BOOK REVIEWS

China’s Policy in the East China Sea: The Role of Crisis Management Mechanism Negotiations with Japan (2008-2015)

Sovereignty over the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands and the establishment of a maritime boundary with Japan in the East China Sea are two of China’s remaining territorial disputes, and a foreign and national security policy priority in Beijing. The disputes have been a source of instability in China-Japan relations, with risks of military conflict arising from their overall strategic rivalry in East Asia but also from more specific military activities in the disputed areas, which in a worst case scenario could lead to unplanned collisions. This second type of risk has considerably increased in recent years as a result of China’s decision to establish a more regular presence in the areas claimed by Japan, especially around the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands, which Japan controls administratively – and for which the government of Japan does not recognise the existence of a sovereignty dispute. (1)

The history of China’s policy on territorial disputes shows a willingness to compromise to reach final border settlements under certain circumstances. Taylor Fravel has demonstrated that counterintuitively, domestic insecurity was a factor of compromise in negotiations over land boundaries, while a decline of bargaining power was a factor in military escalation. (2) In maritime disputes, Fravel showed that China constantly pursued delay, with two decisions to use force in the South China Sea – against Vietnam in the Paracels (1974) and the Spratlys (1988). (3) Delay is precisely what Deng Xiaoping advised for the East China Sea and the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands when he famously said in 1978 that the two sides “should set the issue aside for a while” because it was not “an urgent issue” and one for which “the next generation will have more wisdom.” (4)

In recent years, however, tensions over the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands resulted in the appearance of crisis management negotiations on the agenda of China-Japan relations, while the negotiation of a settlement of the sovereignty dispute appeared to be completely unrealistic.