0% found this document useful (0 votes)
2 views3 pages

Territorial Dispute of The South China Sea

Download as docx, pdf, or txt
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1/ 3

COMMITTEE: SPECIAL POLITICAL AND DECOLONISATION

COUNTRY: HONG KONG


SCHOOL: INDIAN SCHOOL MUSCAT
DELEGATE NAME: SHASHINI DEENADAYALAN
TOPIC:1 Territorial Dispute of the South China Sea
China began its war for the South China Sea. China’s claims of South China Sea (SCS)
ownership are illegal, but Beijing’s hyper-nationalistic officials increasingly encourage its forces
to attack U.S. Navy ships operating lawfully there. The People’s Republic of China (PRC)
appears to be calling for war—a war it may well get. But it is a war that will not stay confined to
that body of water, and a war that could ultimately end with regime change in Beijing. One
People’s Liberation Army (PLA) officer recently exhorted PLA Navy vessels to ram and sink
U.S. Navy ships conducting freedom of navigation operations in the SCS. Another called for the
sinking of two U.S. aircraft carriers and killing upward of 10,000 U.S. sailors to force the U.S.
from these hotly contested waters.
In the SCS, China’s Navy, Coast Guard, and the People’s Armed Forces Maritime Militia
harassed other nations’ fishing boats and military vessels. However, nations from around the
world began to slowly push back against China’s overt SCS aggression. When the British Royal
Navy and U.S. Navy held joint exercises in the SCS in early 2019, Beijing was put on notice.
The United Kingdom-U.S. exercise followed closely the Royal Navy’s first freedom of
navigation operation the previous August, near the contested Paracel Islands. London committed
Great Britain to re-engagement in the region to combat China’s growing strength and
militarization of the SCS. Beijing sharply criticized the UK’s actions, of course. But perhaps less
well appreciated by Beijing’s rulers was the growing concern by the European Union (EU) and
the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) regarding China’s illegal assertiveness in the
SCS, and its corrupt and coercive activities globally.
NATO Secretary General H.E. Mr. Jens Stoltenberg often stated NATO’s “concern about the
situation in the East and South China Seas” and reaffirmed NATO’s “opposition to unilateral
coercive actions that could alter the status quo and increase tensions.” This political resolve was
reflected in renewed commitment of NATO to increase defense spending and modernize
capabilities.
As important from the SCS perspective, NATO’s commitment included the projection of
“stability abroad” through rapidly deployable expeditionary forces. Nevertheless, Beijing seemed
to dismiss NATO’s concerns, and the Alliance’s proven ability to conduct sustained combat
operations in such distant locations as Afghanistan following the 9/11 terror attacks on the
United States. Senior EU officials echoed concerns about China’s unlawful conduct in the SCS.
China’s expansionism was seen as a direct threat to the EU, as the EU focused on enhanced
security and defense integration. The EU boosted its military readiness, and integrated defense
policy and capabilities with the European Defense Fund and Permanent Structured Cooperation,
by bolstering rapid deployment forces, and through the creation of the French-driven European
Intervention Initiative.
In another alliance-strengthening move, the U.S. Pacific Fleet and Japan’s Maritime Self
Defense Forces in the SCS expanded combined carrier flight and naval surface and submarine
operations. This sent a clear signal to Beijing that the SCS remained global commons, and not
China’s private lake, and that the SCS would not be a safe haven for its ballistic missile
submarine force. This show of unity greatly encouraged many nations that had seen little
meaningful pushback against China’s expansionist activities
Russian naval and air forces in Far East Military District were placed at a heightened state of
alert, at Beijing’s request. Beijing and the Russian Federation conducted increasingly
sophisticated military exercises together for nearly a decade. Globally, Beijing orchestrated mass
demonstrations and “peace protests” by its United Front organizations in major cities.
Simultaneously, it accelerated cyber attacks and began sabotage operations in “enemy” countries
to disrupt military operations and national-level decision-making processes. But Beijing’s
coercive deterrence and political warfare campaigns had already failed.

TOPIC: 2 Prevention of War Crimes

Even though the prohibition of certain behavior in the conduct of armed conflict can be traced
back many centuries, the concept of war crimes developed particularly at the end of the 19th
century and beginning of the 20th century, when international humanitarian law, also known as
the law of armed conflict, was codified. The Hague Conventions adopted in 1899 and 1907 focus
on the prohibition to warring parties to use certain means and methods of warfare. Several other
related treaties have been adopted since then. In contrast, the Geneva Convention of 1864 and
subsequent Geneva Conventions, notably the four 1949 Geneva Conventions and the two 1977
Additional Protocols, focus on the protection of persons not or no longer taking part in
hostilities.
What would a war over the South China Sea islands be like? This is a question for today's
military strategists to answer. An open conflict, while the least desirable option, could erupt
happen any time. That's why there's a need for a code of conduct adhered to by all parties. The
consequences of war would be hard to even imagine given the destructive power of today's
sophiscated weaponry in the era of electronic warfare. The militarisation of the islands reclaimed
by China, however, remains a new fact on the ground.
South China Sea: Beijing FIRES BACK over US sanctions threat - ‘VIOLATES relations’
CHINA has responded angrily to plans by a group in US Congress to impose new sanctions over
Beijing’s building work in the disputed South China Sea. A group of Republicans and
Democrats, led by Marco Rubio, are demanding sanctions on Chinese firms involved in the
construction. Beijing’s territorial claim in the South China Sea overlaps with that of five other
countries. China has been building military installations on islands and artificial reefs in the
region.
Macau, leased in 1557 to Portual as a trading post, remains a de facto Portuguese colony,
although it has since become a Special Administrative Region of China. Beijing did not forcibly
take Hong Kong and Macau back, and kept their systems in place — "one country, two systems".
China is creating many Hong Kongs and Macaus in the mainland.

BIBLIOGRAPHY:
 https://www.scmp.com/news/asia/southeast-asia/article/2188681/us-more-likely-
philippines-end-shooting-war-south-china-sea
 https://www.scmp.com/week-asia/geopolitics/article/2188305/us-promises-come-
philippines-defence-south-china-sea-event
 https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy/article/3005439/us-china-greater-risk-
military-incidents-south-china-sea-think
 https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1131362/World-War-3-South-China-Sea-Beijing-
Xi-Jinping-Donald-Trump-America-USA-dispute-Rubio
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OM5vaF2kzPA
 https://www.un.org/depts/los/convention_agreements/
convention_overview_convention.htm

You might also like