THE world can neglect the troubles at sea... at its own peril. They include theft, robbery, and piracy at sea (TRAPS), maritime terrorism (MT), marine pollution, ocean acidification, overfishing, illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing (IUUF), interference with freedom of navigation as well as meddling with the global positioning system (eg. spoofing).
By neglecting the sea, we are inadvertently choking our life-support system and lifeline. The sea provides food. Over 15 per cent of the global demand for protein and pharmaceutical products come from the sea.
The sea facilitates trade. More than US$30 billion of international trade goes through South China Sea (SCS). Globally, 90 per cent of international trade goes by sea. Almost the entire world supply chain passes through the sea.
The sea is important for global communication. More than 90 per cent data used in Internet communication is carried by undersea cables. The data for the Internet is not in the "clouds" but in the oceans.
More than 50 per cent of our oxygen comes from the sea. It is also the world's largest carbon sink.
The sea is also a dumping ground of non-biodegradables like plastic, tyres and a myriad of things. That the sea has also become a conduit for contraband goods, drug and human trafficking reflects our indifference, negligence and complacency.
Maritime incidents like the United States F-35 plane that went down in the SCS on Jan 24 and the earlier incident of the USS Connecticut, a modern submarine with sophisticated electronic gadgetry that hit a sea mount in the SCS in October last year have added to the list of regular collisions, groundings and capsize.
The anarchic situation is caused by perpetrators not abiding by established rules to keep the ocean as a global common zone that is clean, healthy and peaceful. While the non-traditional forms of threat at sea are important, it is geopolitics that still hogs the headlines.
Take, for example, the situation in the SCS. The US-Sino rivalry can develop into a military crisis if both are not willing to de-escalate as in the situation of Russia and the Ukraine.
There is a perception in China that the US and its allies are doing everything they can to undermine China in all domains: in cyber space, outer space and at sea.
Beijing is also portrayed by Western media as aggressive and adventurist in the maritime domain off its coast in the East and South China Sea and elsewhere, as far as the Indian Ocean.
However, China is not alone in asserting unreasonable claims to the sea contiguous to its shoreline. Major maritime powers use their navies or gunboat diplomacy to promote influence at sea. Small states, too.
For example, cases recorded during the early weeks last month include events in the southern sector of the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden involving allegedly Iranian assistance with Houthi "rebels" against ships bound for United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabian ports in retaliation for air strikes (drones and planes) on Yemeni territory.
Although a signatory, China has been singled out by Western media for non-compliance with the United Nations Convention on law of the Sea (UNCLOS) provisions.
However, Western media has also failed to point out that the US, Canada, Israel and Turkey have not ratified the convention.
The US and its allies have responded to alleged China's assertiveness in the East and SCS by sending more naval frigates and fighter aircraft from as far as Europe into the region.
When China agreed to be bound by UNCLOS by its ratification in 1996, it made four declarations (reservations), including reaffirming sovereignty over all its archipelagos and islands listed in its 1992 Law on Territorial Sea and Contiguous Zone.
Despite the exclusion clause, Beijing was dragged against its consent in litigation before an International Tribunal, which found China legally bound by its decision. Under international law, a state cannot be bound by a rule to which it has not consented.
Another reservation requires a foreign state to obtain advanced approval or give prior notification for warships to pass through its territorial sea.
Both specifications are recognised by the international community. However, the precise limits are not stated and there is ambiguity in the terminology employed and in the interpretation of the provisions of UNCLOS and in China's domestic regulations pertaining to navigation in coastal and offshore waters.
While a strong China can challenge US dominance at sea, it too has its own share of problems internally and externally to contend with. The future of Pax Sinica is anything but certain. The only constant in international relations is "history never travels in a straight line".
The world can be a safer place if the US and China (and Russia) can put aside their geopolitical disagreements and work towards managing global issues at sea, the cyber and outer space together.
Writer is a keen student of geopolitics