Hardcover
-
PICK UP IN STORECheck Availability at Nearby Stores
Available within 2 business hours
Related collections and offers
Overview
China’s territorial disputes have been a matter of debate since the 1950s. While China has amicably resolved boundary disputes with 12 out of 14 neighbouring countries, it is yet to resolve its boundary disputes with India and Bhutan as also its two maritime disputes in the South China Sea and East China Sea. Given that the prediction for the settlement of China’s remaining disputes is largely doubtful, this book investigates the reasons for differences in Chinese behaviour with India. China’s boundary dispute with India is a subject of deliberation and it remains to be seen whether China plans to devise its ‘boundary diplomacy’ with a country as huge and strong as India.
Product Details
| ISBN-13: | 9789383649891 |
|---|---|
| Publisher: | Sun Links Ltd |
| Publication date: | 06/15/2016 |
| Series: | First |
| Pages: | 286 |
| Product dimensions: | 6.00(w) x 9.00(h) x 0.94(d) |
About the Author
Read an Excerpt
CHAPTER 1
Defining Territories and Territorial Disputes in the Chinese Context
Introduction
Territory is one of the principal pillars on which the 'modern state' stands. Countries across the world today are shaped by the tools known as boundaries and frontiers. The origin of the word territory is from a Latin word territorium, whereas the origin of the word boundary can be traced back to the early 17th century. While territory is an area under a ruler or a state's jurisdiction, a boundary can be defined in the simplest possible terms as a line between two sovereign states or as the imaginary line which divides two pieces of land from one another. A frontier is an area with length and width and, therefore, merely indicates, without fixing the exact limit, where one state ends and another begins. Interestingly, ever since the modern state came into being, disagreements over territories have become a prime matter of difference between them, often leading to conflict, violent or otherwise. Highlighting the significance of territory, Alex Murphy argues, "The centre of a state's national identity revolves around the notion of territory." He points out that "territory is frequently a source of conflict because the state is fundamentally a place; its very existence and autonomy are rooted in territory ... territory provides a tangible basis for the exercise of state power by delimiting the human and physical resources over which the state has some control ... succinctly put, territory is at the heart of national identity and cohesion." In other words, it may be said that territory determines the state, and the state defines the territory.
In order to have a detailed and comprehensive study of boundary disputes between states, it is imperative to differentiate boundary disputes from territorial claims. As A. Oye Cukwurah points out, "While in the latter case, the salient aspects of the part of the international law are to be found in the traditional rules relating to the acquisition of territorial sovereignty by discovery, occupation, conquest, cession or prescription; boundary disputes largely raise issues concerned with boundary-making". He affirms that whereas all boundary disputes are territorial questions in a wider sense; territorial claims are not always subsumed under the category of boundary claims. In the 20th and 21st centuries, territorial conflicts have centred upon six types of disputes:
• Disputes between states over competing claims to their homeland territory;
• Disputes between two states with competing claims to the homeland territory of one state and the overseas territory of the other state;
• Disputes between two states whose competing claims involve the overseas territory of both sides;
• Disputes between an existing state and an aspiring new state that seeks to establish its independence by seceding from the homeland territory of the existing state;
• Disputes in which political units within the colonial overseas empire of a state seek to establish and be recognised as independent states; and
• Disputes between states that centre on claims on territorial rights to waters or land along the seabed.
Clearly, territorial sovereignty, of which boundary disputes are a narrower offshoot, has always been a predominant factor in international politics. Approximately one-third of the world's land boundaries could be classified as unstable and trapped in overlapping claims. Most of these conflicts are also a result of global geo-political changes in the recent past. However, just as conflicts are natural among the states over the extent of expanse and control over the territory, so are boundary dispute resolutions. It is important to note that "boundaries must be drawn so as to include all of the territory of the sovereign state. The purpose of a boundary is ... to mark in no unmistakable manner the limit of the territory in which the state exercises its sovereign power with all the trappings which that exercise carries with it." Living together peacefully is not a choice but a compulsion for states to survive. Therefore, sovereign states have learned to coexist through centuries.
A boundary dispute resolution mechanism involves three steps, namely:
• Defining the boundary;
• Delimitation of the boundary; and
• Demarcation of the boundary.
That there would be differences in perception with respect to a disputed territory or a line of control between two states is an established fact, witnessed without exception. It is in this context that the first step towards boundary dispute resolution is considered as defining the disputed boundary by the governments of the states involved in the dispute, in order to have a mutually agreeable boundary between them. The second step in the process is delimitation of the disputed boundary. This step commences when the states in disagreement agree to divide the boundary that was defined through mutual agreement. A. Henry McMahon defines delimitation as "determining a boundary line by a treaty or otherwise, and its definition in written, verbal terms". Demarcation is the third and the final step in the boundary dispute resolution process. According to McMahon, the process of demarcation involves the actual laying down of a boundary line on the ground and its definition by boundary pillars or other similar physical markings.
China: A Major Player in the Asian Territorial Disputes
Given that Europe was the centre of boundary disputes in the 17th century, where the modern nation-states came into being for the first time, the need to effectively deal with such issues was also felt there strongly. In fact, the concept of territorial sovereignty has its roots in the notion of the Westphalian States. The Treaty of Westphalia (October 1648) was the watershed moment in that regard, as after the treaty, it was acknowledged that boundaries drawn around territory circumscribed a single political and legal unit over which the state had sovereignty. However, in the contemporary times, the focus of attention has shifted from Europe to Asia. From the second half of the 20th century, Asia increasingly became the ground for intense boundary disputes, with China playing the lead role in the maximum number of conflicts over territories — the trend is only intensifying in the 21st century.
History as the basis of claiming territories has generally been the most common phenomenon for centuries. Since the end of World War II, boundary disputes with neighbouring states have almost always been on the basis of historical claims and justified as attempts to recover land that had been "wrongfully" taken away. China is no exception to this raison d'être. The Government of China, on taking power in 1949, declared that it would reexamine treaties concluded by its predecessors with foreign powers, and either "reorganise, abrogate, revise or renegotiate them". The Chinese explain most of their claims of sovereignty by saying that territory has been illegally taken away from them through "unequal treaties" by foreign powers during the "Century of Humiliation" and now they are reclaiming it in order to reunify it with the Chinese motherland. Therefore, one of the most important legacies inherited by the new government was the relatively ill-defined boundary of China. This logic has made it easier to understand how and why several conflicts had arisen between China and its neighbouring countries.
China has long been embroiled in several territorial disputes, occasionally flexing its military muscle over the issue and its conduct in such situations has been of great theoretical and practical relevance that has attracted considerable attention from scholars across the socio-legal spectrum. While China had boundary disputes with virtually all of its neighbours, it was inclined to avoid confrontation, notably of a military nature, and generally preferred to pursue its goals in an orderly fashion, readily engaging in give-and-take via formal and informal channels, provided it did not entail submission to third-party judgment; nor did it persistently signal its opposition to well-established international legal principles, but, instead, often acted in accordance with them. As Roda Mushkat explains:
Chinese boundary disputes are manifold and have deep historical roots. Some, but not all, have been resolved, yet not necessarily in a manner that might have been anticipated. Given the international prominence of the parties involved, notably China, the ramifications of actions taken and refrained from, the not-easy-to-read policy signals, and the elaborate strategic maneuvers, this is a subject that merits careful scholarly attention. Students of international law have responded to the challenge by exploring it broadly and consistently. The largely traditional orientation of those involved in the enterprise has left some inevitable gaps and social scientists have stepped into the breach.
With China rising on the international stage and gaining prominence in the global political and economic domains, its boundary disputes with neighbours also have gained the world's attention. China's situation gets more precarious in the light of the fact that in the history of major power politics, no other major power has been entangled in disputes of this nature.
China's Perception of "Century of Humiliation" and "Unequal Treaties"
The rise of China has been one of the prime features of the 20th century and is a continuing process in the 21st century. While China has been stepping on the path of inevitable rise, it has also found itself caught in a wide array of boundary questions along its borders, involving almost all of its neighbours. When the PRC was established under the leadership of Mao Zedong, the Chinese leadership decided to undergo a prolonged task of establishing smooth, cordial relations with the immediate neighbours and beyond. That was the time when Mao initiated a policy of Good Neighbourliness (Mulin Youhao Zhengce) for the first time. However, as it turned out, the biggest stumbling block in smoothening relations with neighbours was China's geography itself. China is a country with an intricate physical geography and even more complex borders. It shares land borders with 14 sovereign states and is landlocked from three sides. Apart from China, Russia, that is located towards the northwest of China, also shares international borders with 14 nation-states. No other country except China and Russia shares international borders with as many countries. When the PRC was established, it acquired boundary disputes with all its immediate neighbours. To justify its claims, China maintains that the imperialist forces forcefully took territories, which were a part of the Qing Empire, away from the Chinese Empire in the 19th and 20th centuries. After the decline of the Chinese Empire in the 19th century, the Western powers not only took over many of China's tributaries, but also pushed the frontiers forward into areas that China itself would have preferred to control, and those new frontiers were often institutionalised in what China called "unequal treaties".
The late 18th and the 19th century have been dramatic for the Chinese civilisation in more ways than one. China, under the Qing dynasty (16441911), was an isolated country. Qing China was willing to engage with other civilisations only within the restrictive framework of the 'tributary system' and the canton system. Its contact with other countries was minimal at that point of time. Intriguingly, while China was the preferred destination for silk and tea for the foreign traders, these countries had to religiously conform to the rules of the dynasty before establishing any diplomatic and trade ties with China. In order to seek permission from the emperor, foreign traders, as a part of Chinese culture and customs, first had to pay tribute to the emperor and perform kowtow in front of him. Moreover, during the early and mid-19th century, foreign traders were allowed to conduct trade activities only through the city of Canton, now renamed as Guangzhou province. Interestingly, due to the high demand for tea, Britain became the largest importer of Chinese tea with the balance of trade heavily tilted towards China. To bridge that huge trade imbalance, the East India Company had begun exporting Indian opium to China. Eventually, the Chinese population became addicted to opium consumption, including opium smoking as well as in other forms. In view of the negative effects of opium smoking, the Qing Emperors decided to put a halt to the import of opium. Such developments led to the First Opium War, which began in 1839 and lasted till 1842. China had to taste defeat at the hands of the British and, as a consequence, it was forced to sign unequal treaties. Unequal treaties, in the Chinese history, are the series of treaties which were imposed on China by the foreign imperialist powers such as Britain, France, Germany, Russia, Japan and the United States during the 19th and 20th centuries. As per the provisions of the treaties, China was forced to concede many of its territorial and sovereignty rights over its own territories. One such treaty was the Treaty of Nanking, signed on August 29, 1842, to end the First Opium War. The provisions of the treaty forced China to come out of its self-imposed isolation and open five treaty ports to foreign traders. Hong Kong was also ceded to Great Britain, but was returned to China as a Special Administrative Region in 1997. Apart from these, foreign traders were granted extra-territorial rights in China, and Chinese traders were forced to pay indemnities. This fact is widely regarded as the beginning of the "Century of Humiliation" in China. While the signing of the Treaty of Nanking was just the beginning of foreign intervention in China, the country was forced to conclude a second round of unequal treaties after its defeat in the Second Opium War (1856-60). The second series of treaties allowed Western imperialist powers to open more treaty ports in China. These treaties also gave further economic privileges and diplomatic immunity to the foreign traders and officials in China. In 1894-95, Japan joined the imperialist club that triggered a new phase of European imperialism during which the Western powers divided China into spheres of economic and political influence. External determinants, coupled with domestic upheavals, led to the fall of the Qing dynasty, and the Nationalist forces came to power in 1911. However, foreign aggression left an indelible mark on the Chinese psyche and leadership, which perceived it as a threat on China's "territorial integrity". This feeling was further exasperated with the rise of the Communists to power in 1949.
From the Western point of view, the treaties were creative and an initial beginning phase in which an institutional structure was gradually worked out, whereas, from the modern Chinese point of view, the treaties were vehicles of imperialist invasion. The narratives from the Chinese side insist that during this period, China was forced to open up, and cede its treaty ports to the Western powers by signing the unequal treaties. That has become the basis for China to justify its boundary disputes with its neighbours, and regaining control over the lost territories became China's foremost priority in the mid-20th century. The Chinese leadership has maintained the stance that by demanding sovereignty over territory controlled by its neighbouring countries, China is merely engaged in the process of overcoming the challenges posed by the unequal treaties. In addition, under the treaties' obligations, China's sovereignty was impaired, but with the rise of nationalism and the revolution in China, it was reasserted by degrees. The concept and salience of unequal treaties in the Chinese foreign policy may be understood further from the following editorial from the People's Daily. The editorial states:
During the time of more than 100 years before the victory of the Chinese revolution, the imperialist and colonist states, such as the United States, Britain, France, Imperial Russia, Germany, Japan, Italy, Austria, Holland, Portugal, etc. invaded China aggressively. They coerced the Chinese government into signing scores of unequal treaties, such as the 1842 Nanking Treaty, the 1858 Aigun Treaty, the 1858 Tientsin Treaty, the 1860 Peking Convention, the 1881 Yili Treaty, the 1887 China-Portuguese Treaty of Peking, the 1895 Shimonoseki Treaty, the 1898 Convention for the Extension of Hong Kong Territory, the 1901 Boxer Protocol, etc. Through these unequal treaties, these states seized land in the east, west, north and south of China, and leased land in the coastal and inner China. Some of them used force to occupy Taiwan, Penghu Islands, and some of them used coercion to occupy Hong Kong and lease Kowloon, and some them occupied Macao by force.
Clearly, the concept of "unequal treaties" is purely of Chinese origin. It has been argued that international customs are ranked higher than international laws and international treaties. Arguably, China is "often entrapped in a disjunction between theory and practice when confronted with the 'unequal treaties' related to its territorial and boundary disputes." According to T. Wang:
China follows Articles 52 and 53 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties and considers that since "unequal treaties" are always characterised by the imposition of grossly unequal obligations on a weaker state by a stronger one through use or threat of force, they violate not only the law of treaties but also the principle of sovereign equality and the abolition of these treaties, therefore, constitutes a lawful exception to the pacta sunt servanda rule.
(Continues…)
Excerpted from "China's Approach Towards Territorial Disputes"
by .
Copyright © 2016 Centre for Air Power Studies, New Delhi.
Excerpted by permission of KW Publishers Pvt Ltd.
All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.
Excerpts are provided by Dial-A-Book Inc. solely for the personal use of visitors to this web site.
Table of Contents
Acknowledgements
Preface
Introduction
List of Abbreviations
1. Defining Territories and Territorial Disputes in the Chinese Context
2. China’s Boundary Disputes: Mongolia, North Korea and Ussr/Russia
3. China and Central Asia: Amicable Boundary Dispute Resolution
4. China’s Boundary With Nepal, Pakistan and Afghanistan: Resolved Disputes, Unresolved Troubles
5. China’s Boundary Dispute Resolution With Myanmar, Lao Pdr and Vietnam
6. China’s Maritime Disputes in the South China and East China Seas
7. China and Bhutan: Prolonged Unresolved Boundary Dispute
8. China-India: Complex Dynamics of Boundary Dispute
9. China’s Diplomacy on ‘Boundary Disputes’: Lessons for India
Appendices
Index