China has justified its claims over all of the South China Sea by reliance on a worldview based on the Chinese concept of Tian Xi（all under heaven/天下). In doing so China has attempted to provide an alternative to international law and norms(see article below) even as it seeks to be part of that international system.
Meanwhile, China has ignored the Malay Muslim worldview, which is illustrated in part by these Ottoman maps(click to enlarge):
The Ottoman maps above are of Singapore and Borneo, and define in green and red the demarcations of the Anglo-Dutch Treaty of 1824.
The maps, which are presented in the original as one, describe in Arabic land masses that encompass the South China Sea.
Written in Arabic they appear to describe Islamic lands under colonial rule. Consequently could it be argued that the Muslim world, in which the Ottomans were at that point the leading "superpower", recognised the Malay Nusantara, including both land and sea, as part of the Muslim world? Could it not then be argued that this worldview challenges the Chinese concept of
Tian Xia（all under heaven/天下), and the Chinese claim to the South China Sea that flows from it?
TO BE READ WITH
Monday, July 13, 2020
Chinese academic publication justifying China's claims over the South China Sea based on notions of Chinese racial superiority : Implications for all of China's other territorial claims
by Ganesh Sahathevan
This, believe it or not, is the conclusion to a legal analysis of China's claims over the South China Sea by Chinese legal academic Zheng Zhihua and Wu Jingnan
China has suffered great challenges and humiliation, inflicted by colonial powers since the outbreak of the Opium Wars in the mid-19th century. Since 1864, China has tried to learn and use the concept of Western International Law to defend its territorial integrity. As Joseph Levenson put it:
“The history of modern China is a journey from Tian Xia（all under heaven/天下）to a nation-state.” [45] “Tian Xia is a civilization order concept based on the sharing of Chinese culture and ethical order.” [46]
Under the order of Tian Xia system, countries are not separated by concrete boundaries but united by culture and moral appeal. The Western vocabulary of sovereignty, nation-state and boundary is ill-suited for the traditional Chinese worldview.
The 1935 map (see above) has not only significant value in proving China’s territorial sovereignty of the islands in the South China Sea, but also profound meaning as a facilitator of China’s transition into a modern nation-state, defining its geographical boundaries and safeguarding China’s maritime rights and interests today.
Map of the South China Sea Islands of China, 1935
This, believe it or not, is the conclusion to a legal analysis of China's claims over the South China Sea by Chinese legal academic Zheng Zhihua and Wu Jingnan
China has suffered great challenges and humiliation, inflicted by colonial powers since the outbreak of the Opium Wars in the mid-19th century. Since 1864, China has tried to learn and use the concept of Western International Law to defend its territorial integrity. As Joseph Levenson put it:
“The history of modern China is a journey from Tian Xia（all under heaven/天下）to a nation-state.” [45] “Tian Xia is a civilization order concept based on the sharing of Chinese culture and ethical order.” [46]
Under the order of Tian Xia system, countries are not separated by concrete boundaries but united by culture and moral appeal. The Western vocabulary of sovereignty, nation-state and boundary is ill-suited for the traditional Chinese worldview.
The 1935 map (see above) has not only significant value in proving China’s territorial sovereignty of the islands in the South China Sea, but also profound meaning as a facilitator of China’s transition into a modern nation-state, defining its geographical boundaries and safeguarding China’s maritime rights and interests today.
The author assumes that Chinese culture and order is something that non-Chinese would want to be part of.That seems to be the underlying thesis. Clearly, that is not the case, not even among the people of South East Asia. The notion that all must want to "share" in Chinese culture and ethical order is inherently racist and cannot possibly be the basis of international law and norms.The above provides a basis for rejecting all of China's territorial claims.
