July 27, 2012
High Stakes in South China Sea
by John Teo@http://www.nst.com.my
PHILIPPINE President Benigno Aquino III has been creating waves not just within his country but without as well. While the waves within — if they do not prove so overly disruptive as to be counter-productive – may be necessary, overdue and largely welcome by Filipinos, those without are a totally different matter.
For many weeks now, Manila has been caught in a debilitating stand-off with China over uninhabited rocky islets in the South China Sea. The Philippines is not alone in such disputes with China. Malaysia, Brunei and Vietnam share similar disputes with China or each other.
In the case with Brunei, we have come to an understanding after rather protracted bilateral talks that allowed for what appears to be a win-win setting aside of overlapping claims in favour of joint exploration of whatever resources may lie undersea, believed to be mostly hydrocarbons.
Beijing is known to favour settling its maritime disputes with the ASEAN states in a similar, 
bilateral fashion. While individual ASEAN states may be understandably wary of entering bilateral talks with the budding Asian superpower over the disputes, there has been no ASEAN consensus so far about taking up the disputes with Beijing as a united grouping.
This much is clear from the almost deafening silence of the Philippines’ ASEAN neighbours in its current stand-off with China, despite the Filipinos’ plea for ASEAN nations to take a stand. There may in fact be some understandable resentment on the part of some ASEAN states over the Philippines choosing to confront Beijing at this stage before ASEAN arrives at a collective stance.
The Philippines may want to portray itself as the plucky little guy standing up to the regional bully. This stance may resonate well domestically but smacks of dangerous brinksmanship.
As things stand, the idea of Beijing as bully may be more threat than reality.
While regional states obviously need to be wary not just of Beijing’s intentions and designs but those of all big powers towards the region, it is to no one’s benefit to provoke Beijing into making its intentions clear.
Beijing’s claims in the South China Sea may be questionable, but the very act of staking them does not in and of itself make Beijing out to be a bully. It will be noted, after all, that Taiwan, otherwise still officially the Republic of China, makes the same claims as China. There is at least equal if not greater evidence of China as generous benefactor to weaker states than otherwise.
However, China’s growing global heft definitely marks it out to be a potential bully and it must concern Beijing that regional states are prone to be mistrustful of its intentions and designs.
That said, the Philippines’ stance does seem needlessly disruptive.Aquino recently returned from a trip to Washington having secured fresh commitments of American support — crucially, in shoring up the Philippines’ military — as well as a joint reaffirmation of navigational safety in the South China Sea.
That reiteration of safe passage through the sea may be viewed in Beijing as superfluous and therefore a further provocation. China, after all, has built itself up as a rising economic power and is only now beefing up its own military and defence capabilities.
No country, least of all the US (at least officially), begrudges Beijing a military commensurate with its growing status and, therefore, its added responsibilities, particularly to its own people and burgeoning global interests.
Moreover, China has developed to become the largest trading nation on earth and if any nation has the greater interest in ensuring safe passage through all seas, it clearly is China.
What will be a threat to all nations with peaceful intentions is the unintended escalation of disputes to such an extent that any accidental miscalculation on the part of any party leads to armed conflict.
China and the Philippines have, to both their credit, pulled back from the brink. But the
stand-off remains and the potential for grave miscalculation or an untoward accidents remains real.
China is famously known to be playing very long-term games. It seems to have time on its side. If current projections hold, it will eclipse the US as the world’s largest economy in the not-too-distant future. What that does to either of the two big powers is anybody’s guess.
The wisest course for all regional states would appear to be to postpone for as long as possible any likelihood of any of them having to choose between either of the two.
The Philippines thinks it can count on US support should its relations with China becomes difficult leading to military confrontation. Talking tough has its limits. In stead, the Philippines should work within the ASEAN framework.
The so-called Phnom Penh fiasco shows that ASEAN is structurally weak with a Secretariat which is led by a very experienced, able, and dynamic former Thai Foreign Minister as Secretary-General. Dr Surin Pitsuwan has a limited role. The Secretariat itself is poorly funded to support research and technical support for its members.
It is very convenient to blame Cambodia as Chairman for not being able to come up with a joint communique at the end of the ASEAN Ministerial Meeting in Phnom Penh. The truth should be told and that is, ASEAN member states cannot think beyond their self interest. Until they can think beyond themselves, they will make ASEAN ” ineffective and neutered”(Simon Tay).–Din Merican
Someone asked the bloghost in one of the earlier posts why he was posting so many pieces on ASEAN. I for one am glad that he is doing that because WE the People must understand what is being done on our behalf in ASEAN by our leaders and officials.
ASEAN should not be left to the officials alone. Most of cannot imagine what our external environment would have been like without ASEAN. It pays to remember that Southeast Asia is a dangerous neighborhood. It has the potential to become a real nasty place if major power relations get out of hand.
Therefore I’m exasperated at all the silliness that is going on. Scarborough is a bilateral problem with China and so is Paracels, a bilateral problem of Vietnam with China. Both these islets DON’T belong in the Spratlys. These two countries must find a way to work a deal with China. No they don’t! Instead they try to cover their make up for their inability to think by hiding under the cover of the Code of Conduct. And now the Philippines is thinking of asking the UN to step in. To do what and where?? Neither has China been too smart by declaring a new city covering the Spratlys ! Instead of addressing its bilateral problem with Philippines, China’s actions has made it more difficult for the claimants to address the code of conduct. There must be a dearth of thinking people in these capitals. Their silly tactics only reveal desperation. And putting our security at risk as well!
I am happy to read that Sonia Brady is coming back. It’s a good choice because she knows the genesis of the issue very well. I hope that with her some sense would prevail at future ASEAN summits and ministerial meetings. It’s also good that Marty and Jock Seng from Brunei are there too.
On the present problem, Marty has done a good job knocking heads on his shuttle. Now action must start on several tracks. Otherwise ASEAN indeed risks being neutered. The first track involves the bilateral track. Philippines and Vietnam and China must address their issues bilaterally or trilaterally. The second track is the claimants track. This track is NOT about the code of conduct. The ASEAN claimants must sit down and get a common position before meeting China in November. The third track is the ASEAN and China track to deal with the code of conduct in the South China Sea. Since there is something on paper why not work on it? All three tracks are non-exclusive and problems on one track should not impede the other tracks.
Now back to ASEAN. I find it unacceptable that our leaders and officials are merrily crafting ideas and making pronouncements without really understanding what the people want. I would like to know how an ASEAN Community is going to be realised when the host country unilaterally can threaten to hold a Joint Communique hostage and carry out its threat!
I am clear about what I want – I want a peaceful Southeast Asia. I want our children and theirs not to fear war. I want an ASEAN Community that understands this as well. Therefore I want our officials to see to it that whatever plans or projects they conjure up ultimately lead to this aspiration – PEACE AND AMITY and COOPERATION.
This is why I am happy that our bloghost puts so many articles on ASEAN because it allows us to express our views. I hope that our Filipino brothers and sisters and others would also do the same in their countries even if not Southeast Asian citizens can freely express their views.
____________
Thanks, Observer. I was involved with Dr Kao Kim Hourn and others at Cambodian Institute for Cooperation and Peace in Phnom Penh (1995-1997) on planning for Cambodia’s entry by 1997 (postponed to 1998 due to the coup in July, 1997). I was living there.
Our argument then was that the Cambodian people will benefit from their country’s membership through greater trade and investment, tourism, and labour mobility. We also thought we could be bring our youth together through cultural and educational exchanges. There were none of the stuff our leaders and officials are talking about today.
People have become disconnected from the ASEAN process as elites and leaders take ego trips, expounding their vision of an ASEAN community by 2015, ARF, EAS, etc. In and out of expensive hotels in various ASEAN capitals, sampling fine cuisine, champagne, and wine and God knows what else behind closed doors, they saunter and roam at our expense, producing no results. I bet they will miss this Community thing by miles, because we have yet to begin.
There are countless meetings and committees, and Track 2 Diplomacy stuff. All crap talk and high sounding communiques. Now just a glitch at AMM in Phnom Penh, they start blaming Cambodia and each other.This is utter gubberish, and a waste of taxpayers money which is spent on jet setting leaders and their officials. No accountability and transparency.–Din Merican
Will those at the ASEAN secretariat respond to our comments. Well, the next time I meet Dr. Surin Pitsuwan who is a very committed ASEANist. I will politely advise him not to waste his time and talent. I bet he is glad that his tenure is about to end. Once his term is over, he should write about his experience as ASEAN Secretary-General. Rudolfo Severino of the Philippines, now a researcher at ISEAS, Singapore, did. –Din Merican