WILL THE SOUTH-CHINESE SEA BECOME THE CHINESE MARE NOSTRUM? MILITARY STRATEGIC AND FOREIGN POLICY ASPECT OF THE TERRITORIAL CLAIMS OF CHINA IN THE SOUTH-CHINESE SEA

South-China Sea has been gradually becoming a place of collision of the USA as an acting global hegemon and growing China. Beijing is strongly interested in controlling this area for the purposes of national security as Washington intends to enhance its influence and containing Chinese expansionism. Both parties freely manipulate with the International law and simultaneuosly raise miltary activity within the South-Easat Asia that can cause a seruos conflict. Nevertheless, two contemporary centers of power likely to sustain complex interdependence relationship than start a global confrontation. Brand new vision of coercion is inspired by messian Belt and Road Initiative backing mostly on sealanes control. South-China Sea has been becoming vitally importatnt for China as it is a hub of international communications. The better Beijing controls mare nostrum the more stable its political system is. Respectively, Washington benefits from unstability in SCS for preventing sinization of the entire East Asia. Moreover, in the case of deteriorating bilateral ties America should be ready for implementation “geo-economic stranglehold“ strategy aimed to destroy the rival. South-East Asian nations do not tend to participate in the Great Game directly and choose ad hoc ally strategy as they are totally unable to form an Anti-China coalition. An attempt to resolve the dispute on the principle of international law factually failed – China doesn’t acknowledge Tribunal decision and recommendations but continues expansionist policy as well. The only positive moment can be found in introducing new negotiation positions among pretending ASEAN members – all the tensions are to be mitigated by investments and priveleges. This “smart power” instrument is able gradually to bring China a victory. 

1. Banlaoi R.C. (2013). US-Philippines Alliance: Meeting 21st Century Security Challenges Baker C., Glosserman B. (eds). Doing More and Expecting Less: The Future of US Alliances in the Asia Pacific. 55-66. URL: https://www.files.ethz.ch/ isn/161906/IssuesInsights_vol 13no1 .pdf (Accessed: 15.08.2017)

2. Barabanov M.S., Kashin V.B., Makienko K.V. (2013). Defense industry and arms trade of the PRC. Moskva: Tsentr analiza strategii i tekhnologii, Rossiiskii institut strategicheskikh issledovanii. 272.

3. Blanchard J.M. (2003). Maritime Issues in Asia: the problem of adolescence. Alagappa M. (ed.). Asian Security Order: Instrumental and Normative Features. Stanford: Stanford University Press. 424-457.

4. Dolven B., Kan Sh. A., Manyin M.T. (2014). Maritime Territorial Disputes in East Asia. Congressional Research Service Report, (R42930). 42. URL: https://fas.org/sgp/crs/row/R42930.pdf (Accessed: 15.08.2017)

5. Fenenko A.V. (2013). Modern international security: the nuclear factor. Moskva: «Aspekt Press». 573.

6. Glaser B.S. (2016). Seapower and Projection Forces in the South China Sea. Statement before the House Armed Services Subcommittee on Seapower and Projection Forces. Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS). 7. URL: http://docs.house.gov/meetings/AS/AS28/20160921/105309/HHRG-114-AS28-Wstate-GlaserB-20160921.pdf (Accessed: 15.08.2017)

7. Guruleva T.L., Makarov A.V. (2011). China: multilateral cooperation in the security system of Northeast Asia (Russia, USA, RK, Japan, Mongolia, North Korea). Moskva: Yurist. 335.

8. Jian Zhang. (2015). China's new foreign policy under Xi Jinping: towards ‘Peaceful Rise 2.0'? Global Change, Peace & Security, 27 (1). 5-19. DOI: 10.1080/14781158.2015.993958

9. Kaplan R. (2014). Asia’s Cauldron: the South China Sea and the end of a stable Pacific. New York: Random House. 230.

10. Komissina I.N. (2017). The Sea Silk road of the XXI century is a global geopolitical project of China. Problemy natsionalnoi strategii, (1). 60-81.

11. Kryachkina Yu.A. New trends in the defense policy of Japan. Problemy natsionalnoi strategii, (5). 136-151.

12. Mearsheimer J. (2001). The Tragedy of Great Powers Politics. New York: W.W. Norton. 555.

13. O'Rourke R. (2017). Maritime Territorial and Exclucive Economic Zone (EEZ) Disputes Involving China. Congressional Research Service Report, (R42784). 94. URL: https://fas.org/sgp/crs/ row/R42784.pdf (Accessed: 15.08.2017)

14. Scott Sh.V (2016). China's nine-dash line, International Law and the Monroe Doctrine analogy. China Information, 30 (3). 296-311. DOI: 10.1177/0920203x16665054

15. Valencia M.J. (2012). The South China Sea Disputes. Global Asia, (Fall). 56-73.

16. Voskresenkii A.D. (2010). «Greater East Asia»: world politics and regional transformations. Moskva: MGIMO. 444.

17. White H. (2010). Power Shift: Australia's Future between Washington and Beijing. Quarterly Essay, (39). 83.