Addition for clarification: The “South China Morning Post”(SCMP) is a state-controlled Chinese media outlet. Sometimes they appear to publish articles like this one that are, at least to some degree, critical of the CCP, although the article increasingly reiterates the CCP’s stance as you read along. The post provides a rare glimpse into the Chinese propaganda machinery, however, which is why I posted it here. In general, however, one should be very careful using this source.
-
“Narrative construction and discourse building are essential if we are to effectively defend our rights and interests in the South China Sea – both in the present and in future,” Wu Shicun, founder of the National Institute for South China Sea Studies, told a seminar held in Hainan province last week.
-
Without naming any country, Wu said China faced “an increasingly arduous battle over public perception and opinion”, adding that “rival claimants” were “stepping up cooperation with extraterritorial forces in the study of historical and legal issues” concerning the South China Sea.
-
Beijing lays claim to much of the South China Sea, citing historic activities and records in support.
-
Its claims were rejected by the Permanent Court of Arbitration at The Hague in 2016 in a case filed by the Philippines.
-
Beijing has dismissed the Hague ruling as “null and void” and continued to build up its infrastructure and troop presence in the South China Sea. But the Philippines and other claimants – which include Vietnam, Malaysia and Brunei – along with the United States and its allies have repeatedly urged China to abide by international law.
-
Yi Xianliang, a former ambassador to Norway who previously served as deputy director of the foreign ministry’s boundary and ocean affairs department, also spoke at Tuesday’s seminar and dismissed the 2016 ruling as a “bad joke”.
-
But Yi warned “we have to ask why the ruling is flawed” and ask if it “will happen again and how we can prevent it from happening again”.
You may have a particular perception of reality -a narrative- and then infer a claim. But it is a completely different thing if you have a claim and then seek to construct a narrative.
What this incident tells us is that the Chinese government doesn’t know itself how to justify its claims, so it urges academics to find something to justify the claims of sovereignty over the sea (and the sea’s estimated 11 billion barrels of untapped oil and 190 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, btw) against a wide range of (non-Western) countries like the Philippines, Taiwan, Vietnam, Indonesia, Malaysia, and Brunei.
The fact that China is pursuing its claims very aggressively makes this whole thing even worse (And, yes, other countries may do similar things, and it is bad too, but it doesn’t justify China’s move here.)
And, yes, other countries may do similar things, and it is bad too, but it doesn’t justify China’s move here.
That’s really all my entire point. I’m not defending China’s claim, because it’s just as ludicrous as Vietnam’s. I was actually surprised to see how nuanced you approached this rather than assuming ill intent. Thanks for that
Yeah, as you mention Vietnam: the interesting bit here maybe is that Vietnam -a single-party country with a similar totalitarian approach like China- appears to seek closer ties to the U.S. rather then to Beijing, at least that’s my interpretation of the country/'s political moves over the last year or so.
