Search

Begin New Search Topic Territorial Disputes Political Geography China

51. South China Sea Dispute: China’s Role and Proposed Solutions

Author:
Mubeen Adnan and Fakhara Shahid
Publication Date:
07-2020
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal of Political Studies
Institution:
Department of Political Science, University of the Punjab
Abstract:
South China Sea (SCS) is a part of Pacific Ocean and is the most strategic and important waterway in the world containing large deposits of hydrocarbons and fossil oil. Due to its unquestioned importance it has become bone of contention among many East Asian nations and China regarding its sovereignty and control of the territory. Two Islands Parcel and Spratly in the SCS are the flashpoints of the dispute because countries like, Philippine, China, Vietnam, Brunei and Malaysia are claiming their rights over some parts or sovereignty over all the above mentioned Islands. Primary concern of the dispute lies in U shaped nine- dashed demarcation line by China in the SCS. A decision of international court of Arbitration in “Philippines v. china arbitration case” showed that China U-shaped nine dash line demarcation is uneven with UNCLOS 1982. This verdict has been rejected by China on the grounds that it has no binding forces because China controls 90% area of the SCS through nine dashed line by having historical claim of the sea and this line was drawn in 1946 by the help of USA prior to the 1982 UNCLOS. China wants to solve the dispute bilaterally without any third party interference while due to the importance of the region many other actors are getting involved in to the dispute. A permanent and lasting solution of the dispute is a dire need of the time to solve the complex issue.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, International Law, and Territorial Disputes
Political Geography:
China, Asia-Pacific, and South China Sea

52. India–China Unsettled Boundary & Territorial Dispute: Institutionalized Border Mechanisms since 39 Years, Sans Resolution

Author:
Monika Chansoria
Publication Date:
07-2020
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Japan Institute Of International Affairs (JIIA)
Abstract:
The border dispute between India and China does not pertain to the definition of a boundary that can be marked physically on ground, and, on a military map, alone. It also takes on board vast tracts of disputed territorial frontiers. China continues to be in illegal physical occupation of large territorial land areas of India’s territory, starting with the entire Aksai Chin plateau in Ladakh, approximately 38,000 sq kms, since the mid-1950s. In addition, India maintains that in 1963, Pakistan illegally ceded to China, 5,180 sq kms of Indian Territory in the Shaksgam Valley of Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK), north of the Siachen Glacier, under a bilateral boundary agreement that holds no legal validity. Besides, China also stake claim to about 96,000 sq kms of Indian Territory in north-eastern Arunachal Pradesh, which it terms as ‘Southern Tibet’. The statements regarding Arunachal Pradesh being “Chinese territory and part of southern Tibet” are a key instrument of the marked shift in China’s strategy and stance in the early 1980s when Beijing began signaling that the eastern sector was the larger part of the boundary dispute. China’s stated position is that reunification of Chinese territories is a ‘sacred duty’ of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA). China shares a 22,000 kms land border with 14 adjacent states. It has resolved territorial disputes with 12 of them, but still needs to resolve the territorial and boundary dispute with India. Beijing, for that matter, also challenges the total length of the Indo-China International Land Border, which runs 3,488 kms according to the Indian Ministry of Home Affairs. This was also acknowledged by Indian Prime Minster, Narendra Modi, while addressing the India-China Business Forum in Shanghai on May 16, 2015.
Topic:
Security, Territorial Disputes, and Borders
Political Geography:
China, South Asia, India, and Asia

53. Tibet Leadership in Exile and the Indo-Pacific Strategy

Author:
Ellen Bork
Publication Date:
09-2020
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Project 2049 Institute
Abstract:
In this publication, Ellen Bork, Visiting Fellow at the Project 2049 Institute, examines the historical basis for Washington’s Tibet policy to demonstrate that America’s position on Tibet originates from misguided strategic assumptions about the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and its ambitions in Tibet, the Indo-Pacific region, and the liberal world order. The author asserts that the time has come for Washington to revise the United States’ policy toward Tibet and its democratic government-in-exile, as a critical component of America’s free and open Indo-Pacific strategy. Leading the way, Bork provides a roadmap of recommendations for Washington, including the adoption of democratic legitimacy as the basis of Tibet policy, the enlistment of supportive democracies in establishing a unified position, prioritizing the issue at international organizations, and engaging Tibetan leadership, among others.
Topic:
Sovereignty, Diaspora, Territorial Disputes, Democracy, Leadership, and Chinese Communist Party (CCP)
Political Geography:
China, Nepal, Tibet, United States of America, and Indo-Pacific

54. No Sanctuary: China’s New Territorial Dispute with Bhutan

Author:
Felix Chang
Publication Date:
07-2020
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Foreign Policy Research Institute (FPRI)
Abstract:
Resting at the eastern end of Bhutan is the Sakteng Wildlife Sanctuary. Spanning some 750 square kilometers, it is spread out across a densely forested area of the Himalayan Mountains. The sanctuary is far better known for its unique flora and fauna (including the red panda and, reputedly, the fabled yeti) than its geographic boundaries. But the latter is precisely what brought it to international attention in June 2020. Early that month, Bhutan sought a grant for the sanctuary from a global environmental organization that funds sustainable development projects. Unexpectedly, China’s representatives to that organization opposed the grant. Their reason: China considers the sanctuary to be “disputed territory.”
Topic:
Development, Environment, Territorial Disputes, and History
Political Geography:
China, Asia, and Bhutan

55. India’s “Tibet Card” in the Stand-Off with China: More Provocative than Productive

Author:
Sudha Ramachandran
Publication Date:
09-2020
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
The Jamestown Foundation
Abstract:
Tensions between India and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) have remained high ever since violent clashes occurred in the Galwan Valley region in mid-June, resulting in the deaths of 20 Indian Army soldiers and an undisclosed number of People’s Liberation Army (PLA) troops (Jamestown, June 29; China Brief, July 15). A significant new development occurred on the night of August 29-30, when the Indian Army took control of strategic heights at the southern bank of the Pangong Tso, a lake in eastern Ladakh that straddles the Line of Actual Control (LAC), the de facto border between India and China. The operation was significant: it was the first time since the eruption of tensions along the LAC in May that the Indian Army preempted the Chinese from unilaterally altering the status quo (The Telegraph, September 2).
Topic:
Diplomacy, Territorial Disputes, Armed Forces, Conflict, and Borders
Political Geography:
China, India, Asia, and Tibet

56. The Trans-Himalayan ‘Quad,’ Beijing’s Territorialism, and India

Author:
Jagannath P. Panda
Publication Date:
11-2020
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
The Jamestown Foundation
Abstract:
Connectivity linkages between the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and trans-Himalayan countries have taken on a new hue with the recent Himalayan ‘Quadrilateral’ meeting between China, Pakistan, Afghanistan and Nepal (MOFA (PRC), July 27). Often referred to as a “handshake across the Himalayas,” China’s outreach in the region has been characterized by ‘comprehensive’ security agreements, infrastructure-oriented aid, enhanced focus on trade, public-private partnerships, and more recently, increased economic and security cooperation during the COVID-19 pandemic.[1] The geopolitics underlying China’s regional development initiatives, often connected with its crown jewel foreign policy project Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), have been highly concerning—not just for the countries involved, but also for neighboring middle powers like India, which have significant stakes in the region.[2] At the Himalayan Quad meeting, foreign ministers from all four countries deliberated on the need to enhance the BRI in the region through a “Health Silk Road”. Chinese Communist Party (CCP) General Secretary and PRC President Xi Jinping’s ‘Community of a Shared Future for Humanity’ was cited as justification for facilitating a “common future with closely entwined interests,” and the ministers agreed to work towards enhancing connectivity initiatives to ensuring a steady flow of trade and transport corridors in the region and building multilateralism in the World Health Organization (WHO) to promote a “global community of health” (Xinhua, July 28).
Topic:
Diplomacy, Territorial Disputes, Geopolitics, and Economy
Political Geography:
Pakistan, Afghanistan, China, India, Asia, and Nepal

57. China Leverages Tibetan Plateau’s Water Wealth

Author:
Brahma Chellaney
Publication Date:
06-2020
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Georgetown Journal of International Affairs
Abstract:
While the international attention remains on China’s recidivist activities in the disputed waters of the South China Sea, where it continues to incrementally expand its strategic footprint, Beijing is also quietly focusing its attention on the waters of rivers that originate in the resource-rich, Chinese-controlled territory of Tibet.
Topic:
Development, Environment, Science and Technology, Territorial Disputes, Water, and Sustainability
Political Geography:
China, Asia, and Tibet

58. Arbitration as a Means to Settle Territorial Disputes in the South China Sea: Case Study and History of China and The Philippines

Author:
Monika Chansoria
Publication Date:
05-2020
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Japan Institute Of International Affairs (JIIA)
Abstract:
South China Sea’s territorial disputes gained the spotlight yet again with the April 18, 2020 announcement1 by China’s State Council, through which, it approved setting up ‘two new’ municipal districts (dependencies of the southernmost Sansha city, in the Hainan province) covering the South China Sea – namely the ‘Xisha District’ and ‘Nansha District’. Home to an estimated 11 billion barrels of untapped oil, and 190 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, the Spratly Islands in the South China Sea possess rich natural resources and fishing areas. The Fiery Cross Reef will be in charge of the administration of the islands, reefs, and sea areas of the Spratly Islands.2 The Fiery Cross Reef used to be an underwater reef that was converted into an artificial island following massive land reclamation undertaken by China. This reef was virtually untouched by manmade structures until March 2014 and was transformed into an artificial island in the span of one year by March 2015. Furthermore, the Woody Island will be in charge of the administration of the islands, reef, and sea areas of the Paracel Islands.3 China’s Ministry of Civil Affairs and the Ministry of Natural Resources has released the longitudes, latitudes, and standardized names of 25 islands and reefs and 55 undersea geographic entities in the disputed South China Sea. The listed islands include Sanzhizai – an islet north of the Woody Island in Sansha city in South China’s Hainan Province.
Topic:
Territorial Disputes, Geopolitics, and Arbitration
Political Geography:
China, Asia, Philippines, and South China Sea

59. Defending the Maritime Rules-Based Order: Regional Responses to the South China Sea Disputes

Author:
Rebecca Strating
Publication Date:
01-2020
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
East-West Center
Abstract:
The seas are an increasingly important domain for understanding the balance-of-power dynamics between a rising People’s Republic of China and the United States. Specifically, disputes in the South China Sea have intensified over the past decade. Multifaceted disputes concern overlapping claims to territory and maritime jurisdiction, strategic control over maritime domain, and differences in legal interpretations of freedom of navigation. These disputes have become a highly visible microcosm of a broader contest between a maritime order underpinned by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and challenger conceptions of order that see a bigger role for rising powers in generating new rules and alternative interpretations of existing international law. This issue examines the responses of non-claimant regional states—India, Australia, South Korea, and Japan—to the South China Sea disputes.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Territorial Disputes, Geopolitics, Maritime, and Jurisdiction
Political Geography:
China, Asia, North America, United States of America, and South China Sea

60. South China Sea Threat Assessment: Is China a Threat or a Paper Tiger?

Author:
Shaoyu Yuan
Publication Date:
02-2020
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Georgetown Journal of International Affairs
Abstract:
Tensions in the South China Sea continue to rise. China’s People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN)’s Rear Admiral Lou Yuan, regarded as a hawkish military commentator, recently proclaimed that the continuing dispute over the ownership of the South China Sea could be resolved by sinking two US aircraft carriers. Statements like these result in a legitimate fear that China’s increasing presence in the South China Sea might spark a kinetic military conflict with the United States. However, while most Western scholars and media are paying excessive attention to the rise of China, few are contemplating China’s weaknesses in the region. Despite China’s constant verbal objections and rising tensions with the United States in the last century, the world has yet to witness any major military confrontation between the two superpowers. China will continue to avoid directly confronting the United States in the South China Sea for at least another decade because China’s military remains immature and defective.
Topic:
Security, Power Politics, Territorial Disputes, Grand Strategy, and Conflict
Political Geography:
China, Asia, North America, South China, and United States of America