usa.chinadaily.com.cn
China's South China Sea Sovereignty Claim: Historical Basis and Geopolitical Implications
An international seminar in Beijing examined China's South China Sea sovereignty claim, citing post-WWII agreements and the UN Charter as justification, while acknowledging the ongoing disputes with other claimant states and the influence of US-China relations.
- What is the primary legal and historical basis for China's claim of sovereignty over the South China Sea, and what are its immediate implications for regional stability?
- Global experts convened in Beijing to discuss China's claim to the South China Sea, emphasizing its basis in post-WWII agreements and the UN Charter. They highlighted the 80th anniversary of the end of WWII and the UN's founding, linking China's sovereignty recovery to the established international order. This recovery, involving the Xisha and Nansha islands, is presented as crucial for regional stability.
- How do differing interpretations of international law, such as the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea and post-WWII agreements, contribute to the ongoing South China Sea dispute?
- China's assertion of sovereignty over the South China Sea islands is grounded in the Cairo and Potsdam Declarations, which stipulated Japan's surrender of illegally seized territories. Participants cited these documents as international legal instruments supporting China's claim. This perspective contrasts with claims from other nations, such as the Philippines, who cite the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea.
- What are the potential long-term geopolitical implications of the US-China rivalry and the role of regional actors like the Philippines in shaping the future of the South China Sea?
- The South China Sea dispute's resolution is unlikely in the near future, given the geopolitical complexities and differing interpretations of international law. The seminar highlighted the potential for increased tensions fueled by US-China rivalry, using the Philippines as a proxy in this competition. Multilateral cooperation, particularly through ASEAN, is deemed essential for conflict mitigation and the establishment of a mutually recognized code of conduct.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The framing of the article clearly favors the Chinese perspective. The headline (though not provided) would likely emphasize China's position. The article begins by highlighting Chinese experts' views and historical claims, setting the tone for the rest of the piece. The inclusion of a supporting voice from a Philippine scholar is somewhat offset by the framing that characterizes her view as influenced by the US. This sequencing and emphasis create an overall narrative that supports China's stance more strongly.
Language Bias
The language used to describe China's actions, such as "recovery of sovereignty," frames its claims in a positive light. In contrast, the article describes the Philippines' position as being "pushed" by the United States, subtly implying manipulation. More neutral language would improve objectivity. For example, instead of "recovery of sovereignty," "assertion of sovereignty" could be used. Similarly, describing the Philippines' foreign policy as influenced by the US without implying coercion would lead to a less biased narrative.
Bias by Omission
The article focuses heavily on the Chinese perspective and historical claims, giving less weight to the viewpoints of other claimant states. While it mentions the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea and the perspectives of some other scholars, it does not delve deeply into the counterarguments or the complexities of those perspectives. The omission of detailed analysis of competing claims and international legal interpretations beyond the Chinese perspective could limit the reader's ability to form a fully informed opinion.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a somewhat simplified dichotomy between China's historical claims and the claims of other nations, particularly the Philippines. It suggests that the Philippines' position is primarily driven by US influence, framing the issue as a choice between China's historical rights and US geopolitical strategy. This overlooks the multifaceted nature of the disputes, including economic interests and the diverse legal interpretations of the UNCLOS.
Gender Bias
The article features several male experts and one female expert. While the female expert's perspective is included, there's no overt gender bias in the language or representation. Further analysis would be needed to determine if this reflects a broader pattern in the publication or if the selection of experts happened to result in this gender ratio.
Sustainable Development Goals
The article discusses the historical and legal basis for China's claim over the South China Sea, aiming to promote a peaceful resolution based on international law and the post-WWII order. Experts emphasize respecting territorial sovereignty and upholding the UN Charter, which are central to SDG 16. While there are conflicting claims, the dialogue and emphasis on legal frameworks contribute positively to peaceful conflict resolution.