Globes Without Nine Dashes: Taiwan's Claims in the South China Sea

Dash-less globes for sale in Taipei

At a shopping center in Taipei today I noticed some world globes for sale. A closer looked revealed they didn't include some dashes I used to seeing in mainland China, whether on globes or maps of restaurant locations. These dashes, commonly referred to as the Nine-Dash Line, have been used by both the People's Republic of China (PRC) and the Republic of China (ROC, Taiwan) to indicate their claims in the South China Sea. The exact nature of the claims represented by the dashes hasn't always been clear. The globes inspired me to learn a bit more about the ROC side of things in this complex issue.

So below are a links to a few relevant pieces with different perspectives along with excerpts. Of note, after the first two pieces were published the ruling in the South China Sea Arbitration was issued in July 2016. The next two pieces capture some of its ramifications.


1. "Where Does Taiwan Stand on the South China Sea?" (May 2016) by Jiye Kim

The ROC seems to have slightly adjusted the gravity of its claim. Recently, the ROC’s claim has focused more on the islands, their surrounding waters and continental shelf, rather than the whole body of water in the U-shaped line. The ROC ‘suspended its claim to the entire waters’ within the line in December 2005, while still advocating its ownership of land features within the line.

2. "Has Taiwan Implicitly Clarified the U-Shaped Line?" (May 2016) by Chi-Ting Tsai

The illustration of the U-shaped line on an official map, “The First ROC Territorial Baseline and Territorial and Contiguous Zone Lines,” also constrains Taipei’s legal options. There is a brief footnote on the map noting, “All of the islands and rocks of the Spratly Islands within the traditional U-shaped line are ROC territory.” The map therefore suggests Taiwan claims only territorial sovereignty over the islands and rocks within the U-shaped line, not historical rights or sovereignty over the waters within the line. If Taiwan’s government regarded historical rights and waters as an indispensable interest within the U-shaped line, there would be no reason to exclude mention of them from the map. This does not necessarily prevent Taiwan from taking action to claim historical rights and waters in the future, but it does provide ammunition against Taipei were it to do so.

3. "Taiwan Can’t Negotiate, Likely to Observe Rules on South China Sea" (May, 2017) by Ralph Jennings

Taiwan lost a chance to make a global impression by stepping away from its nine-dash line claim, said Euan Graham, international security director with the Lowy Institute for International Policy in Sydney.

“There was an opportunity there I think for Taiwan to get ahead of China in a way by maintaining its claim on the basis of features, but separating itself from the nine-dash line,” Graham said. “That would have been interesting, how China would have responded to that.”

4. "Taiwan’s Unique Opportunity to Help Resolve the South China Sea Maritime Territorial Dispute" (November, 2017) by Christopher Yung

Two of the larger remaining grand strategic options appear to be quite risky. A threat to renounce Taiwan’s traditional claim based on historic rights would plunge Taiwan into a deep and sustained row with Beijing. If the purpose of the renunciation is to create greater negotiating leverage with the PRC, then the risk might be worth taking. A move toward greater cooperation with Beijing on issues related to the South China Sea poses the risk that Taiwan is snared by Beijing’s “United Front” tactics, but if the result is a PRC promise to agree to a Taiwan proposal to convene an international conference to help bridge the Chinese position with that of international law, thereby elevating Taipei’s international status, then this too might be worth the risk.