Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Power Politics in Asia’s Contested Waters pp 469–491Cite as

Distant Partners: Europe and the South China Sea

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

  • 2122 Accesses

Part of the book series: Global Power Shift ((GLOBAL))

Abstract

Europe and the countries adjacent to the South China Sea (SCS) share a long and very contradictory history. European powers colonized most of the countries in South-East Asia, but the fighters against colonialism also relied on European ideas and ideologies like nationalism and socialism. Until today, the conflict parties in the SCS base their claims on legal norms and concepts developed in Europe during the era of colonialism. Though the European Union is one of the biggest trade partners and investors in the SCS area, Brussels did not work out a convincing political strategy accompanying and protecting its economic interests. In 2012 the EU started some initiatives for a stronger political engagement in this part of the world, but these initiatives were not consolidated and elaborated in the years to follow. Nevertheless, Europe could offer a lot of—positive and negative—experiences in common management of resources, in coping with an asymmetric conflict constellation etc., which might be helpful to find a solution for the conflicts in SCS. To put these experiences into effect an intensive and sustainable political dialogue is needed which may lead to a partnership between the two regions based on equal footing and mutual benefit.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    See Peter Feldbauer, Die Portugiesen in Asien 1498–1620, Essen 2005, pp. 48f.

  2. 2.

    Such as Malacca (1511), Macao (1557), Manila (1571).

  3. 3.

    See Reinhard (2014).

  4. 4.

    Hayton (2014, pp. 32 f).

  5. 5.

    See Schottenhammer (2006).

  6. 6.

    See Hayton (2014, pp. 29–60).

  7. 7.

    See Krell (2009).

  8. 8.

    Michael Strupp has already pointed to the contrast between Chinese territorial claims and China’s positions on international law in 1982. See Strupp (1982).

  9. 9.

    See Hayton (2014, pp. 38–40).

  10. 10.

    Corresponding to the average range of coastal artillery at the time, thus also referred to as “cannon shot rule”.

  11. 11.

    In April 1954, the American President D. Eisenhower announced that all South East Asian states would fall like dominos if Vietnam should fall.

  12. 12.

    Apart from the Vatican.

  13. 13.

    See Table 22.1 IWF, Direction of Trade Statistics (accessed May 14, 2013).

  14. 14.

    IWF, Direction of Trade Statistics, trade EU-ASEAN, China ASEM (accessed May 14, 2013).

  15. 15.

    European Commission, Facts and figures on EU-China trade, September 2012, p. 2, <http://www.latviachina.eu/f/Facts_and_Figures_EU-China_trade.pdf> (accessed on December 12, 2013)

  16. 16.

    Document available online at http://www.eu2007.de/de/News/Press_Releases/March/0315AAEUASEAN.html.

  17. 17.

    Document available online at http://www.asean.org/news/item/asean-vision-2020.

  18. 18.

    Besides those of the 10 ASEAN member states, the defence ministers of Australia, China, India, Japan, New Zealand, South Korea, Russia and the USA participate in these meetings. See https://admm.asean.org/index.php/about-admm/about-admm-plus/2013-01-22-11-01-22.html.

  19. 19.

    http://www.asean.org/asean/external-relations/east-asia-summit-eas.

  20. 20.

    Bersick (2009).

  21. 21.

    See Cronin and Kaplan (2012).

  22. 22.

    This is clearly reflected in the principles outlined in the ASEAN Charter 2007.

  23. 23.

    Daewon and Richey (2012).

  24. 24.

    See Wolfgang Ischinger, “Europe has to show more presence in Asia“(“Europa muss mehr Präsenz im asiatischen Raum zeigen”), Interview with Deutschlandradio, 21.11.2011, <http://www.dradio.de/dkultur/sendungen/interview/1609029> (accessed September 2, 2013).

  25. 25.

    Parello-Plesner (2013).

  26. 26.

    More than 15 dialogue partners of ASEAN have already signed this treaty years ago, such as China (2003), Japan (2004), Russia (2004), and the USA (2009).

  27. 27.

    Document available online at http://www.asean.org/images/archive/document/BSB%20Plan%20of%20Action%20to%20Strengthen%20the%20ASEAN-EU%20Enhanced%20Partnership%202013-2017.pdf> (accessed December 18, 2013).

  28. 28.

    Document available online at http://www.google.de/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CDwQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.consilium.europa.eu%2Fuedocs%2Fcms_data%2Fdocs%2Fpressdata%2Fen%2Fmisc%2F97842.pdf&ei=UslWU_eMKcnXtQbZjYD4AQ&usg=AFQjCNFDZIzxF84gy0AI6oueB63-zKLbig&bvm=bv.65177938,d.Yms.

  29. 29.

    European Union (2015): Speech by High Representative /Vice-President Federica Mogherini at the IISS Shangri La-Dialogue 2015, 31. 05. 2015, http://eeas.europa.eu/statements-eeas/2015/150531_02_en.htm (02.06.2015). See on the international role of the EU also Boening et al. (2013).

  30. 30.

    See footnote 25.

  31. 31.

    The corresponding section in the Guidelines says “… deepen its cooperation with the countries of the region in global fora such as the UN and the WTO…”.

  32. 32.

    U.S. Department of State, “U.S.–EU statement on the Asia Pacific region”, <http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2012/07/194896.htm> (accessed December 18, 2013).

  33. 33.

    Kaiser and Muniz (2013).

  34. 34.

    Casarini (2013a, p. 3).

  35. 35.

    See also “Guidelines” III, par.12.

  36. 36.

    See Baas (2013, pp. 148–154).

  37. 37.

    Concerning this debate see Guan Yan, “Shadow of war hasn’t yet disappeared from East Asia” in: Global Times, October 29, 2012, <http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/741097.html> (accessed December 18, 2013) and Gustaaf Geeraerts, “Dove of trade may be just another hopeful illusion”. in: Global Times, October 29, 2012, <http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/741093.shtml> (accessed December 18, 2013); Amitav Acharya, Common Security with Asia. Changing Europe’s Role from ‘Model’ to ‘Partner’, Friedrich Ebert Stiftung, December 2012 (International Policy Analysis), pp. 4f, <http://eugrasp.eu/fileadmin/user_upload/Common_Security_with_Asia_-_Amitav_Acharya.pdf> (accessed December 18, 2013).

  38. 38.

    Muxfeldt (2013).

  39. 39.

    As stated by the Vietnamese diplomat Ton Nu Thi Ninh in an interview with “Deutsche Welle” in June 2014. http://www.dw.de/eu-should-intervene-in-sino-vietnamese-dispute/a-17729637.

  40. 40.

    http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/china/2014-4/02/c_133230788.htm. A detailed analysis of this paper is provided by Nele Noesselt, Chinas neue EU-Strategie: Aufbau einer strategischen Achse der Weltpolitik? Hamburg 2014 (GIGA Focus 4/2014), www.giga-hamburg.de/de/system/files/publications/gf_global_1404.pdf

  41. 41.

    See Yingying and Feng (2011).

  42. 42.

    See p. 48f.

  43. 43.

    Besides China, Japan and South Korea, the Guidelines explicitly mention the USA, India, Australia, New Zealand and Canada.

  44. 44.

    European Union, “Joint U.S.–EU Statement on the Asia-Pacific Region“, June 12, 2012, <http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/EN/foraff/131709.pdf> (accessed December 18, 2013).

  45. 45.

    In the German Foreign Office, it has been discovered recently that officials responsible for specific task regions, such as the commissioners for German-Russian and German-American relations do not compete for responsibility with the minister, but help to consolidate his work.

  46. 46.

    See Casarini (2013b, p. 2) and Grebe (2013, pp. 8–9).

  47. 47.

    North Sea Commission, <http://www.northsea.org/index.php/about> (accessed December 18, 2013).

  48. 48.

    The list of NSC members mentions England and Scotland, not Great Britain.

  49. 49.

    Vu Duc (2012).

  50. 50.

    EU Public Service, “EU closes in on major fisheries reform“, July 1, 2013, <http://www.academiclounge.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=13:eu-closes-in-on-major-fisheries-reform,-public-service-europe&catid=8&Itemid=101> (accessed June 1, 2014).

  51. 51.

    European Commission (2013).

  52. 52.

    Khandekar (2012).

  53. 53.

    Raine/Le Mière, Regional Disorder. The South China Sea Disputes, pp. 210–212.

  54. 54.

    Ashton (2013).

  55. 55.

    Concerning EU-China collaboration at the Horn of Africa, see Warnault (2012).

  56. 56.

    Denmark, Netherlands, Norway and Great Britain.

  57. 57.

    This ReCAAP-led center serves the purpose of exchanging all information gained on piracy.

  58. 58.

    Hibernik (2013).

  59. 59.

    Response of the German government to a brief inquiry issued by the parliamentarians Viola von Cramon-Taubadel, Agnes Brugger, Dr. Thomas Gambke, additional delegates, and the parliamentarian group of the Green Party (BÜNDNIS90/DIE GRÜNEN) (Drucksache 17/18402), “Zur sicherheitspolitischen Lage in Ost- und Südostasien“, Deutscher Bundestag, Drucksache 17/8561 (February 8, 2012), Point 28, <http://dipbt.bundestag.de/dip21/btd/17/085/1708561.pdf> (accessed December 18, 2013).

  60. 60.

    Ibid, point 20.

References

  • Ashton, C. (2013). Defending national interests, preventing conflict. Speech delivered by High Representative Catherine Ashton at the Shangri-La Dialogue, www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_Data/docs/pressdata/EN/foraff/137368.pdf (accessed December 18, 2013)

  • Baas, N. (2013). Europe and Southeast Asia: Time for an upgrade. In: Strategic Review. The Indonesian Journal of Leadership, Policy and World Affairs (pp. 148–154), July–September 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bersick S (2009). Die Rolle der EU in der Sicherheitsarchitektur Ostasiens (SWP-Working Paper FG 7, 2009/05). Berlin: Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik, pp. 16f.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boening, A., Kremer, J.-F., & van Loon, A. (Eds.). (2013). Global Power Europe (Vol. 1 & 2). Heidelberg: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Casarini, N. (2013, September). EU Foreign Policy in the Asia Pacific: Striking the right balance between the US, China and ASEAN. In: European Union, Institute for Security Studies Analysis (p. 3). <http://www.iss.europa.eu/uploads/media/US-China-and-ASEAN_01.pdf> (accessed December 18, 2013)

  • Casarini, N. (2013). The European ‘pivot‘. Issue Alert, European Union, Institute for Security Studies, March 2013, p. 2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cronin, P. M., & Kaplan, R. D. (2012). Cooperation from strength: U.S. strategy and the South China Sea. In: P. M. Cronin (ed.), Cooperation from strength. The United States, China and the South China Sea. Washington: Center for a New American Security, p. 7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daewon, O., & Richey, M. (2012). The future of the EU’s security role in a Transformed East Asia. The Korean Journal of Defense Analysis, 24(2), 265–283, 265.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2013). Mitteilung der Kommission an den Rat. Konsultationen zu den Fangmöglichkeiten 2014. Brussles, May 15, 2013, COM, 319 final, p. 11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grebe, J. (2013). Europäische Rüstungsexporte nach Südostasien. Südostasien, 3, 8–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayton, B. (2014). The South China Sea. The Struggle for Power in Asia. New Haven, London: Yale University Press, pp. 32 f.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hibernik, M. (2013). Countering maritime piracy and robbery in Southeast Asia. The Role of the ReCAAP Agreement. Briefing Paper, EIAS, 2013/2, p. 10, <http://www.eias.org/sites/default/files/EIAS_Briefing_Paper_2013-2_Hribernik.pdf> (accessed December 18, 2013).

  • Kaiser K, Muniz M. (2013, September 5) Europe’s Asian Pivot. Project Syndicate. <http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/why-europe-also-needs-an-asian-pivot-by-karl-kaiser-and-manuel-muniz> (accessed December 18, 2013).

  • Khandekar, G. (2012). Maritime security in Asia: what the EU can do. In FRIDE, (p. 6, No. 5), March 2012. <http://www.fride.org/download/PB_5_Maritime_Security_Asia.pdf> (accessed December 18, 2013)

  • Krell, G. (2009). Weltbilder und Weltordnung. Einführung in die Theorie der internationalen Beziehungen (4th edn.). Baden-Baden: Nomos, pp. 109, 113ff.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muxfeldt, L. (2013). Overview of EU Trade Policy in Southeast Asia. In Eu-Asia Center Publications. July 11, 2013, <http://www.eu-asiacentre.eu/documents/uploads/pub_102_policy_briefing_eu_trade_policy_sea.pdf> (accessed December 18.2013).

  • Parello-Plesner, J. (2013, February 28) Grading Europe in the Asia-Pacific: European Foreign Policy Scorecard 2013. In Asia Pacific Bulletin (East–west-Center, No. 203).

    Google Scholar 

  • Reinhard, W. (2014). Europa und die atlantische Welt. In W. Reinhard (ed.), 1350 1750 Weltreiche und Weltmeere (p. 771). Munich

    Google Scholar 

  • Schottenhammer, A. (2006). The sea as barrier and contact zone: Maritime Space and Sea Routes in Traditional China. In A. Schottenhammer & R. Ptak (Eds.), The perception of maritime space in traditional chinese sources. Otto Harrassowitz: Wiesbaden. 3 ff.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strupp, M. (1982). Chinas territoriale Ansprüche (pp. 26–35). Hamburg: Instituts für Asienkunde.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vu Duc. (2012, September 28). An opportunity for peace in Asia-Pacific. In: Asia Sentinel. <http://www.asiasentinel.com/politics/an-opportunity-for-peace-in-asia-pacific/> (accessed May 30, 2015)

  • Warnault, R. (2012). Fighting Piracy off the Coasts of Somalia: A milestone for China and the European Union. EU-Asia at a Glance, EIAS. <http://www.eias.org/sites/default/files/EU-Asia_at_a_aglance_RW__Piracy_ChinaEU.pdf> (accessed December 18, 2013).

  • Yingying, D., & Feng, L. (2011, October). Disputing Nations Should Side with China for Joint Development of Oil and Gas in South China Sea. In: Global Review, Shanghai, p. 3

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik, German Institute for International and Security Affairs, Ludwigkirchplatz 3-4, 10719, Berlin, Germany

    Gerhard Will

Authors
  1. Gerhard Will
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gerhard Will .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Center for Global Studies, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany

    Enrico Fels

  2. and Humanities, University of Social Sciences, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

    Truong-Minh Vu

Appendix

Appendix

See Tables 22.1, 22.2, and 22.3

Table 22.1 EU trade with ASEAN, China, ASEM, 1975–2013
Full size table
Table 22.2 ASEAN trade with top 10 trade partners, 2012 (retrieved in December 2013)
Full size table
Table 22.3 10 Top Investors in ASEAN region (14.1.2013)
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Will, G. (2016). Distant Partners: Europe and the South China Sea. In: Fels, E., Vu, TM. (eds) Power Politics in Asia’s Contested Waters. Global Power Shift. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-26152-2_22

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation