Introduction 3

states. The second examines in detail the geopolitics of the disputes under
consideration. The final section considers the prospects for the management and
resolution of the maritime territorial disputes in the East and South China seas.
Territory, natural resources, and power competition are all driving forces in the
Senkaku/Diao yu dispute. The coexistence of the three components of geopolitics
has the potential of leading to a dangerous escalation of the situation. The disputed
territory is at an impasse as none of the parties is willing to make concessions on
its sovereignty claims. The dispute over sovereignty has also caused repeated
diplomatic rows between China, Japan, and Taiwan and it has evoked strong
nationalist sentiments domestically in the claimant states. The respective
governments have, however, largely sought to monitor patriotic nationalism in
order to maintain stable diplomatic ties and economic relations. The Senkaku/Diao
yu dispute has also been influenced by access to gas and oil deposits as well as
fisheries. That said, the oil and gas reserves of the East China Sea have remained
uncertain. Finally, Japan is in physical control of the disputed islands and has
superior defense capabilities and equipment relative to the other disputants. Yet,
this situation of power asymmetry is gradually shifting toward growing naval
competition, as China continues to make advances in strengthening its own naval
capabilities.
Circumstances pertaining to the Senkaku/Diao yu dispute have generally echoed
domestic popular nationalist sentiments and energy pressures in China, Japan, and
Taiwan as well as the ongoing importance of such considerations in bilateral and
trilateral relations. However, the recent improvement of Sino-Japanese relations
has softened the geopolitical conditions influencing the Senkaku/Diao yu issue and
made possible joint exploration and development in the East China Sea. Bilateral
ties have warmed significantly since late 2006, leading to the successful visit of
Chinese President Hu Jintao to Japan in May 2008. This contributed to the signing
of a bilateral agreement in June 2008 on the joint development of gas deposits in
a specific area of the East China Sea.
In the South China Sea disputes, we see similar geopolitical considerations
driving the conflict. The Paracel and Spratly Islands are at the center of competing
territorial, economic, and strategic interests, making the disputes reminiscent of
those seen in the East China Sea. The three components of geopolitics have in recent
years acted in a divergent manner, however. The question of sovereignty remains
an escalating attribute central to the disputes. The claimant states have not yet
succeeded in shelving the sovereignty issue in an attempt to improve Sino-Southeast
Asian diplomatic and economic relations. Instead, none of the claimants are willing
to make concessions on sovereignty, leaving the disputes at an impasse. Moreover,
the territorial claims still have nationalist importance in the states concerned,
especially in China, the Philippines, and Vietnam. Still, the disputants have at
least attempted in recent years to defuse tensions in the South China Sea, with China
shifting its behavior vis-à-vis the Southeast Asian countries.
In contrast to the sovereignty question, some initial de-escalating trends have
been observed with regards to natural resources. Potential oil and gas reserves in
the South China Sea have remained uncertain. In March 2005 some claimant states