DAYS after operationalizing a new law that allows military action based on Beijing’s perception of its territory, a Chinese Coast Guard (CCG) formation encountered a lone Philippines Navy vessel near the Second Thomas Shoal in the Spratly Islands of the South China Sea on Monday, June 17. It was almost a throwback to the Galwan moment in Ladakh, with the Chinese personnel threatening Filipino soldiers with improvised weapons like spiked sticks, knives and axes. Video footage that emerged showed CCG motorboats chasing and ramming the Philippines boat before boarding it and physically attacking the Filipino personnel on board.
Two things came out of the episode. One, China gave itself a legal cover to take military action in its ongoing standoffs in the contested waters of South China Sea (SCS). The Coastguard law allows Chinese coast guard commanders to detain foreign vessels and personnel without due process if they perceive them to be inside their perception of sovereign territory. Second, as a corollary to one, China told the world that it cares two hoots for international rule of law. The Monday action took place at least 1000 kms away from the southern most tip of China in the Hainan islands, clearly making it an illegal act in international waters.
From Galwan in Ladakh to Doklam with Bhutan, from Spratly Islands in SCS to the Senkaku islands with Japan, there’s a clear pattern of Chinese bullying to fashion its territorial claims in breach of international rule of law. China, which currently has territorial disputes with no less than 17 nations at present, displays this pattern with great consistency.
The pattern is not difficult to notice at all. Here’s a look at how it plays out in every region China is involved in, from the Himalayas to the South China Sea to Central Asia.
The Himalayas
India: The Sino-Indian border dispute is one of the most prominent and long-standing conflicts. Beijing claims Arunachal Pradesh and parts of Ladakh, while New Delhi asserts sovereignty over these regions and Aksai Chin. The 1962 Sino-Indian War and subsequent skirmishes have kept this dispute simmering, with both nations maintaining a heavy military presence along the Line of Actual Control.
China leverages anti-colonial rhetoric, opposing the McMahon Line established during British rule while simultaneously invoking historical claims over Tibet and its surrounding regions from its imperial past. Military presence, infrastructure developments in disputed areas, and skirmishes such as the Galwan Valley clash in 2020 are a testament to the two-tiered strategy at play.
Bhutan: Bhutan faces Chinese territorial claims, particularly in its eastern regions. Despite numerous rounds of negotiations, the boundary remains undefined. China’s claims are based on historical ties with Tibet, complicating modern geopolitics. Beijing uses both anti-colonial arguments, critiquing boundaries influenced by British colonialism and imperial claims rooted in historical control over Tibetan regions. Aggressive tactics include road construction and military incursions into disputed areas, as seen in the 2017 Doklam standoff, where Chinese troops attempted to build a road in territory claimed by Bhutan.
Nepal: In 2020, China allegedly encroached into Nepalese territory at multiple locations. Nepal’s muted response highlights the delicate balance smaller nations must maintain with their powerful neighbour. China’s historical claims over regions once part of the Sino-Nepalese War add to the complexity. China criticises the boundaries drawn by the British while asserting imperial claims over Himalayan territories. The construction of infrastructure projects in contested areas and military presence along the border are examples of China’s assertive strategy.
Japan: China’s maritime disputes with Japan focus on the Senkaku and Ryukyu Islands. These islands hold strategic value due to their proximity to key maritime routes and military installations. China’s claims are based on historical assertions dating back to the Ming Dynasty. Here, instead of criticising Western colonialism, China laments the cruel Japanese imperialism. The declaration of an Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) in 2013, overlapping Japanese airspace, exemplifies China’s aggressive tactics. There are regular military patrols here as well.
South China Sea Conflicts
The South China Sea is a flashpoint of contention, encapsulated by China’s ambiguous nine-dash line, which claims nearly 90% of the sea. Despite international legal rulings rejecting these claims, Beijing continues to assert its dominance.
The Philippines: The Scarborough Shoal is a strategic location rich in resources. Here, again, China invokes historical claims from ancient Chinese maps. The military aggression from Beijing is understood without much elaboration.
Vietnam: The Paracel Islands, vital for defending China’s Hainan Island and holding potential underwater resources, are contested by Vietnam. China’s claims are based on historical control during the Qing Dynasty. However, somewhat friendly relations, especially given Vietnam’s communist history, have kept the conflict tempered.
Indonesia: The Natuna Archipelago, part of Indonesia’s Exclusive Economic Zone, faces periodic tensions due to China’s nine-dash line extending into these waters. Here, China is seen as violating UNCLOS provisions. Since that is not a colonial-era “imposition”, China has rarely, if ever, raised the matter of boundaries in light of French and Dutch colonisers. China’s aggressive tactics include naval patrols and the establishment of fishing fleets in contested waters. China had also asked Indonesia to stop drilling for oil in the region, claiming it to be Chinese territory.
Malaysia and Brunei: China’s claims overlap with the exclusive economic zones of these nations, areas rich in natural gas and oil. Historical assertions from ancient Chinese records are used. Military presence and infrastructure projects on disputed islands are common tactics.
Taiwan: Though not a formal claimant in the South China Sea disputes, Taiwan’s status remains a critical and contentious issue. Beijing’s view of Taiwan as a breakaway province (from when Chiang Kai-Shek’s forces fled to the island after losing to Mao Zedong’s forces) invokes historical claims from the Qing Dynasty onwards. Military drills and diplomatic pressure on countries recognising Taiwan reflect China’s aggressive strategy.
Central Asia and Beyond
Tajikistan: Historical claims over the Pamir region add complexity to Sino-Tajik relations, with China asserting that the area was part of the Qing Dynasty. Anti-colonial rhetoric critiques Russian and British influence in Central Asia. China’s infrastructure projects and military cooperation with Tajikistan illustrate its strategy to secure influence in the region.
Russia: Even Russia is not immune to Chinese territorial claims. Nationalist assertions about Vladivostok, taken following the Opium Wars, highlight the potential for future disputes. China uses historical claims from the Qing Dynasty and anti-colonial rhetoric to criticise Russian expansion. Diplomatic pressure and economic leverage are key components of China’s approach.
Mongolia: China’s informal claims over Mongolia, based on historical ties to Genghis Khan, add another layer to its territorial ambitions. Anti-colonial rhetoric targets Russian and Western influences, while historical claims date back to the Yuan Dynasty. Economic dependency and diplomatic influence are China’s primary tactics.
North Korea and South Korea: Disputes over the Yalu and Tumen rivers with North Korea and Socotra Rock with South Korea further illustrate Beijing’s expansive claims. Historical ties to ancient Chinese kingdoms and anti-colonial rhetoric against Japanese and Western influences are used. Military presence and strategic alliances with North Korea, combined with economic influence over South Korea, reflect China’s dual strategy.
Laos and Myanmar: China’s vague claims in northern Laos and Myanmar, often backed by separatist militias, show its strategic interests in these regions. Historical claims from the Ming and Qing Dynasties are used alongside anti-colonial narratives against French and British colonialism. Infrastructure projects and support for local militias are China’s aggressive tactics.
Diplomatic and Military Strategies
China’s approach to resolving these disputes blends diplomacy and trade with military posturing. For a much more powerful nation like Russia, aggression is not the chosen way for China. While Beijing has successfully negotiated settlements with some countries, such as Kazakhstan and Pakistan, it has also engaged in aggressive actions, particularly in the South China Sea and along the Indian border. Friendlier nations like Vietnam feel the heat ever so often, but diplomatic channels are used a lot more frequently in light of mutual economic benefits and limited ideological commonalities. The construction of artificial islands and military installations has drawn international condemnation and increased military presence from other nations.
Can Belligerence Be Resolved?
China’s extensive list of boundary disputes underscores its hegemonic ambitions. From the rugged Himalayas to the resource-rich South China Sea, Beijing’s claims have far-reaching implications for regional stability and international relations. While China has shown a capacity for diplomatic resolution in some cases, the path forward for many disputes remains uncertain. Whether Beijing will leverage these disputes as bargaining chips or seek genuine peaceful resolutions is yet to be seen. As China continues to rise as a global power, its territorial claims and the resulting conflicts will remain a critical focus for policymakers and analysts worldwide.
In Philippines’ Galwan Moment, China’s Brazen Hegemonic Designs Come Undone world-news World News | Latest International Global World News | Todays Breaking News Headlines
