ABSTRACT
A decade after the stand-off between the USS Impeccable and a handful of Chinese vessels in the vicinity of Hainan Island, the South China Sea remains a critical flashpoint in regional politics. It is no longer confined to a set of disputes over territories and resources among the coastal states bordering the South China Sea, but it has been transformed into a battleground for diplomatic and strategic manoeuvres for regional primacy, or for strategic realignments shaping the maritime order in a vast swathe of oceanic space. As laid out by Stein Tønnesson, the South China Sea conundrum is both a historical and contemporary problem. Since the beginning of the 20th century, the South China Sea has evolved from an unhindered waterway that connects coastal communities to a dangerous maritime area that divides nations. The latest episode of tension has taken place in the context of China’s rise and was centred on the legitimacy of China’s historic rights in the form of its nine-dash line map legally and politically. The entire region is now divided into two opposite legal stances: One is based on the universally accepted United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), and the other is China’s own interpretation of international law. Although the case was brought to arbitration, the legal battle has not ended as China did not accept the court’s verdict. The wrangle was not confined a range of high-profile standoffs and incidents and the substantial military build-up at sea but has also been translated into a rising nationalism in all the claimant states and exchanges of reproaches at diplomatic forums. As a regional grouping, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) has found it difficult to hold its members together as their interests have diverged under China’s push and pull. As the strategic waterway turned perilous, other major powers became entangled since they had vested interests in maintaining the existing maritime order. With the advantage of hindsight, Tønnesson argues that China’s maritime expansionism constituted the major destabilizing force which was again driving its small and medium sized neighbours to lurch closer to its rivals, particularly the US and the Western powers. Subsequent chapters have substantiated Tønnesson’s line of reasoning.
