Paper
Ashley J. Tellis
{
"authors": [
"Ashley J. Tellis"
],
"type": "other",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "ctw",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "SAP",
"programs": [
"South Asia"
],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"South Asia",
"East Asia",
"China",
"Southeast Asia"
],
"topics": [
"Economy",
"Trade",
"Security",
"Military",
"Foreign Policy",
"Global Governance"
]
}
Source: Getty
Other
Diplomatic Implications of the South China Sea on the Indo-Pacific Region
China’s actions in the South China Sea will likely have adverse consequences for the global maritime order. Such actions require a sustained and intentional response on the part of the United States.
Published on Feb 1, 2018
Source: Hudson Institute
Speaking at the Hudson Institute, Carnegie’s Ashley J. Tellis addressed the strategic and diplomatic implications of Chinese actions in the South China Sea. Arguing that China’s intention to enforce its ambiguous but expansive claims poses unmistakable danger to the existing international order, Tellis sketched out some of the possible long-term consequences, as well as possible U.S. responses.
Beyond the potential risk to freedom of navigation in the region and economic disadvantages for neighboring countries with conflicting claims in the South China Sea, China’s actions strengthen the shift toward progressively greater “national enclosure” of open international waterways, Tellis warned. He added that, if left unchecked, Chinese militarization would disturb the local military balances and force the United States to commit more resources to the region in order to fulfill its obligations to its local friends and allies.
Tellis called for a coordinated campaign to increase pressure on China through multilateral institutions and other international maritime functional organizations. Sanctions could be applied to specific, Chinese state-owned enterprises engaged in illegal construction in the region, he added. He argued that a regime of routine freedom of navigation operations should be maintained, and a coalition of like-minded nations in Southeast Asia should be assisted to develop their surveillance capacities as well as their naval and air power deterrents.
About the Author
Ashley J. Tellis
Former Senior Fellow
Ashley J. Tellis was a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
- Multipolar Dreams, Bipolar Realities: India’s Great Power Future
- India Sees Opportunity in Trump’s Global Turbulence. That Could Backfire.Commentary
Ashley J. Tellis
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 Europe
- Letter from the Editor: Europe Takes Two Steps Forward But One Step BackCommentary
As we close out another season of Strategic Europe, it is worth taking stock of the deep shifts underway.
Rym Momtaz
- Assessing Information Ecosystems: How Governments Can Get Ahead of Hybrid ThreatsPaper
The hybrid warfare landscape is evolving rapidly, leaving policymakers without clear strategies. To better inform their work in addressing emerging challenges, governments must dig deeper into the underlying dynamics at play.
Raluca Csernatoni, Alicia Wanless
- Taking the Pulse: Are the EU’s Watered-Down Russia Sanctions Better than None?Commentary
The EU had to compromise to adopt a twenty-first sanctions package against Russia, exposing growing cracks in the union’s resolve. Is this latest, weaker round worth it to keep pressure on Moscow?
Rym Momtaz, ed.
- Why Europe Must Take Charge of its Russia Diplomacy NowCommentary
Trump is distracted and Ukraine wants Europe to step up. The continent’s leaders must find their voice and assert it in talks with Russia.
Alissa de Carbonnel
- Why Russia Could Escalate Hybrid Warfare Against EuropeCommentary
Mounting economic strain and battlefield losses will not necessarily make the Kremlin less dangerous. They could instead push Moscow toward a more aggressive hybrid campaign designed to test NATO’s Eastern flank, exploit allied hesitation, and fracture European resolve.
Maksym Beznosiuk
