“Spratly” is derived from sprat, which is a small marine food fish of Northeast Atlantic waters that is often canned in oil. No matter how obscurely the meaning of sprat resonates, the row on the Spratly Islands inhibits part of its definition especially with oil.
The Spratly Islands are an archipelago of more than 100 reefs, atolls, and islands in the South China Sea. The Philippines are 163 miles east of the islands, while China is 1000 miles north. The Islands have been in conflict in East Asia since the 1930s and assertions of sovereignty have caused tensions between China, the Philippines, Vietnam, Brunei, Malaysia, and Taiwan.
China first discovered the islands in 200 B.C. and declared that the Spratlys part of the Guangdong Province, establishing a military base on Itu Aba Island. Later on Vietnam rejected Beijing’s claim over the Spratly’s and in the early 1800s Vietnam asserted its ownership over the islands. Soon the Philippines followed suite, contending that the islands were without sovereign authority until their formal claim in 1978. These events have ignited tensions between China and the Philippines. Who owns these islands? What is the measure to ownership and possession for islands in international seas?
Minxin Pei, Professor of Government and the Director of the Keck Center for International and Strategic Studies in Claremont Mckenna College, expressed his thoughts on the struggle for in an interview with the Port Side. Professor Pei views the situation optimistically, “Honestly, this conflict has died down after President Aquino’s visit to the islands. I don’t think China is flexing its muscles. It is not necessary for the quarrel in any dimension. In the future, the struggle will be under control and there will there be no mean of conflict”.
In order to completely reconcile the struggle, it is necessary to recognize the intentions and motives over owning the islands. The South China Sea is rich in oil and natural gas and has therefore garnered attention from Asian-Pacific countries. Over the next 10-20 years, oil consumption is expected to rise 4% annually, thus creating a large energy demand. This means that if this growth is constant, oil demands will reach around 25 million barrels per day- more than double current consumption levels- by 2020.
If these projections are true, East Asian countries will need to constantly import oil from the Middle East and Africa. As a result, Asia-Pacific countries will depend heavily on specific sea routes to accentuate their trade and shipping lanes. Thus, the Spratly Islands have great geopolitical importance and economic potential.
Professor Pei is not convinced that this will cause tensions: “Suspicion to verification is not verification at all. There are not reliable estimates statistically nor scientifically if there cease to be oil in that area. Despite the arrest because of fishing boats, a military treaty with Manila accentuated that there should be freedom on navigation without any impediments according to the law of sea”.
Still, this combination of motivations complicates why certain nations are seeking sovereignty over the Spratly Islands. Does China view the situation as a matter of nationalistic pride, potential economic prosperity, or simply solidity of armed forces? Could China be flexing its muscles over the Philippines in order to ensure its own geopolitical stability, historical ownership, potential further industrial growth, and military force? On the other hand, is it practical for the Philippines to simply claim ownership of the islands based on geographical proximity? Proximity certainly does not justify ownership.
Hopefully, the issue will be resolved before it escalates into higher forms of conflict. The worst-case scenario is a military confrontation resulting in loss of lives, financial and military resources, and commercial trust. The best case would be mutual collaboration in regarding the Spratly Islands. Still, such collaboration would likely result in fewer benefits and more autarchic control and exploitation of the islands’ resources. Nevertheless, these are future problems can only be addressed and resolved once conflict has been eliminated from the Spratly Islands.




Vietnam has both historical and legal documents of its sovereignty over Paracels and
Spratlys since 17th century.
http://www.eyedrd.org/2011/12/historical-and-legal-documents-of-vietnamese-sovereignty-over-paracel-islands-hoang-sa-centuries-ago.html#comment-9230
http://www.eyedrd.org/2011/08/china-distorts-the-historical-truth-about-paracel-and-spratly-islands.html
http://www.scribd.com/doc/56817668/Republic-of-Vietnam-s-White-Paper-on-Paracel-and-Spratlys-Islands
we live in the 21st century and should respect the international law and should not submit to the gunboat diplomacy of the 19th century.