Forming, Maintaining, and Sustaining International (Adversary) Regimes in the South China Sea: Analyzing Some Obstacles from a Chinese Perspective

  • Peter Kien-hong YUEmail author


Whether or not the sovereignty issue can be shelved, solved, or resolved, due to the fact that each international regime transcends national boundary, the six, multiple claimants of the South China Sea (SCS), if not including outsiders, will have to learn to form, maintain, and sustain a series of regimes to benefit all the parties here and there. However, it is easy to form a certain regime, and it is more difficult to maintain and sustain a series of SCS regimes because the formation of a regime is only in your mind and heart, or you can feel the urgency of it.

This chapter analyzes some obstacles (and issues) in terms of two major categories during the regime formation process. We can pose several important questions. Do all the claimants understand the very abstract term, international regimes? Would the regimes be imposed? Would there be hegemon(s) in the SCS? If so, which country or multiple entities should it/they be? Would the Southeast Asian claimants try to first resolve some 30 territorial disputes in other parts of the world? What would be the outcome of having international regimes in the SCS? Can the regime experience elsewhere be applied to the SCS? Would the SCS regimes also be fragile, retarded, derailed, violated, and failed? Last but not least, what are some of the problems regarding Mark J. Valencia’s ideal model of having regimes for Northeast Asia?


South China Sea International regimes Mainland China Taiwan Southeast Asia 


  1. Antony, J. D. (1981). Resources, regimes, world order (p. 9). New York: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
  2. Bilder, R. B., Schachter, O., Charney, J. I., & Mendelson, M. (1987). Disentangling treaty and customary international law. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting (American Society of International Law), 81, 157–164.Google Scholar
  3. Choon-ho, P. (1991). Territorial disputes over uninhabited islands: The case of South China Sea, paper presented to the Lingnan College (Hongkong), Conference on the SCS, May 26–30, pp. 7–10.Google Scholar
  4. Denoon, D. B. H., & Brams, S. J. (1997). Fair division: A new approach to the spratly islands controversy. International Negotiation, 2(2), 315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Hamzah, B. A. (1991). The spratlys: What can be done to enhance confidence. In R. D. Hill, N. G. Owen, & E. V. Roberts (Eds.), Fishing in Troubled waters. Hong Kong: Centre of Asian Studies, University of Hong Kong.Google Scholar
  6. JIA, B. B. (1998). The regime of straits in international law (pp. 74–77). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Johnson, D., & Valencia, M. J. (2005). Piracy in Southeast Asia. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.Google Scholar
  8. Jurgielewicz, L. M. (1995). International regimes and environmental policy: An evaluation of the role of international law. In R. V. Bartlett, P. A. Kurian, & M. Malik (Eds.), International organizations and environmental policy (p. 148). Westport: Greenwood Press.Google Scholar
  9. Krasner, S. D. (1985). Structural conflict: The third world against global liberalism (p. 290). Berkeley: Univeristy of California Press.Google Scholar
  10. Krasner, S. D. (1993a). Sovereignty, regimes, and human right. In K. Ahuja et al. (Eds.), Regime transformations and global realignments: indo-european dialogues on the post-cold war world (p. 147). New Delhi: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  11. Krasner, S. D. (1993b). Sovereignty, regimes, and human right. In K. Ahuja et al. (Eds.), Regime transformations and global realignments: indo-european dialogues on the post-cold war world (p. 141). New Delhi: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  12. Masker, J. S. (1995). Small states and security regimes: The international politics of nuclear non-proliferation in Nordic Europe and the South Pacific (p. 15). Lanham: University Press of America.Google Scholar
  13. McKinney, J. A. (1994). The world trade regime: Past successes and future challenges. International Studies (hereinafter IS), XLIX(3), 458.Google Scholar
  14. Naess, T. (2001). Environmental cooperation around the South China Sea: The experience of the South China Sea workshops and the United Nations environment programme’s strategic action programme. Pacific Review, 14(4), 553–573.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lang, L. (1989). Internatiional regimes and the political economy of east-west relations (p. 39). New York: Institute for East-West Security Studies.Google Scholar
  16. Macridis, R. C., & Burg, S. L. (1991). Introduction to comparative politics, 2nd ed (p. 173). New York: HarperCollins Publishers.Google Scholar
  17. Susskind, L. (1994). Environmental diplomacy: Negotiating more effective global agreements (pp. 12–13). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Valencia, M. J. (1996). A maritime regime for north-east Asia (pp. 58–61). Hongkong: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Vallega, A. (2001). Sustainable ocean governance (p. 85). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  20. Williams, M. (1994). International organizations and the third world (p. 27). New York: Harvester and Wheatsheaf.Google Scholar
  21. Young, O. R. (1989). International cooperation (p. 29 and 89). Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Young, O. R. (1998). Creating regimes: Arctic accords and international governance (p. 193). Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Yu, P. K-h. (2002). The crab and frog motion paradigm shift: Decoding and deciphering Taipei and Beijing’s dialectical politics. Lanham: University Press of America.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Singapore 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.National Quemoy UniversityJinmen CountyChina

Personalised recommendations