The Spratly Islands dispute, which involved the largest number of regional claimants, remains the most complex and controversial case in the South China Sea (Joyner, 1999, p. 54). As Schofield stated: “The Spratly Islands conflict remains the main source of tension in Southeast Asia. There is a real fear that the ongoing incidents could escalate into a full-blown confrontation. (Jane's Intelligence Review, 2000). At the same time, the delimitation of maritime boundaries is problematic as the current border is the result of overlapping unilateral claims to sovereignty (Joyner, 1999, p. 55). Efforts to resolve the dispute regionally have so far been unsuccessful. Following the naval confrontation between China and Vietnam in the Spratly Islands in 1988, Indonesia attempted to apply preventive diplomacy in 1990–1999 by establishing informal workshops using tract two diplomacy; and in July 1994, the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) was established as a leading form of diplomacy in the Asia-Pacific region. However, the mentioned efforts failed to prevent conflict in the region, as violent conflicts still erupted between the claimants (Phy, 2009, p. 4). Treaties and agreements have also been signed by claimants, such as the 2002 Declaration of Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea, which has eased tensions but tends to prove futile due to resistance from China to address issues in a multilateral manner (Chin, 2003). Since conflict management tends to fail, the question of what is the best solution to resolve this dispute was then raised. Some possible solutions are discussed. Interest-based solutions or an institutional approach and a rights-based solution or an alternative dispute resolution approach are recommended for the Spratly Islands dispute (Phy, 2009, p. 7).4.1 Intere..... . middle of document... ...as compensation, they will get the central part of the South China Sea.c. The same distance line method must be applied to demarcate overlapping areas. But if this proves unpalatable, an alternative bilateral or trilateral development arrangement can be arranged. Works Cited Joyner, C. (1999). The Spratly Islands Dispute in the South China Sea: Issues, Policies, and Prospects for Diplomatic Accommodation. Survey of Confidence Measures in the Asia-Pacific Region, Washington: Stimson Center, May [Report No. 28], 53--108. Phy, S. (2009). Managing the Spratly Islands conflict: success or failure? University for Peace Ciudad Colon, Costa Rica. Stanslas, P. (2010). The Spratly Dilemma: External Powers and Dispute Resolution Mechanisms (1st ed., p. 9). Warsaw: Amicus Europae Foundation. Retrieved from http://fae.pl/biuletynopiniefaethespratlydilemma.pdf