The Modern Origins of China’s South China Sea Claims: Maps, Misunderstandings, and the Maritime Geobody

Abstract

This article offers a new account of the development of China’s territorial claims in the South China Sea. It argues that a collective Chinese belief in a “historic claim” to the reefs and rocks therein emerged in distinct episodes during the first half of the twentieth century, partly in response to perceived threats to the country’s sovereignty but mainly as attempts to shore up declining nationalist legitimacy. It situates the claim within efforts by Chinese intellectual and state elites to construct a national “geobody” in the first decades of the twentieth century. It argues that this was not a process of documenting a preexisting claim but of imagining and asserting one through the mobilization of both emotion and archival documents. Moreover, this account emphasizes the importance of the acquisition of knowledge from foreign sources and the confusion that entailed. The legacy of this confused claim-making shapes South China Sea geopolitics today.

China's Identity through a Historical Lens 1

“…China's protestations that the South China Sea islands form part of its "historic territory" do not stand up to scrutiny: indeed, when Chinese nationalists first began to agitate for sovereignty over the Spratlys and the Paracels in the first few decades of the twentieth century, there was confusion between the two archipelagos. 43 There are questions about what China hopes to achieve in the South China Sea, but it appears to some military observers to be part of a wider strategy aimed at neutralizing U.S. deterrence against an operation to retake Taiwan. 44 China's approach to the Diaoyu (Senkaku) Islands dispute is similar.…”

Construing and constructing the South China Sea beyond state‐led environmentalism: Vernacularizing geographical, geopolitical and sociotechnical imaginaries of territory

“…While much of the literature focuses on economic, military and political dimensions (e.g., Do Thanh Hai, 2017 ; Buszynski & Roberts, 2015 ), some studies have sought to understand the SCS disputes in terms of cartographic representations of territory, maritime sovereignty, sovereign rights, or localized, politicized and territorialized fisheries (Hayton, 2014 ; 2019 ; Sasges, 2016 ; 2020 ; Roszko, 2015 ; 2020 ; Zhang, 2016 ; Zhang & Bateman, 2017 ). Elsewhere I have shown that rather than an abstract and bounded state territory, the disputed Paracel and Spratly archipelagos are the historical fishing grounds of ethnically diverse groups (Hainanese, Việt, Cham, Bugis and others) who became familiarized with these spaces through seafaring, fishing, planting coconut trees or even salvaging cargo from shipwrecks (Roszko, 2017 : 36−9).…”

“…The Law of the Sea Convention (LOSC) gave coastal states full sovereignty over twelve nautical miles of territorial waters only and the exclusive sovereign right to explore, exploit, conserve and manage all natural resources within an Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) that extends 200 nautical miles outward from the coast into the sea. 4 While the exclusive EEZ rights do not extend to de jure sovereignty, China's national discourses construe its contiguous EEZs as de facto sovereignty (Hayton, 2014 ; 2019 ) over the whole SCS, a point I develop further as I discuss geographical and geopolitical imaginaries. Paradoxically, China's (and other claimants’) land reclamation in the SCS is embedded in the logic of LOSC, which requires that islands have to be able to sustain human habitation or economic life on their own in order to be a valid basis for claims to 200 nautical miles of an EEZ.…”

Klaim Republik Rakyat China atas Zona Ekonomi Ekslusif Indonesia

“…1 Konflik Laut Cina Selatan (LCS) yang hingga saat ini belum terselesaikan, telah berdampak terhadap Indonesia sebagai negara yang memiliki wilayah yurisdiksi nasional pada Zona Ekonomi Eksklusif Indonesia (ZEEI) Laut Natuna Utara. 2 Keamanan maritim Indonesia tidak dirasakan secara langsung oleh Indonesia karena aktivitas militer asing di ZEE Indonesia tidak pernah secara langsung bertentangan dengan kepentingan Indonesia di ZEE Indonesia, namun secara berkepanjangan dapat memicu konflik antara Indonesia dan negara asing yang melakukan aktivitas militer di ZEE Indonesia. 3 Laut China Selatan adalah suatu wilayah laut yang merupakan jalur laut yang sangat strategis dan kaya akan potensi sumber daya alam hayati dan non hayati.…”

“…Hukum Laut Indonesia, Jakarta: Rineka Cipta. 7 Haiton, B. (2009), "The Modern Origins of Chinas South China Sea Claims: Maps, Misunderstandings, and the Maritime Goebody", Sage Journals 8 Juwana, H, "Press Release", 28 Januari 2020 9 Monteiro, S. (2020), "Yurisdiksi Negara Pantai di Wilayah Delimitasi Maritim Zona Ekonomi Eksklusif yang Belum Ditetapkan Berdasarkan Ketentuan Hukum Laut Internasional (Study Di Timor Leste-Indonesia)", Jurnal Komunikasi Hukum, 6 (1): 303-334, h. 303.…”