Topic: Territorial Dispute in the South China Sea
Country: Djibouti
Delegate Name: Brandon Lee
School: Forest Hills Eastern High School
Topic page: background guide and all position papers All Djibouti position papers GLIMUN 2015 committees
Home to one of the busiest shipping routes in the world and abundant with natural resources, the identities of the owners of territories in the South China Sea has been constantly debated since the early 20th century. Despite the existence of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Seas (UNCLOS), there are still countless territorial disputes and rising tensions due to imprecise laws and loopholes/excuses that countries can jump through. There is room for amendments and reworks to the document. Overlapping territorial claims are a major problem in the South China Sea and past proposed solutions including maritime hotlines, taking the issue to a Court of Arbitration, and demilitarizing the conflict zone, have taken little effect in de-escalating the situation. Although the South China Sea is of no legitimate interest to Djibouti, the country’s economy relies on sound relations with China and a ruling unfavorable to China could have resounding impacts.
In 2008, after breakouts of territorial conflict between Eritrea and Djibouti, the United Nations Security Council passed Resolution 1862 which urged the two countries to resolve their conflict peacefully. The resolution was successful and the dispute was over. Although attempts to encourage dialogue between conflicting countries similar to Djibouti and Eritrea have been made to solve this maritime issue, finding peace so easily is rare. As Henry Kissinger stated earlier this year, “Deng Xiaoping dealt with some of his problems by saying not every problem needs to be solved in the existing generation. Let’s perhaps wait for another generation but let’s not make it worse.” China has clearly proclaimed its sovereignty for lands including the Spratly and Paracel Islands and attempts to persuade the country have been futile in the past. Attempts to demilitarize islands and redraw boundaries could possibly escalate the situation. However, some actions that can be taken without worsening the situation are possible.
The UNCLOS is not specific enough in a way that countries can provide many justifications for actions that seem to violate the UNCLOS, but in reality, do not. For example, when a Chinese delegate was questioned on whether or not China violated the UNCLOS, the delegate stated Article 298 and Article 310 which gives the nation states the freedom to not accept one or more of the procedures in UNCLOS and allow the states to make declarations or statements, therefore justifying China’s claim over the South China Sea. However, as not all nations have the required economic and political background to follow the articles, the articles should be rewritten to be less generalized and more specific. Regarding the Spratly and Paracel Islands, claiming possession of said islands due to “historical claims” are unacceptable and against UNCLOS policy. If that were so, the United Kingdom could claim India and even half of the world. However, because of the generalization of the articles, nations could find their way around these regulations. The UNCLOS should be more specific, loopholes should be closed, and Exclusive Economic Zones should be strictly enforced.
