South China Sea Dispute: What Is At Stake?
Tensions have been rising in the South China Sea of late, and these are threatening to put strains on China’s relations with South East Asia and the US.
Essentially, China has reiterated its long-standing claims over the whole of the South China Sea, including the Spratly and Paracel islands. Unsurprisingly, this sovereignty assertion is disputed by Brunei, Malaysia, the Philippines, Taiwan, and Vietnam, which each claim part of the islands or the sea (See this link from the US Energy Information Administration for an overview).
In late July, the US entered the fray, saying that it is willing to mediate in the dispute. This greatly angered China, which regards the South China Sea as an internal matter. Indeed, Beijing now views the South China Sea as one of its ‘core interests’ of territorial integrity, alongside Taiwan, Tibet, and Xinjiang province.
Why Is The South China Sea Important?
There are several reasons:
- Critical trade route: Much of the trade between Europe and the Middle East and East Asia passes from the Indian Ocean through the Malacca Strait, then up through the South China Sea to China, South Korea, and Japan. Japanese defence planners in particular don’t want this trade route dominated by China, even though the likelihood of interdiction is remote.
- Oil and gas reserves: Some of the islands are believed to contain significant hydrocarbon resources. Given that most Asian economies import the vast majority of their oil needs, mainly from the Middle East, they naturally wish to tap sources closer to home. The sea also has substantial fish resources.
- Global naval strategy: China is seeking naval preponderance in the South China Sea as part of its bid to become a global naval power. This would include projection capabilities in the Indian Ocean, which is fast becoming a zone of Great Power competition. Japan and South Korea, too, are seeking to strengthen their naval prowess.
South China Sea
What Are The Geopolitical Implications?
The US is clearly trying to deal itself back into South East Asian geopolitics, after a decade of relative neglect by the Bush administration, which focused more on Afghanistan, Iraq, and the wider Middle East. During this time, China stepped up its influence in South East Asia through increased trade, investment, and use of ‘soft’ power. US attempts to bolster its position in the region are evident from its tentative outreach to Myanmar last year, and a planned resumption of cooperation with Indonesia’s Kopassus special forces. Both moves are considered controversial, due to human rights concerns.
However, the real clincher for the US could be its growing ties with Vietnam. The two countries are staging naval exercises this week, and Hanoi could well become Washington’s main ally in South East Asia. This is because Vietnam is arguably the country in the region most concerned about China’s rising power. Not coincidentally, Vietnam was the last sovereign state to be attacked by China, in 1979, and the two are the most active disputants in the South China Sea. China has the upper hand, as evidenced by the fact that in 2008 it forced ExxonMobil to abandon plans to explore for oil off Vietnam’s shore in disputed waters.
A US-Vietnamese alliance would be a strong counterweight to China, and could attract support from Japan, and potentially India. However, there is an inherent danger in building a counter-Chinese alliance, namely it could result in South East Asia being divided into competing camps. This would undermine efforts to build Asian unity through organisations such as ASEAN.
Should I Be Worried About War?
Back in 1997, a British journalist published a future-fiction Tom Clancy-esque novel called Dragon Strike, which portrays a Chinese attack on Vietnam and other regional states in 2001 in order to secure the South China Sea. This prompts US intervention, bringing Beijing and Washington to the brink of nuclear war. This was clearly an alarmist situation, and one that is quite at odds with China’s cautious approach to foreign policy. However, I do not preclude future skirmishes between Chinese and South East Asian vessels, and perhaps even with the US navy if tensions continue to rise.
Recall that it was only as recently as 2001 that China forced down and captured a US spy plane in its vicinity and detained its crew for almost two weeks. Back then, the world’s economy was less dependent on ‘Chimerica’, but were such an incident to replay itself, it would surely send shockwaves through the global financial system, at least in the short term, as investors pondered the future of Sino-US relations.
Even if such skirmishes are avoided, the South China Sea looks set to be another bone of contention between the China and the US, on top of exchange rate reform, trade issues, intellectual property theft, Taiwan, Tibet, and human rights.
Going forward, the key challenge for Beijing and Washington will be ensuring that geopolitical tensions are isolated from economic issues, which necessitate a high degree of cooperation. However, this will not always be easy.
August 11th, 2010 at 5:08 pm
….China’s cautious foreign policy…. China’s peaceful rise…. Don’t believe it! Call me a cynic, but give me an example from history when a country as significant in global terms as China is now, and which grew in economic and military power at the pace that China is now, has NOT come into conflict with existing great powers and/or its neighbours. China will be involved in a war over the next 30 years. How devastating it will be, I don’t know (hopefully not very).
August 16th, 2010 at 9:54 am
First Let me state that no other government on earth ruled for so long over so many people as the empire of China. From the pre-China period of the Xia – 2205-1600bc to the end of the warring states period- 480-221bc-Even taking the last possible date for its foundation- 221bc – it remained in place for over two millennia, during which 157 emperors sat on China’s throne. It took over 5000 years for China to evolve and 200 years for it to fold. When China was weak and the Japanese raped Nanjing in 1937 and the rest of it’s helpless country, America was busy defending the world and 8 years later came to China’s rescue while fighting the Germans and all others trying to destroy world peace. Remember Japan wanted to own China and almost succeeded. Do not forget this fact! Then to make maters worse Chairman Mao made a big mistake by destroying China’s wonderful heritage. All the social & culturural air looms that were erased by the cultural revolution left China with out it’s identity. Very Sad because I love China’s history but stupidity reigned supreme here my brothers. America’s 400 year trajectory is not perfect either but our track record and world resume is far more qualified to handle world affairs even if we are making mistakes along the way. Our intentions are far more mature than China’s but China can become a world example by maturing first as in re-establishing cultural identity to it’s provinces, economically creating a fair place for all rural chinese, Keeping it’s dialects alive, letting it’s spiritual identity evolve without government interference and really understanding that China is not ready to rule the south China seas like it had from the Han dynasty-220ad till 1420. Example for a brief interlude, The great chinese Admiral Zheng He challenged such conservative tendencies. By the end of his fleet’s seven voyages, China had become an unrivaled naval power. As a result of the expeditions, the Emperor in Nanjing (and later Beijing when the capital was moved north in 1420) commanded the fear and respect of leaders throughout South and Southeast Asia. China had established itself as a trade and diplomatic force, its authority backed up by the thousands of troops who accompanied Zheng He on his travels. If countries could be said to “own” centuries—the 20th century is often viewed as America’s; the previous one arguably belonged to colonial superpower Britain—the 1400s were all China’s. Or at least they could have been, had the country not suddenly turned inward.
There are many theories as to why China curtailed its maritime aspirations in the mid-15th century. The simplest is that the Confucians prevailed. The imperial bureaucracy sought to contain the expansionary ambitions of its sailors and the increasing power of its merchant class: Confucian ideology venerates authority and agrarian ways, not innovation and trade. “Barbarian” nations were thought to offer little of value to China. Other factors contributed: the renovation of the north-south Grand Canal, for one, facilitated grain transport and other internal commerce in gentle inland waters, obviating the need for an ocean route. And the tax burden of maintaining a big fleet was severe. But the decision to scuttle the great ships was in large part political. With the death of Yongle, the Emperor who sent Zheng He on his voyages, the conservatives began their ascendancy. China suspended naval expeditions. By century’s end, construction of any ship with more than two masts was deemed a capital offense. Oceangoing vessels were destroyed. Eventually, even records of Zheng He’s journey were torched. China’s heroic age was over; its open door had slammed shut. “The expeditions wasted tens of myriads of money and grain,” a 15th century Minister of War complained. Roderick MacFarquhar, a sinologist at Harvard University, characterizes the conservative triumph this way: “Yellow River over blue water.” Now China wants to have power over other south china sea travel and shipping lanes. China needs to pay it dues by proving and doing just as good or better than everything that America has done over the past one hundred years. This will not happen in your lifetime ………..so let go. Enjoy being a part of China’s renaissance and let China mature as a nation and also learn how to be ecologically responsible before trying to run the rest of the world.
February 8th, 2011 at 4:42 pm
CONFUCIOUS SAID: America’s 400 year trajectory is not perfect either but our track record and world resume is far more qualified to handle world affairs even if we are making mistakes along the way.
R. C. Christian
I am not sure what history books, you’ve been reading. America’s ideals, direction and nature are not mature and rarely have been. Part of the worlds problem is the American foreign policy. America has been responsible for more death and destruction in their short history, then China has over its whole history. If you need evidence, just look at the history of the CIA and what they have been doing over the last 60 years. America needs to get their greedy little hands out of everyone elses business for sure. They are not the respected Global leaders as you suggest. Its up to the united nations to deal with world policy and the USA needs to get out of this aggressive foreign policy unless they want to increase world terrorism, it will happen. It’s up to that area, to dispute the South China Sea and when the USA starts to get a conflict of interest, which they have for hundreds of years, then you will see larger escalations towards war in that area. Its not China against Vietnam. Its China against the USA controlling Vietnam and other smaller countries in that region. Make no mistake. America are not the angels you put them up to be. Having said that China is responsible for problems in that region as well. But their foreign policy is a lot less volatile then the good ole USA. America needs to get their grubby little hands out of every world resource and start concentrating on their home soil if they want to do what’s right. Its obvious to me anyways, that the regions water ways, should be shared equally by all involved, but you can bet because of American interests, that won’t happen. When will we grow up as a society and enter this age of reason?
June 9th, 2011 at 7:34 pm
I am in favor of world bodies to mediate, countries that are generous to countries in need and I highly question countries that provide aid – biild infrastructure with their own citizens in exchange for significant access to commodities while only offering only low paying jobs to natives.
It sounds like the US has done a lot for China and China has been a plus.
How many countries has the US and China helped that have accused of significant civil rights violations, attacked other countries, developed nuclear bombs, been non-democratic, accused of killing different religious sects or genocide while they imported commodities, vetoed sanctions and looked the other way?
Help your people, help the people of the world and everyone is happy.
No one is perfect however what are are our leaders doing in 2011?