China’s territorial sovereignty over the South China Sea islands, historical rights within the U-shaped line, and traditional fishing rights in certain waters, all have a solid jurisprudential foundation that meets the constituent elements for the formation of historical rights, and should be recognized and protected under international law and the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). The paper also points out that the 2016 South China Sea Arbitration Award, which rejected China’s historical rights claims, seriously deviates from objective facts and legal rules, lacking legitimacy. Historical rights play an important role in resolving the South China Sea dispute and maintaining regional peace and stability.

From the border of ‘barrier’ to the border of ‘connectivity’: The current development and connectivity of Vietnam-China cross-border infrastructure

The purpose of the article is to examine the changes in cross-border cooperation between Vietnam and China as a result of the development and connectivity of cross-border infrastructure between the two countries. This article is based on a mixed-methods study that includes desk research and surveys. The article explains how the two countries’ approaches to border shifted from ‘barrier’ to the border of ‘connectivity’. Accordingly, the article examines the changes in border management cooperation between the two countries, which serves as a vital basis for cross-border development cooperation. Furthermore, the article examines the perceptions of the two countries regarding the development and connectivity of cross-border infrastructure for comprehensive cooperation between the two countries and beyond. At the same time, the article examines how the two countries promote the development and connectivity of cross-border infrastructure, both hard and soft. The article also examined some initial results and some issues facing the two countries. The paper concludes with some findings. In particular, the article concludes that increased border connectivity will encourage cross-border cooperation and integration between the two countries and help to alleviate security concerns. Although the two countries have made efforts to open their borders, in the transition from a border of ‘barriers’ to a border of ‘connectivity’ remain partly to Vietnamese people’s memories of the 1979 Sino-Vietnamese border war, as well as the impact of the two countries’ unresolved South China Sea disputes. However, Vietnam also tries to promote cross-border cooperation within a controllable level.

Does Reputation Matter? Explaining China’s Evolving Strategy in South China Sea Disputes

What drives China’s approach to disputes in the South China Sea? While conventional wisdom often attributes Beijing’s actions primarily to material interests, this overlooks the possible influence of non-material factors such as China’s desire to uphold its national reputation. Contrary to the assumptions of traditional prospect theory, China’s behavior is not driven solely by calculations of gains and losses but also by considerations for its international reputation. Beijing may temper its assertiveness when its reputation is declining but still manageable, as demonstrated by its increased willingness to resolve disputes multilaterally after its global image was tarnished following the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic. Contrarily, China may resort to more assertive actions when these do not significantly hurt its reputation or when the damage seems irreversible, as seen in its unwavering stance during the 2012 Scarborough Shoal standoff with the Philippines.

Language and Social Issue Relationship: Journal and Speeches on the South China Sea Dispute

The paper made use of and deconstructed some of the extracted salient texts and some speeches from published articles which can relate to the language’s relationship with social issues from correspondents criticizing former President Duterte about the South China Sea dispute; on his independent foreign policy and his alleged ruthless anti-criminality campaigns specifically on the war on drugs. The introduction details how the social issues of the Philippines-China dispute on the South China Sea began. In Section 2, some salient extracted texts in subsections 2.7 and 2.8 were deconstructed and analyzed using the combined analytical lenses of the Language of Peace, and Media Content theories. The analysis reveals that the language used in both published articles was predominantly integral to violence such that under the journal there were 83% violent social issues and 17% integral to peace, and under the speeches, 79% % violent social issues and 21% integral to peace with only 21%. On the other hand, as regards PH-China South China Sea disputes, as many as 36% of social issues favored Pro-peace Advocacy or preferred bilateral negotiation in contrast to 64% favoring Pro-Confrontational Advocacy, or legal offensive as with the Hague and with the UNCLOS.

PEACEFUL DIPLOMACY IN THE SOUTH CHINA SEA: SETTLEMENT OF INTERNATIONAL DISPUTES THROUGH ARBITRATION AND NEGOTIATION

The South China Sea dispute is one of the hottest conflicts in regional politics, involving a number of countries in the Asia-Pacific region. The complexity of this dispute is rooted in overlapping territorial claims, competition for rich natural resources, and historical tensions between the countries involved. This study aims to discuss the resolution of international disputes through peaceful diplomacy, with a case study focusing on the South China Sea Dispute. The controversy over territorial and resource claims in the region culminated in an arbitration court, which resulted in a decision in favor of the Philippines. However, the resolution of the dispute did not stop there; this article reviews the development of post-arbitration diplomacy between China and the Philippines, culminating in a joint agreement to develop and manage resources in the South China Sea. The results of the study show that the role of the arbitration court, government response, and negotiation dynamics support peaceful resolution. The conclusion highlights global implications and provides valuable lessons for dealing with international disputes, emphasizing that diplomacy remains a key pillar in building and maintaining relations between countries.

Geopolitics in Deep Waters: The South China Sea Dispute and Strategic Global Shifts

Geopolitics in Deep Waters: The South China Sea Dispute and Strategic Global Shifts

Vymezení umělých ostrovů v mezinárodním mořském právu a jeho význam pro spory v Jihočínském moři

This paper explores the concept of islands in international law and its implications for the South China Sea dispute. Islands are important for various reasons, such as territorial sovereignty, maritime rights, and natural resources. However, the legal binding definition of artificial islands has not been enacted by any international document until now. This paper traces the historical development of the concept of islands, from the Hague Conference in 1930 to the United Nations Convention of the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) in 1982. It also analyses the challenges and opportunities of artificial islands, which are man-made structures that can serve different purposes but can also create various legal and environmental problems. Artificial islands are especially relevant for the South China sea dispute, which involves multiple costal states, while China has significant geopolitical and economic implications. This paper argues that the South China Sea dispute can be resolved through cooperation and dialogue, based on international law framework. Taking into account the provisions of UNCLOS, South China Sea dispute, state practise, and legal scholarship, this article aims to unpack the complexities surrounding artificial island and implications of artificial islands on the international relations.

Peran Arbitrase dalam Resolusi Sengketa Internasional: Studi Kasus Sengketa Laut Tiongkok Selatan

The purpose of this study was to find out how the arbitration line could settle south China's sea dispute. The study USES a normative-law study method, including a constitutional approach, a case approach, and a historical approach. Data collected and processed is viewed as secondary; The collection of primary and secondary legal materials is done by literature; Thereafter, the data is systematized and analyzed through descriptive methods. The results of this study explain south China sea disputes raised by the Philippines, which feel that they have a right to the region. The Philippines brought their conflict with the country of China in the south China sea into the international arbitration system. The Philippines claims that the coral reef environment was damaged by China's action to build an artificial island.

Navigating Turbulence: ASEAN’s Leadership Challenges in the Human Rights Violation in Myanmar and South China Sea Dispute

The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) is one of the most rapidly growing regional organizations, significantly influencing the geopolitical landscape of Southeast Asia and beyond. Despite these successes, however, ASEAN currently faces serious challenges in maintaining its unity, solidarity, and cohesiveness. A critical issue is the divergence in views, attitudes, and policies of member countries on crucial political and security matters. This study explores the concept of leadership within the structure of regionalization in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). The concept is shaped by structural capabilities derived from the region's resource production and manpower, with charisma playing a crucial role in leadership. Based on this concept, this study explores the leadership role in ASEAN's efforts to address current and upcoming issues, particularly about human rights abuses in Myanmar and South China Sea disputes. This study compares Indonesia's leadership within ASEAN to that of other member states using a qualitative comparative case study design. This method investigates how different elements affect the phenomenon that is being studied. A more nuanced understanding of the complex relationships between various variables, including leadership, domestic turmoil, and regional dynamics, can be obtained through the analysis of cases in real-life contexts. The study posits that ASEAN will not be able to uphold its integrity and accelerate the realization of a harmonious ASEAN society in the future without robust leadership. Unlike in its early years, ASEAN today lacks a leader capable of mobilizing political resources to address and resolve collective issues within the organization.

Country Boundary Agreement as An Effort to Resolve The South China Sea Dispute

Country Boundary Agreement as An Effort to Resolve The South China Sea Dispute

The South China Sea Dispute and Regional Response

Background: Beginning in December 2013, the South China Sea dispute has emerged as a complex and highly contested issue with significant implications for regional stability in East and Southeast Asia. The Chinese military began constructing artificial islands anchored by seven coral atolls in the Spratly Islands until it had created land that it then claimed in October 2015. The construction is over 3000 acres and houses military equipment (anti-aircraft and anti-missile systems) and personnel for the People's Republic of China. Objective: From a realist perspective, the dispute reflects a struggle for power and influence among claimant states, driven by their desire to secure regional strategic interests. Neighbouring countries, recognising the implications of China's rise as a significant power, have responded mainly by using soft realist methods to accommodate or counter China's growing influence in a collective setting. This paper explores the geopolitical implications of the dispute and how other powers have chosen to engage with China and other regional actors. Methods: This article is a case study. The article analyses the case of the South China Sea dispute since 2000 through a realist lens. It first explains the lens and its focal points. Then, it examines the different facets of the dispute through this lens: economic interests, national security concerns, domestic and regional politics, and historical issues. The focus is on analysing China and ASEAN member-states as the primary parties to the conflict. Results: This lens provides valuable insights into the power struggles, self-interest, and security concerns that underlie the conflict. This paper provides a comprehensive understanding of its multifaceted nature by critically examining the dispute's territorial claims, legal frameworks, and historical context. It also explores the geopolitical implications and the involvement of major regional powers. Liberal solutions have largely failed, while more minor actors have cooperated on limited terms when their interests intersect using soft realist diplomacy and collective action within international arenas. Conclusion: The dispute has unveiled the limits of international diplomatic efforts brokered by organisations such as ASEAN to address aggressive behaviour consistently. Small and medium states are largely constrained from directly confronting China, have accommodated China, used international forums to advance power positions and prestige, and cooperated on other issues to indirectly address the dispute.

Role conceptions and diplomatic behaviours: comparing Japan and South Korea in the South China Sea

ABSTRACT The South China Sea is a region marked by overlapping territorial claims and escalating tensions among various nations. Unlike claimant states, whose direct territorial interests significantly shape their foreign policy decisions, non-claimant states possess a broader range of diplomatic options. This article examines the contrasting diplomatic behaviours of non-claimant regional states in the South China Sea disputes. Through a comparative case study of Japan and South Korea, it argues that the divergent responses of these two middle powers largely stem from the roles they assume within the policy arena. Japan, as an assertive actor driven by a sense of obligation, has actively taken positions on disputed events to demonstrate its presence. Conversely, South Korea, adopting the role of a detached observer, has exercised caution and maintained a low profile, aiming to avoid potential diplomatic costs. The findings highlight the significance of ideational factors in influencing regional states’ responses to security challenges. Furthermore, this study contributes to role theory research by introducing a new term for further study and by demonstrating the tangible effects of role conceptions on state behaviour in specific policy contexts.