Везде
The Impact of South China Sea Territorial Dispute on U.S. – Chinese Relations
Table of contents
Annotation Estimate Publication content
References Comments
Share
QR
Metrics
The Impact of South China Sea Territorial Dispute on U.S. – Chinese Relations
Annotation
PII
S032120680000714-9-
DOI
10.31857/S032120680000714-9
Publication type
Article
Status
Published
Authors
Dmitriy B. Grafov 
ORCID: 0000-0002-7334-5398
Affiliation: Institute of Oriental studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences
Address: 12 Rozhdestvensky blvd., 107031 Moscow, Russian Federation
Edition
Issue 9
Pages
24-39
Abstract

   The article is devoted to consequences of raised China's territorial claims in the South China sea and how the United States may respond. The possibility of a negotiations and agreement between China and the United States is considered.

The United States put pressure on China. American destroyers and aircrafts violate the Chinese forbidden zone around the Spratly Islands. For the first time since 1979 the US President talked with the Taiwanese leader. On the one hand, the goal of China is to avoid a clash with the US, but at the same time to challenge the US and to declare Chinese claim to be a superpower. On the other hand, negotiations between Beijing and Washington are possible if the United States will be more in need of Chinese help to put pressure on Iran or North Korea.

Keywords
China, USA, Spratly Islands, Paracel Islands, South China Sea, conflict, territorial dispute.
Received
08.08.2018
Date of publication
10.09.2018
Number of purchasers
11
Views
2407
Readers community rating
0.0 (0 votes)
Previous versions
S032120680000714-9-1 Дата внесения правок в статью - 29.08.2018
Cite   Download pdf

References

1. Christensen T.J. 2001. Posing Problems Without Catching Up: China's Rise and Challenges for U.S. Security Policy // Quarterly Journal: International Security, vol. 25. no. 4 (Spring), p. 5-40.

2. Fisher R., Ury W. 1981. Getting to Yes: Negotiating Agreement without Giving In. New York: Penguin Group, 224 p.

3. Lobell S. E., Ripsman. N.M., Taliaferro. J. W. 2009. Neoclassical Realism, the State, and Foreign Policy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 324 p.

4. Mearsheimer John J. 2014. The Tragedy of Great Power Politics. New York: W.W. Norton Company. 555 p.

5. Mosyakov D. V. 2012. Politika Kitaya v Yugo-Vostochnoj Azii: ot proshlogo k nasto-yashchemu. Moscow: Institut vostokovedeniya RAN, 220 s. [Mosyakov D.V. 2012. The Chinese Policy in Southeast Asia: from Past Towards Future, Moscow, 220 p.].

6. Pon'ka T.I., Bel'chenko A.S., Trusova A.A. 2017. Dvuhvektornyj podhod KNR k raz-resheniyu territorial'nyh sporov v Yuzhno-Kitajskom more // Vestnik RUDN. Seriya: Mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya, 17 (3), s. 518-529. [Pon'ka T.I., Bel'chenko A.S., Trusova A.A. 2017. The Chinese Dual-track Approach towards Territorial Dispute Settlement in the South-Chinese Sea, p.518-529].

7. Schelling T. C. 1958. The Strategy of Conflict: Prospectus for the Reorientation of Game Theory // Journal of Conflict Resolution, No 2, p 203-264.

8. Spykman N.J. 1944. The Geography of the Peace. New York: Harcourt, Brace, 78 p.

9. Timashev N.S. 1968. Kak voznikajut vojny? // Novyj zhurnal. № 90, s. 205. [Ti-mashev N. S. 1968. How Do the Wars Occur? // The New Journal, No 90, p. 205].

10. Todd C.K. 1999. Vietnamese Claims to the Truong Sa Archipelago [Ed. Spratly Is-lands], Explorations in Southeast Asian Studies // A Journal of the Southeast Asian Studies Student Association // Vol. 3, Fall. Available at: https://web.archive.org/web/20130402164512/ http://www.hawaii.edu/cseas/pubs/explore/todd.html (accessed 26.02.2018).

Comments

No posts found

Write a review
Translate