China and the United States have been feeding an escalatory security dilemma in the South China Sea, with Beijing jealously protecting its extensive sovereignty claims and Washington resisting being pushed out of its traditional sphere of influence by a rising China. Each claims to be defending against the other’s actions. Their rhetoric is growing increasingly strident.
On July 12, 2016, the arbitration tribunal of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea will issue its judgment (or award) on fifteen issues raised by the Philippines against Chinese claims in the South China Sea. China has refused to participate in the deliberations and has mounted a publicity campaign to dismiss the impending ruling. Beijing would be better off preparing to seize the ruling as a turning point away from increased tensions.
Early in 2015, Beijing touched off the latest round of escalation by using landfill to expand low- tide elevations and rocks it controls in the Spratly Islands in the South China Sea into what are effectively small military air and naval bases, though still only lightly armed. China claims these are for navigational safety, and the country’s leader, President Xi Jinping, said in September 2015 that “China does not intend to pursue militarization.”
For more than a year, U.S. officials have acted as if they fear a credibility deficit in the region, a sense that friendly governments do not believe that Washington has been doing enough to offset rising Chinese power and assertiveness in the sea, evidenced by the new artificial islands. To fill the deficit, last year the U.S. Navy commenced freedom of navigation operations in waters close to recent Chinese landfills, but unlike in most such operations, the United States has publicized these in detail. Moreover, U.S. Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter and senior military commanders have been outspoken on American interests in the area, while civilian officials have seemed almost absent. If this were happening in China, one would speculate that perhaps the military was speaking for itself and not the civilian leadership.
This noise level has had the predictable effect of provoking populist nationalism in China, making hardline policy choices more appealing (or less threatening) to the leadership than more moderate ones. If the United States wants China to show greater flexibility, its tactics are having the opposite effect. If, as some argue, China’s leaders are determined to pursue tough policies in this arena anyway, despite their rhetoric about cooperation with the United States, then a period of American restraint might at least smoke out the truth.
Now, events have created a moment of impending adversity for China that Beijing should turn into an advantage. In May 2016, the Philippines elected a new leader, President Rodrigo Duterte, who has set domestic development as his priority. He is a proud defender of Filipino sovereignty, but he does not own the dispute with China as much as his predecessor did.
Duterte said many things when campaigning, but since taking office he has indicated a willingness not to “taunt or flaunt” the arbitration’s expected findings. He has expressed openness to talking with Beijing, and his foreign secretary plans to send a special envoy to China.
When the arbitration panel’s judgments are released next week, China will have already painted itself into a corner where it will ritually and forcefully denounce the rulings. But Washington and Manila would do well to respond coolly and neither gloat nor fulminate. The two capitals should think about giving China a little space to begin to back down.
Concretely, China should seize the opportunity to talk with the Filipino special envoy to float a de-escalatory trade-off. China can promise to reopen Scarborough Shoal, which it has closed to Filipino fishermen since 2012, and keep it open to legal fishing, while withdrawing military vessels. In exchange, the Philippines can be assured that if it removes its handful of marines from Second Thomas Shoal, where they are just surviving in a derelict and crumbling old landing ship, Beijing will not take advantage and move in its own forces to occupy it. Both can agree to keep the fishing grounds open and free of military ships while their sovereignty remains disputed.
Beyond that potential trade-off, there is scope for greater investment and trade between China and the Philippines that might cool the context of their territorial disputes, which are unlikely to be settled soon and probably would be most effectively addressed bilaterally. If China has wounds to lick after July 12’s arbitration announcement, it can take satisfaction that it has demonstrated its control of some Spratly archipelago features and is in a stronger position to negotiate with its rival claimants. But China needs to get beyond that to reach the point of reconstructing relations with its neighbors.
Comments(18)
"Beijing would be better off preparing to seize the ruling as a turning point away from increased tensions." This is a moot point as China, long time ago, declared and rejected whatever PCA ruling will come up on July 12 (Dai Bingguo's "...a scrap of paper" comment sound familiar?). Now, China's ambassadors in at least 21 countries put on a charm offensive by publishing a centrally templated articles designed to win international views in Chinese favor. Finally, as Kerry Brown stated, "[These articles] show firstly just how nervous China is about the impact of the ruling when it comes, and also how much more proactive their attempt is now to use the western press and media to get their message across." - http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-36732406
China's repeated declare rejection of the PCA ruling to crush the surprise, awe and shock media announcement of the rulings expected to be in Philippine's favor.
"Beijing would be better off preparing to seize the ruling as a turning point away from increased tensions." This is a moot point as China, long time ago, declared and rejected whatever PCA ruling will come up on July 12 (Dai Bingguo's "...a scrap of paper" comment sound familiar?). Now, China's ambassadors in at least 21 countries put on a charm offensive by publishing a centrally templated articles designed to win international views in Chinese favor. Finally, as Kerry Brown stated, "[These articles] show firstly just how nervous China is about the impact of the ruling when it comes, and also how much more proactive their attempt is now to use the western press and media to get their message across." - http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-36732406
"Beijing would be better off preparing to seize the ruling as a turning point away from increased tensions." This is a moot point as China, long time ago, declared and rejected whatever PCA ruling will come up on July 12 (Dai Bingguo's "...a scrap of paper" comment sound familiar?). Now, China's ambassadors in at least 21 countries put on a charm offensive by publishing a centrally templated articles designed to win international views in Chinese favor. Finally, as Kerry Brown stated, "[These articles] show firstly just how nervous China is about the impact of the ruling when it comes, and also how much more proactive their attempt is now to use the western press and media to get their message across." - http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-36732406
Gee. Second Thomas Shoal is a mere 150 miles from Palawan while Scarborough is even closer to Luzon. Both are 600 miles or more from mainland china, far, far away from the EEZ of china and Hainan. While it is true that china has painted itself into a corner, it is also true that their claims are preposterously crass, illegal and aggressive. So is their propaganda machine's output of "news" articles misleading the ill informed and those w/o a free press. A Chinese ADIZ, or a Chinese base on Scarborough are going to be even harder for china to roll back while preserving any face. Also, if I may point out, the small bases in the Spratly's have three bomber, fighter and naval patrol aircraft runways, hangars, fuel facilities and anti stealth radars. They also have been experiencing extensive fortifications construction. Benign only because the bases aren't swarming with fighter jets and missile batteries, this oversight can be corrected in a matter of days. In the meantime, the military infrastructure they need to support offensive air and anti ship capabilities based out of these "islands" 700 miles away from their coastline and within tactical air reach of the Straits of Malacca, Manila, Subic and Clark AFB grows daily as Chinese construction crews build barracks, aircraft hangars , maintenance facilities and mess halls. The buildup of these islands was a HUGE change to the strategic backdrop of the area. But more importantly, some are INSIDE the EEZ of the Philippines. When we combine that with the fact that china claims "sovereignty" over the entire south china sea , what does giving them time to "back off" accomplish exactly other than to encourage them to get more aggressive with Indonesia further south west and on top of the Straits of Malacca? They're not going to back off. When US Navy warships transit this area nowadays they are stalked by Chinese ships and aircraft. The Chinese have convinced themselves they "own" this strategic international waterway and that they are going to write new rules as to who can use, when they can use it and how much of its neighbors seas and resources china will take (the short answer is all). Waiting and watching is sound advice often. However its clear that no matter what the USA does, china intends to claim ownership of these seas and to continue to run over its neighbors, period. And there is little logic or law that will change that, as the world has seen with other aggressors in history. A little too soft sir.
Accord.
Thomas Shoal and Scarborough Shoal are not included as territories of Philippine when USA granted Philippine its independenc. They are within the Dash Lines and belong to China.
Historically and geographically South China Sea belongs to China or another Asiatic Power. For a white christian country like the US to posture is colonial mind set .When are Americans and Europeans going to realize that colonialism is passe,
Your pithy comments are rather dated and a rerun of Marxist ideology. Just about any country or empire of worth had a colonial phase or area's of influence which they controlled. So stating the obvious is a dead end really
You miss the point here Naveen. This is not about colonial mindset though, given your country's experience I understand you immediately going there. This is about our allies in the region and their claims. China is building artificial islands to lay claims to territory that international law does not recognize. International Law - I think we can agree that this is something to be upheld.
Useless propaganda. The world and international community condemn China aggression for hegemonic power ambition in Asia pacific region, and in fact China's concept 'one belt one road' extended thru Indian ocean up to the Netherlands, well the dragon belt seems looking for worlds power without credential.
Duterte has hinted that the Philippines might be amenable to just selling disputed islands to China (though this is not how it would be spun). Seems reasonable to me. In the long run, China is going to control the South China Sea. The main US goal should be to lock down navigation rights for commercial shipping. The idea that China can rise without the US and neighboring countries making adjustments to accommodate that fact is ludicrous.
China is not pushing America out of its traditional regon of influence. If America feels so, that means America is no contributing enough to the prosperity but potential calamatous conflict to the region. PCA violates its mandate of authority in handling the Philippine dispute case. So China exercises the UNCLOS Article 298 right to reject PCA's action. From in 2015 on, Beijing has been exercising its sovereign rights to do whatever is appropriate on its territorial features within the Dash Lines. America's unilateral FONOP has not been approved by any international institutions. For America to enforce it indicates America intends to be a dictatorial tyrant. The Law of the Seas is UNCLOS, not FONOP. China has been openly declared its rejection of PCA's ruling many times under the support of more than 50 nations, a lot more than those that support USA-Philippines. So it is up to USA-Phiippine to find how to gracefully retreat. When USA granted Philippine its independence, no feature within the Dash Lines were included as territories of Philippine. That means the features Philippine occupy right now within the Lines were looted from China and are ,therefore, illegal.
Wishful thinking. China has been pushing these matters from the start, and will continue to do so. It is not licking its wounds. It has publicly declared that it would not respect the award or its source. It did not participate. What, therefore, would one expect ? That it would win ? China will indeed attempt to buy off the new Philippine administration, if it has not done so already. It has no intention of giving ground on any of its claims. That, it has made clear. If the ROP pulls its Marines from Scarborough, it will lose it forever, and the loss will set a precedent that will determine the future of the entire area. They may do that, but if they do, it will signal that they have become a vassal state of China. Your proposal is not sound. China will respond aggressively to the award. The violent bear it away. It remains to be seen how far they will push before someone pushes back.
Let's see: America occupies Hawaii and expects this to be acknowledged. Or Guam. So when China follows America's example in defensive posturing it is called to account. Curious norms to enact.
So are you saying China is recognizing it's "occupation" of these territories? If so, then the allies in the region may want to request a declaration of war.
The world order was established right after WWII by WWII victors to settle the leftover territories of German, Italy and Japan. China, being one of the victors, announced the Dash Lines and physically claimed the features within the Lines with USA support right after WWII and received no renunciation from WWII victors. That means the features within the Lines belong to China and China has has the sovereign right to do whatever is appropriate on them. When France and USA granted Vietnam and Philippine their independence, no features within the Lines were granted as territories of Vietnam and Philippine. That means the features that Vietnam and Philippine occupy right now were looted from China and are illegal. Vietnam and Pilippine intend to leverage America's China containment policies to legitimize their loot from China. The Arbitration Tribunal is not a UN agency. Its judges are not on UN payroll. The Tribunal was formed at the request of Philippine to handle the dispute case and the judges were paid entirely by Philippine because China didn't participate. The judges were not selected for impartiality through a rigorous selection process. They were simply appointed. The PCA rulings have many faults. All this makes the rulings void and null and internationally insignificant
One of the positive things which came out of the Permanent Court of Arbitration ruling is that the court made clear the distinction between an “island”, meriting a claim for an Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), and a “rock”, which does not. There are a number of “islands” in the Pacific (Howland, Baker, Jarvis, Palmyra, Johnston, Wake) around which the US claims EEZs but which would be classified as “rocks” under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). Vice President Biden has said ““We expect China to play by the same rules as everyone else.” Wouldn’t it be a nice and productive gesture on our part if we relinquished these claims without having to be dragged into court?
Comment Policy
Comments that include profanity, personal attacks, or other inappropriate material will be removed. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, steps will be taken to block users who violate any of the posting standards, terms of use, privacy policies, or any other policies governing this site. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.