November 22, 2015
ASEAN: Bridging the South China Sea Dispute
by Mergawati Zulfakar
Nobody wants to admit it publicly, at least on the Malaysian side that the ASEAN Defence Ministers Plus meeting in Malaysia early this month nearly became a disaster.
Disagreement between the United States and China over how to address the South China Sea issue resulted in the ministers failing to issue a joint declaration outlining cooperation in regional security matters.
The United States and its allies had pressed for a mention of disputes in the South China Sea in the joint declaration while a senior US defence official said China had lobbied ASEAN members to avoid any reference.
This is not the first time maritime and territorial disputes in the South China Sea became an issue. ASEAN Foreign Ministers ended a meeting in Cambodia two years ago without issuing the customary joint communique as there had been disagreement over the growing assertiveness of China in the South China Sea.
This week as the 27th ASEAN Summit and related summits begin, the issue is escalating again. It will be interesting to see how as Asean chair Prime Minister Dato’ Seri Najib Tun Razak will handle leaders from China and the United States during the 10th East Asia Summit (the Asean 10 plus Australia, China, India, Japan, South Korea, New Zealand, Russia and the US).
Should the host country downplay the issue as it doesn’t want to get the unnecessary attention of China? Well, it depends on the situation.
A senior Malaysian official said Malaysia should not sweep it under the carpet as it was a claimant country.“As chair we have to be objective, we have to be fair but we have to reflect the discussions that will take place. If the South China Sea is featured substantially in the leaders’ discussion, then it will have to be reflected in the 27th ASEAN Summit chairman statement and China will have to understand that.We do not want to isolate anybody. We have our views and perhaps ours will probably not be the same as Vietnam or the Philippines. Still, we have to acknowledge all these diverse views and it should be reflected in the statement.”
ASEAN and China have long been working on a binding code of conduct (CoC) to address numerous issues faced by claimant countries. However, only a Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea was finalised and signed in 2002.
The declaration reaffirms the parties’ commitment to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and other international laws on state-to-state relations. It also states that ASEAN members and China should resolve disputes “by peaceful means, without resorting to the threat or use of force, through friendly consultations and negotiations”.
In the last few years, China has been rather aggressive in reclaiming the area and latest reports suggest Beijing is trying to establish a de facto 12-mile territorial zone around the reclaimed area by building airstrips and other facilities for military forces.
These activities have been received with much criticism from claimant countries like the Philippines and Vietnam.
During the ASEAN Foreign Ministers meeting in Kuala Lumpur in August in a joint communique issued, the ministers in criticising China had said reclamation activities carried out in the disputed area could undermine the peace, security and stability in the area.
However, in recent weeks, Chinese President Xi Jinping has been more conciliatory in his remarks by saying China has always insisted the dispute should be resolved peacefully through talks but Beijing has a responsibility to protect the country’s sovereignty and maritime rights.
One official believed that China was so far advanced in reclamation of the area that there was no turning back. “They won’t reverse in whatever they are doing so they can afford to be conciliatory. Now they can talk about the CoC because they have managed to change the reality on the ground, building port facilities, military buildings and even an airstrip on the islands. It is like checkmate, really,” the official said.
Another concern now is that they have widely reclaimed the area and that their authority has become more effective in the area. “So potentially their claim can over time be supported in international courts,” warned the official.
Another concern is a recent move by a US warship conducting a so-called freedom-of-navigation patrol around the area claimed by Beijing.
“It is worrying really. The question is to what extent do you want to challenge China? It can turn the area into a hotspot which we have avoided all these years,” said an official.
For Malaysia, its quiet diplomacy to manage the issue has worked well so far.Kuala Lumpur has to be careful how it deals with China, which is its biggest trading partner. At the same time in recent years, Malaysia has developed solid relations with Washington.
“We do not want instability in the region and we do not know how China as a superpower will behave in future. We do not know how they will treat us and maybe it is good to have somebody to provide a check and balance,”said an official.
Din Merican: the Malaysian DJ Blogger 
We do not know how they will treat us > an official says.
Figure out how you treat the Chinese within your own nation first, and the rest would be so much easier to handle.
Chinese current policy is a mere reflection of insecurities of existing Chinese administration to hold onto her blue-and-white porcelain. Putting this in mind, issues related to this Spratly Island would resolve itself, when dealing with China on this. It is only a matter of time, when China would stop its claim. XiDaDa meant to last only another 5 years, according to unwritten consensus, unlike Najib who could aim to last forever. XiDada’s main pre-occupation would always be how to retire. Current Najib adminstration should be familiar with that. There is some talk about XiDada needing to last more than his 10 years term, given so many powerful interest group who has been hurt.
Perhaps, mentioned official is trying to figure that out. An assertive Obama who will definitely be stepping down in another year, but XiDada might stick around much longer. A business friendly republican president, or Clinton, would definitely ignore this issue, and Malaysia would have to forget her oil rights.
In any case, mentioned official has to worry if his/her job would last, since he/she doesn’t get much direction from a missing boss. Perhaps, the ‘they’ this official has in mind is not current Chinese adminstration, but just mean his/her next boss.
So much Machiavelian calculation. Noone cares about what ought to be done.
Melayu tentu akan hilang di dunia.
if the official learnt Chinese (which is not an outlandish idea for a diplomat), just talk about building sustainable development, all building issue in Spratly Island would be resolved immediately by XiDaDa.
Obama should visit see this White House in China, built in a small town called 阜阳 in 安徽 province.
XiDaDa did not approve that building apparently. https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E9%98%9C%E9%98%B3%E2%80%9C%E7%99%BD%E5%AE%AB%E2%80%9D%E8%85%90%E8%B4%A5%E7%BE%A4%E6%A1%88
See the above link in google translator.
Opps.. I forgot, the official’s boss is building an unsustainable building also. Perhaps, all the 1MDB money is needed to build this building, just for the Razak name 😦
The world has always been divided into two categories. Now it is those aligned to USA and the other to China. All due to personal reasons and the rest of the world is being asked to align between these two giants who each want to ‘control’ the world. This may be another form of domination to colonize the world economically whereas in the past it used to be by military might and occupation for plundering the resources of the other countries of the world.
Only those who think that they are strong enough to stand on their own such as EU-UK may be fooling themselves as they may be under the economic and military might of the US. China may be having similar objectives but is doing it more subtly whereas US does this openly.
/// The declaration reaffirms the parties’ commitment to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and other international laws on state-to-state relations. ///
Until and unless the US ratifies UNCLOS, it has no locus standi to invoke UNCLOS on China’s actions in the South China Sea.
I felt that Asean should be focusing on this instead in light of what’s happening in Paris. Just watch the similarities in these 2 incidents
Perhaps, Singapore should lead Asean instead