Advertisement

Assembling a City in the Ocean: Sansha Island in the South China Sea and the New Politics of Chinese Territorialization

  • Guanpei Ming
Chapter
Part of the Global Power Shift book series (GLOBAL)

Abstract

In 2012, the Chinese State Council upgraded Sansha, a tiny community on an island in the disputed region of the South China Sea, to the status of a prefecture-level city. The city population had not grown and while Sansha’s upgrade meant an increase of its administrative power, it meant very little in terms of physical construction or migration. Shortly after the declaration, 21 companies were approved to set up offices in Sansha, an official government website was launched, a newspaper was opened, and the island was extended to accommodate a new airport runway. This chapter examines how China has demonstrated that its understanding of “territory” goes beyond that which can be simply drawn on a map. China wishes to extend its territorial control over the South China Sea; the airspace above it, the islands in it, the surface of the ocean, the submarine spaces, and the ocean floor. The chapter considers how China’s creation of infrastructure in the South China Sea has become the focus of recent political conflicts between China and its neighboring countries. It concludes by considering how building infrastructure is reflected and interpreted in foreign policy and territorial disputes.

Keywords

South China Sea Sansha Territoriality Assemblage 

References

  1. Bureau of Public Affairs Department of State. (2012a, July 24). The Office of Website Management. Daily Press Briefing. U.S. Department of State. http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/dpb/2012/07/195425.htm.
  2. Bureau of Public Affairs Department of State. (2012b, August 3). The Office of Website Management. South China Sea. Press Release|Press Statement. U.S. Department of State. http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2012/08/196022.htm.
  3. Campbell, R. B. (2009). Toward a networks and boundaries approach to early complex polities: The Late Shang Case. Current Anthropology, 50(6), 826. doi: 10.1086/648398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cartier, C. (2004). City-Space: Scale relations and China’s spatial administrative hierarchy. In F. Wu & L. J. C. Ma (Eds.), Restructuring the Chinese City: Changing society, economy and space (pp. 21–38). New York: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
  5. Cartier, C. (2013, July 3). The Territorial City. http://www.thechinastory.org/2013/07/the-territorial-city/.
  6. Chen, S., & Zhang, B. (2009). Jianguo 60nian Lai Zhongguo Difang Xingzhengquhua He Fuji Guanxi de Biange He Zhanwang (Changes and Prospects of China Administrative Division and Relationships between Levels of Government over the Past 60 Years). Journal of Zhengjiang Gongshang University (5), 5–15.Google Scholar
  7. Chung, H. (2007). The change in China’s State Governance and its effects upon Urban Scale. Environment and Planning A, 39(4), 789–809.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chung, H. (2008). State regulation and China’s administrative system: A spatial perspective. China Review, 8(2), 201–30.Google Scholar
  9. Cohen, J. A., & Van Dyke, J. M. (2010, December 7). Limits of tolerance. South China Morning Post. http://www.scmp.com/article/732659/limits-tolerance.
  10. Cronin, P. M. (2012). Cooperation from strength: The United States, China and the South China Sea. Center for a New American Security.Google Scholar
  11. Dai, J. (2000). Zhongguo Shizhi (China’s City System). Beijing: Zhongguo Ditu Chuban She.Google Scholar
  12. Deleuze, G., & Hand, S. (1998). Foucault (p. 36). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  13. Deleuze, G., & Parnet, C. (1987). Dialogues (T. Hugh, Trans.) (pp. 315–327). New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Deng, L. (2004, December 20). Deng’s six points. China.com.cn, http://big5.china.com.cn/zhuanti2005/txt/2004-12/20/content_5733737.htm.
  15. Dittmer, L., & Kim, S. S. (1993). China’s quest for national identity (p. 81). Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Dutton, P. (2011). Three disputes and three objectives: China and the South China Sea. Naval War College Review, 64(4), 42.Google Scholar
  17. Fitzgerald, J. (2002). The province in history. In J. Fitzgerald (Ed.), Rethinking China’s provinces (pp. 11–39). London, New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  18. Fravel, M. T. (2005). Regime insecurity and international cooperation: Explaining China’s compromises in territorial disputes. International Security, 30(2), 47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Fravel, M. T. (2008). Strong borders, secure nation: Cooperation and conflict in China’s Territorial Disputes (pp. 10–39). Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Fravel, M. T. (2011). China’s strategy in the South China Sea. Contemporary Southeast Asia: A Journal of International and Strategic Affairs, 33(3), 292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Fravel, M. T. (2014, March). U.S Policy towards the Disputes in the South China Sea Since 1995. S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies, 7 Google Scholar
  22. Ge, J. (2006). Zhongguo Xingquzhenghua de Lishi Huigu Yu Gaige Zhanwang: Zunzhong Lishi Lizu Xianshi (The History and Future of China’s Administrative Dvisiion: Respect History and Look at the Reality). Jianghan Tribune, 1, 76–79.Google Scholar
  23. Holmes, J. R. (2014). Strategic features of the South China Sea: A touch neighborhood for Hegemons. Naval War College Review, 67(2), 30.Google Scholar
  24. Hu, D., & Liu, J. (2007). Zhengqu Dengji Quanli Yu Quyu Jingji de Guanxi: Zhongguo Zhengfu Quanli de Kongjian Guocheng Jiqi Yingxiang (the Relations between Administration Divisions Ranking, Rights and Economy: The Spatial Process and Its Impact of China’s Government’s Rights). Chinese Public Administration, 6, 11–13.Google Scholar
  25. Klauser, F. R. (2012). Thinking through territoriality: Introducing Claude Raffestin to anglophone sociospatial theory. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 30(1), 106. doi: 10.1068/d20711.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Krasner, S. D. (2001). Rethinking the sovereign state model. Review of International Studies, 27(05), 18. doi: 10.1017/S0260210501008014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Ma, L. J. C. (2005). Urban administrative restructuring, changing scale relations and local economic development in China. Political Geography, 24(4), 477–497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Ma, L. J. C., & Wu, F. (Eds.). (2005). Restructuring the Chinese city: Changing society, economy and space (p. 24). London, New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  29. Mahan, A. T. (1987). The influence of sea power upon history, 1660-1783, New edition. New York: Dover Publications.Google Scholar
  30. Mastro, O. S. (2014). The Sansha Garrison: China’s deliberate escalation in the South China Sea. Accessed August 18, 2014, from http://www.cnas.org/content/bulletin-5-sansha-garrison-china%E2%80%99s-deliberate-escalation-south-china-sea
  31. Mearsheimer, J. J. (2003). The tragedy of great power politics, Reprint edition. New York: W. W. Norton & Company.Google Scholar
  32. Raffestin, C. (1984). Territoriality: A reflection of the discrepancies between the organization of space and individual liberty. International Political Science Review/Revue Internationale de Science Politique, 5(2), 140.Google Scholar
  33. Sack, R. D. (1983). Human territoriality: A theory. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 73(1), 56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Sack, R. D. (1986). Human territoriality: Its theory and history (p. 2). Cambridge [Cambridgeshire], New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Sassen, S. (2008a). Neither global nor national: Novel assemblages of territory, authority and rights. Ethics and Global Politics, 1(1), 61. doi: 10.3402/egp.v1i1.1814.Google Scholar
  36. Sassen, S. (2008b). Territory, Authoristy, Rights: From Medieval to Global Assemblages (p. 29). Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Scott, J. C. (1998). Seeing like a State: How certain schemes to improve the human condition have failed. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  38. Scott, J. C. (2009). The art of not being governed: An anarchist history of upland Southeast Asia (p. 10). New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  39. Skinner, Q. (1978). The foundations of modern political thought. Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Srnicek, N. (2007). Assemblage Theory, Complexity and Contentious Politics: The Political Ontology of Gilles Deleuze, 52.Google Scholar
  41. Taylor, P. J. (2003). The state as container: Territoriality in the modern world-system. In: N. Brenner et al. (Eds.), State/Space: A reader (1st ed., p. 101). Wiley-Blackwell: Oxford.Google Scholar
  42. Waltz, K. N. (2001). Man, the state, and war: A theoretical analysis. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  43. Xie, Y. (2000). Shilun zhongguo lidai zhengqu zhidu bianqian de tiedian (Features in the Changes of Administrative Regions in China’s Different Dynasties). Journal of Southwest University for Nationalities, 21(02), 89–94.Google Scholar
  44. Yang, D. L. (1998). Calamity and reform in China: State, rural society, and institutional change since the Great Leap Famine. Stanford: Stanford Univ. Press.Google Scholar
  45. Yang, G. (2012). Lun Zhongguo Zai Nanhai Wenti Shang de Guojia Liyi (On China’s National Interests in the South China Sea Dispute). Xin Dongfang (New Oriental), 46, 10–16.Google Scholar
  46. Zhang, J. (n.d.). China’s growing assertiveness in the South China Sea. http://nsc.anu.edu.au/documents/occasional-5-brief-4.pdf.

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Political ScienceUniversity of Hawaii at ManoaHonoluluHawaii

Personalised recommendations