Reconciling History and International Law: Territorial and Maritime Claims in the South China Sea and East China Sea

High-ranking Chinese military officials are often quoted in international media as stating that China cannot afford to lose even an inch of Chinese territory, as this territory has been passed down from Chinese ancestors. Such statements are not new in Chinese politics, but recently this narrative has made an important transition. While previously limited to disputes over land borders, such rhetoric is now routinely applied to disputes involving islands and maritime borders. China is increasingly oriented toward its maritime borders and seems unwilling to compromise on delimitation disputes, a transition mirrored by many states across the globe. In a similar vein, scholarship has found that territorial disputes are particularly intractable and volatile when compared with other types of disputes, and a large body of research has grappled with producing systematic knowledge of territorial conflict. Yet in this wide body of literature, an important question has remained largely unanswered - how do states determine which geographical areas will be included in their territorial and maritime claims? In other words, if nations are willing to fight and die for an inch of national territory, how do governments draw the boundaries of the nation? This dissertation uses in-depth case studies of some of the most prominent territorial and maritime disputes in East Asia to argue that domestic political processes play a dominant and previously under-explored role in both shaping claims and determining the nature of territorial and maritime disputes. China and Taiwan are particularly well suited for this type of investigation, as they are separate claimants in multiple disputes, yet they both draw upon the same historical record when establishing and justifying their claims. Leveraging fieldwork in Taiwan, China, and the US, this dissertation includes in-depth case studies of China’s and Taiwan’s respective claims in both the South China Sea and East China Sea disputes. Evidence from this dissertation indicates that officials in both China and Taiwan have struggled with how to reconcile history and international law when establishing their claims, and that this struggle has introduced ambiguity into China's and Taiwan's claims. Amid this process, domestic political dynamics have played a dominant role in shaping the options available and the potential for claims to change in the future. In Taiwan’s democratic system, where national identity is highly contested through party politics, opinions vary along a broad spectrum as to the proper borders of the nation, and there is considerable evidence that Taiwan’s claims may change in the near future. In contrast, within China’s single-party authoritarian political system, where nationalism is source of regime legitimacy, views on the proper interpretation of China’s boundaries do vary, but along a much more narrow range. In the dissertation’s final chapter, additional cases, such as South Korea’s position on Dokdo and Indonesia’s approach to the defense of Natuna are used as points of comparison to further clarify theoretical findings.

Using a Combination of Phylogenetic Comparative and Paleobotanical Methods to Elucidate Patterns of Lineage Selection in Rosales (Plantae: Anthophyta)

An increasing focus in evolutionary biology is on the interplay between mesoscale ecological and evolutionary processes such as population demographics, habitat tolerance, and especially geographic distribution, as potential drivers responsible for patterns of diversification and extinction over geologic time. However, few studies to date connect organismal processes such as survival and reproduction through mesoscale patterns to long-term macroevolutionary trends. In my dissertation, I investigate how mechanism of seed dispersal, mediated through geographic range size, influences diversification rates in the Rosales (Plantae: Anthophyta). In my first chapter, I validate the phylogenetic comparative methods that I use in my second and third chapters. Available state speciation and extinction (SSE) models assumptions about evolution known to be false through fossil data. I show, however, that as long as net diversification rates remain positive – a condition likely true for the Rosales – these violations of SSE’s assumptions do not cause significantly biased results. With SSE methods validated, my second chapter reconstructs three associations that appear to increase diversification rate for Rosalean genera: (1) herbaceous habit; (2) a three-way interaction combining animal dispersal, high within-genus species richness, and geographic range on multiple continents; (3) a four-way interaction combining woody habit with the other three characteristics of (2). I suggest that the three- and four-way interactions represent colonization ability and resulting extinction resistance in the face of late Cenozoic climate change; however, there are other possibilities as well that I hope to investigate in future research. My third chapter reconstructs the phylogeographic history of the Rosales using both non-fossil-assisted SSE methods as well as fossil-informed traditional phylogeographic analysis. Ancestral state reconstructions indicate that the Rosaceae diversified in North America while the other Rosalean families diversified elsewhere, possibly in Eurasia. SSE is able to successfully identify groups of genera that were likely to have been ancestrally widespread, but has poorer taxonomic resolution than methods that use fossil data. In conclusion, these chapters together suggest several potential causal links between organismal, mesoscale, and geologic scale processes, but further work will be needed to test the hypotheses that I raise here.