This research aims to analyze the possible correlation between the concept of coercive diplomacy and China’s foreign policy behaviors towards South China Sea maritime territorial disputes. Chinese leadership has always emphasized the peaceful essence in China’s foreign policy, but China’s proactive behaviors towards several disputed territorial and maritime issues with some of its neighboring nations have boosted them to believe China’s changing its foreign policy. China has recently tried more flexible approaches in dealing such issues, among which coercive diplomacy is most prominent. Coercive diplomacy theoretically is more diplomatic than coercive, or diplomacy with coercion, therefore a consistent approach in China’s foreign policy. The new leadership under Xi Jinping currently has declared to secure China’s national interests without engaging in a direct military conflict with regional countries. In this regard, it can be concluded that the link between China’s interests and coercive diplomacy in the South China Sea issue has increased only recently.In this academic research, I intend to examine the theory of coercive diplomacy and analyze the characteristics of China’s foreign policy based on its historical traditions and current realities relevant with the dispute or crisis management. Besides discussing the various dynamics of Chinese foreign policy, this study also aims to create a link between the logic of coercive diplomacy and China’s specific policy and measures taken to manage the South China Sea issue, especially during the case of the Huangyan Island Crisis, to find the effect of China’s coercive diplomacy in practice. The case of Huangyan Island Crisis between China and the Philippines in 2012 is examined within the framework of the research, which is designed to trace the South China Sea disputes and seek to answer questions such as whether the China’s coercive diplomacy is effective in the South China Sea disputes, and if so, in what ways? For that purpose, the thesis will illuminate the Chinese coercive diplomacy and the case is examined to support the main concerns of the research. |