Spratly Island

This article examines the genesis, usage, and meaning of the People's Republic of China's and the Republic of China's U-shaped line claim in the South China Sea territorial dispute from 1946 to 1974. The Republic of China (ROC) officially created the line in 1947, which the People's Republic of China (PRC) then adopted in 1949. Although the PRC claims sovereignty over all of the disputed islands and features, it remains silent on what specific waters the line claims. Based on ROC national archival files on the line, which remain virtually unused by scholars on the dispute, this article argues that the line was an "islands attribution" boundary until at least 1974. It claimed only the islands, features, and any adjacent waters consistent with contemporary conceptions of international maritime law. The article concludes with the present-day significance of this history and suggestions for future avenues of scholarship.

This article investigates the on-going issue that is associated with China’s String of Pearls (SOP) strategy in South China Sea which has trespassed on Malaysia’s water territories, analyzed from the perspectives of military costs, international business trade relation, and natural resources acquisition as well as its possible impact on Malaysia’s position in South China Sea using the game theory. China’s vision is to expand its seaborne trading route strategy to secure its commodity and energy transaction by mobilizing the sea channel ‘silk road’, otherwise also known as the String of Pearls strategy. Each ‘pearl’ plays a unique, different role in different location for its mixed strategy in the international trading area especially in the Spratly Islands. Currently, China has been aggressive in the South China Sea by provoking Vietnam, the Philippines, and Malaysia. Therefore, international trade relation between China and Malaysia is questionable. However, Malaysia’s ‘status quo’ strategy that is analyzed and reflected in the game theory may be adopted as the possible solution to this pertinent issue, paving the way for Malaysia to also serve as a role model within the ASEAN region to end the conflict and gain sustainable economic growth.

The aim of this article is to examine two treaties which are often presented by scholars as potential models for a maritime regime in the South China Sea, namely the Svalbard Treaty and the Antarctic Treaty System. The work concludes that even though both of the treaties have resolved equally complex territorial disputes, their importance as a role model for the SCS is limited due to the unique political condition in the Asia-Pacific. However, the solutions within the sphere of environmental protection and the structure of decision-making institutions developed by the abovementioned treaties present a valuable lesson and a potential example for the countries involved in the South China Sea dispute to emulate. The article argues that cooperation within environmental protection and fisheries management, as a low-profile endeavour, is easier to be put into practice than the joint development of highly contested hydrocarbon resources of the SCS. Furthermore, it can potentially lay foundation for the future high profile collaboration. The paper also presents a model of a maritime regime for the South China Sea.

This article introduces the historical development of the territorial dispute in the Spratly Islands area and discusses claimants’ arguments from the law of territorial acquisition perspective. It also analyses the legal implications of the South China Sea Arbitration case for the territorial dispute and discusses the prospects for dispute settlement.

Over the past decade and prior, the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia, Indonesia and Brunei, all of whom are members of ASEAN (Association of South East Asian Nations), have been engaged in territorial disputes with China, particularly in regard to the South China Sea. Hence, in this paper, we perform a Data Analysis of how changes to US military aid to these countries, Economic growth in these states as well as pressure from China’s increasing Military Budget has affected changes towards Military Spending in these nations. We start off by performing a data analysis of these individual factors. Following so, we perform a multiple linear regression model to determine which factors prove the most significant, if any, towards changes in military spending in these countries. Our results show that based off data from 2008 to 2018, from a Statistical Multiple Linear Regression analysis, we could conclude that Individual Economic Growth is the most significant factor in affecting changes towards Vietnam’s military expenditure, while pressure resulting from China’s increasing Military Expenditure is the most significant factor in affecting changes towards Malaysia’s military expenditure. Additionally, at significance level α = 0.1, Indonesia’s individual economic growth is the most significant factor in affecting changes towards its military expenditure.  However, at α = 0.1, we are inconclusive in determining any significant factor affecting changes towards Brunei and Philippine’s military expenditure.

Abstrak Laut Cina Selatan memiliki tensi dan tingkat ketegangan yang tinggi setelah Cina mereklamasi 7 gugusan pulau di Laut Cina Selatan yang terdiri dari Fiery Cross Reff, Cuarteron Reff, Subi Reef, Gaven Reef, Mischief Reef, Johnson South Reef, dan Hughes Reef dan mengubahnya menjadi pulau buatan dan mendirikan fasilitas militer diatasnya. Tindakan Cina ini merupakan bagian dari klaim sepihak U-Dash Line yang mengklaim hampir keseluruhan Laut Cina Selatan dan tentunya membawa efek yang buruk teradap stabilitas perdamaian di Laut Cina Selatan. Reklamasi yang dilakukan oleh Cina atas 7 gugusan pulau, mengubahnya menjadi pulau buatan dan mendirikan fasilitas militer diatasnya tentu bertentangan dengan hukum internasional. Selain itu reklamasi atas 7 gugusan pulau ini menimbulkan implikasi hukum terhadap rights of navigation yang dimiliki oleh setiap kapal. Implikasi hukum tersebut ialah tidak diperbolehkannya kapal-kapal asing melaksanakan kebebasan bernavigasi dan munculnya ketidakpastian penerapan rights of navigation di perairan sekitar gugusan pulau yang direklamasi oleh Cina tersebut. Abstract Tension in the South China Sea has increased significantly since China's land reclamation occurs in seven group of islands in the South China Sea i.e Fiery Cross Reff, Cuarteron Reff, Subi Reef, Gaven Reef, Mischief Reef, Johnson South Reef, and Hughes Reef. China then turns them into artificial islands and built military facilities there. This unilateral action is part of the China's U-Dash Line claim and certainly bring worst effect towards the peace stability in the South China Sea. This surely contradicts with the international law and therefore, it's absolutely illegal. The land reclamation also raise the legal implication towards the rights of navigation owned by the foreign ships whom sail across the South China Sea i.e China forbids the foreign ships to exercise the freedom of navigation and raise the uncertainty of the implementation of the right of navigation in the waters around the seven group of islands reclaimed by China.

" So historical experience and realism both bid us to be more objective and less emotional, or if we are to engage our emotions it should be based on our authentic identity as Asians. It is on this basis that we reexamine the world, our region and ourselves. We are Asians. We live in Asia. Our future is in Asia. And we should remodel our thoughts and our policies in accordance with that indubitable fact. " – Philippine President Ferdinand E. Marcos, Sr., June 9, 1975 on the occasion of his Official Visit to China " China will never be a superpower, and will never commit aggression or bully other countries. We always maintain that all countries, big or small, should be equal. We support all the oppressed nations and oppressed peoples in their just struggles. It is possible for countries with different social systems to develop state relations on the basis of the five principles of mutual respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity, mutual non-aggression, non-interference in each other's internal affairs, equality and mutual benefit and peaceful coexistence. Our policy and stand are consistent and firm. Vice-Premier Deng Xiaoping, State Banquet Welcoming President Ferdinand ABSTRACT The paper aims to examine the nature of Philippine foreign policy towards China by reviewing the timeline of their relations through the theory of critical junctures. While the tie that connects these two nations can be traced back a thousand of year ago but its formal relationship as sovereign entities is not a replication not even a reinforcement of what has been cited to as to their long and rich 'traditional friendship' in the distant pasts. Some factors may have come along the way that hinders the flourishing of this ancient connection like politics among nations and the alliances especially the period of ideological confrontations between the Liberals of the US and the Communist of the Soviets

Threat serves as an impetus in the foundation, development, revitalization, and waning of the contemporary Philippine-United States alliance. Using Stephen Walt’s balance of threat theory as the analytical framework, this study proves that, historically, the dynamics of the Philippine-U.S. alliance revolves around the interaction of threatcentric issues and the member-state’s response. Threat serves as the prime mover of the alliance; foreign aid, ideological solidarity, and institutional penetration do not guarantee the alliance stability. They do, however, serve as critical factors in the alliance management. Shared or unshared existential threats with external overtones have a greater impact on the alliance. Moreover, internal security threats affect alliance efficiency. A coordinated approach is needed to confront and master them. 
The Philippine Communist Insurgency of the CPP-NPA-NDF, the South China Sea Dispute with China, the ambiguity of 1951 Mutual Defense Treaty provisions including its executory mechanisms, and U.S. “strategic ambivalence” in the case of conflict serve as disconnecting factors of the Philippine-U.S. alliance. These factors created and continue to create friction between the Philippines and the United States. This study recommends that the allies must align their threat assessments, resolve or manage disconnecting threats, and then address the ambiguity of the agreement through further research and deeper strategic discourse.