South China Sea Dispute as International Law and Politics

Youngmin Seo, J.S.D. (U.C. Berkeley, 2021), has been practicing international law at the Korean Foreign Ministry since 2006. He has published numerous articles on interdisciplinary topics, focusing on the balance of power in law, the law of the sea, and the Indo-Pacific region.

• PrefaceAcknowledgementsList of Figures and TablesAcronyms1 The Facts and the Formal Law1.1 The Facts and Recent Events1.1.1 History of the Dispute1.2 Recent Events1.2.1 Naval Conflicts between the United States and China1.2.2 Arbitration between the Philippines and China1.2.3 Land Reclamation and Island-Building1.3 International Law and the Resolution of the South China Sea Dispute1.3.1 Territorial Sovereignty1.4 Freedom of the Seas1.5 The Legal Status of Geographic Features1.6 Maritime Zones1.7 Maritime Boundaries1.8 Historic Rights Claim (The Nine-Dash Line)1.9 Submerged Landmass and Island-Building1.10 Dispute Settlement Mechanism1.11 Structure of the Book2 The South China Sea Dispute as Law-Fare2.1 The Chinese Legal View2.1.1 The Chinese View on the International Legal System2.1.2 The Chinese View on the International Law of the Sea System2.2 The Chinese View on the South China Sea Dispute2.3 The Western Legal View2.3.1 The Western View on the International Legal System2.3.2 The Western View on the International Law of the Sea System2.3.3 The Western View on the South China Sea Dispute2.4 An Analysis of the South China Sea Lawfare2.4.1 Is the International Law of the Sea International?2.4.2 The Utility and Fertility of UNCLOS2.4.3 The Growing Need to Clarify Core UNCLOS Regimes3 The South China Sea Dispute from the Perspective of International Relations Theories3.1 Research Programs in International Politics3.1.1 Realism3.1.2 Liberalism3.1.3 Constructivism3.2 China’s Intentions—China’s Goals and the South China Sea3.2.1 Oil and Gas3.2.2 Recovering Historical Regional Dominance3.2.3 Fear of Containment3.3 Security Seeking Purpose3.4 Nationalism and Domestic Politics3.5 Conclusion3.6 Realist Evaluation of the South China Sea Dispute3.6.1 Ominous Prediction of Balance-of-Power Politics3.6.2 Power Transition Theory and the Inevitability of War3.6.3 A Possible Way out from the Realist Perspective3.7 Liberalist Evaluation of the South China Sea Dispute3.7.1 Optimistic Prediction of Economic Interdependence, International Institutions, and Globalization3.7.2 The South China Sea Dispute within the Current World Order3.7.3 A Possible Way out from the Liberalist Perspective3.8 Constructivist Evaluation of the South China Sea Dispute3.8.1 Beliefs, Ideas, Identities, and the South China Sea Dispute3.8.2 A Possible Way out from the Constructivist Perspective3.9 Conclusion4 What Should International Law Do for the South China Sea Dispute?4.1 The Role of International Law in Times of Power Shift4.1.1 Power in International Law4.1.2 Power Shift Entailing Law Shift4.1.3 The Condition and Process of the Law of the Sea Shift4.2 The Mode of Power Shift Reflection in the Law of the Sea4.2.1 US-Chinese Joint Declarations or Agreements4.3 Modification under the Built-In UNCLOS Mechanism4.4 Regime Creation for the South China Sea Dispute4.5 The Propriety of Regime Creation in the South China Sea4.6 Why Does Regime Creation Benefit China?4.7 Soft-Law Regime Building: the South China Sea Council4.8 ConclusionBibliographyIndex