Minxin Pei
{
"authors": [
"Minxin Pei"
],
"type": "legacyinthemedia",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"Carnegie China"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "asia",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie China",
"programAffiliation": "AP",
"programs": [
"Asia"
],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"North America",
"United States",
"East Asia",
"China",
"Southeast Asia"
],
"topics": [
"Foreign Policy"
]
}Source: Getty
How China Can Shut US Up
China’s most effective response to Secretary Clinton’s unexpected declaration in Hanoi regarding the South China Sea disputes would be calm diplomacy rather than outrage.
Source: The Diplomat

Then, Beijing made public its displeasure over the large-scale joint naval exercise conducted by the 7th Fleet and the South Korean Navy in the Sea of Japan, saying it viewed such a display of military power as ‘destabilizing.’
But it was US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s declaration on July 23 at the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) in Hanoi that ‘The United States supports a collaborative diplomatic process by all claimants for resolving the various territorial disputes without coercion,’ and announcement that the United States ‘oppose[s] the use or threat of force by any claimant,’ that sent China into a rage, with officials accusing the Americans of attempting to ‘internationalize’ the South China Sea disputes.
On the surface, Beijing seems to be fully justified in being upset about Clinton’s remarks. First, she clearly caught the Chinese by surprise. Apparently, no hint had been given to the Chinese that Clinton would make a momentous announcement at this year’s ARF, which is known chiefly as an uneventful talk-shop.
Second, the symbolism carried by the venue itself, Hanoi, must deeply trouble the Chinese. Vietnam is one of the principal claimants in the dispute and Clinton’s remarks, although taken alone sounding neutral, actually are closer to the Association of South-east Asian Nations’ positions than to China’s.
So in Beijing’s eyes, Washington has now taken sides. China believes that, despite the long-simmering territorial disputes in the South China Sea, that it has taken serious steps to address its neighbors’ concerns. In 2002, for example, China and ASEAN signed a historic Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea that pledges to seek a peaceful resolution to the territorial disputes. Meanwhile, some ASEAN officials expect that China will sign a code of conduct at the end of this year.
However, Beijing shouldn’t allow fury to muddle its judgment. To be sure, no US secretary of state has ever publicly declared a US position on the South China Sea disputes (making this perhaps the most significant aspect of the Clinton statement). But on the other hand, the substance of her remarks don’t depart from the long-standing US position on the South China Sea disputes. So in reality there’s been no policy change.
Indeed, although the Clinton statement seems to have come as a nasty shock, Chinese officials should really have been paying more attention to recent statements coming from Washington on the South China Sea dispute—in February this year, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense Robert Scher stated essentially the same positions in his testimony to the US-China Economic and Security Review Commission, a Congressional-chartered body.
And if Scher failed to get Beijing’s attention, the remarks by US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates on June 5 should have. Addressing the Shangri-la Dialogue in Singapore, Gates declared that ‘the South China Sea is an area of growing concern…Our policy is clear: it is essential that stability, freedom of navigation, and free and unhindered economic development be maintained. We don’t take sides on any competing sovereignty claims, but we do oppose the use of force and actions that hinder freedom of navigation. We object to any effort to intimidate US corporations or those of any nation engaged in legitimate economic activity. All parties must work together to resolve differences through peaceful, multilateral efforts consistent with customary international law.’
Curiously, Gates’ remarks, more pointed than Clinton’s, elicited no howls of protest from China.
So Chinese officials needn’t read too much into Clinton’s recent remarks on the South China Sea, and they certainly shouldn’t overreact and pick a fight with Washington over a non-issue like this.
The best response from China instead would be to turn on their charm as a counter-offensive against Washington’s (belated) diplomatic efforts to restore its influence and prestige in South-east Asia. For the past decade, China has achieved great success in leveraging its economic influence and plying its diplomatic skills to reassure South-east Asian countries and improve its image in the region.
In fact, to quell this little diplomatic storm—and shut the Americans up—all Beijing has to do is to sign the South China Sea of Code of Conduct with ASEAN.
About the Author
Former Adjunct Senior Associate, Asia Program
Pei is Tom and Margot Pritzker ‘72 Professor of Government and the director of the Keck Center for International and Strategic Studies at Claremont McKenna College.
- How China Can Avoid the Next ConflictIn The Media
- Small ChangeIn The Media
Minxin Pei
Recent Work
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
More Work from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
- What’s Having More Impact on Russian Oil Export Revenues: Ukrainian Strikes or Rising Prices?Commentary
Although Ukrainian strikes have led to a noticeable decline in the physical volume of Russian oil exports, the rise in prices has more than made up for it.
Sergey Vakulenko
- The U.S. Export-Import Bank Was Built for a Different Era. Here's How to Fix It.Commentary
Five problems—and solutions—to make it actually work as a tool of great power competition.
Afreen Akhter
- Russia Is Meddling for Meddling’s Sake in the Middle EastCommentary
The Russian leadership wants to avoid a dangerous precedent in which it is squeezed out of Iran by the United States and Israel—and left powerless to respond in any meaningful way.
Nikita Smagin
- Three Scenarios for the Gulf States After the Iran WarCommentary
One is hopeful. One is realistic. One is cautionary.
Andrew Leber, Sam Worby
- The Fog of AI WarCommentary
In Ukraine, Gaza, and Iran, AI warfare has come to dominate, with barely any oversight or accountability. Europe must lead the charge on the responsible use of new military technologies.
Raluca Csernatoni