IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/cdanxx/v31y2015i4p293-302.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

UNCLOS and maritime security: the “securitisation” of the South China Sea disputes

Author

Listed:
  • Christo Odeyemi

Abstract

This Critical Comment seeks to situate the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) within the context of South China Sea (SCS) dispute. Bearing in mind that maritime actions of the main disputants -- China, Vietnam, and the Philippines -- increasingly “securitise” these long-standing disputes and vice versa, the study examines the concept of a maritime “regime complex.” Whereas efforts have being made to examine UNCLOS and indeed the dispute within the framework of a maritime “regime complex,” the key finding shows that the increased “securitisation” of the disputes makes it difficult to envisage effective engagement of UNCLOS as a resolution mechanism. It will also reveal that China's firmly established expansionist agenda in the SCS region is indicative of Beijing's susceptibility to compromise a diplomatic solution to these long-standing disputes. These discoveries are structured around the knowledge that the spatial relation of the SCS critically espouses not only its geo-strategic significance in terms of natural resources endowment, but also the enduring maritime disputes within the region.

Suggested Citation

  • Christo Odeyemi, 2015. "UNCLOS and maritime security: the “securitisation” of the South China Sea disputes," Defense & Security Analysis, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(4), pages 293-302, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:cdanxx:v:31:y:2015:i:4:p:293-302
    DOI: 10.1080/14751798.2015.1101186
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/14751798.2015.1101186
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/14751798.2015.1101186?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    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:taf:cdanxx:v:31:y:2015:i:4:p:293-302. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/CDAN20 .

    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.