China and US at a Draw in South Seas

Published in Huanqiu
(China) on 12 August 2014
by Yafei Di (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Anthony Chantavy. Edited by Gillian Palmer  .
In last weekend’s Association of Southeast Asian Nations regional forum, China and the United States shared their opinions on their gains and losses. Looking at the declaration signed by the foreign ministry, discussing the South China Sea crisis with a fixed amount of space, the U.S. expressed satisfaction. There are Americans who believe that ASEAN countries have grown more united under U.S. encouragement to oppose China. But everyone realizes that the declaration did not say China’s name, and the meeting did not discuss the American proposal to cease all action in the South Sea. The U.S. clearly felt a cold shoulder in the meeting; there was even a comment that it suffered defeat.

Regarding the gains and losses discussed in this meeting, there was a lot of room for opinion, but it was more certain that China and the U.S. are at a draw in the South Sea. This is also probably the game that China and the U.S. play in the entire Western Pacific.

When the U.S. returned to the Asia-Pacific [region] when Hillary Clinton was secretary of state, China was unprepared. Potential points of controversy in the East and South China Seas surfaced one after another, with America’s shadow of encouragement behind them. Japan, the Philippines, Vietnam and other countries had not only large-scale operations, but also arrogant attitudes toward China, together giving it geopolitical pressure.

However, in these past years, the chaos surrounding China has gradually subsided with a vague sense of limits. In the Diaoyu Islands, China and Japan have shown willingness to control risk of military conflict. Although fierce language echoes over the East Sea, China and Japan are truly becoming calmer to avoid war.

In the South Sea, China has contained the Philippines and Vietnam’s controversial territories as well as maritime provocation, arousing Western criticism. But the South Sea situation has gradually gained stability; China has clearly gained more right of initiative.

The first wave of the U.S. Asia-Pacific rebalance strategy has been more or less completed. It includes the U.S. returning to the Asia-Pacific, which some countries hope will help balance China's desire to rise, the amount of trust that the U.S. has earned and the natural advantages of other major countries, among other things. In this stage, the U.S. has been relaxed, and China has spent some energy, but the result is that both countries have limits to their own strategies, which basically makes for a draw.

The reason is that the U.S. has unique qualities, such as a strong military and allies for strategic support. But China’s economic influence is dominant and its allies are closer. One could say that America's strength is unmatched by China’s proximity. If East Asian countries were forced to stand between China and the U.S. right now, the outcome would be very uncertain. For most countries, standing in the middle best suits their interests.

Therefore, after its first victory, the U.S. wants to continue to give China trouble, but it will not be as easy as it was a few years ago. When it moves forward, it will feel China’s struggle. If the China-U.S. competition increases around the South Sea, both sides will be forced to invest lots of resources.

It should be noted that Chinese actions in the periphery have a clear goal, and that is to defend national sovereignty and [preserve] an environment for national development. These are the core interests of China. The [purpose of] the Asia-Pacific rebalance is for the U.S. to maintain its leadership in Asia, its next level of core interests. China and the U.S. can consider the worst-case scenario of resorting to antagonism, testing their determination to stand their ground. It should be said that China's determination must surpass that of the U.S.

Besides this, China is still developing rapidly. The U.S., on the contrary, is in decline. The shift in China-U.S. power is bound to receive a different perception every few years. In the China-U.S. game in the Western Pacific, the U.S. is losing its overall advantage.

The China-U.S. draw will last a while. Its overall inclination is in China’s favor, which is a chance for the countries to strengthen their strategic attitudes. The United States should calm down and no longer make unrealistic calculations about China in the East and South Seas. The U.S. is unable to contain China's united front; China could easily mobilize an East Asian army to drive the U.S. out.


在上周末举行的东盟地区论坛外长会上,中国和美国各有什么得失,众说纷纭。从外长们签署的宣言内容看,用了一定篇幅谈南海危机,美方自称对此满意。有美方人士解读,这表明东盟国家在美国的鼓励下为对抗中国变得更加团结。但所有人都注意到,宣言未点中国的名,会议也没有讨论美国关于各方“冻结南海行动”的倡议,美国的主张在会上“受到冷遇”的分析明显更加突出。甚至有评论称,美国遭遇了挫败。

  单说这一次东盟外长会的中美得失,主观发挥的空间较大,但如果说中美就南海问题总体打了个平手,应比较可信。而且这大概也是目前中美在西太平洋博弈的总态势。

  美国在希拉里任国务卿时期开始“重返亚太”,中国有些措手不及。东海和南海的潜在争议点相继浮上水面,背后都有美国怂恿的影子。日本、菲律宾、越南等不仅行动尺度大,而且对华态度相当嚣张,联合形成了对中国的地缘政治压力。

  然而经过这几年,中国周边局势的“失控感”逐渐收窄,有了条隐隐约约的分寸线。在钓鱼岛方向,中日在相当危险的游戏中都表现了控制军事冲突风险的意愿,东海上空虽然回荡着各种激烈言语,但中日双方面对战争风险的真实冷静也在增加。

  在南海方向,中国遏制了菲越围绕争议领土和海洋权益肆无忌惮挑衅的势头,这导致了西方舆论对中国的围攻,但南海地区的局面也逐渐有了新的稳定,中国的主动权明显更多了。

  美国“亚太再平衡”战略的第一波能量已经释放得差不多。它们包括美国“重返”这一地区与一些国家希望美“平衡”中国崛起愿望的契合、美国实力所吸引的信任感,以及域外大国的天然优势等等。这个阶段美国行动轻松自如,中国则下了些力气,但结果是双方都不能无限制地推行自己的战略,这大体是个平局。

  究其原因,美国有一些突出长项,比如军事力量强大,有盟国做战略支撑点等。但中国经济影响力占优,地区内友好国家很多,可以说,美国的“强”被中国的“近”在相当程度上抵消掉了。如果现在强迫东亚国家在中美之间站队,那么结局是很不确定的。对大多数国家来说,站在中美的中间位置上最符合它们的利益。

  因此有了最初的得分之后,美国要想继续在亚洲为难中国,决不会像过去几年那么容易了。它再往前走,就会同中国的反弹一样吃力。如果中美围绕南海升级彼此之间的竞争,双方都将被迫投入大量资源,蒙受它们未必心甘情愿的损失。

  需要指出的是,中国在周边的行动有着明确的目标,那就是捍卫国家主权,维护国家进一步发展的战略环境。这些都是中国的核心利益。美国“亚太再平衡”是为了保持自己在亚洲的主导地位,是美国次一级的核心利益。中美都会考虑双方一旦放纵对抗的最坏情况,从而考验各自坚持立场的决心。应当说,中国的决心要高于美国。

  此外,中国仍在高速发展,实力不断增强。美国却相对衰落,中美力量的此消彼长每隔几年就能有一定感知。中美在西太平洋博弈,美国的全面优势正在消失。

  中美在南海的“平局”会持续很长时间,它的大走向对中国是有利的,对中美理顺彼此的战略态度则是一个机会。美国应冷静下来,不再在南海、东海不切实际地算计中国。美国搞不起围堵中国的“统一战线”,这就像中国无法动员东亚国家一起把美国势力从这一地区赶走一样。▲
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

United Kingdom: We’re Becoming Inured to Trump’s Outbursts – But When He Goes Quiet, We Need To Be Worried

Ethiopia: “Trump Guitars” Made in China: Strumming a Tariff Tune

Egypt: The B-2 Gamble: How Israel Is Rewriting Middle East Power Politics

Germany: Trump’s Disappointment Will Have No Adverse Consequences for Putin*

             

Poland: Jędrzej Bielecki: Trump’s Pyrrhic Victory*

Topics

Singapore: The US May Win Some Trade Battles in Southeast Asia but Lose the War

Ethiopia: “Trump Guitars” Made in China: Strumming a Tariff Tune

Egypt: The B-2 Gamble: How Israel Is Rewriting Middle East Power Politics

China: 3 Insights from ‘Trade War Truce’ between US and China

United Kingdom: We’re Becoming Inured to Trump’s Outbursts – But When He Goes Quiet, We Need To Be Worried

Poland: Jędrzej Bielecki: Trump’s Pyrrhic Victory*

Austria: Trump Is Only Part of the Problem

Canada: Canada Must Match the Tax Incentives in Trump’s ‘Big Beautiful Bill’

Related Articles

Indonesia: US-China: Tariff, Tension, and Truce

China: US Chip Restrictions Backfiring

Thailand: US-China Trade Truce Didn’t Solve Rare Earths Riddle

Taiwan: Taiwan Issue Will Be Harder To Bypass during Future US-China Negotiations

Hong Kong: Amid US Democracy’s Moral Unraveling, Hong Kong’s Role in the Soft Power Struggle