The United States must not take direct sides - and instead encourage peaceful negotiation - lest it make matters worse.
The rhetoric is growing hotter among China, most of its Southeast Asian neighbors, and the United States. Recently, the U.S. State Department took the unusual step of issuing a press statement that singled out Chinese behavior for criticism in creating a new administrative district covering most of the disputed islets in the South China Sea. Beijing’s media outlets have been responding with invective that is stoking already high emotions in the Chinese public. The issue of managing tensions and territorial claims that are inherently difficult to resolve has become more difficult, not less.
It was not apparently intended in Washington for the situation to deteriorate in this fashion. In 2010, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton spoke out against unilateral actions in the South China Sea and for the development of an effective code of conduct to govern rivals’ activities in the area. This was widely understood to be a needed shove in China’s direction to quit stalling on agreeing to the code of conduct and to restrain the aggressive actions of its fishermen and oil drillers. It was accompanied by American professions of disinterest in the specific territorial disputes, but insistence on freedom of navigation in the heavily trafficked waters and peaceful resolution of the disputes under international law.
China did not like the American push then, at a time when Chinese diplomacy was scoring costly “own goals” in the East China Sea and on the Korean Peninsula. But by the end of 2010, China was trying harder to get along with its neighbors and Clinton’s warning seemed to have done well. More recently, National Security Advisor Thomas Donilon made a trip to Beijing (and Tokyo) that was well received by Beijing’s highest leaders and seemed to put discussion of thorny issues on a high-policy plane. Coming right after his visit, the State Department statement must have arrived as a shock in Beijing.
The South China Sea presents complicated issues of evolving international law, historic but ill-defined claims, a rush to grab declining fish stocks, and competition to tap oil and gas reserves. Beijing’s much discussed “nine-dashed line,” that purports to give China a claim on about 80 percent of the South China Sea and its territories, used to be an eleven-dashed line. Two dashes separating Chinese and Vietnamese claims were resolved through bilateral negotiations years ago. This suggests that the remaining nine dashes are equally negotiable. But China rigidly refuses to clarify the basis for its claims, whether they are based on the accepted international law of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) or the less widely accepted historical assertions. Beijing’s refusal to choose suggests it wants to maximize its legal and political leverage, even as the growth of its military and maritime assets gains physical leverage over its weaker neighbors.
Beijing is not alone. Hanoi has leased oil exploration blocks in contested waters, and Manila is trying the same. Their colonial occupations left a discontinuous record of historic claims, inclining them to rely more on UNCLOS to manage disputed resources. They eagerly encourage American weight thrown onto their side of the competition with China for free.
This is where the United States needs to move with caution and only after thinking many steps ahead. The overriding strategic objective of the United States in Asia is to manage China’s rise—which appears inevitable—in ways that do not diminish vital American interests in the region. Navigating the transition period peacefully requires strength and consistency as well as the recognition of changing realities. Severe tests of the Sino-American relationship are to be expected as the United States works to persuade China to accept the existing international rules and principles that have brought prolonged peace, stability, and prosperity to the participants, especially China.
China’s immediate neighbors are by definition weaker than the much larger People’s Republic. Beijing’s temptations to exploit that differential in power needs to be resisted with policies that reward positive behavior and raise the cost of negative behavior.
Photo Credit: U.S. Navy (Flickr)
View as Single Page
Reddit
Digg
StumbleUpon
Delicious
Technorati
Yahoo
Google
Plurk
Luj
The world has learned, painfully, the cost of war from millenia of conflict. As far as we are most practicably affected, for better or worse, America has won not just militarily, but more importantly triumphed in ideology and culture. Capitalism has triumphed over all other forms of economic thought and, aided by her prowess in technological advancement geared to her own true character of freedom and prosperity, America had spread the message far and wide, exporting highly appealing, if somewhat superficial, cultural ideals as freedom, self-determination and fun, all embodied in the products leaving their ports.
And while it seems sometimes, incorrectly, that Americans are either trying to kill you or sell you something, I still believe they've been competent custodians of the current world order.
Many of the great nations of the world fought each other to an inch from death, only to forgive, forget and forge anew together, over time. Nobody will allow that kind of bloodshed again on such a massive scale and over such a prolonged period.
Still, for a nation on the rise not to swagger and step on a few toes is neither plausible nor without naivette.
We can only hope for cooler, sounder and less ignorant heads to prevail.
brotherfrancis
@Luj: Hot air is cheap. Be a little specific. Your bliss-bunny agitprop lacks content. It doesn't relate to anything. How is your pep talk going to make your fantasies even a little bit factual? If we all just scrunch our eyes shut very hard, click our shoes together and make a wish, we'll all be in Kansas in no time? You're hiding from reality in the Land of Oz. All the world is NOT your local Chamber of Commerce.
brotherfrancis
Glad to see some interest here in my point of view. That viewpoint is apparently where the ultimate extremes of satire and seriousness meet and become one. When seriousness or satire, either one, go beyond a certain point, can there be a meaningful distinction between them? Like Nietzsche & Wagner: Which is right? Is there really a difference? If I am satirical enough, then perhaps I must be seriously at least a little correct? So, @ACT: ME eccentric? Have you looked out your window lately? Our world is far more eccentric that I can ever hope to even begin to catch up with… But I try! (Eccentricity is never for the half-hearted.) Our current events are purest eccentricity carried to the extremes of a circus freak show, so the serious few among us are nowadays quite satirically-challenged…
My compatriot Jacques666 doesn't seem to have heard of decadence. My take on his clearinsight that China has cruel borders whereas the U.S. has kind borders is that this natural blessing can end up with greatly counter-intuitive effects to what he presumes: What if, for Chine, what doesn’t destroy them only makes them stronger? Whereas perhaps the U.S. suffers from the deadly complacency of a "creeping decomposition" from our national soft underbelly, aka the Mexican border. Our relationship with Mexico may be like the rotting of a sweet-smelling fruit in which all appears pleasant aromas and harvest pastels, but meanwhile the cute little maggots are quietly nibbling away their self-satisfied host country alive? All with the cutest little maggoty smiles, Mariachi music and tasty Margaritas, of course.
So, yes, America has the safest borders anywhere, EXCEPT FOR JUST ONE. And that is all it takes. Remember, ancient Italy also had uniquely "safe" borders, except for that insignificant detail of a few scenic and picturesque Alpine passes on their remotest northern frontiers. But Attila the Hun still managed to find his way in despite all the sunny travel brochures about the balmy and impregnable "Garden of the Empire."
Whereas for China, decadence is not an option. So to speak, Mongols to the north of them, Mongols to the south of them, Mongols to the east of them and Islam to the west of them. Sounds to me like the Chinese will learn to be the world's ultimate Super-Mongols, or else. THEY know they have no where to hide.
@Bankotsu: Don't be timid! China is not in the position of Imperial Germany before the Great War. In particular, you have no King George V to deal with nor anything like a jealous Imperial British Establishment lined up against you. You have nothing more to fear than a disintegrating herd of self-important Yankee rednecks! Just remind the Mexicans and other Hispanics of the riches to their North and nature will take care of the rest for you. (Like when somebody pointed out the Italian women, in particular the Emperor's sister, to Attila and his horn-helmeted Barbarians, and then the rest was history.)
True enough, China must construct a Ruling Elite worthy of the name. But the Taiwanese and Overseas Chinese can make some major contributions in that regard. At any rate, China has her MONGOL SOUL to draw upon, not to mention a superb Neo-Confucianism that must deserve a warm welcome everywhere, but especially among the Roman Catholics. And if China needs any suggestions concerning elitism, surely the Catholics would be more than delighted to provide you with more than a few. You Chinese must send your comprador bourgeoisie packing and then get down to your pressing business of world domination!
Bankotsu
"China's recent actions in the South China Sea are nothing so much as reminiscent of the Kaiser's bungling, bullying foreign policy."
Some people say that U.S recent aggressive wars in the muslim world are similar to the German Kaiser's bungling of international affairs.
Who will win this battle of the spheres of influence?
Emmanuel Todd:
Most apparent is how clumsy the US has been to date, and how far they have
moved away from any notion of universality. They don't see the world as it
really is anymore. They are failing in any balanced and fair approach to
their allies. All of this reminds me of Germany under Wilhelm II. The US is
losing allies steadily. One gets the impression that an office somewhere in
Washington has been tasked with the duty to daily prepare a scheme to
develop new enemies for the US…
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article4381.htm
BenjaminB85
"Some people say that U.S recent aggressive wars in the muslim world are similar to the German Kaiser's bungling of international affairs. "
No. It's more like the Boer Wars, which were (you guessed it) started by the British a little over 100 years ago.
BenB85
The pre-WWII Munich analogy is flawed.
The Pacific today is much more similar to Europe around 1910, with China in the role of Germany and the United States in the role of Great Britain. A rising land power seeking to dominate a region that the dominant naval power in the world has, as one of its central foreign policy objectives, to keep the balance of power in said region.
China's recent actions in the South China Sea are nothing so much as reminiscent of the Kaiser's bungling, bullying foreign policy. And China certainly has the same inferiority complex vis. the United States that Imperial Germany did vis. the United Kingdom.
Cyrus
Unlike you we are not paid but does it none thee less because of love of country. Bigotry is yours and it appears you are somewhat educated by using Padre Domingo a character in one of the books of Jose Rizal.
vic
@Cyrus
Rizal was Chinese mestizo, and so was Ferdinand Marcos. FM's father was surnamed Chua. There is much intermingling of blood that you should tell the Chinese government you are entitled to 50% of Chinese claims on SCS rocks, reefs, etc.
This is based on Chinese inheritance. Make use of history, however slim, to your advantage. The Son of Heaven should acknowledge what is fair.
LC
@Cyrus
You are doing excellent my friend, your opponents are desperate, so now they are digging bits and pieces of your peoples history to twist and manipulate to use against you. And you know they run out of valid and reasonable counter argument when they start to move away from the topic and begin to attack you personally by calling you idiot, poor, racist, uneducated, etc. Too bad for them, they still lose!
Cam
This is called "socialism with Chinese characteristics".
Ari Tai
re: Sudetenland
Can only be clear in hindsight – at what point could a "this far and no further" line have been drawn that minimized future trauma. No one can know if, say, proportionate response now will have reduced the need for a larger response in the future until we get there, and even then it'll only be a "what if?" discussion.
In any case the U.S. remains responsible (as it did when communism proceeded to bring early and often horrific death to a 100 million souls, and make meaningless the lives of billions of others – i.e. what happens when work, invention, and innovation by the masses can't be guided by price signals). When you can act to attempt to create a morally better result, and don't, it's called a sin of omission. (something George Kennan observed – and regretted – at the end of his life – i.e. "containment" being as nearly great an evil as the disease).
Leonard R.
This article has introduced two excellent new posters whose viewpoints are different, Jaques666 and Brother Francis. Their posts make much better reading than Professor Paal's article. Their viewpoints are more honest and the analysis from Jaques666 is absolutely on-the-money.
Brother Francis' analysis is oddly nostalgic and fun to read too. The trend toward entropy of sociopathic cultures? Fun stuff. A Chinese-Mexican/Russo-German 'Hammer & Anvil' Axis that brings the world to its knees? Now that's original! And it makes more sense than what Professor Paal and other appeasement tract authors are recommending.
ACT
@Leonard
i honestly couldn't tell whether BrotherFrancis' comment was pure satire or actually serious, considering the fact that Mexico has a national policy of maintaining its military for national defense only. my money's on satire, for the moment, unless BrotherFrancis is just that eccentric
Leonard R.
Brother Francis' post harkens me back to college days. We would hear all sorts of wild scenarios from other students. But as crazy as it all sounded, those students made more sense than what our professors were teaching us.
My prizes go to:
For analysis: Jaques666
For fun reading: Brother Francis (and actually, the Russo-German half-way makes sense. I can't wait to see how the PLA does south of the border though.)
For the rubbish bin: Professor Paal & High White
Observer
LOL @ chinese posters with comments such as "smack others around" or "Godfather" and so on.
First of all, with your own kind dismay record of fighting against competence military forces, I would not brag if I was you. Don't take my words for it, use Google and look up the history of china and how they fought vs. Japan, Britain, Manchuria, Mongolia. All humiliation and shameful huge losses. Those are FACTS, people.
Secondly, in order to be a Godfather, you must be strong and able to fight. See above. How pathetic.
Summary = inferior complex from hundreds of years of humiliation is hard to overcome. Nice try.
An-noy ed
P#ss-off you %rse-hole! Racist comments like yours only drags this blog down. Need to impress your paymasters to increase your 50-cents?
Bankotsu
"Don't take my words for it, use Google and look up the history of china and how they fought vs. Japan, Britain, Manchuria, Mongolia. All humiliation and shameful huge losses. Those are FACTS, people."
Since you are also aware of the military short comings of China, I think U.S should stop encircling China with military bases and troops. China poses no threat to the U.S.
Some people in the U.S like to exaggerate the military threat of China to U.S, this is nonsense and such talk must stop.
brotherfrancis
@Bankotsu, This is not about Americans feeling threatened, but about Americans being bored sociopaths in need of their sociopath "entertainments." For sociopaths there can never be enough such amusement, presuming of course they are not on the receiving end.
The good news is that sociopathy has consequences and reduces its perpetrators gradually into a deep passivity. This underlying creeping national passivity now goes by the name of President Obama, our American equivalent to the late Boris Yeltsin. But the American dynamic is not towards fragmentation like in the U.S.S.R., but rather towards PARTITION. Mexico will face increasing IMPERIAL ambitions to her north and south as she rediscovers her long-dormant potentials. It is in China's and the world's self-interest to encourage and clear the way for this absolutely healthy natural process within the North American continent. Mexico richly deserves her imperial future!
As Mexico expands northwards she is likely to incorporate the present American Southwest, Texas and, most likely, most of the American South as well. The obvious global potential in this is a world-wide Neo-Confucian-Roman Catholic Alliance! The possibilities for this are truly boundless.
Mexico is like China's anvil for removing your incurable sociopath foe. The "hammer" would come from Russia via a Russo-German Alliance that will also naturally expand to incorporate the present American Northeast, Midwest and North West together with Canada. As vast potential for imperial expansion is rising in Mexico, such potential is also rising in Moscow and, by extension, Berlin. As you well know, the Germans will have no psychological barriers whatsoever against such a development that would be so advantageous to their own self-interest. I can assure you that love for America among Germans does not run very deep.
Hence Chinese should not only look at China's weaknesses, but also look very carefully at America's immense weaknesses too. China does not have any monopoly over national weaknesses! There are plenty to go around, especially in the contemporary Western world.
With this two-pronged hammer and anvil approach against China's (and the world's) sociopath mass-murderer, the future for a Chinese Empire, allied especially with a Mexican Empire and a Russo-German Empire, will be bright indeed.
(Your secret weapon is to use Roman Catholicism to again subject the West to the East, just like during the Middle Ages.)
Cheers! And congratulations…
Duke
Instead, I just see the coming of the Union of North America consisted of the US, Canada & Mexico as a new global superpower. There's no place for China there, so sorry, pal!
Kangmin Zheng
@Bankotsu and pro CCP supporters,
What CCP is doing at SCS and ECS is exactly the same as Nazi German and Imperial Japan before WW2. United States can't allow CCP to use dark force to attack its neighbors and eventually take on US at Guam, Hawaii and California. CCP is evil, stop supporting them. If you think China has legitimate claims at ECS & SCS, tell CCP to go to international courts. Are there anything to hide?
Conflict Inevitable
It's quite clear to every nation involved that we all made a terrible mistake when we allowed China to participate in the WTO. You can't expect this communist state to turn back from its conquest, but that's all water under the bridge now. I believe we should press even more on the global boycott campaign against products exported by China whose earnings will absolutely used to bully the smaller countries in the region. Their manufacturing sector is now experiencing a sharp decline and should be able to fan greater local discontent.
It is understandable the current position of the US, having been indebted to China to the tune of 3 trillion USD, whose hands are tied and contented to issuing press statements as some token resistance to the latter's aggressive posture. Conflict is inevitable, it's just a matter of time.
Inquiring Mind
Some people have been kept holding on to yesterday.
This is not 19th, or even 20th century.
It is 21th century.
First of all, U.S. owed China 1.1+ trillions dollars for the starter.
U.S. is the one who is fanning the flame in Asia.
In the age of internet, let's search for some facts.
The Cairo Declaration was signed on 27 November 1943 and released in a Cairo Communiqué through radio on 1 December 1943,[3]stating the Allies' intentions to continue deploying military force until Japan's unconditional surrender. The three main clauses of the Cairo Declaration are that "Japan be stripped of all the islands in the Pacific which she has seized or occupied since the beginning of the First World War in 1914", "all the territories Japan has stolen from the Chinese, such as Manchuria, Formosa, and the Pescadores, shall be restored to the Republic of China", and that "in due course Korea shall become free and independent".
However, U.S. unilaterally gave what are Chinese Islands to Japan after WWII.
U.S. is the one to blame on today's heated actions between China and Japan on those disputed islands.
To add insult to injury, U.S. officials had mentioned those Japan illegally controlled Chinese islands are subject to U.S. and Japan mutual defense pact?
How pathetic can U.S. get?
The Cession Treaty of 1900
The Boundaries Treaty of 1930
Philippine's territories were defined by it's two former colonial masters (U.S. and Spain) and didn't included those islands belonged to China and illegally occupied by Greedy and crying wolf Philippine.
To add insult to injury, U.S. was the colonial master that had defined Philippine's territories and out of all people should has known what are Philippine's territories.
Before those greedy, wolf crying Philippine is crying again, should check with it's former colonial master where are the Philippine territories before Philippine was running out to steal China nature resources.
U.S. has totally ignored how Philippine's illegal stealing in South China Sea.
If U.S. really want peace as it has been talking about in it's South China Sea Statements,
U.S. should tell it's former colonists to vacate all Chinese owed island and run back to those territories which were defined by U.S. in 1898, 1900 and 1930.
Justice is blind and in this case, U.S. is covering it's eyes and ears and telling Chinese to stop stir up trouble in South China Sea?
This is 2012 now and U.S. is at it's twilight years as world policeman.
If anything, U.S. needs to focus on it's domestic slow economy, high national unemployment rate, huge national budget deficits and regain it's AAA credit rate.
Therefore, U.S. doesn't have to keep sending Treasury Secretary to China to reassure China that it's 1.1+ trillions debts will be pay in full in U.S. has been screaming about human right for how long?
When will U.S. release those native American Indians from their prisons/reservations.
U.S. has locked up American Indians in prisons/reservations over one hundred year.
Since European Americans first step onto Plymouth from May Flower, European Americans are on their robbing, killing and genocide spree until now which Americans called their "manifested destiny" or licensed to rob, kill and other.
If U.S. is so much belief in how Philippine and Vietnam are interpreting the U.N. 200 miles EEZ, U.S. should follow the same rules and give up the followings,
Alaska closer to Canada.
Florida closer to Cuba.
Stay away from Mexico's 200 miles EEZ.
In other word, no more drilling for oil and natural gas in part of Gulf of Mexico that is within Mexico's EEZ.
Hawaii and other U.S. held islands.due time.
vic
Have you heard of American exceptionalism? Everyone follows prescribed standards except America. America can also set standard for others to follow except herself.
nirvana
And for you "Japan be stripped of all the islands in the Pacific which she has seized or occupied since the beginning of the First World War in 1914" means Japan must return which islands to China?
vic
@nirvana
The whole bloody lot, of course. In the meantime, no point fighting over them as yet. You must weigh out the costs against benefits. But, in due time, my friend, in due time.
nirvana
@vic,
I have understood your point Vic: For you China wants everything. Here, we are talking International Law. More precisely, I want to understand which islands Chinese think of that must be returned to China, according to the wording of the Cairo Declaration.
vic
@nirvana
Better still, go to your local library and check out the book printed by the League of Nations about China's Unequal Treaties. I think it may be dated 1900 (or thereabouts).
Cam
Fancy name with a fancy comment.
Conflict Inevitable
It's quite clear to every nation involved that we all made a terrible mistake when we allowed China to participate in the WTO. You can't expect this communist state to turn back from its conquest, but that's all water under the bridge now. I believe we should press even more on the global boycott campaign against products exported by China whose earnings will absolutely used to bully the smaller countries in the region. Their manufacturing sector is now experiencing a sharp decline and should be able to fan greater local discontent.
It is understandable the current position of the US, having been indebted to China to the tune of 3 trillion USD, whose hands are tied and contented to issuing press statements as some token resistance to the latter's aggressive posture. Conflict is inevitable, it's just a matter of time.
China_ACorruptSystem
People in the civilized world rather prefer US as world dominant power to china given its advanced ideology, technology and open culture. China is basically a corrupt system which built on dictatorship, blatant lies, brainwashing its underclass people. Newly rich china has become more and more arrogant even against its neighbors, claiming their lands and seas as its own based on trash arguments and threaten them with big guns. If china foolishly decide to fight US, i would love to see how US would devastate/destroy china coastal cities with its huge power, show china who is the real boss. In a few months of war, hundreds of millions of chineses will starve. It's time for china to reflect on its own why so many non-china people hate china so much. No sound-minded people wants to learn from a corrupt/communist/dictatorship system. Money is good but don't let it take over your soul, china!
Bankotsu
"People in the civilized world rather prefer US as world dominant power"
I doubt that. Recents polls suggest otherwise.
China Ranked 5th in BBC Global Popularity Survey, Above USA
http://www.beijingshots.com/2012/05/china-ranked-5th-in-bbc-global-popularity-survey-above-usa/
China_ACorruptSystem
U missed the point. The poll should be: "Which country do people prefer to be the world only dominant power, china or US?"
When china finally decide to fire its big gun, then you would see how low the new rankings would be. Think you got brain-washed so much by that system to see what is right or wrong.
Dan Pendleton
All of the rhetoric from China these days is they "think" the PLAN can go toe-to-toe with the US Navy within a few years. The reality is close to 20. The PLAN and the US Navy are light-years apart in naval doctrine and strategy. China thinks it has it all figured out by deploying its capital ships against Guam or Hawaii. What they don't realize is that Ohio-class submarines can just surface a few miles from their shores and bombard Beijing and their industrial cities with cruise missiles. It's what you don't see that will hit you smack in the head.
vic
@Dan
It's what's not inside your head that will make you meet the "unexpected". Surprise, surprise. This was what happened to General MacArthur in Korea. Never inside his head did he expect that China would fight the fight; hence the famous "advance to the rear" command. And the rearguards had to "hold back the night".
Never underestimate your enemy. China will never underestimate USA.
Cam
The surprise element the US never expected from China was the PLA generals couldn’t care how many Chinese soldiers got killed, human waves after human waves for each battle. Never in a history warfare of the world, could we see human lives were wasted like that. And the Chinese are so proud of that. SAD!