Sovereignty And The Senkaku/Diaoyu Territorial Dispute
This paper examines the East China Sea territorial and maritime dispute between Japan and China, from the re-emergence of the dispute in the 1990s until the 2010 collision between the Japan Coast Guard and Chinese fishing trawler. In the absence of the use of force, the paper provides an understanding of how both states seek to improve their position in the dispute. Utilising a constructivist understanding of sovereignty, the paper shows how both sides have sought to maintain or improve their position in the dispute’s sovereignty status quo by effecting exercises of sovereignty over the disputed islands and associated waters, and preventing the other state from doing the same. This approach enables the paper to highlight the change in Japan’s dispute policy, from a ‘hands off’ approach which prioritised positive bilateral relations throughout the 1990s, to a more assertive policy from the Koizumi administration onwards. It also demonstrates how China has successfully improved and consolidated its position in the dispute through a policy of preventing Japan’s effective exercise of sovereignty, and provides an alternative explanation of the 2010 collision incident: a successful prosecution of a Chinese citizen in the disputed area would have considerably altered the sovereignty status quo in Japan’s favour, leaving China had no choice but to react strongly to prevent it.
|Date of creation:||18 Sep 2012|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: The European Institute of Japanese Studies, Stockholm School of Economics, P.O. Box 6501, 113 83 Stockholm, Sweden|
Web page: http://www.hhs.se/en/Research/Institutes/EIJS/
More information through EDIRC
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hhs:eijswp:0240. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Nanhee Lee)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.