U.S. V. PRC: COMPARATIVE APPROACHES TO LAWFARE IN THE SOUTH CHINA SEA
Loading...
Authors
Marcinskas, Emil
Subjects
lawfare
South China Sea
international law
UNCLOS
South China Sea
international law
UNCLOS
Advisors
Candreva, Philip J.
Huntley, Todd, Georgetown University Law Center
Date of Issue
2024-12
Date
Publisher
Monterey, CA; Naval Postgraduate School
Language
Abstract
This thesis provides a comprehensive analysis of maritime territorial disputes in the South China Sea through the lens of lawfare—the strategic use of legal means to achieve military and political objectives. The research examines these disputes, focusing on claimed historic rights and the contentious Nine-Dash Line asserted by China. It analyzes China's military ambitions and compares them with the United States' stance on ensuring freedom of navigation and adherence to international law. Central to this study is the role of international law, particularly the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), and the differing perceptions of this legal framework by China and the United States. The 2016 ruling by the Permanent Court of Arbitration serves as a crucial point of analysis, highlighting China's non-participation and subsequent rejection of the decision, which challenged its extensive maritime claims. The thesis explores the concept of lawfare, detailing China's strategies, including land reclamation, domestic legislation, and military actions, as well as its broader strategy against Taiwan. It also examines and compares the United States' approach to lawfare and critiques from various perspectives. Finally, the thesis proposes strategies for the United States to enhance its lawfare approach.
Type
Thesis
Description
Series/Report No
Department
Organization
Identifiers
NPS Report Number
Sponsors
Funder
Format
Citation
Distribution Statement
Distribution Statement A. Approved for public release: Distribution is unlimited.
Rights
This publication is a work of the U.S. Government as defined in Title 17, United States Code, Section 101. Copyright protection is not available for this work in the United States.