{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.025056947608200455, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.4926108374384235, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Conclusion – Tempering the South China Sea slow boil: expanding options for evolving disputes

The South China Sea issue is multi-dimensional in nature. There are at least four existing and parallel categories of disputes and/or competitions between parties in the South China Sea. They are: i) territorial disputes over islands/rocks, low-tide elevations and submerged features between claimants; ii) competing claims among littoral states regarding sovereignty, sovereign rights, and jurisdiction over maritime zones; iii) disputing interpretations about the rights of coastal and user states in different maritime zones (especially within territorial seas and exclusive economic zones of coastal states) regarding freedom of navigation and over-flights, including activities of military vessels and aircraft; and iv) strategic competition between the rising resident power China and the established, however distant, power – the U.S., in which the South China Sea has become the frontier and a bellwether of the AsiaPacific, if not global, competition. This paper explores the dynamics of the South China Sea issue in recent years from international relations and international law aspects and offers predictions of scenarios of near future development as well as suggests some options for management of the issue.