IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/asseca/v4y2017i3p316-336.html

The Regional Consequences of Territorial Disputes: An Empirical Analysis of the South China Sea Disputes

Author

Listed:
  • Kentaro Sakuwa

Abstract

How do territorial disputes shape regional contexts within which politics among local states takes place? This paper analyses regional impacts of territorial disputes drawing on the case of South China Sea and statistical data. I argue that ‘local security externalities’ produced by ongoing territorial disputes influence not only direct disputants but also other states in the regional neighbourhood. Escalated disputes in the South China Sea exacerbated China’s relationships with Japan—which is not a direct disputant—because Japan shares important stakes in the disputed area and China’s assertive policy was perceived as a sign of its willingness to use force and pursue a ‘hegemonic’ ambition in the region. Such effect is also confirmed by a time-series of analysis of the post-Cold War Sino-Japanese relationships. Thus, this paper empirically shows that ongoing territorial disputes may influence a larger group of regional states, thus shaping a regional context for political interactions.

Suggested Citation

  • Kentaro Sakuwa, 2017. "The Regional Consequences of Territorial Disputes: An Empirical Analysis of the South China Sea Disputes," Journal of Asian Security and International Affairs, , vol. 4(3), pages 316-336, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:asseca:v:4:y:2017:i:3:p:316-336
    DOI: 10.1177/2347797017732228
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2347797017732228
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/2347797017732228?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paul D. Senese, 2005. "Territory, Contiguity, and International Conflict: Assessing a New Joint Explanation," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 49(4), pages 769-779, October.
    2. Senese, Paul D. & Vasquez, John A., 2005. "Assessing the Steps to War," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 35(4), pages 607-633, October.
    3. repec:wbk:wbpubs:21634 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Douglas M. Gibler & Jaroslav Tir, 2010. "Settled Borders and Regime Type: Democratic Transitions as Consequences of Peaceful Territorial Transfers," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 54(4), pages 951-968, October.
    5. Suzanna De Boef & Luke Keele, 2008. "Taking Time Seriously," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 52(1), pages 184-200, January.
    6. Thompson, William R., 1996. "Democracy and peace: putting the cart before the horse?," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 50(1), pages 141-174, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. David B Carter, 2017. "History as a double-edged sword," Politics, Philosophy & Economics, , vol. 16(4), pages 400-421, November.
    2. Andrew P. Owsiak, 2019. "Foundations for integrating the democratic and territorial peace arguments," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 36(1), pages 63-87, January.
    3. Stephen L. Quackenbush, 2010. "Territorial Issues and Recurrent Conflict," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 27(3), pages 239-252, July.
    4. Johannes Karreth & Jaroslav Tir & Douglas M Gibler, 2022. "Latent territorial threat and democratic regime reversals," Journal of Peace Research, Peace Research Institute Oslo, vol. 59(2), pages 197-212, March.
    5. David B. Carter & H. E. Goemans, 2014. "The temporal dynamics of new international borders," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 31(3), pages 285-302, July.
    6. David B. Carter & Paul Poast, 2017. "Why Do States Build Walls? Political Economy, Security, and Border Stability," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 61(2), pages 239-270, February.
    7. Nam Kyu Kim, 2018. "Are Military Regimes Really Belligerent?," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 62(6), pages 1151-1178, July.
    8. Steven V. Miller & Douglas M. Gibler, 2011. "Democracies, Territory, and Negotiated Compromises," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 28(3), pages 261-279, July.
    9. William Reed & Daina Chiba, 2010. "Decomposing the Relationship Between Contiguity and Militarized Conflict," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 54(1), pages 61-73, January.
    10. Armèn Hakhverdian, 2009. "Capturing Government Policy on the Left–Right Scale: Evidence from the United Kingdom, 1956–2006," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 57(4), pages 720-745, December.
    11. Kelly M. Kadera & Sara McLaughlin Mitchell, 2005. "Heeding Ray's Advice: An Exegesis on Control Variables in Systemic Democratic Peace Research," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 22(4), pages 311-326, September.
    12. Chamon, Marcos & Schumacher, Julian & Trebesch, Christoph, 2018. "Foreign-Law Bonds: Can They Reduce Sovereign Borrowing Costs?," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 114, pages 164-179.
    13. Laron K. Williams & Guy D. Whitten, 2011. "Dynamic simulations of autoregressive relationships," Stata Journal, StataCorp LLC, vol. 11(4), pages 577-588, December.
    14. William D. Berry & Jacqueline H. R. DeMeritt & Justin Esarey, 2010. "Testing for Interaction in Binary Logit and Probit Models: Is a Product Term Essential?," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 54(1), pages 248-266, January.
    15. Choong-Nam Kang, 2017. "Capability revisited: Ally’s capability and dispute initiation1," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 34(5), pages 546-571, September.
    16. Tsai, Tsung-Han, 2016. "A Bayesian Approach to Dynamic Panel Models with Endogenous Rarely Changing Variables," Political Science Research and Methods, Cambridge University Press, vol. 4(3), pages 595-620, September.
    17. Christian Bjørnskov & Jacob Mchangama, 2019. "Do Social Rights Affect Social Outcomes?," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 63(2), pages 452-466, April.
    18. Kern, Andreas & Reinsberg, Bernhard & Rau-Göhring, Matthias, 2019. "IMF conditionality and central bank independence," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 212-229.
    19. William R. Thompson & Richard Tucker, 1997. "A Tale of Two Democratic Peace Critiques," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 41(3), pages 428-454, June.
    20. Joon Hyeok Lee, 2024. "Consecutive decentralization: The effect of central bank independence on capital account liberalization," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(2), pages 809-831, July.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:asseca:v:4:y:2017:i:3:p:316-336. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.