Competitive Strategies of Beijing and the Small Countries of ASEAN in the South China Sea

Southeast Asia represents a concentration of the most promising countries from the economic point of view, and at the same time is the center of an insolvable territorial dispute that continues to poison intraregional relations. The conflict is developing over the gas- and oil-rich Paracel and Spratly Islands. However, a dispute over natural resources is only the tip of the iceberg. The true motives that move the parties to the conflict are deeper than that and stem from the geostrategic needs of the states concerned, with the latter seeing their interests ensured in the South China Sea region as a guarantee of their security. Thus, Beijing’s ambitions of asserting its sole control in the region cause even more tensions not only among the smaller states participating in the dispute, but also among great powers. The attempts of some of the countries concerned to make the conflict an issue of international law are doomed to failure from the point of view of settling the dispute. At the same time, there is a general understanding that exacerbating tensions, which may lead to a military conflict, is not an option. Each of the parties concerned practice its own strategy, meanwhile, the gap between the smaller states policies to draw international mediators and the Chinese efforts to keep the conflict within the region cannot be bridged, bringing negotiations to a stalemate. The article examines territorial disputes in the South-China Sea between China, Vietnam, Taiwan, Malaysia, the Philippines and Brunei. In light of the lack of tangible results of the negotiation process and the recent escalation of tensions over the disputed islands, the article analyzes the prospects for the development of the situation. Particular attention is paid to the analysis of the parties’ goals and strategies. System analysis used in the context of the problem shows that the opposing sides, in view of the strategic differences of their objectives, have practically no common ground on which the conflict could be resolved through negotiations. Analysis of the parties’ strategies reveals great dependence of the ways of the conflict’s possible resolution from the position of the international community.

1. (2012). Protivoborstvo Kitaya i SShA v Azii: vyvody dlya Rossii. Kruglyi stol. [China – US confrontation in Asia: conclusions for Russia. Round table] // Indeks bezopasnosti [Security index]. Vol. 2 (101): 96-116.

2. Garri M.I. (2013). Geopoliticheskoe znachenie V'etnama v dal'nevostochnoi Bol'shoi igre i geopoliticheskie podkhody velikikh derzhav k sovremennomu v'etnamskomu voprosu [Geopolitical meaning of Vietnam in the Far East Big Game and the geopolitical approaches of great powers towards the contemporary Vietnam issue] // Vestnik Buryatskogo nauchnogo tsentra Sibirskogo otdeleniya Rossiiskoi akademii nauk. No. 2(10): 196-206.

3. Kanaev E.A. (2008). Bezopasnost' na osnove sotrudnichestva v Vostochnoi Azii i konflikt iz-za ostrovov Yuzhno-Kitaiskogo morya. Diss. dokt. istor. nauk. [Cooperative security in East Asia and the conflict over the islands in the South China Sea. Doctoral thesis]. Moscow. 430 p.

4. Kolotov V.N. (2008). Faktor V'etnama v sisteme bezopasnosti Bol'shoi Vostochnoi Azii [Vietnamese factor in the security system of the Large East Asia] // Mezhdunarodnaya konferentsiya Vostokovedenie i Afrikanistika v universitetakh Sankt-Peterurga, Rossii i Evropy. Aktual'nye problemy i perspektivy. St. Petersburg: 233-256.

5. Nong H. (2012). Interpreting the U-shape Line in the South China Sea. URL: http://www.chinausfocus.com/peace-security/interpreting-the-u-shape-line-in-the-south-china-sea (дата обращения 27.09.2014).

6. O’Neill J., Wilson D., Purushothaman R., Stupnytska S. (ed.). (2005). How Solid are the BRICs? // Goldman Sachs Economic Research. Global Economics Paper. No: 134. 23 p. URL: http://www.goldmansachs.com/our-thinking/archive/archive-pdfs/how-solid.pdf (accessed: 27.09.2014).

7. Shakleina T.A., Baykov A.A. (eds.) (2013) Megatrendy: Osnovnye traektorii evolutsii mirovogo poryadka v XXI veke [Megatrends: Major Pathways of the World Order Evolution in the 21st Century]. Moscow: Aspect Press.