Michael Wesley's Snapshot, What's at stake in the
South China Sea, contains
three major assertions and one policy recommendation that I take issue with.
Wesley's first
assertion is that China claims the South China Sea as its territorial waters
and this would restrict the passage of United States warships. China's 1992 Law on
Territorial Sea only
claimed 12 nautical miles of territorial waters around the Paracel and
Spratly islands. China did not issue a map showing the baselines around
individual islands and rocks. Also China did not claim a regime of islands; the inference that China has claimed the
entire South China Sea as its territorial waters is one drawn by US Navy legal
specialists.
In 2009, China
officially tabled a map of the South China Sea containing nine
dashes forming a u-shape
line embracing over 80% of the South China Sea. China claims historic
rights to this area. In recent years China has claimed sovereignty over the
islands, rocks and their adjacent waters. This year China's Foreign Ministry
stated that no country, presumably including China, claims the entire South
China Sea.
Wesley's second assertion, which
is closely related to his first, is that China has challenged shipping in the
South China Sea. China has not interfered with commercial shipping. In 2011,
Chinese civilian ships were involved in three incidents involving oil
exploration vessels in waters where China's u-shaped line overlapped with the
Exclusive Economic Zones of the Philippines and Vietnam. These incidents did
not take place in shipping lanes and have not been repeated.
In 2009, China was also involved
in one incident involving a US military ship (USNS Impeccable) conducting
close-in surveillance in the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) off Hainan Island.
China and the United States fundamentally disagree about the conduct of
military activities in a state's EEZ under international law. This incident did
not take place in an international shipping lane and has not been repeated.
Wesley's third assertion is that
China refuses to discuss the South China Sea in any regional meeting and China
will only negotiate if ASEAN abandons the search for a common position. In fact
ASEAN has already arrived at a common position and Chinese officials have met
with ASEAN counterparts to discuss the modalities of future discussions.
The ASEAN Foreign
Ministers unanimously adopted the key elements of a Code of Conduct in the
South China Sea at
their ministerial meeting in July. China officially stated it is willing
to discuss the code of conduct with ASEAN members 'when conditions are
ripe'. At the same time, Chinese and ASEAN senior officials informally met
twice to discuss the ASEAN draft code of conduct. Formal discussions are
tentatively set for September with a goal of completing the talks by November.
Indonesian Foreign
Minister Marty Natalegawa's recently conducted an intense round of shuttle
diplomacy. As a result of his initiative all ASEAN foreign ministers agreed to
supportASEAN's Six Principles
on the South China Sea and
are now committed to intensifying consultations on the code of conduct.
Wesley concludes his Snapshot by
proposing that Australia launch a new initiative to help resolve South China
Sea disputes. He supports his proposal by arguing because the United States
supports a unified ASEAN position this will make the code of conduct less
palatable to Beijing and Australia contributes nothing to resolving the dispute
by backing the US and ASEAN.
I would like to suggest three
policy proposals. Given that China has played on differences within ASEAN to
advance its interests, now more than ever ASEAN needs the backing of its
dialogue partners. Wesley's policy proposal is likely to add confusion to the
ASEAN diplomatic process at best and weaken ASEAN in its dealing with China at
worst.
·
Indonesia's recent intervention put ASEAN-China discussions on a code
of conduct back on track. Now is the time for Australia to let ASEAN take the
lead and for Australia to provide diplomatic support. A preferable option for
Australia would be to join the United States and other like-minded ASEAN
dialogue partners (Japan, South Korea, New Zealand, Canada, the European Union
and India) in giving their full support to ASEAN.
·
A second option for an Australian diplomatic role is for Australia and
Malaysia, as co-chairs of the Expert Working Group on Maritime Security
established under the ASEAN Defence Ministers Meeting Plus, to continue their
quiet work of developing practical proposals to enhance maritime security in
the South China Sea.
·
Finally, a third option for Australia would be for the government to
finally make a firm decision on developing and funding a credible conventional
submarine force to cooperate with the United States to maintain stability in
the South China Sea.
Business & Investment Opportunities
YourVietnamExpert is a division of Saigon Business Corporation Pte Ltd, Incorporated in Singapore since 1994. As Your Business Companion, we propose a range of services in Strategy, Investment and Management, focusing Healthcare and Life Science with expertise in ASEAN. We also propose Higher Education, as a bridge between educational structures and industries, by supporting international programmes. Many thanks for visiting www.yourvietnamexpert.com and/or contacting us at contact@yourvietnamexpert.com
No comments:
Post a Comment