ABSTRACT
The South China Sea has become the focal point of US-China competition in the Western Pacific, but it was not always like this, and neither was it anticipated to develop in this way. Initially, it was a maritime territorial dispute over an outlier sea area whose ownership was not clear and for that reason did not attract much attention. The demarcation of ownership over maritime areas far removed from the coast is very much a modern concept as in the past the seas were generally waterways for the trade and commerce of all. China raised a claim to the Paracel Islands in the late 19th century which was stimulated by French moves in the area. France was then the colonial overlord of what was then known as Indochina and its moves around the Paracels on behalf of Annam gave shape to Chinese maritime claims. First made in relation to the Paracel Islands, those claims were later extended to the Spratly Islands in response to French as well as Japanese activities in the area in the early 20th century. In the 1950s, competing and overlapping claims to the sea area were made by the littoral states in defining maritime rights as an extension of the process of consolidating statehood after war and decolonization. These claims were triggered as the littoral states moved to outline the maritime borders of the territorial state in a sea where none had existed before. The much-discussed U-shaped or nine-dash line (see map one) that was declared by China’s Nationalist government in 1947 expressed that claim to the entire South China Sea though it was unclear exactly what it meant. Later, China insisted on the first discovery of and historical contact with the entire South China Sea in support of its claim without explaining how historical rights would be compatible with the U-shaped line. Vietnam’s claim to both the Paracel and Spratly islands was made in response to China, and also the Philippines that had occupied an area of the South China Sea called Kalayaan or Freedomland, placing troops on features there. Vietnam’s claim was based on first discovery, historical contact, and effective administration, and in many respects mirrored the Chinese claim. Malaysia’s claim to the resources of exclusive economic zones (EEZs) came later as it also occupied features with troops in response to Vietnamese and Philippine activities.
