China-ASEAN relations have acquired a tenuous stability and economic engagement continues unabated. However, ASEAN’s desire for strategic autonomy is being wooed by other partners and groupings such as the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (Quad).
Despite Indonesia’s proactive leadership of ASEAN negotiations with China regarding the code of conduct in the South China Sea, differences remain. ASEAN insists on adherence to the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, while China wants to make the South China Sea a Chinese lake with ASEAN characteristics.
This is unacceptable to other nations, notably Quad members, which resist giving China control of the South China Sea. In the East China Sea, Japan remains concerned with Chinese intrusions around the Diaoyutai Islands (釣魚台, known in Japan as the Senkakus), and there are heightened tensions around Taiwan, where the US has challenged Chinese intentions.
This has led to the US, Japan and South Korea engaging more where ASEAN is concerned.
ASEAN would like to avoid big power rivalry in the region, including involving Taiwan, but China is not helping. Chinese blockades of Philippine outposts, shoals and islands have flared up. Chinese fishing fleets, coast guard vessels and quasi-armed fishing boats have all intruded into the Philippine exclusive economic zone and prevented the Philippines from accessing its own outposts, leading to the Philippines strengthening its partnership with the US and Japan, and also looking for other like-minded partners such as India.
Some see the Philippines as an isolated response by an ASEAN member, while others see it as the beginning of a trend. Vietnam and Indonesia continue to keep quiet, but if the intrusions become frequent, then challenges would be felt domestically, particularly in Indonesia, which is now going into election season.
Another aspect is that the summit between US President Joe Biden and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on the sidelines of APEC in San Francisco last month re-established high-level communications, but did not set the relationship right.
The US will challenge and compete with China economically and ideologically, but avoid confrontation. China wants the US to stop its confrontational attitude over Taiwan and to stop enticing nations in the Indo-Pacific region into staying independent from Chinese partnerships.
China does not want its developmental path to economic growth, its own manner of engaging nations through the Belt and Road Initiative or its political system to be challenged. It also wants an end to decoupling efforts.
The China-US contentious relationship is to continue and in its wake the Quad would continue to work to keep the shipping lanes in the South China Sea open. The only way in which these engagements can become more congenial is if China becomes less aggressive and unilateral. This is unlikely to happen.
A Quad summit next month is to review the current state of play and would have to conclude that Chinese conduct in the Indo-Pacific region is a matter of concern, and needs to be continuously monitored and challenged.
The relationship between the Quad and ASEAN will then see incremental engagement.
Indonesian President Joko Widodo as ASEAN chair had said that the Quad and Australia’s Trilateral Security Partnership (AUKUS) with the UK and the US are not rivals of ASEAN. ASEAN has multilateral engagement with China, Japan and South Korea under the ASEAN-Plus Three grouping, and if the Quad agenda for functional cooperation with ASEAN continues then it is likely that ASEAN-Quad engagement could emerge.
This year, the Quad focused on ASEAN and the South Pacific as areas where Chinese interests would be challenged through technology, economic and functional cooperation, keeping military challenges to the side so that ASEAN in particular is assuaged. Individual ASEAN members have started various levels of cooperation with Quad nations, either bilaterally or multilaterally. This is part of ASEAN’s policy of strategic autonomy.
Indonesia held the first ASEAN Indo-Pacific Forum in September. All ASEAN leaders, with the exception of Myanmar’s, were present, showing the greater acceptance by ASEAN of the Indo-Pacific concept, which the Chinese have never been comfortable with.
During the year, China held another maritime exercise with ASEAN, aimed at enhancing capabilities in counterterrorism and maritime security between China and five ASEAN members. This helps ASEAN balance its outlook, but it looks odd given that the main problem in the South China Sea emanates from China, which refuses to conclude a balanced code of conduct.
This year’s China-ASEAN summit had a sharper edge because then-Chinese premier Li Keqiang (李克強) told ASEAN members that they should not look to take sides and start a new cold war.
ASEAN has always been keen to avoid taking sides, big power rivalries or war, but it has realized that China is responsible for the emergence of new confrontation in the Indo-Pacific region.
Economically speaking, China and ASEAN have remained close partners and Beijing needs to work with ASEAN more diligently next year. Laos, as the ASEAN chair, is less likely to take up issues which would cause unease for China. It is also unlikely to take initiatives that would bolster ASEAN’s position in any way.
However, individual ASEAN members are undergoing change. Myanmar is in the throes of a crisis which neither ASEAN nor China has control over. Thailand has a new government, which is now reassessing its foreign policy. The Philippines has decided to challenge Chinese aggression.
Indonesia is going through a seminal change as elections come in February and a change of government takes place by October. While there is no doubt that the Indonesia-China economic relationship would remain good, a new presidency could see nuanced changes in how it deals with China strategically.
Cambodia will remain a close Chinese ally, but under new Prime Minister Hun Manet, it might like to seek more economic opportunities.
There are many drummers beating around the Indo-Pacific region, and the Chinese drumming is not the only beat that is being heard.
Gurjit Singh is a former Indian ambassador to Germany, Indonesia, ASEAN, Ethiopia and the African Union.
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS