As part of US President Barack Obama’s efforts to promote a US “return to Asia,” Washington pushed the Trans-Pacific Strategic Economic Partnership (TPP) at the recent APEC summit and proposed the creation of a Southeast Asia Maritime Partnership at the East Asia Summit (EAS), policies that are intended to constrain China both economically and strategically.
A public opinion poll conducted in nine Asian countries and released by Gallup Inc on Nov. 18 showed that 44 percent of respondents supported US leadership in Asia, while 30 percent support Chinese leadership in the region. In Australia, the Philippines and South Korea, the support for US leadership was 29 percentage points higher than support for Beijing.
China has taken note of the shift in the strategic focus of the Obama administration as the US winds down its involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan, and believes the US’ primary goal is to constrain Beijing. Obama recently announced that the US would deploy 2,500 troops at a military base in Darwin, Australia, starting next year. Add to that the continued activities of US warships and fighter jets in East Asia.
Although the US has said it wants a “positive, cooperative, and comprehensive Sino-US relationship for the 21st century,” signs of disagreements between the two countries over the South China Sea are becoming increasingly obvious.
In July last year, US Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton publicly challenged China’s claims to sovereignty over the whole South China Sea. In June, after procrastinating for several years, China finally reached an agreement with ASEAN on guidelines for the implementation of a Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea, signed in 2002, a sign of US influence in the region.
Beijing has been enforcing a unilateral ban on fishing in the region to protect fishery resources, cutting the cables of a Vietnam Oil and Gas Corp (PetroVietnam) vessel, warning Western oil companies not to cooperate with the Philippines or Vietnam in oil and gas exploration projects and expelling US warships and fighters conducting military operations in China’s “exclusive economic zone.” As a result, China’s number of friends in the South China Sea region is dwindling.
Through the newly proposed Southeast Asia Maritime Partnership, the US will provide training and equipment to maritime police and civil units in Southeast Asian countries to enhance their ability to combat transnational threats.
The US is also prepared to share maritime surveillance and information and hold regional conferences to reinforce standard operating procedures, as well as create more space for discussions on the Law of the Sea. Moreover, Washington plans to carry out multinational drills in the South China Sea to help other nations in the region build and expand their maritime capabilities.
Although Beijing hopes to cooperate with Taipei to study the legal significance of China’s “U-shaped Line” in the South China Sea, and jointly explore for oil and patrol the region to safeguard their rights, China has continued to block the participation of the Taiwanese government in official international discussions over the South China Sea issue.
China’s aggressiveness has ruined the image of a peaceful rise that it spent so many years cultivating.
The juxtaposition of Chinese and US interests in the South China Sea means that the risk attached to any Taiwanese cooperation with China is growing.
Lin Cheng-yi is a research fellow at Academia Sinica’s Institute of European and American Studies.
Translated by Eddy Chang
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would