europe.chinadaily.com.cn
China's Assertive Stance on South China Sea Claims Based on Post-WWII Order
The Xinhua Institute released reports on Thursday detailing China's historical and legal basis for its South China Sea claims, criticizing external interference and advocating for regional cooperation, framing the issue within the context of the post-World War II international order.
- How do the reports connect China's claims in the South China Sea to its role in the post-World War II international order and the UN Charter?
- China's justification for its South China Sea claims rests on its participation in WWII and subsequent legal documents like the Cairo and Potsdam Declarations. The reports contend that external interference, primarily from non-regional powers seeking to assert hegemony, destabilizes the region and violates the principles of the UN Charter. This narrative positions China as a defender of the post-war order while framing other actors as disruptive.
- What are the potential long-term consequences of China's assertive stance on the South China Sea, given its impact on regional stability and international relations?
- The Xinhua Institute's reports signal a potential escalation of rhetoric and actions concerning the South China Sea. The emphasis on historical legitimacy and the condemnation of external interference suggest a hardening of China's stance, potentially impacting future negotiations and regional stability. The reports' focus on the post-war order indicates China intends to frame the issue within a broader ideological context, complicating diplomatic solutions.
- What are the immediate implications of Xinhua's reports on the South China Sea dispute, considering their emphasis on historical legitimacy and condemnation of external interference?
- The Xinhua Institute released reports on Thursday asserting China's historical and legal rights in the South China Sea, criticizing external interference and calling for regional cooperation. These reports emphasize China's role in WWII and its subsequent claim based on the Cairo and Potsdam Declarations. The reports frame actions by other claimant nations, particularly the Philippines, as undermining the post-war international order.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The article frames China as a victim of external interference and a defender of the post-war international order. The headline and opening paragraphs immediately establish this framing. The historical context is selectively presented to support this narrative, while potentially negative actions by China are omitted or downplayed. For example, the extensive building of artificial islands and military bases is not mentioned.
Language Bias
The article uses strong, emotionally charged language to describe China's actions ("firm defender," "genuine commitment") and those of other nations ("stirring up tensions," "selfish gains," "blatant challenge"). Neutral alternatives would be more objective and less biased. For example, instead of "selfish gains," one could use "national interests." The repeated use of terms like "hegemony" and "external interference" without specific evidence or elaboration further influences reader perception.
Bias by Omission
The article omits perspectives from countries other than China and its allies. It focuses heavily on China's historical claims and legal arguments, without giving equal weight to the counterarguments or claims of other nations involved in the South China Sea disputes. This omission creates a biased narrative that favors China's position.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a false dichotomy by framing the situation as either supporting China's position or undermining the post-war international order. It doesn't acknowledge the possibility of alternative solutions or perspectives that don't necessarily align with either extreme.
Sustainable Development Goals
The reports emphasize the importance of upholding the post-war international order, resolving disputes through negotiation, and rejecting external interference. This directly supports SDG 16, which promotes peaceful and inclusive societies, access to justice for all, and building effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels.