Nation State: Journal of International Studies P ISSN 2620-391X Vol. 3 No. 2 | December 2020 E ISSN 2621-735X ______Achieving Consensus in the South Sea: Explaining Bilateralism's Bane and 's Boon Mahbi Maulaya Department of International Relations, Universitas Muhammadiyah Yogyakarta – Indonesia Email: [email protected] Submitted: 10 August 2020 | Accepted: 25 December 2020 Abstract A prolonged debate arises whether bilateralism or multilateralism is the most effective path to achieve mutual consensus among parties in the South China Sea dispute. This study identifies bilateral approach negativity to settle such a complex and overlapping dispute existed in that area grounded by two considerations. First, bilateralism is a non-transparent scheme of bargaining process. Due to bilateral implementation only conducted by two states, the more powerful actor will escape from the scrutiny of others, thus making it possesses the opportunity to put forward discriminatory bid and robust sphere to suppress other party’s stance. The bilateral approach would result in a non-consensus agreement for less powerful parties. Second, the conflictual area draws the involvement of more than three sovereign parties with overlapping claims. Multilateralism, negotiation framework for multi-parties, is the most, perhaps the only, promising path to ease the existing tension numerous parties into the stage of consensus. Moreover, multilateralism may present positive norms – transparency and non-unilateralism – that could guide the involving parties to create consensus. The analysis of this paper obtained from utilization of qualitative data, library research methods, and by the comprehension of three conceptual frameworks, bilateralism, multilateralism, and consensus. Keywords: Bilateralism, Consensus, Multilateralism, Resolution, South China Sea. Abstrak Debat panjang tentang apakah bilateralisme atau multilateralisme yang dapat dijadikan cara paling efektif untuk mencapai kemufakatan di antara pihak-pihak sengketa Laut China Selatan. Studi ini mengidentifikasi sisi negatif pendekatan bilateral untuk menyelesaikan sengketa Laut China Selatan yang kompleks yang didasari oleh dua pertimbangan. Pertama, bilateralisme adalah sebuah skema negosiasi yang tidak transparan. Karena bilateralisme hanya dilakukan dua negara, aktor yang paling kuat akan terbebas dari pengawasan aktor lain. Sebab itu, aktor yang paling kuat memiliki kesempatan untuk mengutarakan tawaran diskriminatif karena ia memiliki kemampuan untuk menekan aktor lain. Dalam suasana ini, pendekatan bilateral akan menghasilkan persetujuan yang jauh dari kemufakatan dan tidak memuasakan bagi aktor yang lemah. Kedua, konflik ini melibatkan kehadiran lebih dari tiga aktor dengan klaim yang saling bertabrakan. Multilateralisme, kerangka negosiasi banyak aktor, adalah jalan yang paling menjanjikan untuk meredakan tensi aktor untuk mencapai mufakat. Selain itu, multilateralisme juga dapat menghadirkan norma positif - transparansi dan non-unilateralisme – sehingga dapat memandu para pihak yang terlibat untuk menciptakan konsensus. Analisis studi ini diperoleh dari penggunaan data kualitatif, metode penelitian tinjauan pustaka, dan tiga kerangka teori, bilateralism, multilateralisme, dan konsensus. Kata Kunci: Bilateralisme, Konsensus, Multilateralisme, Resolusi, Laut Tiongkok Selatan.

INTRODUCTION Historically, the South China Sea confrontation (Tonnesson, 2001). It (SCS) dispute is the heritage of the past existed early before the creation of

170 Nation State: Journal of International Studies P ISSN 2620-391X Vol. 3 No. 2 | December 2020 E ISSN 2621-735X ______nation-state concept in Southeast (Marine Conservation Philippines, Asian region (Maksum, 2017). As the 2017). Furthermore, based on 2016’s wheel of trade became enormous in data, an estimated US$3.37 trillion scale and increased in priority, the worth of global trade take across the beneficial geographical location of SCS SCS on an annual basis (How much risen local kingdoms’ desire to take trade transits, n.d.). This global trade control over it. Han Dynasty, flows accounts for a third of global Kingdom of Funan, Kingdom of maritime trade ( Angkor, Kingdom of Sriwijaya, Conference on Trade and Kingdom of Ayutthaya, Kingdom of Development, 2018). Champa, and Sultanate of Melaka were In early of the twentieth century, the entities which scrambling for SCS remained stable as border-meet power to dominate high-natural states concentrated their attention on resources and shipping lines in the area other unfolding disputes, whether in of water (Tonnesson, 2001). international political or their national The struggle of power in the SCS stage. No claimant states occupied a which started centuries ago yet still single island in the whole SCS area exist to this day is not merely a before the World War II. However, it competition without reason. SCS is an only lasts until China regarded itself extraordinarily crucial area of water in several features in the Spratly Islands a geo-economic consideration. It is the and Woody Islands in 1946 and early number two busiest sea lane around 1947 (Mirski, 2015). During the the globe, with over 10 million barrels mediation process of the San of crude oil a day shipped through it. Francisco Treaty in August 1951, Moreover, the area consists of oil Chinese foreign minister Zhou Enlai reserves of around 7.7 billion barrels, officially and publicly declared China's with an estimation of 28 billion barrels sovereignty over Paracel and Spratly in total. Natural gas reserves are Islands. Then, in September 1958, measured to total around 266 trillion China reemphasized its claim to these cubic feet (U.S. Report, 2013). islands when it proclaimed the rights According to scientific research to territorial waters during the Second conducted by the Department of Strait Crisis (Jinmen crisis). Environment and Natural Resources This event marked China’s first of the Philippines, SCS territory holds attempt of China to anchor its one-third of the world's most immense assertion of maritime rights, in this ocean biodiversity, thus making it a case, the authority of territorial waters. vital area of flora and fauna ecosystem From the mid-1970s to this date,

171 Nation State: Journal of International Studies P ISSN 2620-391X Vol. 3 No. 2 | December 2020 E ISSN 2621-735X ______Chinese government’s official have because all of them proposing similar used the same language to delineate sovereignty claims on Spratly Islands China's sovereignty claim. The claim is and Paracel Islands, the two most commonly sound as "China takes paramount islands in SCS. Those possession of indisputable sovereignty over the parties have an extraordinary level of Spratly Islands (or South China Sea islands) confidence to defend their claims and adjacent waters.” (Fravel, 2011). based on historical and geographical In this decade, the SCS dispute backgrounds (SCMP Reporter, 2019). significantly dominate topics of news Not only did overlapping claims reports and researches. The escalating that exist, but also the involving states’ dispute of SCS risen when China approach to deal with, or to resolve capturing world attention in 2009 since this longstanding and convoluting it officially submitted the nine-dash- dispute are contradictive to each other. line map to United Nations. The new China’s tendency to discuss the Chinese maritime map, which dispute by bilateral approach is widely considered by Jason Thomas as a recognized, while other involving tongue-shaped justification, was states, such as the Philippines (under intended to define China’s authority President Aquino III), well-known for on a vast plot of the SCS. To show that its multilateral approach and they are not playing around with their preference to internationalize the claims, Chinese government’s put the issue. In this sense, a debate arises nine-dash-line map into the Chinese among scholars in questioning official maps and passports (Thomas, whether bilateralism or multilateralism 2019). Michaela Del Callar, a GMA can serve to be the most effective path News analyst, believes that these to build consensus among the actions are steps for China to conflicting actors and simultaneously strengthen its claims among some resolve the conflict. The underlying emerging debates. Brunei, Malaysia, presumption of this study is in a the Philippines, Taiwan, and Vietnam contrasting position with several have responded by detesting China's realists, which implies a distinctive offensive claims on the territory tendency to defend bilateral practice in (Callar, 2013). This circumstance then SCS. This study inserts some led to the tension growth among the theoretical arguments suggesting that involving parties (Trang, 2019). multilateralism is the most competent Brunei, China, Malaysia, Taiwan, means to escort the conflicting parties the Philippines, and Vietnam hold to consensus stage and undebatable overlapping territorial demands resolution. The following section of

172 Nation State: Journal of International Studies P ISSN 2620-391X Vol. 3 No. 2 | December 2020 E ISSN 2621-735X ______this study addresses the exploration on case, but also a broad dimension of the existing literature related to this political, economic, and social issues. study’s topic. The next segment In this scenario, Snyder suggests that examines the used-conceptual multilateral cooperative security, framework in a semi-depth which facilitating forum of discussion, explanation. The subsequent feature is negotiation, cooperation, and the elaboration for understanding the compromise, can work as an essential underlying logic and interest of China catalyst for gradual thawing of tension in SCS and also its preference for in SCS (Snyder, 1997). bilateral approach. Then, the Christopher Roberts has an eye- substantive discussion will be catching way of portraying downplayed by explaining both how multilateralism in SCS that he prefers bilateralism will not be valid and how to use the terms of multi-faceted, multi- multilateralism can serve in otherwise. layered, and multi-tiered. He argued that multilateralism-related activities LITERATURE REVIEW should be developed and its boundary Various scholars notions about could be extended further from the multilateralism-related issues in SCS existing ASEAN’s good offices. In the has popped up. Craig A. Snyder lens of Roberts, ASEAN is relatively expressed a notion that the creation of impotent to give satisfying results, due security-based multilateral to its limited capacity, in responding to arrangements in the SCS could pave a sensitive geostrategic problem such the way for maintaining pacific relation as in the SCS. ASEAN’s tendency to and peace among the relevant states. pursue excellent effect of the Code of The approach of cooperative-security Conduct (CoC) turns to be hopeless action would become the alternative due to its mechanism remains opaque growth engine for developing mutual and the growing shadow of self- understandings of security based on interest from both ASEAN states and reassurance and transparency, China. Given this circumstance, cultivating habits of dialogue and Roberts has a suggestion on his mind cooperation among the involving that ASEAN states should support the states, increasing the effectiveness of attempt to internationalize the issue by preventative diplomacy mechanism, addressing it to legal arbitration, as like and establishing an informal or ad hoc the Philippines modus operandi under security policies. Moreover, the Aquino III (Roberts, 2017). proposed framework of cooperation The SCS dispute classified as a does not limit itself to discuss security good sample of a “conflict with high-

173 Nation State: Journal of International Studies P ISSN 2620-391X Vol. 3 No. 2 | December 2020 E ISSN 2621-735X ______level of conflict management”. The picture and emphasize the negativity preservation of Track-1 and Track-2 of bilateralism if it applied to deal with diplomacy have often been attributed a dispute involving more than three exclusively to this matter. Mikael parties such as SCS. On the other side, Weissmann observed that the great this study stands for multilateralism intimacy of each governments elites, and argues that it is the most effective the existing regionalization, economic path for creating consensus among the integration, interdependence, and relevant parties in the SCS dispute. combined forces of Sino-ASEAN Due to the positivity of rapprochement, have successfully multilateralism’s blood, veins, organs, maintained the scheme of conflict and other internal values, this study prevention and changing the status of believes and would explains how SCS from a fragile peace condition in multilateralism can work better than the 1990s into more stable one bilateralism in resolving the SCS (Weissmann, 2010). Yet, in this regard, dispute, which well-known for its a critic has been delivered by David complexity. Scott. He argued that the Track-1 and Track-2 diplomacy indeed acted as a CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK driving force behind the existence of Multilateralism conflict management. Nevertheless, Multilateralism is the global there is an inherent inability for them, governance system assembling large or it may not even be far-fetched to number of parties by constructing a suggest, that they are still premature, in common aim, which the struggle to addressing conflict resolution strategy. achieve it conducted by mutual efforts Thus, Scott labeled the result of and rules. Robert O. Keohane defines ASEAN approach in SCS as a multilateralism as the activity of “conflict irresolution” framework coordinating national policies in (Scott, 2012). groups of three or more states. The It may be far exaggerated to practice of it carried out by the opine that this study is a rare formulation of institutions or any kind commodity and premium. Yet, the of arrangements that provide a intention of this paper to display the platform for states to have a collective weaknesses prosecution of bilateralism purpose. (Keohane, 1990). John G. and the defense trial of multilateralism Ruggie argued that the definition could serve as the distinguishing proposed by Keohane disposed to be quality of this study. Broadly speaking, the nominal definition of this study is intended to paint a gloomy multilateralism and missing the

174 Nation State: Journal of International Studies P ISSN 2620-391X Vol. 3 No. 2 | December 2020 E ISSN 2621-735X ______qualitative value. Hence, he redefined Some scholars argue that and updated multilateralism meaning: bilateralism is an institutional mode Multilateralism is an institutional providing a best platform for form which coordinates relations among governments to negotiate agreements three or more states on the basis of in a reciprocity manner. They generalized principles of conduct (that portrayed bilateralism as state’s tool of is, principles which specify appropriate diplomacy where the costs are just conduct for a class of actions, without equal or, even better, below political regard to the particularistic interest of benefits (Rixen & Rohlfing, 2005). the parties or the strategic exigencies that may exist in any specific Thompson and Verdier then examined occurrence) whether or not any specific the obligations (the agreements or instance suits their individual likes and consensus) that resulted in bilateralism dislikes (Ruggie, 1992). activity only applied to two particular Since ism put at the end of involving states (Thompson & multilateralism, James A. Caporaso put Verdier, 2014). forward a linguistic consideration to In liberal terms, Chaiyakorn define it. Caporasso acknowledges Kiatpongsan defines bilateralism as multilateralism as an ideology or belief the conduct of relations serving a which guided a straightforward affair platform for converging the interests of states (Caporaso, 1992). of two parties. The primacy of bilateralism is, as John Gerard Ruggie Bilateralism explained in Kiatpongsan’s work, the Bilateralism is a set of indorsement of involving parties to arrangements diffusing two states have a straightforward discussion on within a framework of cooperation specific issues. Bilateralism grants the based on self-interest orientation. involving parties to negotiate on 'issue- Highly confront the anomalies of by-issue' and 'case-by-case' basis, multilateralism, the relation conduct of which guarantee a high level of bilateralism only involves two parties. reciprocity (Kiatpongsan, 2011). Arie In some occasion, bilateralism does Reich emphasizes Ruggie’s opinion by not put aside common goal between arguing that bilateralism allows two involving states, but particular governments to put forward the types state in bilateralism often possess a of agreements they require the most in strong leveling impulse to achieve its a way that best to corresponds their personal goals rather than the existing needs and interests and choose their common goal. partners to such agreements. Bilateralism is where actions can best

175 Nation State: Journal of International Studies P ISSN 2620-391X Vol. 3 No. 2 | December 2020 E ISSN 2621-735X ______be arranged suitably to fulfill the needs Rather than only voting for an item of the constituents of the making and having the majority of the group decision unit (Reich, 2010). getting their path, the achievement of consensus is committed for producing Consensus such solutions that everyone actively In literal meaning, consensus is a espouses, or leastwise, can accept to general agreement or understanding of live with (Seeds for Change, 2010). different parties in effecting a given Consensus can perform in all purpose. First emerged in 1861 as a types of platform setting, whether in term in physiology, consensus word small groups, local communities, derived from businesses, even whole the nations and Latin consensus ‘agreement or accord’, territories (Seeds for Change, 2010). past participle of consentire ‘feel Creating a consensus in a widely together’, from assimilated form accepted manner requires a sense of of com ‘with or together’ + sentire ‘to common purpose. The participating feel’ (Consensus, n.d.). states do not need to think similarly, A conflict comprises of multiple have the same opinion, or support the and cumbersome issues. Consensus same proposal in a unanimous vote. building, a collaborative action of Instead, what is earnestly sought is a problem-solving, is basically mediation sense of the meeting. Consensus is the stage to gain consensus among essence of what the group has in involving parties concerning the agreement on, the common ground, debated issue (Community Consensus the shared understanding, or desire Institute, n.d.). Within consensus (Bressen, 2006). building process, involving states deign to construct and agree to DISCUSSION support a decision in the best interest Making Sense China’s Rise and Its or goal of the entire group. By Goal in the South China Sea ensuring that all concerns, ideas, and Historical memories of territorial demands are successfully taken loss and its aspiration to restore the account, and each party listens status of great power after its centuries conscientiously to each other, of humiliation motivated China to be consensus building group intends to totally advancing nations. In recent come up with proposals that suitable years, there have been alarming for everyone. It is also considered as a perspectives that China is potentially a creative and dynamic way of reaching great power in the future. Bambang agreement among all participant states. Cipto (2018) assumed that a country

176 Nation State: Journal of International Studies P ISSN 2620-391X Vol. 3 No. 2 | December 2020 E ISSN 2621-735X ______only capable of gaining superpower for survival in an anarchic-shaped status if it can gain a peak position in world through expansion, as they economic, military, technological and maturate more energetic relative to cultural development. To this view, other great powers. China seemingly has succeeded in For a realist such as John J. achieving the superpower status, Mearsheimer, he considers that signed by its tremendous economic China’s rising position will not be growth, outstanding military peaceful, but rather aggravative and capability, strong political influence, detrimental (Mearsheimer, 2010). It is and widespread cultural values. due to China as a newly emerging The forecast related to China’s power, along with its efforts toward unpeaceful rise, which may stimulate outward expansion, challenges the conflictual and problematic dynamics, interests of the existing hegemon are various. Kim Jihyun predicted () in the system. This China’s rise could be a threat to the conclusion emerges based on the region or even global security. Based historical analysis, whereby rising on presumable supposition, China’s powers have inclined to be eventual dominance on SCS by its troublemakers (Friedberg, 2005). In military and economical cultivation accordance with this view, Robert J. will be inescapable (Kim, 2015). Eric J. Art believes that China's ambitions will Labs (1997) implies realism’s prophesy significantly accrue as its capabilities on the inevitable conflict or dispute increase. Moreover, as its newfound brought by the rising power of China. power allows it to relish more Realism, as he explained, offers a opportunities for influence, China's dismal prediction related to China’s goals will be more expansive than they rise and its expansionist ambitions. now are (Art, 2010). Scholars who acknowledge the The prediction of Kim Jihyun, relevance of offensive realism or the offensive realism theory, John J. power transition theory bring China’s Mearsheimer, and Robert J. Art threat seriously and simultaneously became a matter of reality when China predict it to be a root cause of conflict unilaterally proposed its Nine-Dash in the future. Conflict in international Line to global society. China’s claim politics, according to the theory of has impaired Brunei Darussalam, offensive realism, are feasibly to occur Malaysia, the Philippines, Taiwan, and when rational parties apprehend Vietnam territorial integrity and power as the central source of security sovereignty. China’s arbitrariness gave and seek to expand their probability birth to strenuous tension among the

177 Nation State: Journal of International Studies P ISSN 2620-391X Vol. 3 No. 2 | December 2020 E ISSN 2621-735X ______relevant actors and interrupted the rising powers to strive to secure them foundation of peace and security frontiers and even to challenge within Southeast Asia region. The territorial boundaries, taking measures emerging dispute consists of a number to have access to new markets, of issues, such as natural resource resources, and transportations routes. development and management, They are more likely to try to fully freedom of navigation, and more exercise their rights to protect core importantly sovereignty disputes interest and reclaim their place in the (Steffens, 2013). sun.” (Art, 2010). As a matter of fact, In the second place, China’s one- it is a habitual, commonplace, behavior sided claim is also undermining the of the rising powers to contest the value of international law. The territorial frontiers. Nazi Germany’s Permanent Court of Arbitration, in power, as an instance, began to The Hague, strictly decides that the manifest its rising power and claim is inherently illegal since it is superiority by invading Poland in contradictive to 1982 UN Convention 1939, in the basis of “to regain the lost on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), the territory” (A&E Television Networks, cornerstone for the present-day 2009). This particular case proves that maritime law of over 160 states the new territorial integrity, gained by (including China). The treaty, among challenging the existing determination, its numerous functions, grants is usual and become one of the rising exclusive authority for coastal nations power’s core interests in order to to acquire sole exploitation rights over reclaim their place in the highest realm. all resources in the zone extending Based on the realist’s perspective, across 200 nautical miles from the territorial disputes generally arise shore baseline (named as Exclusive because of power-political interests, Economic Zones) (Mollman & favorable power relations, or even Timmons, 2016). China’s Nine-Dash selfish reasons. Although Hans J. Line is extended outward into 800 Morgenthau indicates that a nation is nautical miles (about 920 miles) from not always “the more powerful, the the Chinese mainland to the Spratly more territory it possesses”. Islands (the farthest claimed-area) Nevertheless, the follower of realism (Poling, 2019). To this scope, the claim believes that power direction is usually is obviously unparalleled with the to find geographical expressions existing legal international law. (Fozouni, 1995). The territory also Robert J. Art has a point in his appears to be a fundamental thought that “It is not unusual for power base since it provides an

178 Nation State: Journal of International Studies P ISSN 2620-391X Vol. 3 No. 2 | December 2020 E ISSN 2621-735X ______imperative strategic and economic long as China presumes that there is no benefits to the relevant states. convincing rational reason for it to Liberman opines that geographical pursue multilateralism, it will continue expansion enhances the power and to, with unwavering commitment, prestige of states (Liberman, 1993). pursue one-sided bilateral negotiations Having this light, China’s arbitrariness for conflict resolution, or even, at and assertive actions in SCS is worst, nullify diplomatic agendas reasonable. entirely. Making matters more Beijing's inclination for dealing malicious, China possibly has a chance with SCS’s Territorial dispute to manage a considerable economic diplomatically in a bilateral framework and political leverage over various rather than a multilateral forum is ASEAN states, attenuating the ability globally recognized. China’s of the group of 10 nations to join recalcitrance and keen personal effort on matters of strategic interest have been entirely rendered importance on maritime issues (Panda, the stagnancy of multilateral efforts at 2015). merely appeasing practical issues in the SCS dispute, such as the ongoing China’s Preference for Bilateralism Approach process in a code of conduct for Southeast Asian states and China in Realists, as Ikenberry (2003) the SCS. To show its unwillingness to argues, sees a shift toward bilateralism put SCS issues on the multilateral in recent years influenced by the end forum, the Chinese delegation to a of the Cold War and the unrivaled preparatory meeting for ASEAN power of the United States as the Defense Ministers Meeting Plus single existing superpower (despite the (ADMM-Plus) in 2015 refused to debate over the collapse of the United allow SCS issues onto the agenda States supremacy). John Ravenhill (Panda, 2015). (2003) explains three fundamental reasons why there is a new interest in China apparently have a narrow conducting bilateralism within ability to achieve superiority if interstate relations scope. One among participate in a multilateral process them is the increasing circumspection that limits its ability to enhance of the weaknesses of existing regional sovereignty over the Southeast Asian or multilateral institutions and area of water. China will continue to initiatives. Within the context of the oppose the attempt to internationalize SCS dispute, ASEAN weaknesses has the SCS issue to prevent the been analyzed by Amador. He opines intervention of other great power. As

179 Nation State: Journal of International Studies P ISSN 2620-391X Vol. 3 No. 2 | December 2020 E ISSN 2621-735X ______that “ASEAN’s role comprises only possesses the ability to outgrow direct the management of tensions rather challenges to its sovereignty claims than resolution (Amador III, 2016). To with armed force. Not only does it this extent, Euan Graham has a have a powerful card on winning a perception that Southeast Asian states military confrontation, but China is are likely to step up bilateral relations presuming that powerless competitor with each other and China (Graham, states within its bilateral-made 2016). negotiation would prefer to retreat or On the same side, China is also even surrender their claims, rather extremely attempting to bilateralizing than pursue costly military action the SCS dispute (Graham, 2016). Since (Samson, 2012). As a high and wide 2016, China has deliberately expressed cleft between China's military power an impulse to conduct bilateral and those of its neighbors grows, discussions rather than negotiating China has a superior position in under the shadow of ASEAN bilateral territorial negotiations. (Rakhmat & Tarahita, 2020). China’s China‘s economic power can also be foreign minister, Yang Jiechi involved to bear in bilateral forums responded by expressing and (Samson, 2012). In fact, there is a simultaneously justifying his country’s considerable number of countries have preference for dealing this issue become the largest trading partner of bilaterally and out of the public eye. To China. China’s increasing economic defend China’s bilateral tendency, he pull certainly has a notable impact on said "Turning the bilateral issue into an the foreign policies of several international or multilateral one would Southeast Asian countries. Some only worsen the situation and add Southeast Asian states may be difficulties to solve the issue" (Ernest, increasingly pulled into China’s sphere 2010). of influence, which would then have an impact on these countries Bilateralism preferred by China ’respective SCS policies through the since it allows them to maximize up its AIIB’s assistance (Terada, 2016). relative strength. (Graham, 2016). The stronger party requires to forcefully Bilateralism is Not Effective? assert its claims through military threat or law enforcement action if the From the previous elaboration, competition for sovereignty claims still bilateralism implies relatively high unresolved to be discussed in the barriers to resolve SCS dispute due to bilateral forum. With its comparatively China’s dominance. Bilateralism is superior naval competencies, China considered as a discriminatory

180 Nation State: Journal of International Studies P ISSN 2620-391X Vol. 3 No. 2 | December 2020 E ISSN 2621-735X ______arrangement and believed to heighten party intervention or the imposition of the powerful states leverage over the drills by a concert of the most weak. Most states, commonly the powerful states in the system”. This smaller, weaker, and powerless states, notion proved by some shreds of are believed to be disadvantaged by the historical evidences whereby most of conduct of bilateralism in certain the newly emerging states after the end circumstances (Kahler, 1992). The of World War II assisted by the sense of dissatisfaction is significantly involvement of third parties to gain striking the less powerful states in their territorial integrity, obtain negotiation process since the greater international recognition, and even country could provide an unfair, gain nation-building. The role of the coercive offer. The weaker state feels United Nations, as an instance, is very obliged to accept the one-sided offer significant to resolve the dispute because of the tendency to fear of the between Indonesia and the powerful state’s intimidation. This Netherlands related to West Irian consideration implies that bilateralism territory. The presence of the United could not provide a good reciprocity Nations as the third party amid the between the involving parties. 1954 proposed-dispute case has Confront the demeanor of assisted Indonesia, which was multilateralism, bilateralism is a non- considered as less powerful state transparent scheme of bargaining compared to Netherlands in that era, process. Since bilateral activity only to gain a proper negotiation result. held by two states, the powerful actor Furthermore, the non- will be exempted from the scrutiny of transparency of bilateralism could other entities. Therefore, the become a means for the powerful opportunity to provide a states to conduct divide and concur discriminatory bid by the powerful tactic. This atmosphere might exist states is higher if the bargaining when the bilateral approach applies to process held by the bilateral conduct. resolve a conflict involving three or Especially in the purposes of conflict more states. Within bilateral conduct, or dispute resolution, less powerful the greater state would have the ability states commonly require the presence to influence less powerful state to defy of third parties to become a bridge for other less powerful counterpart. The the negotiation. As what John Vasquez spokesperson of States Department of (1993) suggests “…negotiation need United States, Victoria Nuland, made not be bilateral. Frequently the most an argument that was implying her effective settlements involve third objection on Chinese Government’s

181 Nation State: Journal of International Studies P ISSN 2620-391X Vol. 3 No. 2 | December 2020 E ISSN 2621-735X ______tendency to deal with the SCS dispute Philippines under President Aquino by bilateral approach: favor the multilateral-like approach We don't think that [the South China and intend to internationalize the SCS Sea] issue ... can be resolved through a dispute. Having that circumstance, series of bilateral intersections. We China assigned several economic don't think that cutting deals with sanctions to the Philippines. As these countries individually is going to observed by Malcolm Cook, there are work, let alone be the expedient way or four kinds of the economic policy of the best way under international law to China that signaling its strained get this done. Bilateral diplomacy that leads to, and is supportive of, an overall relations with the Philippines. First, multilateral deal where all of the claims the Chinese massive scale project of are satisfied and the arrangement that One Belt One Road excluded the emerges under international law is fine. involvement of the Philippines. But an effort to divide and conquer and Second, China donated a slight fund of end up with a competitive situation assistance for humanitarian assistance among the different claims is not going to get where we need to go (U.S. to Typhoon Haiyan disaster in 2013. Department of State, 2012). Third, the dismissal of a travel permittance to Chinese tourists to visit

Bilateralism’s lack of ability to the Philippines. And fourth, the provide acceptable resolution for disallowance of the Philippines’s inter-state’s relation s been delivered banana entrance to Chinese market by Jardish Bhagwati, specifically in (Cook, 2016). bilateral trading cooperation. Bhagwati Realizing that a disharmony with believes that bilateral approach is a China will only invite loss, the scheme producing a 'spaghetti bowl' of Philippines under Rodrigo Duterte trade arrangements that creates prefer to have bilateral-like approach disunity, lack of uniformity, and with China in dealing with the dispute, unpredictability in trading system and which in parallel with China’s interest. giving opportunities for strong Since then, the economic leverage as countries to take excessive merit on mentioned above allow China to act the weaker ones (Bhagwati, 1995 in more dominant and aggressive within Reich, 2010). the bilateral negotiation with the The Philippines case on SCS Philippines. As a result, President might be an appropriate example to Duterte has unexpectedly shifted the shed light how bilateralism may lead to Philippines' firm stance to the SCS in powerful state’s pressure on the manners that are more parallel with weaker one. From 2012 to 2016, the China’s interest. For instance, the

182 Nation State: Journal of International Studies P ISSN 2620-391X Vol. 3 No. 2 | December 2020 E ISSN 2621-735X ______Philippines no longer uses the West negotiation, as mentioned in Article Philippines Sea to refer to the SCS. The No. 2, Point No. 3 and 4: Philippines has also minimized its “3.) All Members shall settle their commitment to the United States – the international disputes by peaceful Philippines proximity in the fields that means in such a manner that China finds unsuitable to its interests international peace and security, and (Cook, 2016). Furthermore, the justice, are not endangered. 4.) All Philippines is no longer wave its flag in Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat its claimed area (Mourdoukoutas, or use of force against the territorial 2019). In return, China has responded integrity or political independence of favorably by making it easier for the any state, or in any other manner Philippines to export bananas and inconsistent with the purposes of the coconuts to its market and lifting its United Nations” (United Nations, travel warning to the Philippines n.d.). (Cook, 2016). This kind of affair indicates that bilateral approach is The peaceful means for opening the floodgate for China’s discussing such a dispute is clearly economic leverages which already in mentioned. The settlement of the pipeline to influence other negotiation among the relevant parties countries' approaches to the SCS of the dispute includes as the first disputes and the Philippines has been concern. In the SCS dispute, scholars one of its scapegoats. have been divided into two sides of a coin since they propose different

Why Can Multilateralism be opinions whether the relevant parties Effective to Reach Consensus? on the dispute should utilizing bilateral or multilateral approach as the The relevant parties within a negotiation framework to resolve the dispute always have full authority to conflict and create consensus among decide how their discord being settled. them. Both bilateral and multilateral International practice in the past approaches are included as the proved that face to face negotiation peaceful means to settle their international between the parties is always the best disputes as upheld by the United way and a priority choice under Nations Charter. Nevertheless, there international law (Jia, 2012). The are several matters that make Charter of the United Nations multilateralism provide better offers to specifies that parties to any dispute the relevant parties in the SCS dispute. shall seek a solution through This consideration is based on the analysis on the values held by

183 Nation State: Journal of International Studies P ISSN 2620-391X Vol. 3 No. 2 | December 2020 E ISSN 2621-735X ______multilateralism (inner context) and the be run accountable, consensus important things in the case of the SCS possibly can be reached because all (outer context). claimant states comprehend other Two internal factors that make parties’ demands or claims. The result multilateralism, compared to hopefully can be acknowledged and bilateralism, able to create consensus recognized by all of the relevant states. amid the dispute of SCS. First, To this extent, multilateral framework transparency curtains that accompany creates a safety valve for deescalating multilateral engagement create for interstate tensions and provides more efficient and effective strategic transparent information so that states planning and decision than could be can take effective pre-emptive action achieved through bilateral scheme to shield themselves against potential (Samson, 2012). The use of external threats (Aris, 2009). On the multilateral forms is associated with an contrary, bilateral approach faces a ideology system which stresses the significant barrier to attain the shared values, aspirations, and previously expected achievements characteristics of the participant provided by multilateral engagement. (Mansbach, 1970). The involvement of Second, a multilateral framework more than two parties would allow lessens the opportunity for the each other to receive more transparent involving parties to pursue unilateral- and adequate information, based on related action. If there are no good the diverse point of views of the multilateral systemic orders, parties, about something in particular prospectively, individual actors will related to the main discussion or strive to get their issue put on to the table problem. of the bilateral forum and resolved by In the case of SCS dispute, which practice or allocation mechanism, involving more than three states, which would make it most likely to win multilateral activity grants open space them at the minimum cost. The and opportunity for the relevant states unilateral tendency of the stronger to introduce, or at least to notify, other party gives them advantages in the claimant states about their demands or negotiations and leads to a claims, complaints or objections to the substandard result, either from a other parties, and suggestions and perspective of distributive justice or input to resolve the conflict. Due to from a perspective of efficiency. On the flows of transparency, which make such occasions, multilateral each of participating parties aware of negotiation grants less other’s interests, the negotiation would powerful countries the possibility of

184 Nation State: Journal of International Studies P ISSN 2620-391X Vol. 3 No. 2 | December 2020 E ISSN 2621-735X ______coordinating their positions and conducted by bilateral form. By the bargaining collectively with establishment of a multilateral the stronger countries, which may lead framework, which consists of to better result (Vasquez, 1993, pp. common principles for governing 307). behavior, the feasibility of China’s Participation in multilateral- tendency to act unilaterally could be related activity necessitates the diminished. acceptance common principles for Anna Samson mentioned that governing behavior and support for a “The rising power of China has led to an framework within which issues of almost universal consensus that such a mutual concern can be managed settlement must be multilateral in nature in properly. To this extent, order to avert the dispute from escalating to institutionalization of norms created the stage of open armed conflict.” She by multilateralism increases proposed three fundamental reasons predictability regarding state behavior that gave birth to this conclusion. (Kawasaki, 2006). John Vasquez First, the claims themselves are (1993) believes that international rules overlapping and having conflicting are understood and norms followed by groundwork. Second, uncertainty a state if it involved in high systematic concerning sovereignty rights has institutionalization (multilateral). If a aggravated the security dilemma for multilateral approach can ensure the states in the region, prompting rules and norms upheld by the increased militarization in and around participating parties, presumably, it the SCS (Samson, 2012). would be able to eradicate the On the other side, several unilateral tendency of decision-making intellectual notions arise from some processes of different governments. scholars arguing that negotiation Unilateral action amid the concerning the SCS dispute must run escalation of the SCS dispute is bilaterally. The opinion of Sam undeniable. China’s rising power has Bateman is particularly striking in this indicated that China is the only context. He considers that: possible source of unilateral-related “It is a mistaken notion that action. Other claimants, such as sovereignty over the islands and reefs Taiwan, the Philippines, Malaysia, of the sea can be resolved on a Brunei Darussalam, and Vietnam, multilateral basis. This is incorrect which considered non-powerful states, because sovereignty is fundamentally would be the victim of China’s a bilateral issue for resolution between the states that claims a particular arbitrary policy if the negotiation is

185 Nation State: Journal of International Studies P ISSN 2620-391X Vol. 3 No. 2 | December 2020 E ISSN 2621-735X ______feature. While arrangements for such as ASEAN, do not own. To this cooperation in managing the South extent, it is a normal event when China Sea and its resources can be Turkey has territorial disputes with discussed multilaterally, sovereignty is Greece, a member of the European a matter for bilateral discussions between the disputing parties. Union, Turkey did not negotiate with ASEAN, for example, as a regional the EU, but directly negotiate with grouping, cannot discuss sovereignty Greece because they are the only two over particular features with China” were having a dispute. (Bateman, 2011). If a dispute involving some resolved by, or at least, Bateman has explicitly manage by a non-sovereign regional or mentioned that multilateralism multilateral organization, it does not approach is unaccepted to discuss a mean that those states’ sovereignty territorial dispute since it related to being abolished or decreased. It is sovereignty issues. The sovereignty because such a regional or multilateral matters, regarding to the opinion of organization would recognize its limit him, are primarily a bilateral issue. Yet, of action and authority on dealing with he precludes the fact that China’s claim a sovereign state. Nonetheless, power not only impairs a country’s demarcation does not attenuate the sovereignty, but it has disturbed more regional or multilateral organization than three countries’ sovereignty. To ability to serve a role as the negotiation this matter, bilateral is relatively bridge of the dispute. There is no incompetent to perform as negotiation reason for a sovereign state of being scheme because it is not the issue hesitate, or even willing to disdain, between the two states, but the problem such regional or multilateral among several states. organization. On top of that, Bateman’s incompatibility with multilateralism manifestation is diverse multilateralism seemingly triggered by and not only implied by such an his consideration that regional or organization. Any form of negotiation international organization (which framework that involving more than become the embodiment of three states is a multilateralism multilateralism) do not possess manifestation, for instances, sovereignty as well as a state. Indeed, international conferences, joint sovereignty refers to the construction comprehensive plan of action, and etc. of the highest independent authority in Thus, ASEAN's inability (because it a territory (Mubin, 2019), which a does not have the value of sovereignty) regional or international organization, to handle the SCS case does not mean

186 Nation State: Journal of International Studies P ISSN 2620-391X Vol. 3 No. 2 | December 2020 E ISSN 2621-735X ______to be the justification for eliminating and admit the deal which excluding his the presence of any kind of multilateral presence? In the case of Spartly engagement amid the SCS dispute. Island’s claim, if Malaysia decides to Furthermore, the complexity of have a bilateral negotiation with dispute which originated from the Vietnam concerning the disputed reefs collide claims of the relevant states and then a consensus has been necessitates the engagement of successfully achieved, how can the multilateralism. This argument is the Philippines accept the two countries’ external factor for multilateralism consensus? Bilateral-related activity being an utmost required. Malaysia only gives birth to the agreement that claims fourteen maritime features would only be accepted, applied, which already been occupied by its obeyed by two related parties. If there military force around the Spratly are more than two parties involving in islands, including Mantanani Reef, Ubi a dispute, how could bilateralism able Reef, Layang-Layang Reef, Laya Reef, to create consensus among those Siput Reef, Peninjau Reef, Small parties? The elaboration of this matter Amboyna Island, Perahu Reef, and emphasizes that multilateralism, which Laksamana Reef. The first six features able to include all of the parties with have been occupied by Malaysia and similar claims, is the only path that the rest are occupied by Vietnam and provides the possibility to achieve the Philippines (Ahmad & Sani, 2017 consensus. cited by Suharman, 2019). Natuna Luo Jia (2012) expressed his Island, for another example, it has skepticism on the application of been officially and recognized by multilateralism by saying that “If any of Indonesia as part of its territory by the these disputes had to be settled multilaterally, establishment of the United Nations with the involvement of parties without a Convention for the Law of the Sea direct concern, it would only lead to chaos in (UNCLOS) 1982 (Prayuda, 2020). the current international order”. It is a Even though so, Taiwan and China plausible truth that there are several both claim Natuna Island to be part of interested parties seek to involve in the their territory (Shaohua, 2006). The dispute. The United States could be states’ similar claims make bilateralism posed as an instance. Yoga Suharman being powerless to deal with this. In argues that “The United States has always the case of Natuna Islands claim, if sought to maintain its unipolar position in the China tries to negotiate bilaterally with international system by expanding its military Indonesia and then a result has been presence in almost all regions of the world.” drafted, how could Taiwan recognize (Suharman, 2019). By considering this

187 Nation State: Journal of International Studies P ISSN 2620-391X Vol. 3 No. 2 | December 2020 E ISSN 2621-735X ______fact, China in general and Luo Jia in organization would be efficient. This specific, apparently afraid that United argument emerges from a set of data States and his counterparts, within the where international organization creation of the multilateral framework, significantly able to aid the resolution would utilize this issue to interfere and of a territorial dispute involving more disrupt China’s growing influence than two states. International Court of towards Southeast Asian Region. Justice, as an instance, has successfully Richard W. Mansbach has a prediction solved the dispute of some Caribbean that when two or more strong party- countries (Colombia, Honduras, regimes are involved, a prolonged Nicaragua) in 2012 regarding the conflict over interests and objectives sovereignty over Serranilla Bank and may occur. A hostile and overbearing Bajo Nuevo Bank. United States’ response would affirm Ken Sato, head of the Institute Chinese suspicions that the United for International Policy Studies (IIPS), States aims to contain its rise. As observed that East Asia (including Bonnie S. Glaser predicted that it Southeast Asia) is remain absent of a could cement the emergency of a permanent organization or regional United States-China Cold War (Glaser, body to become the platform for the 2012). states addressing maritime security The most important thing to issues. In his opening remarks to the remind is that the multilateral 2015 Symposium on New Maritime framework to deal with the SCS Security Architecture in East Asia, he dispute does not mean that external suggested the establishment of a new parties must be involved. But, to some body named the Asia Maritime extent, third parties may be a necessity Organization for Security and since it could serve as the observer to Cooperation (AMOSC). In the view of oversee the actions of deviant actors. Sato, AMOSC’s primary goal would be In other words, third parties have the to prevent, or at least manage, existing ability to prevent the unilateral maritime disputes among countries by tendency of an actor. But in the case of increasing domain awareness, SCS dispute, which China has its enhancing capacity-building, and participation in it, the United States, enacting confidence-building with its striking interests, is unable to measures (Parameswaran, 2015). fulfill the qualification as the third Sato comprehends that a actor. Perhaps, the role of the United multilateral-related activity serves to be Nations, International Court of the most promising path for consensus Justice, or any other multilateral concerning to a maritime dispute.

188 Nation State: Journal of International Studies P ISSN 2620-391X Vol. 3 No. 2 | December 2020 E ISSN 2621-735X ______Southeast Asian countries, along with claimants. That policy is preferable due China, advisably should create a to bilateral negotiation would allow it distinctive platform, as proposed by to act arbitrarily and suppress other Sato, to bridge consensus among claimants with its economic, political, multiple claimant states. The urgency and military leverage. of that idea is crystal clear since Bilateralism is a non-transparent bearing in mind that Southeast Asia is bargaining process. The powerful a regional sector consist of vast and actor will be exempted from the important maritime area. Ankit Panda surveillance of others since the has a brilliant thought that, if bilateral activity only held by two Southeast Asian states, particularly states. Hence, the opportunity to those with maritime disputes among provide a discriminatory bid by the themselves, were able to convene a powerful states is relatively high. pacific negotiation process, resolve Especially in the purposes of conflict their disputes, and consolidate their or dispute resolution, less powerful understanding of maritime issues, a states commonly require the presence multilateral process on disputes of third parties to become a bridge for involving China would be more the negotiation. This assumption promising (Panda, 2015). Without a implies that bilateralism could not widely accepted agreement in place, a offer a better mechanism to result in simple miscalculation could proceed acceptable reciprocity and consensus into a serious military incident among the involving parties. (Kaplan, 2011). Hence, consensus Consensus building is a creative must immediately pursue by the and dynamic result of reaching involving actors of the dispute through agreement among all participant states a multilateralism path. in a dispute. Consensus establishment signifies that all opinions, ideas, and CONCLUSION concerns are successfully taken into Undeniably, China has become a account. Consensus means that great power whether in economic, involving states agree to acknowledge, political, military, and cultural fields. or at least can accept to live with, the Rising power has been driving its decision which has been drafted in the arbitrary behavior and led to the best interest of the whole group. escalating dispute regarding to the Multilateral engagement is argued to sovereignty claims over SCS. Based on be the only path for gaining consensus China’s perspective, bilateral approach values since it provides transparency is the best path for dealing with other curtains that produce more efficient

189 Nation State: Journal of International Studies P ISSN 2620-391X Vol. 3 No. 2 | December 2020 E ISSN 2621-735X ______and effective strategic planning and c.id/index.php/intermestic/article/vie decision. The involvement of more w/92/41 than two parties would allow each Amador III, Julio in Singh, B., & Ho, S. (2016) The South China Sea Territorial other to receive more transparent and Dispute: A Multilateral Perspective adequate information, based on a (Online). Available at: diverse point of view of the parties, https://www.rsis.edu.sg/wp- content/uploads/2017/02/ER170217 about something in particular related _South-China-Sea_WEB.pdf to the main discussion. Furthermore, Aris, Stephen. (2009) “A New Model of the multilateral activity offers open Asian Regionalism: Does the Shanghai space and opportunity for the relevant Cooperation Organisation Have More Potential Than ASEAN?”, Cambridge states to announce other claimant Review of International Affairs, 2(3), pp. states about their demands or claims, 451-467. Available at: complaints or objections to the other http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09557570 903104040 parties, and suggestions and input to Art, J., Robert. (2010) “The United States resolve the conflict. The multilateral and the Rise of China: Implications framework also decreases the for the Long Haul”, Political Science opportunity for the involving parties Quarterly, 125(3), pp. 359–391. Available at: to pursue unilateral-related action, https://www.jstor.org/stable/257670 which sometimes happens amid the 46 conduct of conflict negotiation. This Bateman, Sam. (2011), ‘Managing the South positivity is achievable if and when China Sea: Sovereignty is not the Issue’. RSIS Commentaries No. multilateral-based activity been held in 136/2011 dated 29 September 2011, high esteemed and common Singapore, S. Rajaratnam School of principles and international norm International Studies, NTU. Available at: https://www.rsis.edu.sg/wp- been upheld. content/uploads/2014/07/CO11136. pdf REFERENCES Bressen, Tree. (2006) Consensus Decision A&E Television Networks. (2009) Germany Making (Online). Available at: Invades Poland (Online). Available at: https://treegroup.info/library/Conse https://www.history.com/this-day-in- nsus_Decison_Making-CH.pdf history/germany-invades-poland (Accessed: 26 December 2019). (Accessed: 7 January 2020). Callar, Del, Michaela. (2013) China;s New Ahmad, M., Z. & Sani, M. A. (2017) In ‘10-dash line map’ eats into Philippine Suharman, Yoga (2019). Dilema territory (Online). Available at: Keamanan dan Respons Kolektif https://www.gmanetwork.com/news ASEAN Terhadap Sengketa Laut /news/nation/319303/china-s-new- China Selatan. Intermestic: Journal of 10-dash-line-map-eats-into-philippine- International Studies, 3(2), pp. 127-146. territory/story/ (Accessed: 2 January Available at: 2020). http://intermesticjournal.fisip.unpad.a

190 Nation State: Journal of International Studies P ISSN 2620-391X Vol. 3 No. 2 | December 2020 E ISSN 2621-735X ______Caporaso, A., J. (1992) “International Focus Taiwan News Channel. (2013) U.S. relations theory and multilateralism: report details rich resources in South China the search for foundations”. Sea (Online). Available at: International Organization, 46(6), pp. http://focustaiwan.tw/news/aipl/201 600-632. Available at: 302090013.aspx (Accessed: 24 https://www.jstor.org/stable/270699 December 2019). 0 Fozouni, Bahman .(1995) “Confutation of Center for Strategic & International Studies Political Realism”, International Studies (n.d.) How much trade transits the Quarterly, 39(4), pp. 479-510. Available South China Sea? (Online). Available at: at: https://booksc.xyz/dl/27649842/173 https://chinapower.csis.org/much- c15 trade-transits-south-china-sea/ Friedberg, L., Aaron. (2005) “The Future of (Accessed: 28 December 2019). U.S.-China Relations: Is Conflict Cipto, Bambang (2018). Strategi China Inevitable?”, International Security, Merebut Status Super Power [China’s 30(2), pp. 7-45. Available at: Strategy to Gain Super Power Status]. 1st http://www.jstor.org/stable/4137594 ed. Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar. Glaser, S., Bonnie. (2012) Pivot to Asia: Community Consensus Institute (n.d.). Prepare for Unintended Consensus Building Defined. Available at: Consequences (Online). Available at: http://www.aboutlistening.com/abou https://csis- t/consensus-building-defined prod.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fs- (Accessed: 4 January 2020). public/legacy_files/files/publication/ Consensus. (n.d.) in Online Etymology 120413_gf_glaser.pdf (Accessed: 10 Dictionary. Available at: January 2020). https://www.etymonline.com/word/ Ikenberry, G. John (2003) Is American consensus Multilateralism in Decline? Perspectives Cook, Malcolm in Singh, B., & Ho, S. (2016) on Politics, 1(3), pp. 533-550. Available The South China Sea Territorial Dispute: at: A Multilateral Perspective (Online). https://www.jstor.org/stable/368871 Available at: 0 https://www.rsis.edu.sg/wp- Jia, Luo. (2012) China Right Favour Bilateral content/uploads/2017/02/ER170217 Talks Resolve South China Sea (Online). _South-China-Sea_WEB.pdf Available at: https://www.scmp.com/comment/in Ernest, Z., Bower. (2010) A Tale of Bilateralism and Secrecy in the South China sight-opinion/article/1028305/china- Sea (Online). Available at: right-favour-bilateral-talks-resolve- https://www.csis.org/analysis/jmsu- south-china-sea (Accessed: 12 January tale-bilateralism-and-secrecy-south- 2020). china-sea (Accessed: 6 January 2020). Kahler, Miles. (1992) “Multilateralism with Fravel, Taylor, M. (2011) “China's Strategy Small and Large Numbers” in the South China Sea”, Contemporary International Organization, 46(3), p. 681- Southeast Asia, 33(3), p. 293-319. 708. Available at: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2706992 Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/414462 Kaplan, D., Robert. (2011) The South China 32 Sea Is the Future of Conflict (Online). Available at:

191 Nation State: Journal of International Studies P ISSN 2620-391X Vol. 3 No. 2 | December 2020 E ISSN 2621-735X ______https://foreignpolicy.com/2011/08/ at: http://ejournal.umm.ac.id/index. 15/the-south-china-sea-is-the-future- php/sospol/article/download/4398/ of-conflict/ (Accessed: 25 December 4857 2019). Mansbach, W., Richard. (1970) “Bilateralism Kawasaki, Tsuyoshi. (2006) “Neither and Multilateralism in the Soviet Skepticism nor Romanticism: The Bloc”, International Organization, 24(2), ASEAN Regional Forum as a pp. 371-380. Available at: Solution for the Asia-Pacific https://www.jstor.org/stable/270594 Assurance Game”, The Pacific Review, 7 19(2), pp. 219-237. Available at: Marine Conservation Philippines. (2017) https://doi.org/10.1080/0951274050 South China Sea Sorrows (Online). 0473254 Available at: Keohane, O., Robert. (1990) https://www.marineconservationphili “Multilateralism: An Agenda for ppines.org/dispute-south-china-sea/> Research”, International Journal, 45(4), (Accessed: 23 December 2019). pp. 731-764. Available at: Mearsheimer, J. (2010) “The Gathering https://www.jstor.org/stable/402027 Storm: China's Challenge to US 05 Power in Asia”, Chinese Journal of Kiatpongsan, C. (2011) The EU-Thail`and International Politics, 3(4), pp. 381–396. Relations Tracing the Patterns of New Available at: Bilateralism, Amsterdam: Amsterdam https://booksc.xyz/dl/35845380/d39 University Press. Available at: c1c https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt46n Mirski, Sean. (2015) The South China Sea 0vh.7 dispute: A Brief History (Online). Kim, Jihyun. (2015) “Territorial Disputes in Available at: the South China Sea; Implications for https://www.lawfareblog.com/south- Security in Asia and Beyond”, Strategic china-sea-dispute-brief-history Studies Quarterly, 9(2), pp. 107-141. (Accessed: 26 December 2019). Available at: Mollman, Steve & Timmons, Heather. https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/26 (2016) China Has No Respect for 271078.pdf?refreqid=excelsior%3A3a International Law, Its Neighbors, or cb98db7158311fafcf32f1bc4059bf Marine Life (Online). Available at: Labs, J. Eric. (1997) “Beyond Victory: https://qz.com/729524/chinas- Offensive Realism and the Expansion activities-in-the-south-china-sea-are- of War Aims”, Security Studies, 6(4), pp. illegal-and-destroying-the- 1-49. Available at: environment-an-international-court- http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09636419 finds/ (Accessed: 12 January 2020). 708429321 Mourdoukoutas, Panos. (2019) South China Liberman, Peter. (1993) “The Spoils of Sea: Vietnam Dares What Philippines Conquest” International Security, 18(2), Didn’t (Online). Available at: pp. 125-153. Available at: https://www.forbes.com/sites/panos https://booksc.xyz/dl/48010959/fbf mourdoukoutas/2019/01/02/south- ead china-sea-vietnam-dares-what- philippines-didnt/#7e44119a149b Maksum, Ali. (2017) “Regionalisme dan Kompleksitas Laut China Selatan”, (Accessed:15 January 2020). Jurnal Sosial dan Politik, 3(1), pp. 1-25. Mubin, Fehmita, K. A. (2019) Available “Reconstructing Westphalian

192 Nation State: Journal of International Studies P ISSN 2620-391X Vol. 3 No. 2 | December 2020 E ISSN 2621-735X ______Sovereignty as an Effort to Enforce Ravenhill, John. (2003) The New Human Rights: Case Study; Bilateralism in the Asia Pacific. Third Humanitarian Intervention in the World Quarterly, 24(2), pp. 299-317. Libyan Conflict”, Nation State Journal of Available at: International Studies, 2(1), pp. 1-10. https://www.jstor.org/stable/399351 Available at: 4 https://journal.amikom.ac.id/index.p Reich, Arie. (2010) “Bilateralism Versus hp/nationstate/article/download/536 Multilateralism in International 9/pdf Economic Law: Applying the Panda, Ankit. (2015) Why Hasn’t Maritime Principle of Subsidiarity”, The Multilateralism Worked in Southeast Asia University of Toronto Law Journal, 60(2), (Online). Available at: pp. 262-287. Available at: https://thediplomat.com/2015/02/w https://www.jstor.org/stable/408014 hy-hasnt-maritime-multilateralism- 06 worked-in-southeast-asia/ (Accessed: Rixen, Thomas, & Rohlfing, Ingo. (2005) 16 January 2020). ‘The Political Economy of Parameswaran, Prashanth. (2015) Does Asia Bilateralism and Multilateralism: Need a New Maritime Organization Institutional Choice in Trade and Beyond ASEAN? (Online). Available Taxation’ (2005) TranState Working at: Papers, 31. Available at: https://thediplomat.com/2015/02/d https://mpra.ub.uni- oes-asia-need-a-new-maritime- muenchen.de/325/1/MPRA_paper_3 organization/ (Accessed: 17 January 25.pdf 2020). Roberts, Christopher. (2017) ‘The South Poling, Gregory. (2019) China’s Hidden Navy China Sea Beijing’s Challenge to (Online). Available at: ASEAN and UNCLOS and the https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/06/ Necessity of a New Multi-tiered 25/chinas-secret-navy-spratlys- Approach’ (2017) RSIS Working Paper southchinasea-chinesenavy- No. 307 dated 29 August 2017, maritimemilitia/ (Accessed: 7 January Singapore, S. Rajaratnam School of 2020). International Studies, NTU. Available at: Prayuda, Rendi. (2020) Diplomasi Indonesia https://www.rsis.edu.sg/wp- Terhadap Klaim China di Wilayah Laut content/uploads/2017/08/WP307.pd Natuna Utara (Online). Available at: f http://bermadah.co.id/berita/detail/ Ruggie, J. (1992) “Multilateralism: The diplomasi-indonesia-terhadap-klaim- Anatomy of an Institution”, cina-di-wilayah-laut-natuna-utara International Organization, 46(3), pp. (Accessed: 19 January 2020). 561-598. Available at: Rakhmat, Zulfikar, Muhammad & Tarahita, http://www.jstor.org/stable/2706989 Dikanaya. (2020) As Indonesia Stands up Samson, Anna. (2012) “A ‘Friendly to China in the Natuna Islands, Can Japan Elephant in the Room', The Strategic Come to the Rescue? (Online). Available Foundations of China’s Multilateral at: https://www.scmp.com/week- Engagement in Asia”, Security asia/opinion/article/3046429/indone Challenges, 8(3), pp. 57-82. Available at: sia-stands-china-natuna-islands-can- https://www.regionalsecurity.org.au/ japan-come-rescue (Accessed: 19 Resources/Files/vol8no3Samson.pdf January 2020). SCMP Reporter. (2019) Explained: South China Sea dispute (Online). Available at:

193 Nation State: Journal of International Studies P ISSN 2620-391X Vol. 3 No. 2 | December 2020 E ISSN 2621-735X ______https://www.scmp.com/week- (Online). Available at: asia/article/2186449/explained- https://www.rsis.edu.sg/wp- south-china-sea-dispute (Accessed: 24 content/uploads/2017/02/ER170217 December 2019). _South-China-Sea_WEB.pdf Scott, David. (2012) “Conflict Irresolution Thomas, Jason. (2019) Nine-dash line drawing in the South China Sea”, Asian Survey, trouble in Vietnam (Online). Available 52(6), pp. 1019-1042. Available at: at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1525 https://theaseanpost.com/article/nin /as.2012.52.6.1019?seq=1 e-dash-line-drawing-trouble-vietnam Seeds for Change. (2010) Consensus Decision (Accessed: 2 January 2020). Making (Online). Available at: Thompson, Alexander, & Verdier, Daniel. https://www.seedsforchange.org.uk/ (2014) “Multilateralism, Bilateralism consensus.pdf (Accessed: 3 January and Regime Design”, International 2020). Studies Quarterly, 58(1), pp. 15-28. Shaohua, Ma. (2006) China's Multilateralism Available at: and The South China Sea Conflict: Quest https://politicalscience.osu.edu/facult for Hegemonic Stability? Master Thesis, y/athompson/Lateralisms.pdf Department of Political Science, Tonnesson, S. (2001) ‘An International National University of Singapore. History of the Dispute in the South Available at: China Sea’ EAI Working Paper No. 71, https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/48 Singapore East Asian Institute, National 629257.pdf University of Singapore. Available at: http://www.cliostein.com/documents Snyder, A. Craig. (1997) “Building Multilateral Security Cooperation in /2001/01%20rep%20eai.pdf the South China Sea”, Asian Trang, Minh, Ngoc, Pham. (2019) South Perspective, 21(1), pp. 5-36. Available at: China Sea: The Disputes and Southeast https://www.jstor.org/stable/427041 Asia’s Culture of International Law 17 (Online). Available at: Steffens, W., Aaron. (2013) “Scramble in the https://thediplomat.com/2019/10/s South China Sea: Regional Conflict outh-china-sea-the-disputes-and- and US Strategy”, Strategic Studies southeast-asias-culture-of- Quarterly, 7(3), pp. 88-107. Available international-law/ (Accessed: 6 at: January 2020). https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307 U.S. Department of State. (2012) Daily Press /26270587 Briefing (Online). Available at: Suharman, Yoga. (2019) “Dilema Keamanan https://2009- dan Respons Kolektif ASEAN 2017.state.gov/r/pa/prs/dpb/2012/0 Terhadap Sengketa Laut China 8/196459.htm Accessed: 12 January Selatan”, Intermestic: Journal of 2020). International Studies, 3(2), pp. 127-146. United Nations. (n.d.) UN Charter (Online). Available at: Available at: http://intermesticjournal.fisip.unpad.a https://www.un.org/en/sections/un- c.id/index.php/intermestic/article/vie charter/un-charter-full-text/ w/92/41 (Accessed: 14 January 2020). Terada, Takashi in Singh, B., & Ho, S. United Nations Conference on Trade and (2016) The South China Sea Territorial Development. (2018) Review of Dispute: A Multilateral Perspective Maritime Transport (Online). Available

194 Nation State: Journal of International Studies P ISSN 2620-391X Vol. 3 No. 2 | December 2020 E ISSN 2621-735X ______at: Weissmann, Mikael. (2010) “The South https://unctad.org/en/PublicationsLi China Sea Conflict and Sino-ASEAN brary/rmt2018en.pdf (Accessed: 9 Relations: A Study in Conflict January 2020). Prevention and Peace Building”, Asian Vasquez, J. (1993) The War Puzzle Revisited, Perspective, 34(3), pp. 35-69. Available Cambridge: Cambridge University at: Press. Available at: https://b- https://www.jstor.org/stable/427047 ok.cc/dl/816979/48b564 21

195