Since the 16th century, the world's maritime order has been dominated by Western powers. Portugal in the 16th century, the Netherlands in the 17th century, the United Kingdom in the 18th and 19th centuries, and the United States in the 20th century became maritime hegemons and led the world maritime order. When these countries became hegemonic powers, they created international maritime norms favourable to their countries and used them as tools to maintain their hegemony in the international maritime order. After the Second World War, the political role of Third World countries increased and even the less powerful countries began to have a voice in the global maritime order. In 1982, many developing countries signed the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, which provided a legal basis for the 200-mile exclusive economic zone. This development was a fairer and more positive step in the evolution of the global maritime order, which was adjusted through negotiation rather than the use of force.
However, the current United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea still has many problems, including the following. First, UNCLOS is a product of compromise and negotiation, which contradicts its original meaning and has caused many conflicts around the world over the ownership of islands and the delimitation of maritime boundaries. Second, the maritime order centred on UNCLOS is being challenged by maritime powers such as the United States. In other words, the "production limitation policy" and "forced technology transfer" provided for in Article 11 and Annex III of UNCLOS violate the principle of free competition and economic interests. In other words, UNCLOS needs to clarify the ambiguous provisions because the powers do not recognise the benefits of coastal states' exclusive economic zones, which many developing countries have recognised.
China saw these problems with UNCLOS as the basis for entering the world as a maritime power by securing a certain amount of maritime space and abundant marine resources. As a result, it is intensively researching marine science and technology and working to cultivate marine talent. In expanding its maritime economic activities around the world to become a maritime economic power, China's strong foreign exchange reserves and abundant human resources are in line with the internationalisation of the Chinese economy and international economic cooperation.
Today's new maritime order has given China the opportunity to expand its maritime space and expand its maritime interests. We have been preparing step by step for the goal of reintegrating the world's maritime resources and becoming a global maritime economic power through friendly cooperation with each of the world's maritime powers, and we have already reached a considerable position, but we are facing international disputes and conflicts over issues such as the confirmation of maritime boundaries and the ownership of surrounding islands. Therefore, China's approach to solving problems and the way it develops its maritime zone will have a significant impact on the international maritime order. China aims to become a global maritime power that can assert its interests, values and political views in the new maritime order, while maintaining its voice in the transition of the international maritime order.
This shows that China, which is undergoing rapid political and economic development, also has clearly defined areas of maritime territorial disputes with South Korea. However, in order to strengthen its presence in East Asia, China must give due consideration to the interests of neighbouring countries and not challenge their core interests. In other words, it must give due consideration to the interests of neighbouring countries in the process of realising its interests and expanding common interests. In addition, the process of strengthening maritime rights must not destroy the maritime order. China's strengthening of its maritime claims in the East Asian region, which may conflict with the goals of the United States, is creating tensions among neighbouring countries. The United States is also becoming increasingly interdependent with China on the international stage. If China refuses to choose the current zero-sum game in the process of strengthening its dominance in East Asia, it may face difficulties both internally and externally. In the context of the territorial and maritime disputes with South Korea, a one-sided attitude towards North Korea may actually create more difficulties for China, which is reinforcing its delay.
