国際制度の交差に見る中国の国益

――国連海洋法条約の事例から――

抄録

This paper explores its research question on the behavior of China upon its participation in the creation of an international law, where institutions of different issue areas intersect. It establishes a starting point for theoretical research on the relation between the fluidity of international institutions and their effect on states’ interests.

As to its potential contribution, firstly, since earlier studies that focus on the institutions’ “evolutions” treat states as homogeneous entities, it is valuable to provide the view from states, who utilize the institutions to pursue their own interests. Secondly, while earlier research on China and international institutions concentrates on the socialization of China in the “western” institutions, this paper highlights institutional fluidity and complexity, and the aspect of China utilizing them from their side. China is a country worth taking up, since it is a state with increasing importance in world order.

Methodologically, this research takes up the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), which regulates maritime order, and the related international negotiations in establishing an environmental institution on “Marine Biodiversity of Areas beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ)” under UNCLOS. Qualitative analysis is conducted on the international and Chinese arguments by looking into related minutes, statements and analyses. Related institutions, organizations and international law arguments are also referred to.

Having traced international and Chinese arguments on BBNJ initiation, the conclusion is as follows; firstly, they all attempted to preserve their status quo maritime order as the norm, which I labeled as the “first trend”. Meanwhile, there was a “second trend” that aimed at restricting sovereignty by the international institution, which began as an exceptional argument on environmental control over areas beyond national jurisdiction (ABNJ). However, when it was time the regulation details be specified, it became clear that they had to agree on concrete points, making it difficult to keep the norm intact. The clash between the two trends is ongoing in the international arena, as can be seen in the discussion on the creation of Area-Based Management Tools, and the specification of Marine Genetic Resources.

China was reluctant in undertaking the “second trend” idea at the outset, but gradually committed to its elaboration, as the “third trend” argument on sheer environmental protection also transformed to an issue of maritime order, which questioned whether upholding sovereignty serves as the primary way to maximize state interests. The Chinese interest and the BBNJ process should be further examined by looking at its domestic decision-making process, and the impact of its traditional maritime disputes with surrounding neighbors. Further longitudinal studies should also serve to show how the rising power faces international institutions. However, overall, the “three trends” perspective serve as a heuristic tool to probe the relation of the change in international institutions and state interests.