ASEAN on Sunday issued a joint communique for its ministerial meeting in Manila. Among other things, the communique called for “non-militarization and self-restraint” in the South China Sea.
This touched upon a subject Beijing would prefer to keep in the background.
However, China would have generally considered the meeting a success. In a statement after the communique was issued, the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs said that the ASEAN agreed to work toward a South China Sea Code of Conduct framework with Beijing.
The communique, carefully worded to avoid offending Beijing, will hopefully ease tensions in the area. However, the proposed code will not be legally binding, although certain ASEAN ministers would like it to be.
If China was happy with its meetings, it was frustrated by a statement on Monday by US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, Australian Minister of Foreign Affairs Julie Bishop and Japanese Minister of Foreign Affairs Taro Kono, who, after a meeting on their own on the sidelines of the ASEAN gathering in Manilia, directly addressed the South China Sea issue and China’s “nine-dash line.”
ASEAN promotes economic, political, military, educational and cultural cooperation between member states. China fits in with this group by virtue of the ASEAN–China Free Trade Area that came into effect on Jan. 1, 2010.
However, China has territorial and exclusive economic zone disputes with most ASEAN nations. Its dispute with half of them — the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei and Indonesia — stems from its insistence on the “nine-dash line,” which extends into the South China Sea. Beijing contends that this line gives China historical rights over the vast area it outlines.
China’s historical claim was last year rejected by the Permanent Court of Arbitration in the Hague, the Netherlands, which found for Manila, saying that there was no evidence backing the claim. Beijing refused to accept the court’s findings and the legitimacy of Manila’s case.
This came as no surprise, as it is not in China’s national interest. Beijing will continue to build military installations on the Spratly Islands (Nansha Islands, 南沙群島) because these form part of its regional military strategy and it will not be signing any agreements that question or curtail its right to do so.
Just as China’s claims of sovereignty over Taiwan are based upon a dubious historical basis that fits in with Beijing’s delusional reading of history, its historically dubious claims to vast swathes of the South China Sea seriously jeopardizes regional peace and prosperity.
The joint statement by the US, Australian and Japanese ministers brought the South China Sea dispute back into focus. It demanded that China and the Philippines abide by the Permanent Court of Arbitration ruling. It also urged that the yet-to-be-drafted ASEAN-China code of conduct be legally binding and “consistent with international law.”
It is only right that these foreign ministers stood up to China and encouraged Beijing to face historical reality, its responsibilities as part of the international community and the need for compliance with international law, even if such demands did not fit with Beijing’s agenda.
It is equally right that members of the international community stand up to China on Taiwan’s behalf. Beijing needs to face up to the historical reality of its “claims” on Taiwan, start complying with international law about what constitutes a sovereign nation and begin acting like a responsible member of the international community.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.