Three Complementary, Simultaneous Approaches to Maritime Security in the East China Sea: International Law, Crisis Management, and Dialogue
The various maritime and airspace military incidents with the potential to escalate into military conflicts that have occurred in and near the East China Sea demonstrate the security threat as well as the serious need for counteractive measures in the region. This chapter discusses these incidents and then introduces and recommends the simultaneous implementation of three complementary approaches to resolving the East China Sea disputes, particularly the Senkaku islands conflict, drawing from experiences in dealing with other territorial disputes: establishing a common understanding of international law; taking preventive measures including confidence-building measures against military collisions; and holding bilateral or multilateral dialogues and negotiations.
KeywordsKuril Island Territorial Dispute International Civil Aviation Organization Simultaneous Approach Maritime Security
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 8.Jeremy Page, “Pacific Navies Agree on Code of Conduct for Encounters”, The Wall Street Journal, April 22, 2014, available at: http://online.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702304049904579517342779110078. CUES was first formulated by the WPNS in 2003 as the Code for Unalerted Encounters at Sea. The National Institute for Defense Studies, Japan, East Asian Strategic Review 2013, 126, available at: http://www.nids.go.jp/english/publication/east-asian/pdf/2013/east-asian_e2013_03.pdf, accessed November 29, 2014. See “Code for unalerted encounters at sea (June 2003 version)”, Australian Journal of Maritime and Ocean Affairs (2012), Vol. 4, No. 4, pp. 126–130.Google Scholar
- 32.Pete Pedrozo indicates that many dangerous incidents between US and Soviet naval forces laid the groundwork for the negotiation and signing of the INCSEA Agreement in 1972. Pete Pedrozo, “The US-China Incidents at Sea Agreement: A Recipe for Disaster”, Journal of National Security Law & Policy, vol. 6, 2012, p. 207.Google Scholar
- 37.Foreign Minister Takeo Fukuda’s statement in Kannpou (Japanese Government Gazette) of the House of Representatives, Okinawa and Northern Territories Special Committee, March 8, 1972, No. 3, pp. 2–3.Google Scholar
- 38.Akira Ishii Jianrong Zhu, Yoshihide Soneya and Lin Xiao Guang, eds, Nichuukokko Seijyoka/Nichuuheiwa Yukojyoyaku Teiketsukosho (Japan-China Diplomatic Normalization/Peace and Friendship Treaty Between Them), Tokyo Iwanami, 2003, 20.Google Scholar
- 39.The first newspaper report traced by author Togo that indicated that “Senkaku is an inherent territory of Japan and a territorial problem does not exist”, dates back to October 23, 1990 in the Yomiuri Shimbun.Google Scholar
- 41.Charles E. Ziegler, Foreign Policy and East Asia: Learning and Adaptation in the Gorbachev Era, 1993, 92.Google Scholar
- 42.Joseph Ferguson, Japanese-Russian Relations, 1907–2007, 2008, 58.Google Scholar
- 44.Whereas South Korea has taken the legal position that no territorial dispute exists regarding the Dokdos, Japan has twice proposed to South Korea the submission of the Takeshima dispute to the ICJ, in 1954 and 1962. See ministry of Foreign Affairs, “Takesima Issue,” available at: http://www.mofa.go.jp/region/asia-paci/takeshima/position.html, accessed November 29, 2014.Google Scholar