Sea Power, the Law of the Sea, and the Sino–Japanese East China Sea “Resource War”∗

Hsiung, James C.

doi:10.1080/10803920500433625

Cited by 5 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The Sino-Japanese territorial dispute China and Japan's testy relationship around the disputed Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands has most frequently been analysed as a case of resource competition, 90 virulent popular nationalism, and/or bitter memory politics. 91 Soft power, by contrast, is said to be 'almost entirely absent from the Beijing-Tokyo relationship today'.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Traversing the soft/hard power binary: the case of the Sino-Japanese territorial dispute

Hagström

Pan

2019

Rev. Int. Stud.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Soft power and hard power are conceptualised in International Relations as empirically and normatively dichotomous, and practically opposite – one intangible, attractive, and legitimate, the other tangible, coercive, and less legitimate. This article critiques this binary conceptualisation, arguing that it is discursively constructed with and for the construction of Self and Other. It further demonstrates that practices commonly labelled and understood as soft power and hard power are closely interconnected. Best understood as ‘representational force’ and ‘physical force’ respectively, soft and hard power intertwine through the operation of productive and disciplinary forms of power. We illustrate this argument by analysing the Sino-Japanese dispute over the Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands. Both governments exercise representational force in constructing their respective versions of events and Self/Other. The soft/hard power binary itself plays a performative role as the Self is typically associated with soft power and the Other with hard power. The operation of productive power, moreover, privileges the attractiveness of the former and the repellence of the latter, and disciplinary power physically enforces these distinctions on subjects in both states. Finally, reinforced Self/Other distinctions legitimise preparations for violence against the Other on both sides, thus exposing how fundamentally entangled soft and hard power are in practice.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Traversing the soft/hard power binary: the case of the Sino-Japanese territorial dispute

Hagström

Pan

2019

Rev. Int. Stud.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Until the beginning of the 21 st century, the Chinese authorities confined themselves to exploiting only the gas fields near the Chinese coast, but in 2003 Chinese petroleum corporations started planning construction of an oil platform situated only 5 kilometers from the line which Japan considered its EEZ boundary. 62 Tokyo protested, because there was a strong probability that China would extract oil from the Japanese side. The negotiations on this matter started in October 2004, but Beijing refused to share geological data which could verify Japanese suspicions.…”

Section: Instrumental Use Of the Yasukuni Controversy In China's Diplmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reaction to Popular Pressure or a Political Tool? Different Interpretations of China's Policy Regarding Koizumi's Visits to the Yasukuni Shrine

Zakowski¹

2012

J. Contemp. East. Asia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…This has implications over who could exploit the oil and gas deposits in the central area of the East China Sea, which could potentially go a long way to satisfying the energy needs of both countries. The dispute between the two countries stems from their welldocumented alternative interpretations of the 1982 UN Law of the Sea Convention (LOS) in accordance with two cardinal principles for maritime delimitation (Hsiung 2005).…”

Section: Realist Roots Of the Disputesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Maritime Territorial Disputes in East Asia: A Comparative Analysis of the South China Sea and the East China Sea

Yee

2011

Journal of Current Chinese Affairs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article systematically compares maritime territorial disputes in the East and South China Seas. It draws on the bargaining model of war and hegemonic stability theory to track the record of conflicts and shifts in the relative power balances of the claimants, leading to the conclusion that certainty and stability have improved in the South China Sea, with the converse happening in the East China Sea. To enrich the models, this article also considers social factors (constructivism) and arrives at the same conclusion. This calls for a differentiated methodological approach if we are to devise strategies to mediate and resolve these disputes.

show abstract

Sea Power, the Law of the Sea, and the Sino–Japanese East China Sea “Resource War”∗

Cited by 5 publications

References 0 publications

Traversing the soft/hard power binary: the case of the Sino-Japanese territorial dispute

Traversing the soft/hard power binary: the case of the Sino-Japanese territorial dispute

Reaction to Popular Pressure or a Political Tool? Different Interpretations of China's Policy Regarding Koizumi's Visits to the Yasukuni Shrine

Maritime Territorial Disputes in East Asia: A Comparative Analysis of the South China Sea and the East China Sea

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About