Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
[client name deleted]
Could you provide your assessment of current developments related to the South
China Sea; in particular, the US presence in the area and the relevance of the
meeting between ASEAN defence ministers and their eight dialogue partners
scheduled for October?
ANSWER: In March this year senior US officials who were visiting Beijing were told by
one of their counterparts that China now considered the South China Sea as a core
interest. US officials noted that previously “core interest” referred to Taiwan and
Tibet and implied that China would use force should the circumstances dictate. They
concluded that China was now prepared to use force to uphold its sovereignty claims
in the South China Sea. Subsequently, Chinese officials have backtracked and told
western audiences that it was not official policy to declare the South China Sea a
“core interest.”
Since 2007 the waters in the South China Sea have become roiled due to increasing
Chinese assertiveness, particularly against Vietnam. Late in the year the National
People’s Congress approved the creation of a new administrative unit, San Sha, with
responsibility over the Paracel and Spratly archipelagoes and the Macclesfield Bank
in the South China Sea. This let to unprecedented anti‐China protests by Vietnamese
students. For several years now China has unilaterally declared a ban on fishing in
the South China Sea above the 12th parallel ostensibly to protect the fish stock. Over
the last three years China has aggressively enforced this ban by harassing
Vietnamese fishing boats, chasing them from the area, ramming them, confiscating
their fish catch and any valuable equipment (GPS navigation aids, radios etc.) and
detaining and fining fishermen. In 2007, China began to apply behind the scenes
pressure on US commercial firms that were involved in contracts with Vietnam to
explore and exploit hydrocarbon resources in Vietnam’s Exclusive Economic Zone.
In May 2009, when the deadline for nations wishing to make claims to extended
continental shelves was approaching, Vietnam and Malaysia made a joint
submission. Vietnam also made a separate submission. China protested at both
submissions which meant that under the rule these submissions could not be
considered. China also tabled a map of the South China Sea with nine dash lines
2
seemingly claiming virtually the entire South China Sea as its own. China nas
steadfastly refused to clarify what it is claiming and on what basis.
These and other events set the scene for the issue of the South China Sea to be
raised by the Philippines at the annual ASEAN ministerial meeting with China (ASEAN
Plus 1) and the annual ministerial meeting of the ASEAN Regional Forum in July.
Twelve nations, including the US, raised maritime security and/or the South China
Sea at the ARF meeting. China claimed it was an orchestrated attack on its position.
At a press conference US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton rejected claims to the
South China Sea that were not made on the basis of land, thus rejecting China’s
claims based on historical discovery and dubious claims to continued occupation.
Secretary Clinton also offered US good offices to collaborate in a diplomatic and
peaceful settlement. China retorted that the US was trying to internationalize the
issue. Finally, the Secretary Clinton, echoing the words of other Obama
Administration senior officials, including Secretary of Defense Gates, denounced
pressures brought to bear on US companies that were lawfully engaged in commerce
with Vietnam. The South China Sea, Clinton declared, as a US “national interest.”
The United States does not maintain a physical presence in the South China Sea.
Vietnam, China, Taiwan, Malaysia and the Philippines have all occupied and
garrisoned features (rocks and reefs) in the area. The US Navy regularly transits the
South China Sea. In 2009 and again this year, transiting US aircraft carriers have
hosted fly out visits by Vietnamese military and government officials. Since 2003, the
United States Navy has made regular port calls in Vietnam. It is restricted to one
warship visit per year.
In 2002 China and ASEAN signed a Declaration on Conduct of Parties in the South
China Sea (DOC) that set out a number of confidence building measures. The DOC
has never been implemented. Getting China to follow through on its commitment
would go far in lowering tensions.
China has tried for many years to play divide and rule among the ASEAN countries
and deal with conflicting claims to territory in the South China Sea on a bilateral
basis. China has been overtaken by multilateral efforts to grapple with this problem.
The South China Sea will undoubtedly feature in many of the ASEAN related
meetings and summits at the end of this year.
On 12th October the ASEAN Defence Ministers (ADMM) will meet with eight of their
dialogue partners (Plus 8) for the first time. China wants to keep the talks limited to
transnational security issues like humanitarian assistance and disaster relief. The
United States, Australia, Japan, and South Korea would like to see maritime security
issues raised. Other participants include India, New Zealand, Russia and China. Since
the ADMM Plus 8 meeting is scheduled to take place once every three years, this
upcoming meeting will not resolve the South China Sea dispute.
Of greater significance is the East Asia Summit (EAS) that will follow. It presently
comprises 16 countries (ten ASEAN states, China, Japan, South Korea, Australia, India
and New Zealand). The EAS is about to expand by including Russia and the United
States who will participate next year. This will be the first head of state/government
leaders meeting in the Asia‐Pacific to deal with security issues. When it expands it
will be congruent with the ADMM Plus 8 defence ministers meeting. The EAS could
3
become a vehicle to promote a peaceful resolution of issue that are currently
threatening to undermine peace and security in the South China Sea.
Neither war nor armed conflict is likely in the South China Sea. But unresolved
territorial claims if left unaddressed will probably lead to increased political friction
and spill over and affect other areas of cooperation among the great powers, China
and the United States included.