When a US Navy P8-A surveillance aircraft flew near the Fiery Cross Reef (Yongshu Reef, 永暑礁) in the Spratly Islands (Nansha Islands, 南沙群島) in the South China Sea, it was warned eight times by the Chinese navy to leave the area. Chinese Minister of Foreign Affairs Wang Yi (王毅) said that “China’s determination to safeguard its sovereignty and territorial integrity is as firm as a rock.”
US Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter replied that “there should be no mistake about this: the United States will fly, sail and operate wherever international law allows us, as we do all around the world.”
So, is a US-China conflict in the South China Sea imminent?
In 1995, when I was serving in the Pentagon, China began building structures on Mischief Reef (Meiji Reef, 美濟礁), which is claimed by the Philippines [Editor’s note: Taiwan, also claims these islands.] lies much closer to its shores than to China’s. The US issued a statement that we took no position on the competing claims by five states over the 750 or so rocks, atolls, islets, cays and reefs that comprise the Spratlys, which cover a vast area — 425,000km2 — of the South China Sea. We urged that the parties involved settle the disputes peacefully.
However, the US took a strong stand that the South China Sea, which includes important sea lanes for oil shipments from the Middle East and container ships from Europe, and over which military and commercial aircraft routinely fly, was subject to the UN Law of the Sea Treaty (UNCLOS).
To back up its territorial claim, China relies on a map inherited from the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) period — the so-called “nine-dash line,” which extends nearly 1,610km south of China and sometimes as close as 64km or 80km from the coastline of states like Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei and the Philippines. All of these states claim the 200 mile (322km) exclusive economic zones granted under UNCLOS.
When the dispute over Mischief Reef erupted, Chinese officials failed to clarify the meaning of the “nine-dash line,” but, when pressed, they agreed that the dashes demarcated areas where China had sovereign claims.
At the same time, they agreed that the South China Sea was not a Chinese lake, and that it was governed by the UN treaty. On this basis, the US and China avoided conflict over the issue for nearly two decades.
However, China did not avoid conflicts with its maritime neighbors. Although it pledged to adhere to a code of conduct negotiated by ASEAN in 2002, it used its superior military might in disputes with the Philippines and Vietnam.
In 2012, Chinese patrol vessels chased Philippine fishing boats away from Scarborough Shoal (Huangyan the Island, 黃岩島) off the Philippine coast, and the Philippine government has taken the dispute to the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS), which China claims has no jurisdiction.
After China last year stationed an oil rig in waters claimed by Vietnam, ships from the two countries engaged in ramming and water-cannon battles at sea; anti-Chinese riots in Vietnam followed.
The region’s smaller states sought US support, but Washington remained careful not to be drawn into the competing claims over sovereignty, some of which are tenuous, while on others China sometimes has a stronger legal position. Moreover, the US had to focus on larger issues in its relationship with China.
This began to change when China initiated an active policy of dredging sand to fill in reefs and build islands in at least five locations. Earlier this year, analysts released images of what is expected to be a 3,000m runway on Fiery Cross Reef.
The US says that the UNCLOS grants foreign ships and planes free access beyond a 12-mile (19km) territorial limit, while China claims that military flights cannot cross its 200-mile economic zone without its permission.
If China claimed such a zone for each of the sites it occupies, it could close off most of the South China Sea. As one US official put it, China seems to be trying to “create facts on the ground” — what Admiral Harry Harris, the US commander in the Pacific, calls a new “great wall of sand.”
China correctly declared that it was within its sovereign rights to dredge, and that it was merely following the lead of its neighbors, whose governments had also been creating structures to bolster their claims.
However, US suspicions were heightened by the fact that in 2013, in a separate dispute between China and Japan over the Senkaku Islands — known as the Diaoyutai Islands (釣魚台) in Taiwan — in the East China Sea, the Chinese government unilaterally declared an air defense identification zone without prior warning. The US response was to fly two B-52 bombers through the unrecognized zone. This set a precedent for the naval reconnaissance flight, which had a team of CNN reporters on board.
The US response was designed to prevent China from creating a fait accompli that could close off large parts of the South China Sea. Nevertheless, the original policy of not becoming embroiled in the sovereignty dispute continues to make sense.
The irony is that the US Senate’s failure to ratify the UNCLOS means that the US cannot take China to the ITLOS over its efforts to convert reefs into islands and claim exclusion zones that could interfere with the right of free passage — a major US interest.
However, because China has ratified the UNCLOS and the US respects it as customary international law, there is a basis for serious direct negotiation over clarification of the ambiguous “nine-dash line” and the preservation of freedom of the seas. With properly managed diplomacy, a US-China conflict in the South China Sea can and should be avoided.
Joseph Nye Jr is a professor at Harvard University.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
Former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) trip to China provides a pertinent reminder of why Taiwanese protested so vociferously against attempts to force through the cross-strait service trade agreement in 2014 and why, since Ma’s presidential election win in 2012, they have not voted in another Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) candidate. While the nation narrowly avoided tragedy — the treaty would have put Taiwan on the path toward the demobilization of its democracy, which Courtney Donovan Smith wrote about in the Taipei Times in “With the Sunflower movement Taiwan dodged a bullet” — Ma’s political swansong in China, which included fawning dithyrambs