Introduction
The South China Sea, the focal point of the historical disputes that have evolved into today’s geopolitical rivalries between several countries, all of which make claims over its waters and resources, is a key factor in international relations. Such tensions do not end at borders with strategic, economic, and environmental issues, also including the negative effects of climate change on all the peoples on the Earth. As the consequences of climate change continue to manifest themselves, the need for international cooperation increases and yet competition for resources in the South China Sea, particularly between the USA and China, becomes a barrier to this cooperation. This paper investigates an intricate issue of the South China Sea resource competition and climate change cooperation between the United States and China. The central research question guiding this study is: “How does the competition for natural resources in the South China Sea affect the lack of climate change cooperation between the United States and China?” The proposition is that competition for natural resources increases the disagreement between the United States and China, so they cannot successfully cooperate in addressing the climate change challenge. Such rising tensions make it difficult for the parties involved to cooperate smoothly in resolving this ever more demanding and challenging environmental crisis facing planet Earth. The purpose of this research is to reveal the intricacy of the geopolitics of today and the environmental problems, as well as the ways to overcome the obstacles of cooperation.
Research Gap
In existing literature, there is a lack of sufficient research on the direct implications of South China Sea disputes on global challenges, particularly on how resource competition in the South China Sea exacerbates the obstacles to cooperative efforts on climate issues (International Crisis Group, 2021).
Literature review
According to the International Crisis Group (2021), strategic rivalry between China and the United States has more and more dominated sovereignty issues in the South China Sea. The US-led international pushback against Beijing’s interpretation of international law has been made possible by China’s rising capability and intention to protect its interests in the region and use force to defend those interests. This competition undermines “the rules-based international order” initiated by the United States and is seen by China as a form of containment of its contributions to international society. Minimizing the risk of conflicts begins with building a law-abiding regional order led by the U.S. and China, recognizing the implications of increased competition for the coastal states’ rights, international law, and conflict risks. Not only are China and the U.S. responsible for working together with the other littoral states in the South China Sea, but these nations are also the keystones of peace and stability in the region.
According to Chubb (2021), the research article deals with the complexities of China’s assertiveness in the South China Sea as it focuses on unfolding the patterns of continuity as well as change in the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) policy. Through a new assertive state behavior typology and drawing on original data for time-series events (1970 to 2015), Chubb identifies a crucial policy shift in 2007, contradicting the existing view. This shift involved fast administrative construction and frequent coercive measures by China. The reasons for this development can be traced back to strategies developed in the 1990s, which are closely related to the shaping of these objectives in the 1970s. The study seeks to bridge the existing gaps in understanding China’s behavior by clearly defining and measuring assertive behavior, bringing significant benefits to policymakers and analysts. In this article, the author demonstrates the domestic and international factors that shape China’s maritime policy through four distinctive disjuncture sites. The theoretical debates on foreign policy change in the twenty-first century and the implications for regional stability are also being explored.
According to Lippert (2020), the rivalry between the United States and China emerged as a key factor determining the strategic debates globally. This rivalry, more and more the subject of discussion over the last two years, will continue to shape the political, military, and economic situation in the coming years. At the same time, the U.N. does not solve all international problems but often gives a frame for other actors to make their decisions. Rather, the shift from the “War on Terror” approach, particularly for the United States, to this confrontation has intensified amidst the pandemic, which might influence global governance and partnership. It should be noted, however, that even if there is a push towards strengthening international governance post-pandemic, the competition between the United States and China will continue to play a central role in international relations. As a result, we should expect more confrontation in different areas, such as the sphere of ideology, technology, trade, and economics. Thus, Germany and the European Union must develop an in-depth understanding of this conflict’s multi-faceted nature in order to effectively create unique and independent strategic approaches.
According to Medeiros (2019), the current direction of Sino-U.S. ties is very different from the past, with a rising level of rivalry and a set of new structural causes. This drives the need to question traditional engagement strategies. Across the spectrum of economics, security and geopolitics, the relationship has undergone immense shifts, initiated largely by a unique phenomenon that sets Asia apart: Its growing importance as a key region. Medeiros points out the structural competition which is linked to the Asian ascendancy, and it affects the scenario of international economy and security while bringing more close attention on China’s behaviour and its implications for world order and American interests. Security competition spreads far beyond the confines of the classical sphere, which comprises technology and governance codes; thus, not only does it create a complex security system, but it also results in an increase in tension around hot issues such as Taiwan and maritime disputes. With regard to the economy, the problem is that the competition from countries that have different interests is increasing. The example of China and its state-controlled economic policies that are contrary to U.S. interests and pose national security problems is the most evident. China’s Belt and Road initiative (BRI) is among the examples of this state of affairs. Such changes highlight the necessity of the authorities refusing to ignore the changing nature of the US-China relations and reacting resourcefully to meet the challenges of the present tense in order to guarantee the fulfilment of vital interests and peace in the region.
According to Stromseth (2019), the growing confrontation between the U.S. and China in Southeast Asia leads to the issue of being pushed to declare one’s support for either the United States or China. Stomseth looks at the geo-economic dimensions of this competition, which are the diffident strategic visions of both Beijing and Washington. While the FOIP strategy of the Trump administration portrays the conflict as a choice between “free” and “regressed” visions of the world order, the Southeast Asian nations are more sceptical of the stark tone coming out of the Trump Administration than China’s rising influence in this region. The leaders of the regional powers, including Singapore’s Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and Indonesia’s President Joko Widodo, advocate for unity and togetherness rather than alignment with one of the twin superpowers. Stromseth advocates for a reset in the U.S. policy towards Southeast Asia that primarily focuses on the need for lavishing rhetoric, encouraging economic openness and communicating with the countries in that region on their own terms. Consequently, according to Stromseth, this is a fundamental factor in retaining America’s influence and simultaneous prevention of a hegemonic power in the region.
According to Yang (2021), the analysis of marine ecological and environmental conditions by using a PSR-based methodology has become essential for correctly portraying the complexity of coastal seas, especially for countries like China with high human pressure and climate change. Yang and others generated an MHI system using the PSR framework, which shows spatiotemporal variations in marine health. The South China Sea has the best ecological health scores among other seawaters, such as the Yellow Sea, Bohai Sea, and East China Sea. On the provincial level, the coastal sea around Hainan province was mainly in good health, while other sea areas in other regions were in different degrees of health. The study revealed the effect of both natural and anthropic factors on marine health, in which diverse regions had different changes in MHI over time. Marine disasters and marine factors drove MHI changes at the regional scale, but human factors were more influential at the provincial scale. These results emphasize the need to include spatial scales in the marine health assessment and offer useful hints to marine managers for effective conservation and management policies.
According to O’Rourke, R. (2019), the most recent actions of China in the South China Sea (SCS) regarding island-building and the setting up of military bases have triggered fears among U.S. observers about booming Chinese influence in the Indo-Pacific region, which in terms of strategic, political, and economic significance is considered crucial for the Pacific region. These disputes between the territories, in addition to China’s accentuation of its control over the military operations in EEZ, have increased the tension, which has led to confront the Americans and their allies. These actions not only amplify the already international differences but also focus global opinion on China’s blatant violation of international law and its freedom of navigation. Such confrontation incidents may embolden global perceptions of China as a major power and China’s role in global talks about issues such as climate change. Hence, the study of resource competition is vital for the comprehensive review of the collaboration in combating the climate crisis between the U.S. and China.
According to Nguyễn (2023), climate change cooperation between the United States and China was affected due to the competition for natural resources in the South China Sea. Nguyễn described how the geopolitical significance of the South China Sea, encompassing its oil and gas resources, became the center of attention for both countries. This competition also created tensions and rivalries as each country focused on the economic and geopolitical interests of their states (2023). In conclusion, the conflict over resource allocation eclipsed the possibility of cooperation in global challenges like climate change. Consequently, Nguyễn argued that as long as the fundamental challenges associated with resource competition, such as diplomacy and conflict resolution mechanisms, are not in place, stable cooperation between China and the United States on climate change will hardly be achievable.
Theory
Independent and dependent variables
In this study, the independent variable is the competition for natural resources in the South China Sea, which encompasses disputes over territorial claims, fishing quotas, and exploration and exploitation operations among nations such as China, Taiwan, Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia, and Brunei. This competition is driven by opportunities related to national economies, energy security, and geopolitics, as the South China Sea holds significant reserves of oil, natural gas, fish, and minerals. On the other hand, the dependent variable is the lack of climate change cooperation between the USA and China, despite being the world’s largest economies and contributors to greenhouse gas emissions. These deficiencies show themselves in arguments between countries about emission reduction targets, technological cooperation, and global climate agreements. There is a complex interplay between these factors, which will intensify the disputes between the United States and China, undermine the diplomatic ties between the countries and hamper the fight against climate change. Therefore, this research is mainly focused on the causal link between resource conflict and climate change cooperation in order to develop efficient methods of solving regional conflicts in the South China Sea and environmental problems on a global scale. Understanding these dynamics helps policymakers and stakeholders to work as part of a team rather than opponents and achieve sustainable development goals.
Research Gap
The research gap, which already exists in the literature dynamics, pertains to the implications of South China Sea disputes for global challenges, such as cooperation in fighting climate change. On the other hand, the former neglected the fact that competition for resources in South China makes the achievement of joint environmental actions even harder. The research fails to acknowledge the fact that research should be developed that explicitly connects the South China Sea disputes with climate change cooperation for a comprehensive view of problems that the U.S. and China face in their cooperation. These studies demonstrate that geopolitical issues and environmental concerns are intricately manifested; therefore, policymakers and stakeholders must understand how interconnected and complex dynamics impact regional conflicts and global environmental threats. Moreover, it will focus on the ways of overcoming cooperative difficulties and, as a result, design a space for the mediation of regional instability and global environmental problems.
Justification
The geopolitical importance of the South China Sea, which is abundant in oil and gas reserves, promptly delineates the fierce competition between China and the U.S. to be the calling force in this area. As two strong global leaders with extensive energy needs, their quest for influence and territorial acquisitions in the region has increased the conflict and competition. Resource-based competition has contributed to escalations in existing geopolitical conflicts and has also called attention and resources away from the most pressing global problems, such as climate change. The zero-determination national interests in the region created more problems, cultivated distrust and damaged cooperation on the most important issues. Furthermore, competition and distrust have grown from disputes over maritime resources in the South China Sea to bilateral relationships with regard to climate change, where a collaborative approach is required to alleviate the global environmental consequences.
Logical Reasoning and Support
The geopolitical dynamics of the South China Sea reflect a fierce competition for resources, in which China and neighboring countries are the primary players. This competition has resulted in more military activities, i.e., the construction of artificial islands and the building of military bases, which have increased the tension levels and attracted the attention of some big powers, such as the United States. At the same time, claimant states like Vietnam and the Philippines increased their military capacity and formed alliances to build their positions in territorial disputes. These activities not only exacerbate tensions but also ultimately destroy the confidence between the neighboring states to develop cooperation. Additionally, the economic aspect of the conflict, which draws people with fishing grounds and energy resources in the region, has created more problems. The states seek control of such resources so as to ensure further economic growth and advantageous positions. This, at the same time, reinforces the competition and undermines the tensions. The interaction of commercial interests and territorial tussle makes the South China Sea problem even more complex. This, as a result, hinders both bilateral and multilateral cooperation at both regional and international levels, particularly those key challenges like climate change mitigation and biodiversity conservation.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the South China Sea’s resource competition that prevents both the U.S. and China from coomit on climate change brings difficult dilemmas into modern international relations. The escalation of this competition has resulted in greater disputes in the region and conflicts of a geopolitical nature, as well as fostered aggressive behaviors among claimant states. Tackling this problem not only makes it hard to resolve territorial disputes but it also neglects the key issues of bilateral relations, such as climate change issues. The zero-sum mentality, which reflects the geopolitical importance and economic stakes in the South China Sea area, helps China and the U.S. not to show any joint efforts on pressing global issues. Cooperative efforts for climate change call for it to be the case, but the resource competition in the region hinges on the smooth flow of coordination, which is crucial as an effective adaptation measure. However, in the future, solutions to the conflict in the South China Sea and the generation of a dialogue-friendly environment will be essential components influencing regional stability and efforts to address global climate change challenges and other environmental problems. Recognizing the interlinkage of maritime disputes and broader environmental governance is a precondition for the development of more complex policies that take account of both regional conflicts and global environmental issues, hence allowing peace and sustainable development to prevail on the international stage.
References
Chubb, A. (2021). PRC Assertiveness in the South China Sea: Measuring Continuity and Change, 1970–2015. International Security, 45(3), 79–121. https://doi.org/10.1162/isec_a_00400
International Crisis Group. (2021, November 29). Competing Visions of International Order in the South China Sea. International Crisis Group. https://www.crisisgroup.org/asia/north-east-asia/china/315-competing-visions-international-order-south-china-sea
Lippert, B., Perthes, V., & und Politik-SWP-Deutsches, S. W. (2020). Strategic rivalry between the United States and China: causes, trajectories, and implications for Europe. https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-68408-2
Medeiros, E. S. (2019). The Changing Fundamentals of US-China Relations. The Washington Quarterly, 42(3), 93–119.
Nguyễn Anh, C. (2023). The South China Sea for China, the United States, and what choice for Vietnam. Cogent Social Sciences, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2204570
O’Rourke, R. (2019). China’s actions in South and East China Seas: Implications for U.S. interests—Background and issues for congress. Congressional Research Service, 31.
Stromseth, J. (2019). Don’t Make Us Choose Southeast Asia in the throes of US-China rivalry The New Geopolitics Asia. https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/FP_20191009_dont_make_us_choose.pdf
Yang, W., Zhang, Z., Sun, T., Liu, H., & Shao, D. (2021). Marine ecological and environmental health assessment using the pressure-state-response framework at different spatial scales, China. Ecological Indicators, 121, 106965.
write