A couple of moves in the past few weeks by claimants to parts of the South China Sea have brought that contentious maritime area to the front pages once again. The South China Sea has been generally considered a potential “flashpoint” for armed conflict for some time. Although the potential for such conflict is perceived to have diminished in recent years — partly because of commitments the parties have made to the peaceful settlement of disputes and non-use of force — it still exists. Conflicting claims to the area have not been resolved or reconciled.

To be sure, countries in Southeast Asia and, of late, China have pursued their conflicting territorial claims peacefully, as they are committed to do so under the Treaty of Amity and Cooperation in Southeast Asia (TAC), the United Nations Charter and the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. These commitments were also embodied in the 1992 ASEAN Declaration on the South China Sea and the 2002 Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea (DOC).

What makes the South China Sea question so vexing — and thus dangerous — is the fact that it is subject to multiple, not just bilateral, claims. Brunei, Malaysia, the Philippines and Vietnam — not to mention mainland China and Taiwan — have all made overlapping claims. The involvement of a big, strong and rapidly rising power — China — and what others perceive to be Beijing's extravagant, if ambiguous, claims are additional complications.

The importance of the South China Sea to international navigation is also a factor.

In 1974, practically on the eve of Vietnam's reunification, Chinese armed forces dislodged the South Vietnamese from the Paracels. In 1988, a brief naval battle between China and Vietnam in the Spratlys area sank a number of Vietnamese vessels and killed around seventy Vietnamese. The Philippines has, on a number of occasions, arrested mainland Chinese and Taiwanese fishing in the disputed area and confiscated their vessels.