Tuesday, 15 April 2025

The Borders We Share: Weaving the Threads—Six Tales of Borders and Balance (Section 1 Recap Post)

 


The Borders We Share: A New Way to Fix a Broken World

Six weeks ago, I launched The Borders We Share, a quest to rethink the jagged lines—over 200 territorial disputes—scarring our world, from Crimea’s shadow to Kashmir’s peaks, the Amazon’s roots to Antarctica’s ice. We’ve roamed Tintin’s Khemed, Sherlock’s docks, Robin Hood’s Sherwood, Atlantis’ depths, Narnia’s frost, pairing each with real wounds: Ukraine, Ireland, Brazil, Antarctica, Cyprus. I’m Dr. Jorge Emilio Núñez—Dr. Jorge to you—and this series is my crucible, fusing decades of scholarship with fiction’s spark to test a bold vision: borders as bridges, sovereignty as a shared symphony. This recap stitches those six tales into a tapestry of my Núñezian Integrated Multiverses—a framework born in 2017, sharpened through 2020 and 2023, and peering into 2025. It’s a call for cooperation over domination, lit by quantum entanglement and multidimensional pluralism. Let’s retrace the path and glimpse what’s ahead.

Borders have intrigued me since I was a kid—lines on maps humming with pride, pain, power. They’re not static; they breathe, shift, entangle us all. In The Borders We Share, I’ve spent six Tuesdays chasing that pulse, pairing mythic feuds with living fractures. My toolkit—Sovereignty Conflicts (2017), Territorial Disputes (2020), Cosmopolitanism and State Sovereignty (2023), and a taste of Territorial Disputes in the Americas (2025)—grounds this in the Núñezian Integrated Multiverses, a journey from ideal theory to gritty reality, unidimensional limits to multidimensional depth. Here’s how it unfolded, post by post, weaving a web of entangled stakes and shared solutions.

Post #1: Entangled Worlds, Shared Futures: A New Border Blueprint (March 4, 2025)

We kicked off with a manifesto—borders as living networks, not dead ends. Over 200 disputes pulse globally—Falklands/Malvinas, Gibraltar, Israel-Palestine, Kashmir—each a knot of rivalry and loss. I pitched egalitarian shared sovereignty from 2017: split authority fair, not all-or-nothing, rooted in distributive justice where all voices count, roles match skills, rewards fit effort, and the strong lift the weak. Fiction lit the fuse—Hergé’s Khemed, Borduria, Syldavia clashing over oil, a mirror to Ukraine-Crimea. My 2017 lens set ideal rules, 2020’s cases (e.g., Gibraltar’s co-sovereignty) added grit, and 2023’s multidimensionality—agents (states, locals), contexts (domestic, global), realms (law, identity)—wove a quantum twist: a tremor in one dispute ripples everywhere. The fix? A council where all sit equal, splitting stakes like kids divvying candy—messy, just, entangled. It was the blueprint: borders bind us, and justice in one corner hums across the multiverse.

Post #2: Khemed’s Oil, Crimea’s Shadow: Splitting the Stakes (March 11, 2025)

Khemed flared next—a fictional isle I spun in 2017, dripping with rare metal, torn between Syldavia’s flash and Borduria’s grit, echoing Crimea’s 2014 grab by Russia (30,000 dead since 2022, Black Sea oil and naval chokeholds). People pulse—Khemedians split by faith, Crimeans by roots (Tatars, Russians, Ukrainians). Leaders flex—Putin’s chess, Syldavia’s swagger—while war scars bleed on. My 2017 justice split Khemed’s metal—mining, fishing, taxes—while 2020’s realism (Crimea’s geostrategy, 2014’s Budapest Memorandum breached) and 2023’s pluralism (Tatars as agents, nonlinear NATO risks) shared Crimea’s gas for Tatar schools. Quantum entanglement hums—Crimea’s shift tugs Ukraine, Russia, the West, a particle dance demanding interconnected fixes. Sharing beats zero-sum ruin; 2023’s Chapter 6 (linear roles, nonlinear chaos) proves it—Khemed’s dust settles when all thrive.

Post #3: Sherlock’s Docks, Ireland’s Edge: Clues to Equal Ground (March 18, 2025)

Sherlock Holmes stepped in, pipe aglow, untangling a 1890s London dock brawl—Thames Trawlers vs. Fog Cutters, fish and fog at stake—mirroring Northern Ireland post-Brexit (1.8 million souls, 58% voted “stay” in 2016, trade snags since 2020). History haunts—dock deeds blur in time, Ireland’s 1998 Good Friday peace (30,000 dead pre-’98) frays under 1690’s echoes. My 2017 equity split the wharf—morning hauls, noon sales—while 2020’s depth (colonial scars, Belfast Agreement’s fragility) and 2023’s lens (EU as agent, nonlinear trade tensions) shaped Ireland: joint customs, £4 billion flowing, no walls. A bonus post (March 21) had Holmes dissect it—50 barrels vs. £4 billion, evidence trumping ego. Entangled agents—fishers, farmers, EU meddlers—thrive when borders bend. Chapter 6’s horizontal pluralism (peer dynamics) and nonlinear risks (external meddling) nail it: sharing outlasts rot.

Post #4: Sherwood’s Green, Amazon’s Roots: Forests for All (March 25, 2025)

Robin Hood’s arrows pierced Sherwood—outlaws hunting, Sheriff taxing oaks—echoing the Amazon (12,088 km² razed 2022, INPE), Brazil vs. Yanomami, Kayapó tribes, colonial echoes (1494’s Tordesillas, Portugal’s uti possidetis) fueling the fight. Peasants need firewood, tribes fish rivers poisoned by 11 tons of gold yearly (Greenpeace). My 2017 fairness zoned Sherwood—hunting, taxes, timber—while 2020’s cases (tribes sidelined by colonial law) and 2023’s pluralism (78% Brazilians back protection, 2021 poll; nonlinear land grabs) split the Amazon: tribes steward, Brazil farms, profits fund life. Quantum ripples—Amazon’s loss tugs Sherwood’s myth, a superposition of green hearts. History bends—1750’s Treaty of Madrid swapped land; 2023’s vertical hierarchy (state vs. tribe) meets horizontal equity (shared gains). Sharing grows stronger than plunder.

Post #5: Atlantis Rising, Antarctic Thaw: Deep Claims, Shared Wins (April 1, 2025)

Atlantis surged off Santorini in 2025—Greek Triton League (30% DNA link) vs. U.S.-UK Neptune Pact ($5 billion tech), $10 billion in gold—mirroring Antarctica (1.4 million square miles, 200 billion barrels oil, USGS), seven claimants (Argentina’s Esperanza, UK’s 1908 Patent) frozen by 1959’s Treaty, eyed by Russia, China. Ice melts (10% since 2010, NOAA); greed stirs. My 2017 blind council split Atlantis—relics for Greece, tech for the Pact—while 2025’s Americas (Ch. 9) and 2023’s multidimensionality (Russia’s subs as agents, linear science roles, nonlinear profit risks) zoned Antarctica: 20% heritage, 30% science, $1 billion shared. Entangled stakes—Antarctica’s thaw shifts Atlantis’ gleam—demand harmony. Chapter 6’s chaotic nonlinearity (external powers) proves it: reason balances the deep.

Post #6: Narnia’s Ice, Cyprus Split: Thrones in Balance (April 8, 2025)

Narnia’s frost locked Prince Torin’s scrolls and Lady Sylva’s songs in a Witch’s chill, echoing Cyprus—1,130 square miles, Greek since antiquity, Ottoman 1570s, British 1878, split by 1974’s Attila Line (180 km, 150,000 displaced, UNHCR). Settlers tip north (100,000, TRNC 2023). My 2017 triad—Torin east, Sylva west, fauns commons—fit Cyprus: Greeks south (€2 billion GDP), Turks north (€500 million), trade opens (€50 million tolls). 2020’s Territorial Disputes (Ch. 7, 1974’s invasion) and 2023’s depth (EU’s €1.5 billion trade, nonlinear settler flux) steadied it. Entangled realms—Narnia’s ice thaws Cyprus’s peace—show sharing outlasts ash. Chapter 6’s spiral view (history looping) seals it: thrones balance when all sit.

These six posts form the Núñezian Integrated Multiverses, a path from 2017’s ideal theory to 2023’s quantum-inspired complexity. Sovereignty Conflicts (2017) birthed egalitarian shared sovereignty—rules include: all speak, roles fit skills, rewards match effort, the strong lift the weak—rooted in distributive justice, splitting authority fair over third territories (e.g., Kashmir, Falklands/Malvinas, Gibraltar). Territorial Disputes (2020) grounded it in real cases—Israel-Palestine, Crimea, Northern Ireland, South China Sea, Mexico-United States—blending hermeneutics, law, politics, showing sovereignty as fluid, entangled across agents (states, communities), contexts (domestic, global), and time (colonial pasts). Cosmopolitanism (2023) leapt multidimensional—pluralism of pluralisms: agents (individuals, states), roles (hosts, viewers), contexts (local, international), realms (rational, axiological), modes (ideal, metaphysical), shaped by variables like time (eternalists vs. non-eternalists) and space (land, cyberspace). Chapter 6 maps this: linear models (vertical hierarchy—state over tribe; horizontal peers—trade partners) meet nonlinear twists (chaotic external meddling, random diaspora claims), capturing disputes’ dance. Quantum entanglement ties it—Crimea’s shift ripples to Kashmir, sovereignty in superposition (exclusive, shared) until justice measures it. My 2025 peek (Antarctica’s council) tests it live. Fiction—Khemed’s oil, Narnia’s throne—lights reality’s mud, proving borders hum when shared.

Zero-sum fails—Crimea’s war (30,000 dead), Sherwood’s thinning oaks, Atlantis’ rusting subs lose more than they win. People, not dirt, drive it—Crimeans’ roots, Yanomami’s rivers—entangled with states in a quantum web. History bends—1750’s Madrid, 1959’s Treaty, 1998’s peace—showing sharing works. Leaders thrive on strife—Putin’s chess, the Sheriff’s writ—but 2023’s nonlinear lens (NATO’s chaos, time’s flux) outmaneuvers ego. The multiverse connects—Khemed’s metal tugs Antarctica’s ice, a ripple where fairness in one lifts all. 2017’s justice (equity), 2020’s grit (cases), 2023’s pluralism (agents, realms) stitch equity into chaos—sharing isn’t soft, it’s strategic, a balanced state in an entangled world.

“Sovereignty’s sacred!” skeptics howl. Russia grips Crimea, Greece clutches Atlantis’ myth, Cyprus’s 66% “no” to Annan (2004) digs in. Power rules—Bolsonaro’s chainsaws (1,900 km² razed, 2023), Putin’s 42% turnout flex. Time hardens—450 years in Cyprus, 2,300 in Atlantis’ tale. Space chokes—180 km of wire, 50 miles of ruin. Outsiders—NATO, EU, barons—muddy trust. My 2017 bet needs faith; reality’s a cold blade. Yet 2020’s cases counter—Gibraltar bends, ASEAN ties, 54 nations hold Antarctica. Entanglement demands adaptation—2023’s nonlinear diplomacy (random external shocks) pries open even the toughest knots. Reason, rooted in 2017’s justice, still moves mountains.

These tales—Khemed’s fishers, Ireland’s farmers, Amazon’s elders—are us: a kid hungry by a dock, a mother fearing guns anew, a fisherman watching oil rigs rise. The Borders We Share isn’t just a blog—it’s a call to reweave our entangled world. Six posts down, Section 1’s done, but the multiverse hums on. I’m Dr. Jorge, dreaming this into a book you’ll hold. Swing by https://drjorge.world or X (https://x.com/DrJorge_World )—let’s keep threading this together.

Starting with Post #7 on April 15, 2025, readers of The Borders We Share will notice a shift in the fictional lands anchoring our exploration of sovereignty, resources, and justice. Previously, we drew from Hergé’s Tintin universe—Khemed, Syldavia, and Borduria—to frame these allegories, as seen in earlier posts like “The Case of Khemed Between Borduria and Syldavia” (https://drjorge.world/2024/04/12/the-case-of-khemed-between-borduria-and-syldavia/). However, to ensure this series stands fully on open creative ground and avoids any copyright entanglements (Hergé’s work remains protected until 2053 in the EU), we’re fully transitioning to public-domain alternatives: Laputa, Ruritania, and Cimmeria. These new lands, sourced from classic literature, preserve the thematic heart of our journey—oil and dust disputes, entangled borders, and multidimensional fixes—while offering fresh, vibrant settings that enrich the narrative and align with the series’ vision.

Laputa, replacing Khemed, steps in as our contested prize, drawn from Jonathan Swift’s Gulliver’s Travels (1726). In its original tale, Laputa is a floating island of detached intellectuals, but here we ground it as a small, sea-bound isle—oil-rich, Muslim-majority, and reliant on fishing and farming, mirroring Khemed’s vulnerability. Defenseless and revered as a holy site by its rival claimants, Laputa has been recently seized by Ruritania from Cimmeria’s historical grasp, much like Khemed’s shifting control. Its oil wells fuel posts like Laputa’s Wells, Saudi Sands (Post #8), echoing Saudi-Yemen tensions, while its isolation amplifies the stakes of resource disputes. Laputa’s Swiftian roots add a layer of quirky mystique—think oil rigs rising from misty waters—making it a compelling stand-in that keeps our focus on exploited lands caught in larger games.

Ruritania, taking Syldavia’s place, emerges from Anthony Hope’s The Prisoner of Zenda (1894) as our wealthy, controlling power. A kingdom thriving on finance and trade rather than natural resources, Ruritania sits on another continent from Laputa, wielding advanced defenses and a rigid legal system—think Syldavia’s financial might and intolerance retooled with monarchic flair. Having forcibly claimed Laputa, Ruritania’s royal pride drives posts like Ruritania’s Pride, Iraq’s Line (Post #12), paralleling Iraq-Kurdistan’s dignity clashes. Its elegance and distance contrast with the raw lands it seeks to dominate, offering readers a polished antagonist whose crown casts a long shadow over dust and oil alike.

Cimmeria, stepping in for Borduria, hails from Robert E. Howard’s Conan tales (pre-1929 U.S., free since 2006 EU), reimagined as our vast, struggling neighbor. A sprawling, resource-poor wildland adjacent to Laputa via a shared continental shelf, Cimmeria is Hindu-majority (cast as a warrior cult), agricultural, and economically strained by poverty and tribal disarray—echoing Borduria’s debt and corruption. Militarily weak yet historically dominant over Laputa until Ruritania’s takeover, Cimmeria’s barbaric grit shines in Cimmeria’s Dust, South China Sea (Post #7), akin to China-ASEAN rivalries. Its prehistoric, dust-swept expanse swaps Borduria’s plains for a savage frontier, giving readers a visceral underdog whose faded glory fuels both conflict and hope. Together, these lands—Laputa’s fragile riches, Ruritania’s distant power, and Cimmeria’s rugged fight—carry our multiverse forward, rooted in public-domain classics and primed for your engagement.

Section 1 laid the groundwork—entangled borders, shared stakes. Now, Section 2, Oil and Dust Disputes (Posts 7–12), plunges into the raw core of resource wars—oil, dust, gems—where rivalry turns to redemption. You’ve demanded it, and I’ve delivered: Sherlock Holmes and other beloved characters return, roving through fresh fictional lands to unravel real-world disputes. From Cimmeria’s dust-swept wilds to Utopia’s oil visions, they’ll trek alongside my Núñezian Integrated Multiverses, weaving 2017’s justice, 2020’s grounded cases, 2023’s pluralism, and 2025’s previews. As of Post #7, we’ve swapped Hergé’s Khemed, Syldavia, and Borduria for public-domain gems—Laputa, Ruritania, and Cimmeria—to keep this journey legally free and creatively boundless. Here’s the lineup, kicking off Tuesday, April 15, 2025:

  • Post #7: Cimmeria’s Dust, South China Sea: Rivals as Partners (April 22, 2025)

Cimmeria and Ruritania clash over Laputa’s dusty shores, a stand-in for China-ASEAN tensions in the South China Sea (1.4 million square miles, $3.4 trillion trade, UNCTAD). Sherlock prowls Cimmeria’s barbaric frontier, decoding tribal claims against Ruritania’s royal rigs—oil vs. fishing boats. My 2017 split shares Laputa’s reefs; 2023’s nonlinear lens (U.S. meddling) finds balance amid the dust.

  • Post #8: Laputa’s Wells, Saudi Sands: Oil Beyond One Flag (April 29, 2025)

Laputa’s locals battle Ruritania’s crown over oil wells, echoing Saudi-Yemen border strife (Houthi clashes, 150,000 dead, UNHCR). Holmes digs into the price—Laputa’s fishers vs. Ruritania’s states, Cimmeria’s shadow looming. 2017’s equity splits the pumps; 2020’s cases (Yemen’s chaos) ground it. Oil flows beyond one flag, shared across entangled stakes.

  • Post #9: Laputa’s Wells, Part II: The Entangled Price (May 6, 2025)

Laputa’s oil saga deepens—quantum justice reworks the split. Sherlock maps the entanglement—Ruritania’s rigs ripple to Cimmeria’s dust. 2023’s Chapter 6 (chaotic pricing) and 2017’s fairness refine it: Laputa’s locals fund schools, Ruritania drills, Cimmeria trades. One shift tugs all in this multidimensional weave.

  • Post #10: Oz’s Emeralds, Gulf Oil: Gems of the Deep (May 13, 2025)

Oz’s wizards feud over emeralds and oil, mirroring Persian Gulf disputes (Iran-Saudi, 90 million barrels daily, EIA). Holmes hunts beneath waves—gems vs. crude, Laputa’s lessons in tow. 2020’s cases (Gulf proxy wars) and 2023’s pluralism (tribes as agents) split the deep: fairness shines through emerald tides.

  • Post #11: Utopia’s Oil Dream, Nigeria’s Delta: Fairness Flows (May 20, 2025)

Utopia’s thinkers debate Laputa’s oil with Cimmeria, echoing Nigeria-Cameroon Bakassi (2002 ICJ ruling, oil-rich). Sherlock weighs utopian ideals against Cimmeria’s gritty reality—delta dreams vs. dust. 2017’s justice shares rigs; 2025’s Americas (Ch. 9) tests it. Equity flows where conflict once flared.

  • Post #12: Ruritania’s Pride, Iraq’s Line: Dust Meets Dignity (May 27, 2025)

Ruritania’s royalty guards Laputa’s dust, mirroring Iraq-Kurdistan (Kirkuk oil, 2017 referendum). Holmes traces pride’s cost—Ruritania’s crown vs. Cimmeria’s barbaric honor. 2020’s depth (Kurdish claims) and 2023’s spiral view (history loops) split stakes: Cimmeria farms, Ruritania drills. Dignity bends, not breaks, in this dusty dance.

Section 2 keeps the multiverse spinning—oil and dust as entangled threads, Sherlock’s pipe and other iconic characters lighting the way. Readers, your clamor brought them back, and they’ll roam these new lands—Laputa’s vulnerable isle, Ruritania’s regal realm, Cimmeria’s wild frontier—proving sharing tames even the fiercest disputes.

  • Núñez, J.E. (2017). Sovereignty Conflicts (Ch. 6, 7).
  • Núñez, J.E. (2020). Territorial Disputes (Ch. 1, 7).
  • Núñez, J.E. (2023). Cosmopolitanism and State Sovereignty (Ch. 1, 6, 7).
  • Núñez, J.E. (2025). Territorial Disputes in the Americas (Ch. 9).

New posts every Tuesday.

  1. Entangled Worlds, Shared Futures: A New Border Blueprint
  2. Khemed’s Oil, Crimea’s Shadow: Splitting the Stakes
  3. Sherlock’s Docks, Ireland’s Edge: Clues to Equal Ground
    1. 3.1. Bonus
  4. Sherwood’s Green, Amazon’s Roots: Forests for All
  5. Atlantis Rising, Antarctic Thaw: Deep Claims, Shared Wins
  6. Narnia’s Ice, Cyprus Split: Thrones in Balance

Section 2: Oil and Dust Disputes—Starts April 22, 2025!

State Sovereignty: Concept and Conceptions (OPEN ACCESS) (IJSL 2024)

AMAZON

ROUTLEDGE, TAYLOR & FRANCIS

Tuesday 15th April 2025

Dr Jorge Emilio Núñez

X (formerly, Twitter): https://x.com/DrJorge_World

https://drjorge.world

Thursday, 10 April 2025

China and the South China Sea Territorial Disputes

 

China and the South China Sea Territorial Disputes

The South China Sea (SCS) territorial disputes remain a critical geopolitical flashpoint in 2025, involving China, Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia, Brunei, and Taiwan. These disputes, rooted in overlapping claims over islands, reefs, and maritime zones, encompass historical legacies, legal battles, and resource competition, affecting regional stability and global trade. My research, detailed in 20 posts from July to September 2020 (Territorial Disputes: South China Sea, Parts 1-20), predicted their persistence without radical rethinking, a forecast borne out by recent escalations. This analysis, informed by Sovereignty Conflicts (2017), Territorial Disputes (2020), and Cosmopolitanism and State Sovereignty (2023), aims to provide a comprehensive overview, and aligned with my forthcoming Territorial Disputes in the Americas (2025).

As of April 2025, tensions in the SCS have intensified. On March 29, Reuters reported China’s military conducting “routine patrols” in response to U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s reaffirmation of support for the Philippines, with Beijing accusing Manila of “illegal claims” and destabilizing the region. Aerial footage from March 24 (Newsweek) showed China installing floating barriers at Scarborough Shoal to block Philippine fishing boats, prompting Manila’s Defense Secretary Gilberto Teodoro to label China’s claims “the biggest fiction and lie” (AP News). On April 5, Eurasian Times revealed China’s construction of the world’s first permanent deep-sea research station, targeting gas hydrate reserves estimated at 80 billion tonnes of oil-equivalent energy—exceeding the Persian Gulf’s 50 billion tonnes—set to begin operations by 2030. This move underscores China’s energy ambitions, potentially reducing reliance on Middle Eastern oil.

Tensions spiked further with Vietnam’s expansion of Spratly Islands outposts, including an 8,000-foot airstrip at Barque Canada Reef (Newsweek, March 27), and joint U.S.-Philippine-Japan naval drills on March 28 (SCMP), drawing Beijing’s ire. My 2020 posts (Parts 1-5) traced this cycle to historical claims and colonial legacies, predicting escalation without equitable resource sharing, now evident in China’s energy gambit and regional pushback (South China Sea Part 6).

China’s SCS claims trace back to the Han Dynasty (206 BCE–220 CE), with intermittent maritime activity documented in ancient texts (South China Sea Part 2). The modern dispute crystallized post-World War II with the 1947 “nine-dash line,” encompassing 90% of the SCS, based on alleged historical fishing rights (South China Sea Part 3). Colonial powers—Spain, France, Britain—left ambiguous borders, exploited by Japan during WWII, setting a precedent for post-1945 contention (South China Sea Part 4). The People’s Republic of China (PRC) solidified this claim in 1949, clashing with newly independent Southeast Asian states (South China Sea Part 5).

The 2013 “ten-dash line” update intensified disputes, overlapping with exclusive economic zones (EEZs) under the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) (South China Sea Part 7). Parts 1-5 argued this historical narrative—lacking continuous control—fuels today’s legal and political battles, as seen in recent patrols and constructions.

The legal framework of the SCS disputes is multilayered, reflecting domestic, regional, and international dimensions:

  • Domestic: China’s 1992 Law on Territorial Sea asserts sovereignty over the SCS, rejecting UNCLOS norms (South China Sea Part 8). The 2021 Coast Guard Law authorizes force to defend these claims, escalating tensions (South China Sea Part 9), as seen in March 2025 patrols (Reuters).
  • Regional: ASEAN’s 2002 Declaration on Conduct aimed for a Code of Conduct (CoC), but progress stalled by 2025, with China resisting binding terms (South China Sea Part 10). The Philippines’ 2016 arbitral win under UNCLOS—ruling China’s claims lack legal basis—was dismissed by Beijing, a non-signatory to the tribunal (South China Sea Part 11), highlighting enforcement gaps.
  • International: UNCLOS grants 200-nautical-mile EEZs, violated by China’s artificial islands (e.g., Mischief Reef) and patrols (South China Sea Part 12). The U.S. and allies uphold freedom of navigation (FONOPs), but lack enforcement power (South China Sea Part 13). Parts 16-20 argued legal frameworks crumble without enforcement—China’s rejection of the 2016 ruling and March 2025 actions affirm this.

The political dynamics are equally complex, spanning domestic, regional, and international arenas:

  • Domestic: Xi Jinping’s leadership since 2012 has tied SCS dominance to national rejuvenation, bolstering the Communist Party’s legitimacy amid economic slowdown (South China Sea Part 14). Public support, fueled by nationalist sentiment, sustains this stance (CNA, March 11), as seen in state media narratives.
  • Regional: China pressures ASEAN states—e.g., harassing Philippine vessels at Scarborough Shoal (AP News, February 18)—while offering economic incentives via the Belt and Road Initiative (South China Sea Part 15). Vietnam’s outpost expansion (Newsweek, March 27) and Malaysia’s maritime security push (The Star, February 26) signal defiance, reflecting regional pushback.
  • International: U.S.-led alliances (e.g., Quad, AUKUS) counter China, with joint drills in March 2025 (SCMP) and increased EU-Japan naval presence (Nikkei Asia, March 7). Trump’s 2025 tariffs on China (commonslibrary.parliament.uk, March 12) intertwine trade with geopolitics, yet Beijing’s energy station gambit (Eurasian Times, April 5) aims to shift reliance from Middle Eastern oil (South China Sea Part 17). Sovereignty Conflicts (2017) sees this as distributive injustice—resources favor China—while Territorial Disputes (2020) notes value clashes (security vs. maritime rights).

Culturally, the SCS ties to Han Chinese identity as a maritime frontier, reinforced by state narratives of historical dominance (South China Sea Part 18). Fishermen from Hainan and Guangdong embody this claim, clashing with Southeast Asian counterparts (South China Sea Part 19), as seen in recent Scarborough Shoal incidents. Religiously, while less prominent, Buddhist and Taoist reverence for the sea subtly underpins China’s moral stance, contrasting with Christian-majority Philippines’ resistance (South China Sea Part 20).

Regionally, Vietnam’s Confucian heritage and the Philippines’ colonial Catholic legacy shape their defiance, framing China as an outsider (South China Sea Part 18). Cosmopolitanism and State Sovereignty (2023) views this as a multi-agent tangle—state, culture, faith—distorting resolution, evident in polarized X posts like “China’s lies” (BRPSierraMadre, March 15) vs. “historical rights” (yuceltanay53, April 8).

The South China Sea is a critical artery for global trade, with an estimated $3.4 trillion worth of trade passing through it annually, accounting for one-fifth of global maritime trade (Britannica). For China, 60% of its energy imports and 40% of its total trade traverse these waters, making the SCS indispensable for its economic and strategic interests (East Asia Forum, March 12). The disputes thus have far-reaching geopolitical implications, affecting not only regional stability but also global energy markets and trade routes. The involvement of extra-regional powers like the United States, which conducts freedom of navigation operations to challenge China’s claims, underscores the global nature of the conflict (Newsweek, March 31). Additionally, the strategic competition between China and the U.S. in the Indo-Pacific region is significantly shaped by the SCS disputes, with alliances such as the Quad (U.S., Japan, Australia, India) and AUKUS (Australia, U.K., U.S.) playing key roles in countering China’s assertiveness (Firstpost, March 23).

The South China Sea is not only a strategic waterway but also a repository of vast natural resources. According to estimates, the sea contains approximately 11 billion barrels of oil and 190 trillion cubic feet of natural gas (Eurasian Times, April 5). Moreover, recent developments highlight the potential of methane hydrates, with China’s deep-sea research station targeting reserves estimated at 80 billion tonnes of oil-equivalent energy. These resources are crucial for the energy security of the claimant states and have significant economic implications. For instance, China’s reliance on energy imports makes control over these resources vital for its long-term energy strategy. Similarly, Vietnam and the Philippines are keen on exploiting their EEZs for oil and gas exploration, which directly conflicts with China’s claims, as seen in the barriers at Scarborough Shoal (Newsweek, March 25).

The Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative (AMTI) tracks China’s militarized islands (e.g., Subi Reef) and Vietnam’s expansions (Newsweek, March 27), providing empirical data on militarization. The UN’s February 19, 2025, statement condemned China’s helicopter incident near Scarborough Shoal (State.gov), but lacks enforcement, reflecting international limitations. X posts reflect polarization—“China’s lies” (BRPSierraMadre, March 15) vs. “historical rights” (yuceltanay53, April 8)—yet lack March-specific data. My 2020 posts (Parts 21-25, not posted) predicted civilian tolls from advanced warfare—fishermen’s losses in 2025 bear this out, as seen in Philippine reports (AP News, February 18).

The UN Security Council’s 2024 SCS resolutions were vetoed by China (Al Jazeera, February 21), echoing Parts 10-15’s critique of bias and weakness. ASEAN’s CoC talks falter (CNA, March 11), while U.S.-led drills (SCMP, March 30) signal deterrence over diplomacy. Sovereignty Conflicts (2017) decries this—fisheries disrupted—while Territorial Disputes (2020) notes power bargaining renders it impotent, as seen in stalled ASEAN-China negotiations.

Parts 6-9 warned of narrative wars—2025 amplifies this. China claims precision in patrols (Reuters, March 29), yet Philippine losses mount (AP News, February 18). AMTI data ties actions to military aims, not proven targeting, despite Manila’s accusations (Territorial Disputes, 2020), highlighting the challenge of distinguishing intent.

The SCS crisis exposes global order’s collapse—centralized bodies fail, as Parts 16-20 predicted. Cosmopolitanism and State Sovereignty (2023) urges multi-agent solutions; Territorial Disputes in the Americas (2025) refines this: regional frameworks over a paralyzed UN. ASEAN could mediate—its 2002 initiative offered peace for restraint, viable with Vietnam’s 2025 clout (Newsweek, March 27). Co-sovereignty—shared EEZ zones or joint resource management—could balance security and survival (Sovereignty Conflicts, 2017). This demands mindset shifts—China’s coalition resists (East Asia Forum), and ASEAN’s divisions rigidify lines. Temporary truces and pluralist coalitions (ASEAN, Quad) offer pragmatic pivots, as seen in recent drills (SCMP, March 30).

China’s SCS dispute in 2025—barriers at Scarborough, 80 billion tonnes of energy at stake, ASEAN’s defiance—mirrors my 2020 research: justice skews (fisheries lost), complexity entrenches (U.S.-China rift), and pluralism fractures (CoC stalled). Parts 1-5 rooted this historically, 6-15 exposed legal-political rot, 16-20 urged new lenses. Evidence ties tolls to military aims (AMTI), yet manipulation clouds truth (UN gaps). The current order fails—Sovereignty Conflicts demands equity, Territorial Disputes adaptability, Cosmopolitanism multi-agent hope. Regional guarantors and co-sovereignty chart exits, if rigid mindsets yield. My posts below—free online—trace this fault line; readers can join this reimagining.

My series, The Borders We Share, launched March 4, 2025, probes these divides. My latest post (https://drjorge.world/2025/03/11/the-borders-we-share-khemeds-oil-crimeas-shadow-post-2/) ties Crimea’s 2014 shadow—2 million under Russia—to Ukraine’s fight, blending fiction (Khemed’s oil) and reality. I advocate co-sovereignty to heal—readers are invited to explore these shared edges, from Black Sea to Arctic, where 2025’s fate unfolds. Next week, Post #3: Sherlock’s Docks, Ireland’s Edge: Clues to Equal Ground (i.e. Imagine Sherlock Holmes untangling a dockside brawl over fish and fog—then picture Northern Ireland’s border after Brexit, a real-life riddle of fences and feelings).

State Sovereignty: Concept and Conceptions (OPEN ACCESS) (IJSL 2024)

AMAZON

ROUTLEDGE, TAYLOR & FRANCIS

Thursday 10th April 2025

Dr Jorge Emilio Núñez

X (formerly, Twitter): https://x.com/DrJorge_World

https://drjorge.world

Monday, 7 April 2025

The Borders We Share: Narnia’s Ice, Cyprus Split (Post 6)

 

The Borders We Share: A New Way to Fix a Broken World

Imagine a realm where Narnia’s frozen north splinters under rival claims—a throne of ice contested by heirs still haunted by a witch’s century-long chill. Now picture Cyprus, a sun-baked island in the Mediterranean, its soil split by the Attila Line, where Greek and Turkish Cypriots face off across a divide etched by history and hardened by time. One is a story born from C.S. Lewis’s imagination; the other is a living wound on our globe. In The Borders We Share, I’m threading these tales—mythic frost and real-world rifts—to explore a pressing question: can rival claims find balance on a shared edge, or are they doomed to collapse into chaos? Let’s journey through these divided lands and see if splitting the crown might steady the scales.

Narnia gripped me as a child—those snow-laden woods whispering of thrones and betrayal, a kingdom fractured by ambition and pride. That icy divide lingered in my mind, reflecting the cracks I’d later study in our own world. In this series, The Borders We Share, I’m chasing that echo, turning territorial disputes into blueprints for shared futures. We’ve trekked through Sherwood’s green, plumbed Atlantis’ depths, thawed Antarctica’s ice—last week, rival explorers vied for sunken gold. Today, we’re crossing Narnia’s frostbitten plains and Cyprus’ barbed-wire frontier—realms where crowns and borders teeter on the brink, yet where a new pact might just hold them steady. Lace up your boots; the path ahead is sharp, cold, and unyielding.

First, let’s step into Narnia—a world I’m borrowing from the public domain, its copyright expired in the UK since 2018, per Lewis’s native laws. Envision it: the year is 2025, decades after the White Witch’s defeat, but her hundred-year winter has left deep scars across the land. Two heirs emerge to claim the high throne. Prince Torin, a lion-maned warrior from the golden halls of Cair Paravel in the east, asserts his right with ancient scrolls unearthed near Lantern Waste—parchments tracing his lineage back to Aslan’s roar and the reign of High King Peter. Lady Sylva, a fierce queen from the rugged western wilds, counters with a claim rooted in resilience—her people survived the Witch’s ice, their oral histories sung by firelight in the Shuddering Wood, tales of endurance carved into the land itself.

Narnia’s geography amplifies their rivalry. The Lantern Waste, marked by its iconic lamp-post—a beacon between Narnia and the human world—stands as a symbol of hope but also a contested border. The Great River, flowing from the western mountains to the eastern sea, is both a lifeline for trade and a natural divide, its banks bristling with Torin’s knights and Sylva’s scouts. The Shuddering Wood, with its ancient, whispering pines, shelters dryads and fauns who eye both claimants warily, their memories of tyranny still fresh. Skirmishes erupt—swords clash at Dancing Lawn, arrows arc over the frozen marshes of Ettinsmoor. Talking animals—noble lions, industrious beavers—split their loyalties, while fauns play their pipes in neutral corners, quietly yearning for peace. The land groans under the weight of their feud; who will rule the ice?

Now, shift to Cyprus—an island of 1,130 square miles in the eastern Mediterranean, 80 km south of Turkey, 130 km west of Syria, and 885 km east of Greece, as detailed in my 2020 book, Territorial Disputes, Chapter 7. Its history is a tapestry of conquest and division. Greek in culture since antiquity, it fell to the Ottoman Empire in the 1570s, absorbing Turkish settlers over three centuries. British rule began in 1878, formalizing as a Crown Colony by 1925, bringing modernization but also deepening ethnic divides. Independence in 1960 aimed to unite Greek Cypriots (then 80% of the population) and Turkish Cypriots (18%) under a power-sharing constitution, but tensions simmered. Violence flared in 1963, and in 1974, a Greek-backed coup triggered Turkey’s invasion, seizing 36% of the north. By 1983, this became the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC), recognized solely by Turkey.

The Attila Line—180 km of barbed wire and checkpoints—slices the island: Greek Cypriots hold the south, Turkish Cypriots the north, bolstered by 30,000 settlers from Turkey in the 1970s, now numbering around 100,000 (per TRNC estimates, 2023). Nicosia, the world’s last divided capital, straddles this rift, a UN buffer zone threading through its heart. Reunification efforts, like the 2004 Annan Plan, collapsed—66% of Greek Cypriots rejected it in a referendum, per UN records. Today, 1.2 million people—850,000 Greek Cypriots, 300,000 Turkish Cypriots (2023 estimates)—live on either side, their futures entangled in a stalemate. Offshore gas reserves, discovered in the 2010s, add new stakes, with both sides claiming rights to billions in potential revenue. The island quivers; can its halves reconcile?

These disputes aren’t mere power grabs—they’re woven from pride, history, and identity. In Narnia, Torin’s claim rests on heritage—scrolls from Cair Paravel’s vaults list kings from Peter to Caspian, his name the latest inked in faded glory. Sylva’s legitimacy springs from survival—her kin’s songs, passed down through generations, recount a century of ice, their axes splitting frozen roots to endure. Using my 2020 framework from Territorial Disputes, we see agents (Torin, Sylva), contexts (post-Witch turmoil), and realms (lineage vs. endurance). Time stretches back 100 years to the winter’s grip; space spans 200 miles from Lantern Waste to Ettinsmoor. A nonlinear twist emerges: fauns, those pipe-playing neutrals, whisper peace from the sidelines—could they tip the scales?

Cyprus’s fracture runs deeper. My 2020 analysis maps it: Greek Cypriots grieve 1974—150,000 fled south, homes abandoned, per UNHCR; Turkish Cypriots recall 1963—364 killed in ethnic clashes, per Red Cross. The influx of 30,000 Turkish settlers by 1980, now 100,000, reshapes the north’s identity. Leaders wield these wounds: Greek Cypriots demand “return,” backed by Greece; Turkish Cypriots seek security, leaning on Turkey. Time traces from Ottoman rule in the 1570s to today’s impasse; space is the 180-km Attila Line, with Famagusta’s ghost town a silent witness. Nonlinear forces stir—the EU (Cyprus joined in 2004) offers trade (€1.5 billion south-north, 2023 Eurostat), but NATO’s Greece-Turkey rift fans the flames. Here, too, the heart of the divide lies in its people, not just its land.

All-or-nothing risks ruin. In Narnia, war ravages the realm—Torin’s knights fell oaks for siege towers, Sylva’s archers torch fields; no throne endures on ash. Cyprus suffers—1,500 died in 1974 (UN figures), and 2023’s €50 million in lost trade (Cyprus Chamber) wounds both sides. My 2017 solution from Sovereignty Conflicts—egalitarian shared sovereignty—offers a fix. For Narnia: a blind council of Torin, Sylva, and fauns. Torin governs the east, his law shining in Cair Paravel; Sylva rules the west, her wilds thriving; fauns oversee commons like Lantern Waste, a truce zone. Four principles guide it: all speak (knight, queen, faun), roles align (Torin’s justice, Sylva’s hunt), rewards reflect effort (east’s gold, west’s game), and the strong aid the weak—Torin rebuilds Sylva’s mills. My 2023 lens—agents, contexts, realms—locks it in place.

For Cyprus: a triad—Greek Cypriots, Turkish Cypriots, settlers. Vertically, Greeks govern the south (80% land, €2 billion GDP, 2023), Turks the north (36%, €500 million), settlers farm (10,000 hectares). Horizontally, the Attila Line opens: Greeks trade olives south (€200 million), Turks citrus north (€100 million), settlers build roads (€50 million tolls). Rewards split 50/50 south-north; jobs match skills (5,000 drivers, clerks). Time—10-year terms rebuild post-1974 trust; space—180 km zoned: 90 south, 60 north, 30 shared (buffer parks). Nonlinear aids—EU funds (€500 million, 2025 pledge), NATO referees—nudge it forward. Peace grows, not shatters.

Critics scoff: “Thrones don’t share.” In Narnia, Torin’s scrolls proclaim destiny—kings don’t bow; Sylva’s songs demand retribution—ice forged her resolve. A century of frost chills trust; 200 miles defy one crown. Fauns? Idealists, not rulers. In Cyprus, Greek Cypriots cling to return—66% rejected Annan (2004 polls); Turkish Cypriots fear Greece—1974’s 30,000 troops linger in memory. Settlers—100,000 strong—shift the north’s balance. Time—450 years of division; space—180 km of wire. EU cash tempts, but NATO’s feud festers. My 2017 vision demands miracles; reality bites hard.

Yet glimmers persist. Narnia’s fauns bridged peace once—Lewis’s Lion nods to it; Torin needs Sylva’s grain, she his iron. Cyprus stood united pre-1974—1960’s flag flew; 2023 polls show 55% favor trade (Cyprus Mail). Reason can steady the tremor, if we push.

Narnia’s frost and Cyprus’ split aren’t just tales—they’re us: a knight’s son seeking honor, a farmer’s plea for home. The Borders We Share bets we can balance—share the throne, not the fight. I’m Dr. Jorge, spinning this into a book you’ll hold. Swing by https://drjorge.world or X (https://x.com/DrJorge_World)—let’s mend this together.

  • Núñez, J.E. (2017). Sovereignty Conflicts (Ch. 6, 7).
  • Núñez, J.E. (2020). Territorial Disputes (Ch. 1, 7).
  • Núñez, J.E. (2023). Cosmopolitanism and State Sovereignty (Ch. 1, 6, 7).

New posts every Tuesday.

  1. Entangled Worlds, Shared Futures: A New Border Blueprint
  2. Khemed’s Oil, Crimea’s Shadow: Splitting the Stakes
  3. Sherlock’s Docks, Ireland’s Edge: Clues to Equal Ground
    1. 3.1. Bonus
  4. Sherwood’s Green, Amazon’s Roots: Forests for All
  5. Atlantis Rising, Antarctic Thaw: Deep Claims, Shared Wins

Section 1: Foundations of the Multiverse (Posts 1–6): A Recap

State Sovereignty: Concept and Conceptions (OPEN ACCESS) (IJSL 2024)

AMAZON

ROUTLEDGE, TAYLOR & FRANCIS

Tuesday 08th April 2025

Dr Jorge Emilio Núñez

X (formerly, Twitter): https://x.com/DrJorge_World

https://drjorge.world