Geopolitics: The Heart of the Spratly Islands Dispute
By Sop - February 17, 2020
Geopolitics:
The Heart of the Spratly Islands Dispute
Threat perception is the central issue in the
current Spratly dispute, not island ownership. The Spratly Islands are a
disputed archipelago located in the South China Sea. According to Pletcher
(2015), it is strategically located roughly midway of Vietnam and Philippines
and north of insular Malaysia. Between 1933 and 1939, France held the
archipelago before Japan occupied it in World War II and developed the islands
into their submarine base. After the war, the Chinese Nationalist government
established a military base on Itu Aba, the largest island among the Spratlys.
The Nationalists maintained their garrison in this island even after their
exile to Taiwan; however, when Japan renounced its claim in 1951, countries
such as mainland China, Vietnam, Malaysia, and even the Philippines declared
themselves as the rightful owners. This resulted to the current Spratly Island
dispute, which has persisted to this day. The dispute at the Spratlys had waxed
hot and cold for many decades. Vietnam and China even had skirmish in which
three Vietnamese ships and 88 Vietnamese sailors were killed. Sovereignty has
always been a contested issue among the claimant countries, but at the heart of
the most current dispute between China and Philippines, sovereignty is taking a
backseat as the real reason for the dispute is the current worldwide
geopolitical climate.
China's claim to the Spratlys date long back
to the Ming and Qing Dynasties. According to the Institute for Security and
Development Policy (2016), China was said to be the first country to
discover, name, and exploit the resources of the Spratlys, moreover,
exercising sovereign powers over them. Maps of these islands were found to be
published throughout these times and was acknowledged by a number of
international sources throughout modern history. This included listings in, for
example, international atlases that were published in the 1950s and 1960s.
On the other hand, one of the
Philippines’s claim to the islands was the islands’ proximity vis-à-vis the
Philippine archipelago. Spratlys are located within the Philippines’s Exclusive
Economic Zone (EEZ) and is neighboring the island of Palawan. Because of its
close distance, the Philippines claim that it should be considered theirs.
The thing with these claims is that they can
easily be debunked. Firstly, China cannot use historical claims as a basis in
claiming ownership over the Spratlys. If historical claims were to be used as a
basis then the whole world's geopolitical map would have to be redrawn. The
Māoris would have to take back New Zealand, the US government should yield
power back to American-Indians, the Philippines would have still been under Spanish
rule, and the list goes on and on. Furthermore, it is obviously against
international law to annex and conquer territories based on historical bases.
The Spratlys being located within the
Philippines’s EEZ is not a valid claim either. As imparted by the United
Nations Convention on the Law of Sea signed on December 10, 1982, the exclusive
economic zone (EEZ) is a place where countries can conduct commercial
activities and exercise sovereign rights; however, not granting the countries sovereignty.
Despite these claims and counterclaims to
sovereignty, at the heart of the current dispute is not sovereignty at all.
There are geopolitics behind the scenes at work that is fueling the current
showdown in the Spratlys. For decades, the United States has seen China’s rise
and has sought ways and means to contain China’s development. For instance,
former US President Barrack Obama’s move to “Pivot to the Pacific”. China’s
most productive cities are along the eastern coast which is natural because of the
coastline, allowing these cities to profit from international trades. China
trades predominantly with Europe, Africa, and Middle East as their export
market and their source of fuel. All these goods have to travel through the
South China Sea to reach China’s rich east coast provinces and cities. China’s
entire economy is vulnerable because if this trade is put in peril, its economy
would dry up, and this trade could easily be put in peril if the trade routes
were to be cut off. The routes go through the South China Sea and this has made
it imperative for China to take control of the area because if they don’t, the
US Pacific fleet could take control of the sea and cut off China’s trade with
the rest of the world. In China’s point of view, the South China Sea is a very
crucial part of their continued development. In order to take control of the
sea, China has to militarize reefs and islands so that they can put weapons and
arms to turn these islands into unsinkable aircraft carriers. This is the only
way to safeguard the vicinity, because China cannot go toe-to-toe with the
United States navy.
On the side of the Philippines, if China were
to go through with their plans to take over and build military bases on the
islands, it would be too close for comfort since one of the disputed islands
lies only 200 kilometers away from Palawan. Having a foreign military base
armed to the teeth 200 kilometers away from your coastline is like having a
knife pointed at your neck and is a clear and present danger to any government,
including the Philippines.
The reason why China and Philippines don’t see
eye-to-eye is because they don’t see the situation on the same angle. In the
grand scheme of things, the Philippines is merely a pawn between a geopolitical
chess game of two big superpowers. The ideal world to live in would be a world
where superpowers help each other for the sake of humankind. The negative
policies like the Pivot to the Pacific, trade wars, sanctions, will be a thing
of the past. The world has accomplished this before, take for example the
International Space Station, where the Russians and Americans worked together,
and it can be done again. Wouldn’t that make the world a better place?
References:
Pletcher, K. (2015, October 27). Spratly Islands: Reefs, Shoals, Atolls,
and Islets, South China Sea. Rerieved from https://www.britannica.com/place/Spratly-Islands.
Institute for Security and Development Policy. (2016, June 14). Understanding China’s Position on the South China
Sea Disputes. Retrieved from https://isdp.eu/publication/understanding-chinas-position-south-china-sea-disputes/.
UN General Assembly, Convention on the Law of the Sea, 10 December
1982, available
at: https://www.un.org/Depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/part5.html.
Cha, V. (2016, September 6). The
Unfinished Legacy of Obama’s Pivot to Asia. Retrieved from https://foreignpolicy.com/2016/09/06/the-unfinished-legacy-of-obamas-pivot-to-asia/.
Lyra Sophia Tan
Grade 11 - ABM
0 Comments