Journals / Bölgesel Araştırmalar Dergisi / 2017 / Cilt: 1 - Sayı: 3

Arbitration in the South China Sea: China-Philippines Competition

GÜNEY ÇİN DENİZİ’NDE TAHKİM: ÇİN-FİLİPİNLER REKABETİ

Pages
251–267
Publication Date
2017-12-23
DOI
—
🏛️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)

As a result, in this study workable solutions are proposed to both sides to settle disputes and conflicts in the South China Sea.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Geopolitically and strategically, the South China Sea enjoys a significant role.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The disputes in the South China Sea since 1974 have steadily increased.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:As a result, in this study workable solutions are proposed to both sides to settle disputes and conflicts in the South China Sea.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2013 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Çin · Filipinler · Daimi Tahkim Mahkemesi

Abstract

Geopolitically and strategically, the South China Sea enjoys a significant role. China, Taiwan, Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia, and Brunei all have rival claims in the South China Sea. Therefore, the South China Sea is the most controversial and complex diplomatic issue in East Asia. The disputes in the South China Sea since 1974 have steadily increased. In 2013, the Philippines unilaterally brought the arbitration case to the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA), saying that in the region Chinese activities were against international law. The aim of this study is to highlight the Chinese reaction how to respond the PCA. As a result, in this study workable solutions are proposed to both sides to settle disputes and conflicts in the South China Sea.

Özet

Jeopolitik ve stratejik olarak Güney Çin Denizi önemli bir role sahiptir. Çin, Tayvan, Vietnam, Filipinler, Malezya ve Brunei’nin Güney Çin Denizi’nde birbirlerine yönelik iddiaları bulunmaktadır. Bu nedenle Güney Çin Denizi, Doğu Asya’nın en tartışmalı ve karmaşık diplomatik konusunu oluşturmaktadır. 1974 yılından itibaren Güney Çin Denizi’ndeki anlaşmazlıklar giderek artmıştır. 2013 yılında, Filipinler tek taraflı olarak Çin’in bölgedeki faaliyetlerinin uluslararası hukuka aykırı olduğu gerekçesiyle Daimi Tahkim Mahkemesi’ne (PCA) başvurmuş ve takip eden üç yıl içinde mahkeme, Filipinler lehine karar vermiştir. Çin’in Daimi Hakemlik Mahkemesi’ne cevap olarak nasıl tepki vereceği altı çizilerek belirtilmektir. Sonuç olarak, uygulanabilir çözümler Güney Çin Denizi’ndeki anlaşmazlıkları ve çatışmaları çözmek için her iki tarafa da önerilmektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

KEYVAN, Ö. Z. (2017). Arbitration in the South China Sea: China-Philippines Competition. Bölgesel Araştırmalar Dergisi, Cilt: 1 - Sayı: 3, 251–267. https://ajindex.com/articles/745569

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (10)

  1. “China and Russia conduct war games in South China Sea”, DW, http://www.dw.com/en/china-and-russia-conduct-war-games-in-south-china-sea/a-19546393, (Erişim Tarihi: 31.03.2017). “China hits back at US over South China Sea claims”, BBC, http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-38729207, (Erişim Tarihi: 31.03.2017). “Duterte cancels visit to disputed South China Sea island after warning from Beijing”, theguardian, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/13/duterte-cancels-visit-to-disputed-south-china-sea-island-after-warning-from-beijing, (Erişim Tarihi: 31.03.2017). “Flight-tests check routes to Nansha airfields”, China Military, http://english.chinamil.com.cn/news-channels/2016-07/13/content_7151603.htm, (Erişim Tarihi: 30.03.2017). “Manila Takes a Stand”, The Wall Street Journal, https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887323539804578261140985134254, (Erişim Tarihi: 30.03.2017).
  2. BUSZYNSKI, Leszek, “The Origins and development of the South China maritime dispute”, Leszek Buszynski-Christopher B. Roberts, der., The South China Sea Maritime Dispute: Political, Legal and Regional Perspectives, Routledge, 2015.
  3. CASTRO, Renato Cruz de, “The 2012 Scarborough Shoal stand-off. From stalemate to escalation of the South China dispute”, Leszek Buszynski-Christopher B. Roberts, der., The South China Sea Maritime Dispute: Political, Legal and Regional Perspectives, Routledge, 2015.
  4. CLINTON, Hillary, “America’s Pacific Century”, http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2011/10/11/americas_pacific_century? page=0,0, (Erişim Tarihi: 01.04.2017).
  5. HAGT, Eric-Matthew Durnin, “Space, China’s Tactical Frontier”, Journal of Strategic Studies, Cilt: 34, Sayı: 5, Şubat 2011, s. 733-761.
  6. JU Hailong, China’s Maritime Power and Strategy History, National Security and Geopolitics, World Scientific Publishing, 2015.
  7. MCCAIN, John, “Defining American Interests in Asia”, http://csis.org/files/attachments/120514_TPP _McCain_Transcript.pdf, (Erişim Tarihi: 04.04.2017).
  8. NYE, Joseph, “A New Great Power Relationship?”, CHİNA-US Focus:Foreign Policy, 2013, http://www.chinausfocus.com/foreign-policy/a-new-great-power-relationship, (Erişim Tarihi: 04.04.2017).
  9. LI, Mingjiang-Loh Mıng Hui Dylan, “China’s fluid assertiveness in the South China Sea dispute”, Andrew T. H. Tan, der., Security and Conflict in East Asia, Routledge, 2015.
  10. RICH, Motoko, “Rodrigo Duterte, in Japan, Calls for U.S. Troops to Exit Philippines in 2 Years”, https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/27/world/asia/philippines-president-ro