The Instigator
Mexecutive
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
w.toosmart
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

China's South China Sea claim is justifiable.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/9/2013 Category: Politics
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,431 times Debate No: 35428
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)

 

Mexecutive

Con

I go against this because 1.) I'm not Chinese, and 2.) This would mean economic homicide for countries close to the South China Sea. According to statistics (and I hope I'm right) over a third of the world's shipping travel the South China Sea, meaning that the area is a trading hotspot. Claims of oil and gas are still being investigated, while a fishing abundance in the area is of no doubt a true claim. By having China control the South China would only mean control of the maritime supply routes, which close to more than five countries (including the Association of Southeast Asian Nations) depend for their economic participation. And oil and gas would only escalate the conflict to ASEAN vs China; claiming that the whole area is China's would only send a wrong message that China is a hegemon, creating its own sphere of influence by bullying anyone in its path.
w.toosmart

Pro

You were just a bit racist in your paragraph you wrote. I'm personally a Chinese and I will not only look from my point of view, but yours too. The South China Sea should be owned by China because 1.)China is the most populated country area, therefore meaning that they need it the most. 2.) With this change China might earn more partners, meaning that the economics will improve. 3.) They need this change.

About the shipping travel in the South Sea, with China n charge the trading will improve. Under a good leader for the South Sea, more trading will happen.
Debate Round No. 1
Mexecutive

Con

Though it's understandable that China's population is a factor in its increasing assertiveness to resources in the South China Sea, it's still unjustifiable considering that increased tensions would lead, in a worse-case scenario, to an all-out armed conflict between regional powers; China was able to increase its standard of living during the last three decades when Deng Xiaoping embarked on an open-door policy; why does it need to increase tensions now?

I would argue that in a globalized world, any country can raise its standard of living without the need for war and armed conflict, and through peaceful trade agreements with other developed and developing countries. Member countries of BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India, and China) have been able to supercharge their economies with minimal armed tension, and a factor of that growth is an increase of maritime trade. Control of South China Sea by China would be at the expense of India and other naval powers elsewhere; Singapore would also suffer, because it's economy is dependent on the free maritime trade system. Why would people suffer because of Chinese control? Introduction of Chinese sovereignty in this parts would only subject nations to rules and regulations set out by China; unfairly, to the regional countries. Most of these governments are democracies whose economies are dependent on free trade. Having no free trade would lead to economic suicide, and an unfair lifeline to China's economy. If China's economy suffers, the whole East Asia region will suffer along with it, therefore creating global economic crisis.

China's foreign policy, though seen by regional countries as both helpful, has an underlying tone of keeping rising regional powers in check, or by limiting an economic prowess of the region; this can be seen in it's words of "joint development" offers to the governments of Vietnam, Philippines, and Malaysia. I would argue that this joint development is unfair to the regional countries because the regional countries would first cede territorial control to China before going to step 2; some of the territories are actually overlapping their own shores, therefore, the economics of China would only improve at the expense of the nations who are members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations.

To argue further, having control of South China Sea would only mean leverage against other countries dependent on shipping in the South China Sea, most notably the United States. Both these countries, though trading partners, are culturally and economically worlds apart. Having China controlling SCS would send a wrong message to Washington that China would get what it wants no matter what, and since the US role in the region is one of peace-keeping for the sake of economic growth and development, it would then have no choice but meet China's challenge head-on.

China should then stop its assertiveness in the region. I rest my case.
w.toosmart

Pro

w.toosmart forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
Mexecutive

Con

Forfeiting this round only means that my opponent has no more issues opposing to put at the table.

China's assertiveness in the region should be stopped or minimized, or kept in check by ASEAN, the United States, India, or both.

I rest my case.
w.toosmart

Pro

w.toosmart forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
No votes have been placed for this debate.