ICE Case Studies
Case Number: 21
Case Mnemonic: Sprat
Case Name: Spratly Islands Dispute
Draft Author: May, 1997
1. Abstract
The Spratly Islands of the South China Sea are a potential tinder
box in the region. Approximately 44 of the 51 small islands and
reefs are claimed or occupied by China, the Philippines, Vietnam,
Taiwan, Malaysia and Brunei. The conflict is the result of
overlapping sovereignty claims to various Spratly Islands thought
to possess substantial natural resources -- chiefly oil, natural
gas, and seafood. Disputes have been propelled by an aggressive
China, eager to meet growing energy demands that outstrip its
supply capability. Overlapping claims resulted in several military
incidents since 1974 and in several countries awarding foreign
companies exploration rights in the same area of the South China
Sea. Regional nation-states not directly involved in the Spratly
disputes became concerned about regional stability and established
a regional forum to discuss the peaceful resolution of the
disputes. Sovereignty and exploration disputes were thought to be
resolved with the drafting of ASEAN's 1992 declaration which
committed members to resolve disputes peacefully and to consider
joint exploration of the territory. Military aggression and
exploration endeavors conducted by China since 1992, however, have
brought into question the validity of the 1992 joint declaration
and raises the question of what long-term, peaceful solution could
prevent the region from erupting into a continuum of military
incidents over sovereignty rights to the natural resource-rich
Spratly Islands.
2. Description
The Spratly Islands of the South China Sea are a potential tinder
box in the region. Approximately 44 of the 51 small islands and
reefs are claimed or occupied by China, the Philippines, Vietnam,
Taiwan, Malaysia and Brunei. The conflict is the result of
overlapping sovereignty claims to various Spratly Islands thought
to possess substantial natural resources --chiefly oil, natural
gas, and seafood. Disputes have been propelled by an aggressive
China, eager to meet growing energy demands that outstrip its
supply capability. Overlapping claims resulted in several military
incidents since 1974 and in several countries awarding foreign
companies exploration rights in the same area of the South China
Sea. Regional nation-states not directly involved in the Spratly
disputes became concerned about regional stability and established
a regional forum to discuss the peaceful resolution of the
disputes. Sovereignty and exploration disputes were thought to be
resolved with the drafting of ASEAN's 1992 declaration which
committed members to resolve disputes peacefully and to consider
joint exploration of the territory. Military aggression and
exploration endeavors conducted by China since 1992, however, have
brought into question the validity of the 1992 joint declaration
and raises the question of what long-term, peaceful solution could
prevent the region from erupting into a continuum of military
incidents over sovereignty rights to the natural resource-rich
Spratly Islands.
Claims to various islands of the archipelago began in the 1930s.
Since the 1950s, the involved claimants have developed 29 oil
fields and 4 gas fields in the Spratly region.(1) China's rising
energy demands, decreasing ability to meet demand growth with
domestic energy sources, and continued reliance on oil have
propelled China to look to alternative energy sources -- in
particular the relatively untapped South China Sea in general, and
the Spratly Islands in particular.
According to Kent Calder, China's energy balance of trade has
dramatically deteriorated since the early 1990s, causing China to
become a net importer of oil for the first time in over 25
years.(2) Dependence on imported oil is likely to continue, given
its low per capita energy consumption rate -- 40% of the world
average. Unless China can find a way of coping with the high
start-up costs, waste products and safety concerns affiliated with
the implementation of nuclear energy, oil will remain one of
China's leading energy sources for the mid-to-long term. (3)
3. Duration: 1992 to now
4. Location
The Spratly Islands consist of 100 - 230 islets, coral reefs and
sea mounts (tablemounts).(4) Despite the fact that the archipelago
is spread over 250,000 sq km of sea space, the total land mass of
the Spratly Islands is a mere 5 sq km. The land is not arable,
does not support permanent crops, and has no meadows, pastures or
forests.(5) Furthermore, the Spratly Islands have not been
occupied by humans until recently. Countries with territorial
claims use military means --airstrips and armed forces -- to
reinforce their claims.(6)
The Spratly Islands are situated in the South China Sea -- one of
the largest continental shelves in the world. Typically,
continental shelves are abundant in resources such as oil, natural
gas, minerals, and seafood. According to James Kiras, a
contributing editor of the Peacekeeping & International
Relations journal, one study conducted by China estimated oil
reserves in the South China Sea to be larger than Kuwait's present
reserves.(7)
Oil and natural gas reserves in the Spratly region
are estimated at 17.7 billion tons; Kuwait's reserves amount to 13
billion tons.(8) The Spratly reserves place it as the fourth
largest reserve bed worldwide.
You can also visit the CIA World Factbook site for descriptive information on the
Spratly Islands' ecology.
Continent: Asia
Region: East Asia
Country: China
5. Actors: China, Vietnam, Philippines, Malaysia
- China:
- claims all islands
in the Spratly region. According to Marcus Hall's "Trouble Brewing
in the South China Sea" assessment, China entered the dispute in
three phases.(9) The first phase encompassed China's claim to the
Paracel Islands (which are north of the Spratly Islands) in the
1950s. The second phase took place in 1974, when China seized the
Paracel Islands from Vietnam. The third phase began on 14 March
1988, with China's military engagement with Vietnamese forces over
the removal of China's flag from a newly claimed shoal. The
military clash resulted in China gaining possession of 6 islands in
the Spratly region.
China's claim to all islands in the Spratly archipelago stems from
its historical presence in the region, dating as far back as the
Han dynasty of the 2nd century, BC.(10) According to Marcus Hall's
evaluation, China's historical claim is dubious and neglects
similar historical claims by Taiwan, Vietnam and Malaysia.(11)
Moreover, China's historical interpretation of its sovereignty
rights ignores current international law.
- The Philippines:
- claim
approximately 60 of islands in the Spratly region. Joint
exploration with Royal Dutch/Shell Group and Alcorn International
near the Palawan Island will raise the Philippines annual oil
production from the 3,000 b/d produced in 1991 from 7 wells in the
South China Sea.(12)
- Vietnam:
- claims part of
islands in the Spratly region. Vietnam's only oil well in
production as of 1991 is the White Tiger field, 400 km west of the
Crestone block. In 1992, however, Vietnam hastened leasing to
foreign exploration.(13)
- Taiwan:
- claims all islands
in the Spratly region. The Spratly Islands are strategically
important to Taiwan for two reasons: (1) important shipping lanes
pass through waters surrounding the Spratly Islands; and, (2) the
South China Sea, in general, is fish abundant. Thus, Taiwan feels
compelled to protect its interests.(14)
- Malaysia:
- is the earliest
oil operator in the sea and claims 3 islands and 4 rock groups in
the Spratly region. As of 1992, Malaysia was running 90 oil-
producing wells, with $210 million planned for further development
between 1992 and 1995.(15)
- Brunei:
- claims the Louisa
Reef in the Spratly region, located adjacent to its coastline.
Brunei became an active player in the Spratly disputes only within
recent years. Production of its 9 oil fields in the South China
Sea hovers around 143,000 b/d.(16)
Indirect Actors:
- the United States:
- The
United States could become involved on two fronts -- commercial and
military. U.S. businesses participating in off-shore exploration
in the disputed islands have a commercial stake in how inter-state
tension and disputed claims are resolved. On the military side,
the United States has a mutual defense pact with the Philippines,
yet analysts indicate the Spratly disputes are unlikely to invoke
the pact.(17) The United States would, however, likely take action
if maritime activity was restricted in a manner inconsistent with
international law.
- Japan:
- Like the United
States, Japan has a vested interest in the resolution of the
Spratly disputes. The disputed region is located near Japan's
principal oil imports' shipping lanes. Moreover, Japanese
companies are involved in some of the exploration endeavors in the
disputed territory.
- ASEAN members:
- ASEAN
members are concerned that the U.S. withdrawal of military troops
from the region and the Soviet Union's disintegration will leave
the region without a counterbalance to China.(18) Although many
western analysts view China's military capabilities as obsolete,
China's military might in the ASEAN region is still superior, both
quantitatively and qualitatively.
The following table depicts the military strength of each of the
three main actors in the Spratly disputes -- China, Vietnam and the
Philippines.
Main Actors'
Military Strength(26)
| China | Vietnam | the
Philippines |
Tanks | 9,200 | 2,000 | 126 |
Submarines | 51 | 0 | 0 |
Destroyers and
Frigates | 55 | 7 | 1 |
Patrol
and Coastal Aircraft | 870 | 55 | 44 |
Combat
Aircraft | 5,845 | 190 | 43 |
Armed
Forces | 2,930,000 | 572,000 | 106,500 |
6. Type of Environmental Problem: Resource
7. Type of Habitat: Ocean
8. Act and Harm Sites:
Act Site Harm Site Example
China Pacific Ocean Acess to Oil Resources
9. Type of Conflict: Interstate
Disputes in the Spratly Islands have revolved around overlapping
territorial claims, particularly where potential gas and oil
reserves are involved. The Spratly Islands are also strategically
situated within the waterway servicing Japan with 70% of its
imports from the Middle East.(19)
Disputes have become more frequent in recent years, in part the
result of burgeoning energy demands in China. In an article
written by Japanese Professor, Shigeo Hiramatsu, China's inadequate
domestic oil-refinery and extraction capabilities inhibits China's
ability to increase energy production to meet rising demands.(20)
Consequently, China must either import more oil and gas, improve
its production capabilities, or undertake joint exploration of off-
shore areas to develop potential oil and gas fields.
Unfortunately, the third option will likely entail exploration in
the potentially oil-and-gas-rich Spratly Islands, where territorial
disputes are hotly contested.
Economic exploration endeavors appear to ignite the tenuous
stability in the Spratly region. China granted oil exploration
rights to foreign oil firms in territories with overlapping claims.
In 1992, China National Offshore Oil Corp signed a joint
exploration contract with Crestone Energy Corp. for a disputed area
in the Spratly Islands. The Sino-U.S. contract infuriated Vietnam,
who claimed the contract location is part of its exclusive economic
zone. The situation was further aggravated in 1996, when Vietnam
forged ahead with joint exploration plans in Spratly waters also
claimed by China. Vietnam awarded exploration rights to Conoco in
1996, infuriating China. China claims that the area covered in the
1996 Vietnam-Conoco deal overlaps with the block awarded to
Crestone Energy by China in 1992.(21)
The conflict is further exacerbated by foreign firms willing to
undertake riskier oil development projects in Asia. The foreign
oil firms are looking to profit from the current energy boom in
Asia as well as to find replacement reserves for those in the
United States and the North Sea where production approaches their
peak.(22)
Aside from granting foreign firms exploration rights in disputed
waters and conducting military exercises in the Spratly area, China
has also committed itself to the build-up of its navy and air
force. The Financial Times reported in August of 1996 that
China planned to purchase advanced navy radar from the British.
This radar would improve warning signals to China of 'impending'
attacks as well as facilitate naval task group deployment in the
South China Sea.(23) The islands are particularly strategic to
China.
10. Level of Conflict: Threat
- 1930s
- France first
occupied various Spratly islands.
- 1934-1944
- During WWII,
Japan displaced the French and occupied the Spratly Islands, using
the islands as a submarine base. After the war, neither the French
nor the Japanese returned to the islands.
- 1946
- Kuomintang forces took
possession of the Itu Aba island -- the largest Spratly island.
- 1968
- The Philippines take
control of 3 islands.
- 1973
- South Vietnam possessed 5
islands in the Spratlys
- 1974
- China disregards
territorial claims by South Vietnam, and occupies the Paracel
Islands lying north of the Spratly Islands. U.S. and South Vietnam
naval forces clash over island ownership.
- 1978
- The Philippines
extend an official claim to islands east of the Spratlys, naming
them the Freedom Islands. China removes 6 Spratly atolls from
Vietnam's possession.
- 1979
- Malaysia claims its
first Spratly island, indicating that the island is part of
Malaysia's continental shelf.
- 1988
- China and Vietnam become
military engaged over Johnson Reef. China retains occupation of
the reef. By April, Vietnam expands claims to include 15
additional reefs. China occupies 6 isles.
- 1989
- International outrage
at the Tiananmen Square incident in China calmed China's aggression
in the South China Sea, in an attempt to further avoid infuriating
international opinion.
- 1992
- The Manila
declaration was drafted and claimats agreed to peaceful resolution
of the disputes.
- 1992
- On 25 February 1992,
China passed the "Territorial Sea and Contiguous Zones" Law, laying
claim to all Spratly islands, as well as several other
archipelagos.
- 1992
- In May, China
National Offshore Oil Corp. signed a joint exploration contract
with Crestone Energy Corp. for the 25,1255 sq km Wan'an Bei-21
block in the Spratly Islands.(28) Exploration is set to begin in
1994. Vietnam vehemently opposes this contract.
- 1992
- In July, China
occupied Da Lac Reef, serving as its first military presence since
the 1988 clash with Vietnam.
- 1992
- In September, China drills on
the Vietnamese side of the Gulf of Tonkin median line, violating
the 1972 agreement not to drill in disputed waters.
- 1994
- In November, Exxon
concludes a US$35 billions gas field exploration deal in the area
north of Natuna Island, a region partly claimed by China. Vietnam
signs an exploration deal with Mobil in Vietnam's EEZ, but in
waters also claimed by China.
- 1995
- In February, China
occupied the Philippine-claimed Mischief Reef in the Spratly
Islands.
- 1995
- In March, the
Philippine forces seize Chinese fishing boats and destroy Chinese
markers on Mischief Reef.
- 1996
- Vietnam's PetroVietnam signed
a deal with the U.S.-based Conoco oil company to explore waters 400
km southeast of Ho Chi Minh CIty.
- 1997
- In March, China allegedly
began operating the Kan Tan III oil rig in an area north of the
Spratly Islands, but within Vietnam's EEZ.
How the events in the Spratly Islands unfold have far-reaching
implications. The resolution of Spratly-related disputes will not
only impact the distribution of sovereignty and exploration rights,
but also implicate how future economic and security arrangements
will develop in southeast Asia.
Joint Development:
A 1992 ASEAN declaration, endorsed by China, stipulated that
Spratly-related territorial disputes would be resolved by peaceful
means. China, however, proceeded with foreign company contracts to
explore areas with overlapping sovereignty claims in 1994, and in
1995 destroyed Philippino military structures and erected Chinese
concrete markers on the Philippine-claimed Mischief Reef. These
antagonistic moves by China, virtually renders the 1992 joint
declaration null and void.
The UN Convention on the Law of the Sea and the World
Court:
Issues pertaining to the territorial control of sea
waters have long been the subject of international law. Although
there are some generally accepted rules of maritime shipping and
the extension of a state's territorial limits, emphasis in recent
years on potential undeveloped sea resources has generated a number
of inter-state disputes around the globe (29) Undersea oil
exploration has been particularly contentious. The former Soviet
Union in 1960 extended by 12 miles, its territorial waters. Other
countries claim a 200-mile off-shore territorial zone. To resolve
disputes and regulate issues, the United Nations drafted the Law of
the Sea Convention (UNCLOS) in 1982. The UNCLOS is aimed at
establishing coastal boundaries, erecting an International Seabed
Authority to regulate seabed exploration not within territorial
claims, and to distribute revenue from regulated exploration. As
of 1990, only 42 of the required 60 ratifications to make the
Convention effective were completed.
Article 56 of the treaty outlines parameters for the establishment
of a country's Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), which extends 200
nautical miles from the country's coastline. Article 56 gives
sovereign rights for exploration, exploitation, conservation, and
resource management of living and non-living natural resources of
waters in the country's EEZ. The UNCLOS further attempts to
exclude rocks incapable of sustaining human habitation. The
problem, however, stems from the country's right to define the
natural feature as a rock or an island.(30)
Aside from defining an EEZ, the UNCLOS also contains parameters for
a country's continental shelf in article 77. The continental shelf
is defined as the underwater portion of the country's coastal land
mass -- including the sea bed as well as the subsoil of the shelf.
The deep ocean floor, however, is not considered part of a
country's continental shelf.(31)
The third important part of the UNCLOS is Part VI, which justifies
claims by Brunei, Malaysia and the Philippines. Justification is
based on proximity, not history; hence, China's and Taiwan's
historical claims would not likely win arbitrated cases.
In May of 1996, China's parliament passed a resolution to approve
the Law of the Sea UN Convention. Signing onto the Convention
would enable China to extend its exclusive economic sea zone to 340
km.(32) Yet, it remains unknown whether China will follow through
with its pledge to become a signatory.
Aside from the UNCLOS, the World Court (International Court of
Justice) could also serve as a conduit to resolve the Spratly-
related territorial disputes. In order for the World Court to hear
a case, however, all disputants must be willing to permit the Court
to hear the case and render a binding decision. James Kiras
believes that China will be unwilling to take this conflict
resolution route, given that China claims rights to a sea area
extending 1,000 nautical miles south of Hong Kong. Kiras cites
four motives driving China's resistance to international
arbitration: (1) land-based resource scarcity; (2) population
growth; (3) aspirations to become a regional naval power; and, (4)
territorial claims far exceed anything established in existing
international maritime law.(33)
Consultative or Semiofficial Intergovernmental Forum:
Ali Alatas, the Indonesian Foreign Minister, suggested that
political conflicts in the region need to be diffused by a
consultative or semiofficial intergovernmental forum.(34) China,
however, has continued to acquire territory by means of force
rather than through diplomatic negotiations. This was evident in
China's acquisition of the Paracel Islands from South Vietnam in
1974, and again in 1988 when China clashed with Vietnam over
Johnson Reef in the Spratly Islands. See Time
Line for a list of conflicts and disputes. According to a 1995
article from The Economist, China has resisted suggestions
to expand the purview of ASEAN's Regional Forum (ARF) to include
Spratly-related disputes. China emphasizes that the forum is to
exchange views not to negotiate.(35)
A senior fellow with the Programme on International Economics and
Politics, Mark Valencia, envisions a cooperative regime, whereby
China and Taiwan lay aside their 'historic' claim to the region for
a 51% share of the 'multilateral Spratly Development Authority'
(SDA).(36) The SDA would be responsible for managing resource
exploration and exploitation. The Spratly region would become
demilitarized and authority disputes set aside. Mr. Valencia
admits that the cooperative regime is not perfect, yet asserts that
this type of arrangement should be considered. Otherwise, inaction
and gridlock may inhibit the development of a collective security
agreement for the region.
Asian Executives Poll:
In a 7 November 1996 poll, 47.6% of Asian business leaders
indicated the Philippines had the strongest claim to the Spratly
Islands. China accounted for 24.1% of the vote, while Vietnam
claimed 13.9% of the vote, Malaysia picked up 9.6%, Taiwan carried
3.6%, and Brunei captured 1.2% of the business leaders'
votes.(37)
11. Fatality Level of Dispute: 0
12. Environment-Conflict Link and Dynamics: Direct
To date, military confrontation has been limited and the number of
casualties have been low. Yet, failure to peacefully resolve
sovereignty disputes places the region in a fragile state of
stability. Exploration endeavors undertaken by China in March 1997
increase the uncertainty surrounding China's willingness to
cooperate on sovereignty disputes in the South China Sea and raise
the question of what are China's larger, regional intentions. In
a 1996 analysis of China's military modernization program, author
Felix Chang identifies control over the Spratly Islands as a long-
term objective of China. According to Chang, China will refrain
from igniting a full-fledged military assault until it is certain
that its military forces are strong enough to dominate the forces
of others.(24)
China has provoked, however, limited military clashes in pursuit of
exerting control in the region. According to Kevin Muehring's
Institutional Investor article, China's military exercises
in the Taiwan Strait in 1996 and its aggressive behavior in the
Spratly Islands may be indicative of China's larger, long-term
regional ambitions.(25) Thus, China's actions in the Spratly
Islands may form one part of China's plan to exert greater control
in the larger East/Southeast Asian region.
Although China is unquestionably the most active claimant in
building its military, the other actors are preparing for a
possible armed clash. In 1990, Malaysia announced the erection of
a submarine base and proposed a free trade port on Labuan Island,
situated near the Spratly Islands. Taiwan asserted the right to
sea and air patrols over its Spratly claims in 1992. Moreover, the
Philippines is building up its naval forces. Yet, China's build-up
endeavors surpass all other parties' efforts. Defense spending has
been rising as a percentage of total budget expenditures and naval
and air force fleets have been targeted for extensive
modernization.(27)
Natural Resources (+)----> CONFLICT <---- (+) Territory
Demand ^
|
Cultural Perception (Differences +)
13. Level of Strategic Interest: Regional
Exploration and territorial claims of the Spratly Islands did not
get underway until the 1930s. In fact, prior to the 1950s, the
Spratly Islands were largely regarded as a navigational hazard, not
as a potential natural resource reservoir.
14. Outcome of Dispute: Stalemate
15. Related ICE and TED Cases
ICE Cases
KALIMAN
FALK
KUWAIT
CODWAR
KURILE
DIAOYU
GUANO
AEGEAN
CANFISH
16. Relevant Websites and Literature
Relevant Literature
"Article on Objective of Chinese Naval Buildup." Tokyo
Ekonomisuto 27 Jan 1997: 36-37.
"Asian Executives Poll." 7 Nov 1996.
http://www.abn.com.sg/polls/aep/aep961107.html.
"Asia: What, No
Kow-Tow?" The Economist. Vol 335 No 7916. 27 May 1995:
31+.
"Beijing Said to Warn SRV Against Spratlys Oil Deal." Hong Kong
Standard. 11 Apr 1996.
Calder, Kent E. "Asia's Empty Tank." Foreign Affairs Vol
75 No 2. Mar/Apr 1996: 55+.
Chang, Felix K. "Beyond the Unipolar Moment: Beijing's Reach in
the South China Sea." Orbis. Summer 1996: 353-374.
Chien, Chung. "Strategic Importance of the Islands in the South
China Sea and a Discussion of Essential Defense Measures for the
ROC." Taipei Chien-Tuan K'e-chi (Defense Technology
Monthly. 1 Jun 1996: 81-85.
"China Takes to the Sea." The Economist. 29 Apr 1995:
41-42.
"China to Buy British Advanced Navy Radar." Financial
Times. 6 Aug 1996: 1.
"Editorial Hopes for Peaceful
Solution to Spratly Dispute." Hong Kong Standard. 8 Jun
1996: 10.
Hall, Marcus. "Trouble Brewing in the South China Sea."
http://psirus.sfsu.edu/IntRel/IRJournal/sp95/hall.html.
Heinemann, Rigby. "The Spratly Islands Dispute."
http://www.reedbooks.com.au/heinemann/hot/sprat.html.
Kiras, James. "The South China Sea: Issues of a Maritime
Dispute." Peacekeeping & International Relations. Jul/Aug
1995: 3-4.
"Military Strength of China, Vietnam, and the Philippines."
http://www.reedbooks.com.au/heinemann/hot/spratab.html.
Marsh, Nicholas. "The Spratly Islands Dispute."
http://snipe.ukc.ac.uk/international/dissert.dir/marsh.html.
Muehring, Kevin. "Some Cold War II Investment Scenarios."
Institutional Investor. Vol 30 No 4. Apr 1996: 19+.
"Risk and Return." The Economist. 27 Apr 1996: 66.
"Spratly Islands."
http://www.odci.gov/cia/publications/95fact/pg.html.
"Territorial Disputes Simmer in Areas of South China Sea." Oil
& Gas Journal. Vol 90 No 28. 13 Jul 1992: 20+.
Valencia, Mark J. "A Spratly Solution." Far Eastern Economic
Review. Vol 157 No 13. 31 Mar 1994: 30.
End Notes:
(1) "Territorial Disputes Simmer in Areas of South China Sea."
(2) Calder, Kent. "Asia's Empty Tank."
(3) ibid.
(4) a. http://www.odci.gov/cia/publications/95fact/pg.html; b.
Kiras, James. "The South China Sea: Issues of a Maritime
Dispute."
(5) http://www.odci.gov/cia/publications/95fact/pg.html.
(6)
Heinemann, Rigby. "The Spratly Islands Dispute."
(7) Kiras, James. "The South China Sea: Issues of a Maritime
Dispute."
(8) Marsh, Nicholas. "The Spratly Islands
Dispute."
(9) Hall, Marcus. "Trouble Brewing in the South China Sea."
(10) Marsh, Nicholas. "The Spratly Islands Dispute."
(11) Hall, Marcus. "Trouble Brewing in the South China Sea."
(12) "Territorial Disputes Simmer in Areas of South China Sea."
(13) ibid.
(14) "Scholar Advocates Strengthening Hold on Disputed
Islands."
(15) "Territorial Disputes Simmer in Areas of South
China Sea."
(16) ibid.
(17) "China Takes to the Sea."
(18) Kiras, James. "The South China Sea: Issues of a Maritime
Dispute."
(19) "Beijing Said to Warn SRV Against Spratlys Oil
Deal."
(20) "Article on Objective of Chinese Naval
Buildup."
(21) "Risk and Return."
(22) "Risk and Return."
(23) "China to Buy British Advanced Navy Radar."
(24) Chang, Felix K. "Beyond the Unipolar Moment: Beijing's Reach
into the South China Sea." p 374.
(25) Muehring, Kevin. "Some Cold War II Investment Scenarios."
(26) http://www.reedbooks.com.au/heinemann/hot/spratab.html (27)
Hall, Marcus. "Trouble Brewing in the South China Sea."
(28)
"Territorial Disputes Simmer in Areas of South China Sea."
(29)
Rouke, John T. International Politics on the World Stage.
p 486-488.
(30) Marsh, Nicholas. "The Spratly Islands
Dispute."
(31) Marsh, Nicholas. "The Spratly Islands Dispute."
(32) "Editorial Hopes for Peaceful Solution to Spratly Dispute.
(33) Kiras, James. "The South China Sea: Issues of a Maritime
Dispute."
(34) "Territorial Disputes Simmer in Areas of South
China Sea."
(35) "Asia: What, No Kow-Tow?"
(36) Valencia, Mark J. "A Spratly Solution."
(37) "Asian Executives Poll: Results for November 7, 1996."