#SouthChinaSea Opinion Roundup

wikimedia.org

This is War! No, Wait

China released a white paper on its military strategy on Tuesday, giving a picture of non-confrontation as compared to a media report on Monday that said that a military conflict over South China Sea is "inevitable".

In the white paper, titled 'China's Military Strategy', the government said that a world war is "unlikely" and said that it will never enter a nuclear arms race, but pointed at "increasing external impediments", stating that some countries were "busy meddling in the South China Sea".

IBT

Philippines: "We Are Being Oppressed"

Philippine Defense Minister Voltaire Gazmin said he would meet U.S. Defense Secretary Ash Carter on Wednesday in Hawaii to ask for a stronger commitment. 

“I will ask about the extent of the assistance they will give us, what they can do to help us because right now we are being oppressed,” Gazmin told journalists at a naval base south of Manila. 

“We feel concerned about what is happening in the West Philippine Sea (South China Sea). Freedom of navigation, freedom of flight is disrupted so that even U.S. aircraft flying at the international territory are challenged.”

gCaptain

China's Response

Q: China has been emphasizing the civil and public nature of her construction activities. Will the facilities to be developed be open to the international community? 

A: The primary purpose of China's construction activities on the Nansha islands and reefs is to better fulfill her relevant international responsibilities and obligations. When conditions are ripe, China will invite relevant countries and international organizations to use relevant facilities for cooperation in maritime search and rescue as well as in other areas. China will make overall plans about what facilities to be open to the international community based on comprehensive planning after the completion of development. 

Q: Some believe that China's construction activities on the islands and reefs are aimed to intensify the legal status of the Nansha Islands and the country's claim on the dotted line. What is your comment? 

A: China's sovereignty and relevant claims of rights in the South China Sea have been formed in the long course of history and upheld by successive Chinese governments. This position has adequate historical and legal basis. There is no need to have it strengthened through construction activities on relevant islands and reefs.

Shanghai Daily

"Historical Fiction"

China uses folklore, myths, and legends, as well as history, to bolster greater territorial and maritime claims. Chinese textbooks preach the notion of the Middle Kingdom as being the oldest and most advanced civilization that was at the very center of the universe, surrounded by lesser, partially Sinicized states in East and Southeast Asia that must constantly bow and pay their respects. China’s version of history often deliberately blurs the distinction between what was no more than hegemonic influence, tributary relationships, suzerainty, and actual control. Subscribing to the notion that those who have mastered the past control their present and chart their own futures, Beijing has always placed a very high value on “the history card” (often a revisionist interpretation of history) in its diplomatic efforts to achieve foreign policy objectives, especially to extract territorial and diplomatic concessions from other countries. Almost every contiguous state has, at one time or another, felt the force of Chinese arms—Mongolia, Tibet, Burma, Korea, Russia, India, Vietnam, the Philippines, and Taiwan—and been a subject of China’s revisionist history. As Martin Jacques notes in When China Rules the World, “Imperial Sinocentrism shapes and underpins modern Chinese nationalism.”

World Affairs Journal

Taiwan's Alternative

Ma’s South China Sea Peace Initiative is the latest effort to distinguish Taiwan’s strategy for handling the disputes from China’s. The new initiative is similar to the East China Sea Peace Initiative announced in August 2012, which also calls for shelving disputes (in that case, the Senkaku/Diaoyu Island dispute with Japan) and sharing resources. The East China Sea Peace Initiative led to the signing of a break-through fisheries agreement between Taiwan and Japan, which would see both Taiwanese and Japanese fishing boats allowed to operate within the 12 nautical miles of territorial sea generates by the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands.

The Diplomat

Problem is: Resources On Their Own Are Beside The Point

The answer, happily, is probably not. The risk of regional "resource wars" has been overstated. Sure, hydrocarbon competition can inspire international spats, but as the HD-981 incident demonstrated, governments are quick to contain them. 

When it comes to maritime disputes, islands, not oil, are the greater threat to international stability. Why? Because resources can be shared but islands cannot. In a winner-takes-all environment, leaders have little choice but to dig in their heels. If one country obtains sovereign control over contested territory, the other loses it. But through joint development, resources can be shared. 

Over the last few decades, this difference has been particularly evident in the East China Sea. There, Japan and China are contesting control over a group of islands—known as the Senkakus in Japanese and Diaoyus in Chinese—along with oil and natural gas fields, over 100 nautical miles to the northeast of those islands. The dispute over the islands has generated intense hostility between the two countries. The struggle over oil and gas fields, by contrast, has inspired constructive dialogue.

Vox