South Sea Conflict Needs To Return to Dialogue and Negotiation

Published in China Times
(Taiwan) on 21 March 2016
by (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Anthony Chantavy. Edited by Gillian Palmer.
Last October, more friction between China and the United States arose over the South China Sea issue. The U.S. opposes mainland China's reef reclamation, frequently emphasizing "freedom of navigation" and "international law." When the U.S. deployed a military vessel to the disputed region, Beijing saw it as a deliberate provocation, and a lot of international media believes that it was "irresponsible and dangerous." The East Asian military conflict could intensify because of this.

We at Want Daily once wrote that based on historical experience and diplomacy models, the U.S. could not start a war in East Asia. In the face of a risen China, Washington, even with military superstitions, can avoid a lose-lose situation. U.S. Pacific Fleet Commander Harry B. Harris Jr. was silent when a reporter asked hypothetically what would happen if a Chinese guided missile shot down an American plane. Army Chief of Staff Gen. Mark Milley said frankly that with budget cuts and the dire anti-terrorism situation, the U.S. has no intention to provoke China or Russia.

Beijing is also aware that there is both cooperation and friction between China and the U.S., which has now become the norm. No matter what, China vows never to seek hegemony or expansion, and it also knows that it will not be easy to eliminate Washington's strategic doubts. To reconcile the structural differences of Chinese and American ideologies, trust needs to be built over a long period of time. Unilateral political promises are not enough.

Wang Yi, during his visit to the U.S. this month, stated that China does not hope to see American ships in the South China Sea again. He explained that Beijing has made a diplomatic declaration to America, stressing that, "China will never become another America. China has no intention to supersede or lead others," and "any attempts to disturb the South China Sea and destabilize Asia would not be allowed by China and most other countries in the region." His statements are clearly aimed at America's freedom of navigation in the South Sea, and, when necessary, even at America's wanton activities.

U.S. aircraft carriers in the South China Sea have been described as engaging in routine exercises, but they really intend to flex their military muscle, conveying that the U.S. is the leader of the South China Sea. Wang Yi stated, "History will prove who is a mere visitor and who is the real host." Chinese Ambassador to the U.S. Cui Tiankai warned that the U.S. could pay "a very heavy price" arising from strategic miscalculations in the South China Sea, hinting that China has corresponding countermeasures for U.S. freedom of navigation.

Besides military techniques, China has several ways to prevent wanton U.S. activities. Washington thinks that its military only needs to adhere to Article 18 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea by disabling ship weapons and simply maintaining normal navigation, without needing to inform the coastal country of their innocent passage; however, China has legislated that innocent passage of naval vessels must be authorized. China and the U.S. each have their own understandings of innocent passage and, naturally, their own corresponding countermeasures. According to the Law on China's Territorial Waters and Their Contiguous Areas, China is able to order U.S. vessels to leave Chinese territorial waters immediately and take responsibility for its damage. China can also use countries' own strategies against them, such as scheduling its own innocent passage in U.S. waters.

Washington announced that when the USS John C. Stennis aircraft carrier entered the South China Sea early this month, it was surrounded by Chinese vessels for the first time. From the photograph posted on the U.S. Navy website, we can see a Chinese navy electronic surveillance ship nearby inspecting the U.S. carrier's movements and other Chinese destroyers surrounding the carrier. This is a peaceful scene; the ships do not engage. The Chinese ships are observing, interpreting, and following the carrier's reactions. Only if they took one step further would they be simulating an attack. Recently, U.S. media unhesitatingly reported that a Chinese submarine conducted a simulated attack on a U.S. ship, violating the Code for Unplanned Encounters at Sea agreed between the countries, deliberately pointing fingers at China, but Beijing dismissed it as a groundless accusation.

In fact, China had already taken significant measures in the South China Sea in appropriate response to U.S. freedom of navigation. Multiple examples include a group of fishery administration boats surrounding an American ship, guided missiles being deployed on a reef, and opening the islands for cruise tours. These measures seem to have had a definite deterrent effect on U.S. ships entering the South Sea.

Zhang Zhaozhong, Beijing military theorist and rear admiral in the People's Liberation Army, once suggested utilizing fishing boats, fishery administration boats, ocean surveillance ships, and navy ships to surround the reefs layer by layer. This "cabbage strategy" certainly causes the U.S. worry.

The U.S. has called upon ASEAN, created the U.S.-India-Japan-Australia Quadrilateral Initiative, and deployed a fleet of aircraft carriers, but none of these actions have fazed Beijing's will to defend its South China Sea sovereignty, so all that the U.S. has left are verbal criticism and threats. The Washington Post has recently revealed Washington's tit-for-tat strategy to help Vietnam and the Philippines build artificial islands in the South Sea. Also, U.S. Pacific Fleet Admiral Scott Swift stated during a March 16 speech in Australia that addressing China will require an attitude of "might makes right," yet forgets that in 1989, U.S. forces invaded Panama and forcibly removed dictator Manuel Noriega from office, and in 2003, invaded Iraq to overthrow Saddam Hussein's regime.

The United States’ opponent in solving the South China Sea sovereignty issue is China. Flexing one's military muscle is not enough to put Beijing on edge, and false freedom of navigation is no match for the cabbage strategy. However, the two countries, after all, have common interests on some root issues, like freedom of trade and freedom of navigation. If China and the U.S. converge on 95 percent of their interests, they may yet converge on the South Sea issue. Facing conflict requires wisdom and composure, and the correct path is to return to dialogue and negotiation.


去年10月開始中美在南海的摩擦增多,美國反對中國大陸的島礁填海造陸行為,三番兩次以「維護海上航行自由」和「遵循國際法」為名,派機艦闖入南海爭端海域。北京視其為蓄意挑釁,國際媒體亦多認為美國派遣航母戰鬥群「大膽而冒險」,東亞軍事衝突更可能因此愈演愈烈。

本報社評曾指出,根據歷史經驗和外交行為模式,美國不致於在東亞輕啟戰端。面對已崛起的中國,華府即便迷信軍事手段,也會避免雙輸結局。美太平洋空軍司令哈里斯最近就啞口面對記者追問「中國導彈擊落美戰機」的假設性提問,美陸軍參謀長米利更坦言,美國防預算緊縮與外在嚴峻的反恐情勢,並無意軍事挑釁中國和俄羅斯。

北京也意識到,中美既合作又摩擦,將形成常態,無論如何宣示「永不爭霸、永不稱霸」的決心,都不易消除華府的戰略疑慮。中美結構性的意識形態分歧,需要長時間建立和累積互信,單方面的政治口惠絕不足以化解矛盾。

王毅本月訪美期間即表示,中國不希望再看到美軍機艦出現在南海,說明北京對美已開展對等式的外交表態,聲稱「中國絕不會、也不可能成為另一個美國」、「中國無意取代或領導誰」或「如果有人想把南海攪渾,把亞洲搞亂,中國不會答應」,明顯是針對美國的南海航行自由,甚至必要時將阻止美軍的「橫行自由」。

美軍航母戰鬥群進入南海名為進行例行性演習,實則是展現超強軍力,宣示美國才是南海地區的主導者。王毅訪美時提到「歷史終將證明誰才是南海的主人」,中國駐美大使崔天凱則提出「美國誤判中國的南海戰略要付出大代價」的警語,都暗示了中國對美國所謂的「南海航行自由」策略,已有了因應的對策。

除了軍事手段之外,中國阻止美軍在南海橫行自由的方式很多。華府以為,美軍艦只要符合《聯合國海洋法公約》第18條規定,停止船艦的軍事功能且僅維持正常航行,即可不須通知沿岸國家進行「無害通過」;然已有相關立法的中國則強調,軍艦無害通過必須事先通告並獲核准。中美各自解讀「無害通過」,自然也有各自的因應對策。中方可依據《領海及毗連區法》,明令美機艦立即離開中國領海並自負所受損害責任,也可以「其人之道還治其人之身」,定期派機艦「無害通過」美國領海。

華府聲稱,「史坦尼斯號」航母本月初進入南海時,前所未有遭到中國船艦的包圍,從美國海軍網站公布的照片確能看出,中方海軍電子偵察船就近監視美航母戰鬥群動向,其他多艘中方驅逐艦正布局在美艦周圍,只是過程平和,雙方並無正面衝突。中國軍艦此舉是監測、識別、跟蹤美機艦的制式反應,再進一步才是模擬攻擊。近期美媒大肆報導中國潛艦在南海模擬攻擊美艦,違反中美達成的《海上意外相遇行為準則》共識,刻意凸顯中國是挑釁的一方,但北京反譏為捕風捉影。

其實,中國早已在南海採取「超軍事」的手段,適度回應美國的「南海自由航行」策略。以往不乏藉漁政船包圍美艦、島礁上部署導彈、開放島嶼觀光旅遊的例子,其對美機艦闖入南海爭端海域,似乎產生一定程度的嚇阻效果。

北京軍事評論家,前解放軍少將張召忠即曾為文建議動用漁船、漁政船、海監船與軍艦層層包圍島礁,此一所謂的「包心菜戰略」,確實讓美國感到憂心。

美國拉攏東協並建構美日澳印(度)南海聯防、派遣航母戰鬥群等行為均未動搖北京捍衛南海主權的意志,僅剩下口頭批評與威嚇。《華盛頓郵報》最近透露,華府已有協助越菲在南海建設人工島礁的「針鋒相對」策略,美太平洋艦隊司令史威夫特3月16日在澳洲亦公開抨擊中國奉行「強權即公理」的政策,卻忘了美國於1989年入侵巴拿馬逮捕諾瑞加總統、2003年入侵伊拉克推翻海珊政權。

美國解決南海主權爭端的對象是中國,展現軍力並不足以嚇阻北京,假自由航行之名,也未必能擋得住中國的「包心菜戰略」,但兩國畢竟在一些根本問題上具有共同利益,譬如自由貿易、航行自由。如果中美兩國有95%利益趨同,就有可能在南海問題上趨同。面對爭端,需要的是智慧而非激情,回歸對話與談判才是正途。

(旺報)
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Canada: Trump vs. Musk, the Emperor and the Oligarch

Mexico: Migration: A Political Crisis?

Germany: Donald Trump Is Damaging the US

Canada: President Trump, the G7 and Canada’s New ‘Realistic’ Foreign Policy

Venezuela: The Devil in Los Angeles

Topics

Venezuela: The Devil in Los Angeles

Germany: Donald Trump’s Military Intervention in LA Is a Planned Escalation

Mexico: Migration: A Political Crisis?

Poland: Los Angeles Riots: Battle for America’s Future

Germany: Donald Trump Is Damaging the US

Canada: President Trump, the G7 and Canada’s New ‘Realistic’ Foreign Policy

Taiwan: The Beginning of a Post-Hegemonic Era: A New Normal for International Relations

Canada: Trump vs. Musk, the Emperor and the Oligarch

Related Articles

Taiwan: The Beginning of a Post-Hegemonic Era: A New Normal for International Relations

Taiwan: 2 Terms Won’t Satisfy Trump

Taiwan: Making America Great Again and Taiwan’s Crucial Choice

Japan: US-Japan Defense Minister Summit: US-Japan Defense Chief Talks Strengthen Concerns about Single-Minded Focus on Strength

Taiwan: A Brief Look at Trump’s Global Profit Grab