• Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie Global logoCarnegie lettermark logo
DemocracyIran
  • Donate
{
  "authors": [
    "Paul Haenle"
  ],
  "type": "legacyinthemedia",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
    "Carnegie China"
  ],
  "collections": [
    "China’s Foreign Relations"
  ],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie China",
  "programAffiliation": "",
  "programs": [],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "East Asia",
    "China"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Security",
    "Foreign Policy"
  ]
}

Source: Getty

In The Media
Carnegie China

Charm Offensive At Sea

Since Chinese President Xi Jinping came into office, he has recognized that the success of his domestic agenda depends on the efficacy of China’s regional diplomacy to create a more welcoming environment.

Link Copied
By Paul Haenle
Published on Jan 7, 2014

Since Chinese President Xi Jinping began his leadership transition in November 2012, he has undertaken a more proactive diplomatic approach to reassure the Asia-Pacific region that China’s rise is in fact peaceful. Xi seems to recognize that the success of his domestic agenda depends on the efficacy of China’s regional diplomacy to create a more welcoming peripheral environment. But China’s new leaders have also taken steps that have caused anxiety and uncertainty in the Asia-Pacific, and heightened the risks surrounding regional security flashpoints. This divergent behavior will undermine China’s primary regional diplomatic strategy if continued. 

In their first months in office, China’s new leadership team completed tours of Southeast Asia to shore up relations by participating in high-level summitry and expanding trade ties and infrastructure financing. In a two-week period in October 2013, Xi and Premier Li Keqiang visited five Southeast Asian nations, attended the APEC meeting and East Asia summits (without U.S. President Barack Obama), and made encouraging statements about handling territorial disputes in a peaceful manner so as not to obstruct China-ASEAN comprehensive relations or lead to undesired conflict. At the APEC summit, Xi set a goal to more than double China-ASEAN annual trade to US$1 trillion over the next decade, and proposed the formation of an Asian infrastructure development bank. In front of ASEAN leaders, Li reaffirmed China’s pledge to complete negotiations on the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) free trade pact by 2015. From October 24-25, the full Politburo Standing Committee attended a work forum on diplomacy in China’s periphery to address policy missteps in Beijing’s more aggressive approach to regional territorial claims in past years, which has caused backlash and hedging behavior among China’s neighbors and impeded economic development.

At the same time as Beijing has embarked on this regional charm offensive, Xi and his leadership team have also demonstrated an assertive and uncompromising policy regarding China’s territorial claims that undermines their regional diplomatic approach. Even before taking office, in mid-2012, Xi took charge of the leading small group on the protection of maritime interests, responsible for Beijing’s strong reaction to the Japanese government’s nationalization of the Diaoyu/Senkaku islands in September of that year.  Ever since, China’s newly consolidated and armed coast guard has fundamentally changed the security environment in China’s near seas by maintaining near-constant patrols around the Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands and consistently venturing into the islands’ territorial waters. Chinese and Japanese ships now operate in close proximity of each other. The possibility of an inadvertent collision between the two nations whose militaries and governments lack necessary communication channels and crisis management mechanisms has greatly increased. 

The situation in the East China Sea intensified even further in September 2013 when Beijing flew bombers and a drone over Japan, and on November 23, abruptly declared the establishment of an air defense identification zone (ADIZ) covering an area of the East China Sea that includes the disputed Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands and overlaps with the already-established ADIZs of Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan. The Chinese foreign ministry has not concealed its interest in establishing other zones in the South China Sea and Yellow Sea where contests over territorial sovereignty have experienced a brief but welcome respite from brinksmanship in recent months.  The near-collision of a U.S. Navy vessel and PLA Navy ship in the South China Sea on December 5 was a stark reminder that conflicts over rocks in the Asia-Pacific could trigger a military conflict between the three largest economies in the world.

China’s unwavering stance on issues of territorial sovereignty and its desire to maintain peaceful relations with its neighbors are not necessarily new foreign policy objectives for Beijing.  The difference today is that Chinese leaders are attempting to pursue both goals in a much more forceful manner, with little success. While China’s charm offensive with ASEAN nations has helped to expand economic ties and bolster China's influence, its sudden announcement of the establishment of its East China Sea ADIZ has triggered a strong regional and international backlash, a renewed demand for greater U.S. security presence in Asia and escalated risk of inadvertent conflict.  The dilemma for China’s leaders will increasingly be how to succeed at reassuring the region of China’s peaceful intentions if, at the same time, they want to aggressively expand China’s territorial claims and demand greater accommodation of its interests. 

As Xi enters his second year of leadership, he confronts no shortage of foreign and domestic challenges. By establishing more ADIZs in the South China Sea and continuing a coercive and destabilizing strategy to China’s maritime territorial claims, Xi can expect his diplomatic overtures with neighboring countries, as well as with the U.S., to be seriously undermined. Xi’s all-important domestic economic agenda will also become more difficult to achieve. If, on the other hand, Xi can focus on building mutually beneficial economic and commercial partnerships with neighbors, he can better assure the achievement of his own domestic goals and the region’s broader peace and stability. Given the stakes, all parties should look for ways to encourage the latter approach.

This article was originally published in the American Chamber of Commerce in Shanghai's Insight magazine. 

About the Author

Paul Haenle

Former Maurice R. Greenberg Director’s Chair, Carnegie China

Paul Haenle held the Maurice R. Greenberg Director’s Chair at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and is a visiting senior research fellow at the East Asian Institute, National University of Singapore. He served as the White House China director on the National Security Council staffs of former presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama.

    Recent Work

  • Commentary
    Carnegie China Scholars on the Biden-Xi Meeting
      • +1

      Paul Haenle, Xue Gong, Ngeow Chow Bing, …

  • Q&A
    Biden and Xi Meet at APEC

      Paul Haenle, Chong Ja Ian

Paul Haenle
Former Maurice R. Greenberg Director’s Chair, Carnegie China
Paul Haenle
SecurityForeign PolicyEast AsiaChina

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

  • Japanese troops take part in a counter-landing live fire exercise as part of the annual Balikatan joint military drills on May 04, 2026 in Laoag, Ilocos Norte province, Philippines.
    Article
    The Two Logics Driving Japan’s Security Policy

    Japan’s revision of its three strategic documents reflects an intention to keep the United States engaged in the region while Japan fills any vacuums of U.S. power to preserve the Indo-Pacific order.

      • Ryo Sahashi

      Ryo Sahashi

  • Robot arm with disposable test tube virus sampling in laboratory
    Commentary
    Caught in the Middle: Chinese Biotech Firms’ Divergent Responses to U.S. Sanctions

    Chinese biotech companies have been on the receiving end of U.S. economic coercion. Yet their responses have differed significantly because firm and state interests are not uniformly aligned. For Washington, treating all Chinese tech firms the same, irrespective of their actual interests, risks pushing them farther into Beijing’s corner.

      Xue Gong

  • Two people in blue PPE standing over large metal rolls
    Commentary
    Emissary
    Inside the Global Race to Erode a Battery Manufacturing Monopoly

    Over the past decade, China has moved from marginal player to major producer of all things batteries. The United States, Europe, and others are aiming to balance the market.

      Milo McBride

  • Lee and Lula walking
    Commentary
    Emissary
    Why Korea’s President Skipped Washington for Silicon Valley and Brasília

    Lee’s tour shows how Seoul is reorganizing its diplomacy away from Pyongyang and toward industrial networks and the geography of the compute economy.

      Darcie Draudt-Véjares

  • People standing on rocks in the ocean near the shore, with soldiers in the foreground
    Commentary
    Emissary
    The Migration Wave That Embarrassed Morocco and Rattled Europe

    Most migrants may have left Ceuta, but the effects may linger.

      • Alejandro Rodriguez
      • Sarah Yerkes

      Alejandro Martin Rodriguez, Sarah Yerkes

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Carnegie global logo, stacked
1779 Massachusetts Avenue NWWashington, DC, 20036-2103Phone: 202 483 7600
  • Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
  • Donate
  • Programs
  • Events
  • Blogs
  • Podcasts
  • Contact
  • Annual Reports
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
  • Government Resources
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.