|
|
|
|
|
|
by itp
3471 days ago
|
|
|
My understanding is that despite a lot of hilariously vague statements, the Chinese have never made a formal claim to this area, and what limited claims they have made have been rejected by tribunal in the Hague. Thus, international waters. |
|
|
The long and short? The Qing Dynasty had territory over these islands before WWII. It was never a powerful naval power. The Japanese took them and more during WWII. The US (San Fran Conference, Cairo Conference, Potsdam Conference) demanded the Japanese remove themselves from these islands (including Spratlys, Paracels), and give islands back to China (including, notably, Taiwan). China, during the Cold War, traded some ownership back and forth with Vietnam of Pacific islands in SCS in order to avoid their being involved in Cold War disputes.
Now China is seeking, for National Security purposes, to build infrastructure (including civilian, rescue, emergency response, shipping and military) on these islands. The United States sees this as area access/area denial - it could be denied the ability to project naval power into this area. The Chinese want to be able to protect naval trade, and protect themselves from their historical vulnerability (embargo).
US has tried multiple ways to prevent or slow this project. A recent effort to get the Philippines to contest the waters failed when the Philippines backed off of their claim.
Western reporting likes to present the South China Sea as a consensus, but it's not. It's been very difficult for the United States to get Asian Countries - those involved in the area - to side with the United States about the waters and their future.