SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Güvenlik Stratejileri Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 22 Sayı: 53

Security in the South China Sea in the Context of Regional Security Complex Theory: Actors, Policies, and Processes

Bölgesel Güvenlik Kompleksi Teorisi Bağlamında Güney Çin Denizi’nde Güvenlik: Aktörler, Politikalar ve Süreçler

Volkan Yaman(TRAKYA ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0003-3362-3194
Sibel Turan(TRAKYA ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0003-2198-3387
Pages
1–22
Publication Date
2026-04-27
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The study concludes that durable stability is contingent not upon military deterrence alone, but upon a multilayered security approach grounded in international law and premised on cooperative engagement.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study examines the security issues in the South China Sea within the context of sovereignty disputes and actor interactions, employing the Regional Security Complex Theory as its analytical framework.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The findings demonstrate that, owing to intense militarization, multilateral sovereignty claims, and Sino-American strategic rivalry, the South China Sea has transformed into a sub-regional security complex.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The study concludes that durable stability is contingent not upon military deterrence alone, but upon a multilayered security approach grounded in international law and premised on cooperative engagement.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Güvenlik · Bölgesel Güvenlik Kompleksi Teorisi · Güney Çin Denizi

Abstract

This study examines the security issues in the South China Sea within the context of sovereignty disputes and actor interactions, employing the Regional Security Complex Theory as its analytical framework. The research examines the characteristics of the security order produced by the South China Sea within the broader security architecture of Southeast Asia. The findings demonstrate that, owing to intense militarization, multilateral sovereignty claims, and Sino-American strategic rivalry, the South China Sea has transformed into a sub-regional security complex. The analysis further reveals that ASEAN has assumed a limited intermediary role oriented toward tension management, rather than functioning as a binding security authority. The study concludes that durable stability is contingent not upon military deterrence alone, but upon a multilayered security approach grounded in international law and premised on cooperative engagement.

Özet

Bu çalışma, Güney Çin Denizi’ndeki güvenlik sorunlarını egemenlik ihtilafları ve aktör etkileşimleri bağlamında, Bölgesel Güvenlik Kompleksi Teorisi çerçevesinde incelemektedir. Araştırma, Güney Çin Denizi’nin Güneydoğu Asya güvenlik mimarisi içinde nasıl bir güvenlik düzeni ürettiğine odaklanmaktadır. Bulgular, yoğun askerîleştirme, çok taraflı egemenlik iddiaları ve Çin-ABD rekabeti nedeniyle Güney Çin Denizi’nin alt bölgesel bir güvenlik kompleksine dönüştüğünü göstermektedir. Analiz ayrıca ASEAN’ın bağlayıcı bir güvenlik otoritesinden ziyade gerilimi yönetmeye yönelik sınırlı bir ara aktör rolü üstlendiğini ortaya koymaktadır. Çalışma, kalıcı istikrarın askerî caydırıcılığın ötesinde, uluslararası hukuka dayalı ve iş birliğini önceleyen çok katmanlı bir güvenlik yaklaşımına bağlı olduğu sonucuna ulaşmaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Yaman, V., Turan, S., *, V. Y. (2026). Security in the South China Sea in the Context of Regional Security Complex Theory: Actors, Policies, and Processes. Güvenlik Stratejileri Dergisi, Cilt: 22 Sayı: 53, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.17752/guvenlikstrtj.1818782

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (67)

  1. Âmin, R., & Krishnan, T. (2021). The rise of Indo-Pacific: Responses of the QUAD and ASEAN. Electronic Journal of Social and Strategic Studies, 2(2), 211-228.
  2. Anh, N. (2015). Origins of the South China Sea dispute. İçinde J. Huang & A. Billo (Ed.), Territorial disputes in the South China Sea: Navigating rough waters (s. 15-35). Palgrave Macmillan.
  3. Bahsi Koçer, F., & Gökten, K. (2024). Neoliberal düşünce ekseninde ASEAN’ın uluslararası politik ekonomisinin analizi. Fiscaoeconomia, 8(3), 1472-1494.
  4. Balamir-Coşkun, B. (2014). Kopenhag Okulu ve güvenlikleştirme: Değişen güvenlik ortamı, zorluklar, fırsatlar ve meydan okumalar. İçinde T. Arı (Ed.), Postmodern uluslararası ilişkiler teorileri: Uluslararası ilişkilerde eleştirel yaklaşımlar (s. 179-202). Dora Yayınları.
  5. Bateman, S. (2009). Good order at sea in the South China Sea. İçinde S. Wu & K. Zou (Ed.), Maritime security in the South China Sea: Regional implications and international cooperation (s. 15-34). Ashgate Publishing.
  6. Birdişli, F. (2020). Bölgesel güvenlik. İçinde O. Bingöl & A. Varlık (Ed.), Güvenlik çalışmaları (Cilt-I): Kuramsal yaklaşımlar (s. 335-355). Arel Üniversitesi Yayınları.
  7. Bisley, N. (2018). The South China Sea as symptom of Asia’s dynamic security order. İçinde H. Feng & K. He (Ed.), US-China competition and the South China Sea disputes (s. 98-115). Routledge.
  8. Buzan, B. (1983). People, states, and fear: The national security problem in international relations. Wheatsheaf Books. Buzan, B. (1988). The Southeast Asian security complex. Contemporary Southeast Asia, 10(1), 1-16.
  9. Buzan, B. (2000). The logic of regional security in the Post-Cold War world. İçinde B. Hettne, A. Inotai & O. Sunkel (Ed.), The new regionalism and the future of security and development (s. 1-25). Palgrave Macmillan.
  10. Buzan, B., Wæver, O., & Wilde, J. (1998). Security: A new framework for analysis. Lynne Rienner Publishers.
  11. Buzan, B., & Wæver, O. (2003). Regions and powers: The structure of international security. Cambridge University Press.
  12. Buzan, B., & Wæver, O. (2009). Macrosecuritisation and security constellations: Reconsidering scale in securitisation theory. Review of International Studies, 35(2), 253-276.
  13. Chang, Y. (2018). The South China Sea disputes: An opportunity for the cross Taiwan strait relationship. İçinde S. Lee & H. Lee (Ed.), Asian Yearbook of International Law: Volume 22 (2016) (s. 50-66).
  14. Brill Nijhoff. Chakraborti, T., & Chakraborty, M. (2020). India’s strategy in the South China Sea. Routledge.
  15. Collins, A. (2000). The security dilemmas of Southeast Asia. Palgrave. Collins, A. (2003). Security and Southeast Asia: Domestic, regional, and global issues. Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.
  16. Djalal, H. (2009). The South China Sea: The long road towards peace and cooperation. İçinde S. Bateman & R. Emmers (Ed.), Security and international politics in the South China Sea: Towards a cooperative management regime (s. 175-188). Routledge.
  17. Doğan, D. (2021). Uluslararası ilişkilerde kaynayan sular: Güney Çin Denizi. Akademisyen Kitabevi.
  18. Dutton, P. (2019). Conceptualizing China’s maritime gray zone operations. İçinde A. S. Erickson & R. D. Martinson (Ed.), China’s maritime gray zone operations (s. 50-57). Naval Institute Press.
  19. Emmers, R. (2003). Cooperative security and the balance of power in ASEAN and the ARF. RoutledgeCurzon.
  20. Emmers, R. (2017). Güvenlikleştirme. İçinde A. Collins (Ed.), Çağdaş güvenlik çalışmaları (s. 131-144). Röle Akademik Yayıncılık.
  21. Fang, Y. (2015). The South China Sea disputes: Whither a solution?. İçinde J. Huang & A. Billo (Ed.), Territorial disputes in the South China Sea: Navigating rough waters (s. 164-188). Palgrave Macmillan.
  22. Farrell, H., & Newman, A. (2019). Weaponized interdependence: How global economic networks shape state coercion. International Security, 44(1), 42-79.
  23. Fravel, T. (2011). China’s strategy in the South China Sea. Contemporary Southeast Asia, 33(3), 292-319.
  24. Gökten, K. (2022). Güney Çin Denizi: Ekonomik ve stratejik rekabeti anlamak. Ankara Hacı Bayram Veli Üniversitesi İİBF Dergisi, 24(1), 97-122.
  25. Gumantiara, M., Haqq, H., & Murdani, A. (2024). Regional security complex analysis in Australia, United Kingdom, and United States (AUKUS) viewpoint to the rivalry between United States and China in Taiwan. Formosa Journal of Sustainable Research, 3(3), 541-554.
  26. Harrison, E. (2004). The Post-Cold War international system: Strategies, institutions and reflexivity. Routledge.
  27. Hastey, J., & Romaniuk, S. (2021). Between competition and war: Complex security overlay and the South China Sea. İçinde G. Houlden, S. Romaniuk & N. Hong (Ed.), Security, strategy, and military dynamics in the South China Sea: Cross-National perspectives (s. 7-29). Bristol University Press.
  28. Hayton, B. (2014). The South China Sea: The struggle for power in Asia. Yale University Press.
  29. Huang, J., & Jagtiani, S. (2015). Introduction: Unknotting tangled lines in the South China Sea dispute. İçinde J. Huang & A. Billo (Ed.), Territorial disputes in the South China Sea: Navigating rough waters (s. 1-12). Palgrave Macmillan.
  30. Jin, X. (2019). The Evolution of marginal seas off China. İçinde W. Pinxian & W. Berggren (Ed.), Marine geology and palaeoceanography (s. 47-56). CRC Press.
  31. Kaplan, R. (2014). Asia’s cauldron: The South China Sea and the end of a stable Pacific. Random House.
  32. Keyuan, Z. (1999). The Chinese traditional maritime boundary line in the South China Sea and its legal consequences for the resolution of the dispute over the Spratly Islands. The International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law, 14(1), 27-55.
  33. Kim, J. (2015). Territorial disputes in the South China Sea: Implications for security in Asia and beyond. Strategic Studies Quarterly, 9(2), 107-141.
  34. Kipgen, N. (2020). The politics of South China Sea disputes. Routledge.
  35. Kivimaki, T. (2016). Legalism, developmentalism and securitization: The case of territorial disputes in the South China Sea. İçinde E. Fels & T. Vu (Ed.), Power politics in Asia’s contested waters: Territorial disputes in the South China Sea (s. 57-76). Springer.
  36. Kraska, J., & Monti, M. (2015). The law of naval warfare and China’s maritime militia. International Law Studies, 91, 449-467.
  37. Kuik, C. (2022). Hedging via institutions: ASEAN-led multilateralism in the age of the Indo-Pacific. Asian Journal of Peacebuilding, 10(2), 355-386.
  38. Laksmana, E. (2020). Whose centrality? ASEAN and the Quad in the Indo-Pacific. Journal of Indo-Pacific Affairs, Special Issue, 106-117.
  39. Lemenkova, P. (2020). Mapping South China Sea region by GMT for marine geological analysis and visualization. Analele Universităţii din Oradea, 30(1), 107-121.
  40. Li, L. (2018). China’s policy towards the South China Sea: When geopolitics meets the law of the sea. Routledge.
  41. Matondang, S., Hardiyansyah, M., & Nababan, S. (2022). History and effect of South China Sea conflict in Southeast Asia political stability after World War II. Yupa: Historical Studies Journal, 6(1), 18-32.
  42. McSweeney, B. (2004). Security, identity and interests: A Sociology of international relations. Cambridge University Press.
  43. Munich Security Conference. (2016). Munich security report. https://securityconference.org/assets/user_ upload/MunichSecurityReport_2016.pdf
  44. Qi, H. (2021). China’s incentives and policy choices on joint development in the South China Sea. İçinde H. Qi & S. Xue (Ed.), Cooperative development in the South China Sea: Policies, obstacles, and prospects (s. 31-46). Routledge.
  45. Qi, H., & Xue, S. (2021). Introduction: Cooperative development among the South China Sea coastal states. İçinde H. Qi & S. Xue (Ed.), Cooperative development in the South China Sea: Policies, obstacles, and prospects (s. 1-16). Routledge.
  46. Raine, S., & Mière, C. (2013). Regional disorder: The South China Sea disputes. The International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) and Routledge.
  47. Sadurski, L. (2022). Regional security complex theory: Why is this concept still worth developing?. Athenaeum, 75(3), 137-153.
  48. Schofield, C. (2009). Dangerous ground: A geopolitical overview of the South China Sea. İçinde S. Bateman & R. Emmers (Ed.), Security and international politics in the South China Sea: Towards a cooperative management regime (s. 7-25). Routledge.
  49. Scobell, A. (2018). The geography of conflict: South China Sea and US-China rivalry. İçinde H. Feng & K. He (Ed.), US-China competition and the South China Sea disputes (s. 29-47). Routledge.
  50. Severino, R. (2010). ASEAN and the South China Sea. Security challenges, 6(2), 37-47.
  51. Shicun, W. (2013). Solving disputes for regional cooperation and development in the South China Sea: A Chinese perspective. Chandos Publishing.
  52. Shiddiqy, M., Lugo, D., & Novarizal, R. (2024). Regional security complex (RSC) in the security complexity of the Southeast Asia region. International Journal of Religion, 5(11), 1244-1253.
  53. Son, N. (2020). ASEAN and the South China Sea. İçinde L. Buszynski & D. Hai (Ed.), The South China Sea: From a regional maritime dispute to geo-strategic competition (s. 24-42). Routledge.
  54. Spangler, J. (2018). Undisputed winners: The benefits and beneficiaries of the South China Sea maritime territorial disputes. İçinde J. Spangler, D. Karalekas & M. Souza (Ed.), Enterprises, localities, people, and policy in the South China Sea: Beneath the surface (s. 27-60). Palgrave Macmillan.
  55. Steffens, A. (2013). Scramble in the South China Sea: Regional conflict and US strategy. Strategic Studies Quarterly, 7(3), 88-107.
  56. Tang, D., Sun, Z., & Sui, G. (2023). Geological environment in the South China Sea. Journal of Oceanology and Limnology, 41(2), 403-408.
  57. Temiz, S. (2019). ASEAN’ın bölgesel sorunların çözümüne yönelik sistematiği ve bu bağlamda ASEAN-Çin ilişkileri. İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 33(4), 1319-1343.
  58. Till, G. (2009). The South China Sea dispute: An international history. İçinde S. Bateman & R. Emmers (Ed.), Security and international politics in the South China Sea: Towards a cooperative management regime (s. 26-41). Routledge.
  59. Tønnesson, S. (2002). Why are the disputes in the South China Sea so intractable? A historical approach. Asian Journal of Social Science, 30(3), 570-601. T
  60. urcsányi, R. (2018). Chinese assertiveness in the South China Sea: Power sources, domestic politics, and reactive foreign policy. Springer.
  61. U.S. Congressional Research Service. (2024). U.S.-China strategic competition in South and East China Seas: Background and issues for congress. https://sgp.fas.org/crs/row/R42784.pdf
  62. Williams, P. (2013). Security studies: An introduction. İçinde P. Williams (Ed.), Security studies: An introduction (s. 1-12). Routledge.
  63. Wu, S., & Zou, K. (2009). Maritime security in the South China Sea: Cooperation and implications. İçinde S. Wu & K. Zou (Ed.), Maritime security in the South China Sea: Regional implications and international cooperation (s. 3-12). Ashgate Publishing.
  64. Yang, J. (1999). Moving toward a more secure Asia-Pacific: A Chinese view. İçinde R. Patman (Ed.), Security in a Post-Cold War world (s. 228-246). Palgrave.
  65. Yılmaz, S. (2017). Uluslararası güvenlik: Teori, pratik ve gelecek. Kaynak Yayınları.
  66. Yorulmaz, M. (2021). Güney Çin denizindeki bölgesel ihtilaflar ve Çin’in askerî modernizasyonu. Uluslararası Anadolu Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 5(2), 680-698.
  67. Yu, P. (2015). Ocean governance, regimes, and the South China Sea issues: A one-dot theory interpretation. Springer.