Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
What are the Difficulties in Settling the South China Sea Dispute: Obstacles to Dispute Settlement Through the Lens of Liberal and Neo-Realist IR Theory
Linnaeus University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Political Science.
2019 (English)Independent thesis Basic level (degree of Bachelor), 10 credits / 15 HE creditsStudent thesis
Abstract [en]

Sovereignty over the South China Sea waters and the territorial features therein has been a contentious issue since at least the 1970’s, with conflicting claims going back even further. Key concepts of Liberal and Neo-Realist International Relations Theory are used to assess respective theory’s explanatory capability for why the South China Sea Dispute is difficult to settle. The scope of the study is limited to three pairings of international relations: China-Philippines, China-Vietnam and China-USA. The analysis concerns the development of these sets of international relations from 2016 up until now. The findings point to unilateral action by one claimant in the face of contesting claims by another as being one of the main factors perpetuating the conflict. Treaties and international law are designed with Liberal development of international relations in mind, but in practice Neo-Realist hard power politics interrupts this development. Examples of disruptive action include attempts to unilaterally exploit natural resources in the region, settling features in the sea, doing construction work on features in the sea, as well as regular FONOPS conducted by navy ships in the region. Finally, there are difficulties settling on a mechanism for sovereignty settlement, as China makes its claims based on historic- or historical claims, rather than international law as it is written out in UNCLOS.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2019. , p. 43
Keywords [en]
UNCLOS, South China Sea, International Relations, Border Dispute, South East Asia, Territorial Dispute, Maritime Dispute, Neo-Realism, Liberalism, Maritime Claims, Territorial Claims, China, Vietnam, the Philippines, the USA, IR
National Category
Political Science
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:lnu:diva-79873OAI: oai:DiVA.org:lnu-79873DiVA, id: diva2:1282246
Subject / course
Political Science
Educational program
International Social Sciences Programme, specialization Global Studies, 180 credits
Supervisors
Examiners
Available from: 2019-01-25 Created: 2019-01-24 Last updated: 2019-01-25Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(429 kB)625 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 429 kBChecksum SHA-512
381a97233872dcca85e96d2e02b94675a286dfa68ba7af09368a3904c4ce0971e38be502da66948bffebe007e780d46de11d582c8d64cdc75dfa5f7714280ce0
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Pålstam, Alexander
By organisation
Department of Political Science
Political Science

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 625 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

urn-nbn

Altmetric score

urn-nbn
Total: 1425 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf