Conflict Management under Conditions of Asymmetric Power: The Case of the South China Sea Disputes

Gina Schneider

doi:10.5771/0175-274X-2018-1-45

Contents
- Chapter Expand | CollapseAuthorsPage
- Titelei/Inhaltsverzeichnis
- 1–39 THEMENSCHWERPUNKT 1–39
  - 1–6 Report of the International Workshop „Sliding out of control? Consequences of changes in warfare by major military powers from the “Global North” for the containment of warfare” Michael Brzoska, Hans-Georg Ehrhart, Maxim Kuzmin Michael Brzoska, Hans-Georg Ehrhart, Maxim Kuzmin 1–6
  - 7–13 Hotspot Syrien – konflikttheoretische und -analytische Betrachtungen Walter Feichtinger, Jasmina Rupp Walter Feichtinger, Jasmina Rupp 7–13
  - 14–20 The Blurring of Interstate Wars, Civil Wars and Peace Felix Wassermann Felix Wassermann 14–20
  - 21–26 Learning Difficulties: The US Way of Irregular Warfare David H. Ucko David H. Ucko 21–26
  - 27–33 Cyber Warfare – from Science Fiction to Reality Mika Kerttunen Mika Kerttunen 27–33
  - 34–39 Current Challenges to Normative Restrictions on Warfare Michael Brzoska Michael Brzoska 34–39
- 40–53 BEITRÄGE AUS SICHERHEITSPOLITIK UND FRIEDENSFORSCHUNG 40–53
  - 40–44 Nuclear Disarmament, Arms Control, and Nonproliferation in Retreat: What Europe Can Do Angela Kane, Ulrich Kuhn Angela Kane, Ulrich Kuhn 40–44
  - 45–53 Conflict Management under Conditions of Asymmetric Power: The Case of the South China Sea Disputes Gina Schneider Gina Schneider 45–53
- 54–55 NEUERSCHEINUNGEN 54–55
- 55–59 BESPRECHUNGEN 55–59
Durchsuchen Sie das Werk
Geben Sie ein Keyword in die Suchleiste ein
No access

S&F Sicherheit und Frieden , page 45 - 53

Conflict Management under Conditions of Asymmetric Power: The Case of the South China Sea Disputes

Autoren

Gina Schneider

DOI
- doi.org/10.5771/0175-274X-2018-1-45
- ISSN: 0175-274X
- ISSN online: 0175-274x
Abstract

This article analyzes and compares the development of the conflicts in the South China Sea between China and the Philippines, Vietnam and Malaysia, as well as the strategies the smaller countries have adopted towards China in the context of the disputes. The three conflicts are first analyzed separately, focusing on their development, the strategy pursued by the smaller country, and major crises that have occurred. The results are then compared across the three cases. The article confirms the relevance of asymmetry and finds that hedging is a preferable strategy in such contexts. It further identifies key aspects for conflict management under conditions of asymmetry and closes with a brief outlook on the future of the South China Sea disputes.
Share