Power Analysis and Geopolitical Codes of South China Sea States in the Context of Contemporary Geopolitics

The analysis in this article provides an overview of the research on the current relations among countries of the South China Sea basin. For this purpose, I have decided to apply the geopolitical research workshop, focusing on its contemporary approach. On the one hand, this work uses the available indicators and index to gauge the level of development, economic and demographic potential, and military expenditure of these states. On the other hand, an effort was made to analyze and measure power, taking into account the changing geopolitical status of countries in this sub-region.
Contemporary geopolitics in this context allows to verify the scale of the impact on permanent environmental and geographic factors (e.g. publicized investments carried out by the People’s Republic of China in Mischief Reef, Fiery Cross, Subi Reef and Woody Island) and the elaboration of proposals going beyond the classical, geopolitical framework (morphological, political and military factors). Therefore, this article also includes the use of geopolitical codes to assess the current strategies of these countries and to describe potential scenarios of actors’ behaviour in the sub-region.

REFERENCES:

• Acharya, A. (2001). Constructing a Security Community in Southeast Asia. ASEAN and the problem of regional order. London, New York: Routledge.
• Chang Ch.-L. (2004). A Mesure of National Power. http://www.analytickecentrum.cz/upload/soubor/original/measure-power.pdf, [access: 26.07.2019].
• Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative, Center for Strategic & International Studies. (2017). China’s Big Three near completion. https://amti.csis.org/chinas-big-three-near-completion, 29.06.2017, [access: 02.06.2018].
• Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative, Center for Strategic & International Studies. (2017). China’s Continuing Reclamation in the Paracels. https://amti.csis.org/paracels-beijings-other-buildup/, 09.08.2017, [access: 03.06.2018].
• SIPRI. (2017). China Fears. https://www.sipri.org/, [access: 22.04.17].
• Church, P. (2012). A Short History of South-East Asia. John Wiley & Sons.
• CSIS Expert Working Group on the South China Sea, A Blueprint for a South China Sea Code of Conduct, South China Sea Expert Working Group, Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative.
• (2018). https://amti.csis.org/blueprint-for-south-china-sea-code-of-conduct/, [access: 24.07.2019].
• Daiss, T. (2018). How Oil Drives The South China Sea Conflict. Oilprice.com. https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/How-Oil-Drives-The-South-China-Sea-Conflict.html, 14.03.2018, [access: 02.06.2018].
• Day, T. (2002). Fluid Iron. State Formation in Southeast Asia, University of Hawai‘i Press, Honolulu.
• Friedman, G., Snyder, X., Ligon, Ch. (2017). Chinese Military Installations in the South China Sea. http://www.mauldineconomics.com/this-week-in-geopolitics/chinese-military-installations-in-the-southchina-sea, 27.03.2017, [access: 02.06.2018].
• Stratfor. (2017). Great Power Politics in the South China Sea. https://worldview.stratfor.com/article/great-power-politics-south-china-sea, 26.10.2015, [access: 23.05.18].
• Hart, M. (2018). Brunei Abandons South China Sea Claim for Chinese Finance. Geopolitical Monitor. 04.04.2018, https://www.geopoliticalmonitor.com/brunei-abandons-south-china-sea-claim-forchinese-finance, [access: 03.06.2018].
• Hastedt, G., Lybecker, D.L., Shannon, V.P. (2015). Cases in International Relations. Pathways to Conflict and Cooperation, Power Management in the South China Sea. Los Angeles: SAGE.
• Kelly, T., Kubo, N. (2017). Japan plans to send largest warship to South China Sea. http://www.reuters.com/article/us-japan-navy-southchinasea-exclusive-idUSKBN16K0UP?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=Social, 13.03.2017, [access: 03.06.2018].
• Center of International Relations. (2016). Morze Południowochińskie: serce potencjalnego konfliktu w Azji. Report, Warsaw, May.
• O’Tuathail, G., Dalby, S. (1998). Introduction: rethinking geopolitics: towards a critical geopolitics. In Rethinking geopolitics. London.
• Potulski, J. (2013). Morze Południowochińskie jako obszar konfliktów międzynarodowych. Gdańskie Studia Azji Wschodniej, No. 3.
• Potulski, J. (2010). Wprowadzenie do Geopolityki. Gdańsk: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Gdańskiego.
• Quang, N.M. (2019). Saving the China-ASEAN South China Sea Code of Conduct. The Diplomat. https://thediplomat.com/2019/06/saving-the-china-asean-south-china-sea-code-of-conduct/ [access: 25.07.2019].
• Geopolitical Monitor. (2018). South China Sea Dispute: China. https://www.geopoliticalmonitor.com/south-china-sea-dispute-china/, 08.05.2018, [access: 23.05.18].
• Sułek, M. (2010). O potęgonomii i potęgometrii. In Geopolityka. elementy teorii, wybrane metody i badania,. Z. Lach, J. Wendt (Eds.), Częstochowa: Instytut Geopolityki.
• Sykulski, L. (2014). Geopolityka. Częstochowa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Grategia.
• Tarnogórski, R. (2016). Przyczyny i konsekwencje arbitrażu w sprawie Morza Południowochińskiego.
• No. 45 (1395), 18.07.2016, the Polish Institute of International Affairs, Warsaw.
• Taylor, P.J., Flint, C. (2007). Political Geography: World-economy, Nation-state, and Locality. Harlow: Pearson Education. CIA. The World Factbook. https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook, [access: 02.06.2018].
• Treverton, G.F., Jones, S.G. (2005). Measuring National Power. RAND Corporation. https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/conf_proceedings/2005/RAND_CF215.pdf, [access: 26.07.2019].
• WTO. (2018). World Trade Statistical Review 2018. https://www.wto.org/english/res_e/statis_e/wts2018_e/wts2018_e.pdf, [access: 30.01.2019].
• Vatikiotis, M. (2019). Populism and identity politics damage Southeast Asian democracy. Nikkei Asian Review.
• Xuequan, M. (2017). Non-regional countries’ interference in South China Sea issue “worth maintaining vigilance”. Xinhua. http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/2017-07/28/c_136481286.htm, 28.07.2017, [access: 03.06.2018].