Territorial claim: Relevance in age of trade, technology

China and the United States resumed their war game over Taiwan recently, when the Speaker of the US House of Representative, Nancy Pelosi, embarked on an official visit to Taiwan, calling the bluff of several warnings from China not to do so.

For several decades, China has been unwavering in its claim to Taiwan, as part of its territory and has proved several times that it would go all lengths to keep that stake in Taiwan. China’s stand on Taiwan is respected by the United Nations and at least in theory by the United States also.

China does not have the military power to invade Taiwan successfully, but it has declared repeatedly that it will go to war if Taiwan declares independence. So far even though such a war might be irrational on China’s part, the threat has deterred Taiwan from formally declaring independence. China might lose such a war, but would certainly inflict immense damage on Taiwan.

Territorial significance

Every country values every inch of territory it owns, because of their association with the integrity of the state, territories are valued far beyond any economic or strategic value they hold. The territorial nature of the interstate system reflects the origin of that system in an age when agrarian societies relied on agriculture to generate wealth.

Historically, territory was the basis of economic production. Even in Sun Tzu’s time, it was said that “land is the foundation of the state.” It was in these agrarian societies that our current international system developed. Winning and losing wars meant gaining or losing territories, which meant increasing wealth and hence long-term power.

Changing Times

Today, there seem to be a reduction in the inherent value of territory as technology has developed. Much more wealth derived from trade and technology than from agriculture. The cost of most territorial disputes appears to outweigh any economic benefit that the territory in question could provide.

There are exceptions, however, such as the capture of diamond-mining areas in several African countries by rebels who use the diamond revenue to finance war. In 2002, forty countries created a programme of UN certification for legitimate diamonds, trying to keep the “conflict diamonds” off the international market.

This notwithstanding, countries value home territory with an almost fanatical devotion, and such strong attachments seem never to be changing. Countries will seldom yield territory in exchange for money or anything of positive reward, nor do countries quickly forget territories that they lose involuntarily. Many of the countries today were as a result of wars in which winners take territory out of the losers. Some were also imposed arbitrarily by third parties such as colonisers

Irredentism

Though trade and technology create wealth and power more than land in recent times, faith in irredentism still holds strong for countries and their citizens. Irredentism is the goal of reclaiming territories lost to other states. This form of nationalism colours most of the trending and flagship interstate conflicts the world has witnessed in modern times, from the current Russia-Ukraine war to the protracted Arab-Israeli conflict.

Conclusion

In 1996, China held war games near Taiwan, firing missiles over the sea. The US sent two aircraft carriers to signal China that its exercise might not go too far. Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan has rekindled another war game between China and the US. How long these “wars” will remain a mere game is every one’s guess as more official visits from US to Taiwan is more likely. The ongoing loss of lives and destruction of valuable properties in Ukraine is enough to teach us the necessary lesson when dealing with disagreements involving countries’ territorial claims.
”A word to the wise is enough”

The writer is with the
Institute of Current Affairs and Diplomacy (ICAD)
E-mail: Lawmat2014@gmail.com