论文部分内容阅读
Since 2009， the United States has played a driving role in increasing tensions between China and Southeast Asian countries， turning the South China Sea into a regional hotspot. No one benefits.
On several recent occasions， Admiral Harry B. Harris， Commander of the United States Pacific Command， and Daniel Russell， U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs， have made comments on the South China Sea issue， accusing China of threatening neighboring countries and undermining regional stability.
China and some littoral countries of the South China Sea have had disputes over territorial and maritime interests for more than three decades， but China and relevant claimant countries have managed to address differences and control risks， not letting the issue hinder the sustained growth of bilateral ties among them and China-ASEAN relations at large. In November 2002， China and ASEAN countries signed the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea （DOC）， stipulating that signatories will resolve their territorial and jurisdictional disputes by peaceful means through friendly consultations and negotiations. They were also committed to maritime cooperation.
However， since the United States adopted the so-called rebalancing strategy in the AsiaPacific region， the South China Sea issue has become increasingly prominent. Since 2009， some senior U.S. officials have repeatedly made irresponsible remarks about China’s policy， rendered support to the countries that have disputes with China， and gone even further to drive wedges between China and Southeast Asian countries. I would argue that 2009 marked the watershed of the South China Sea issue and that the United States has acted as the main driving force behind the tensions in the South China Sea. This conclusion is based on the following foundations.
Abetting regional countries
After Hillary Clinton’s first visit as U.S. secretary of state to Asia in February 2009， some Southeast Asian countries made considerable changes to their policies on the South China Sea issue. Shortly after， in March， the Philippines passed a new baseline law to claim sovereignty over Huangyan Island and some of the Nansha Islands that belong to China. In May， Viet Nam completed its submissions on the outer limits of the continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles from its “territorial waters” to the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf， claiming sovereignty over China’s Xisha and Nansha islands. Thanks to the abetting by senior U.S. officials， the South China Sea issue gradually evolved into a disturbing regional hotspot. In May 2012， at a hearing of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations， Clinton said that China’s claims in the South China Sea exceeded what was permitted by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea（UNCLOS）. During her July visit， she reaffirmed U.S. support for Viet Nam in Hanoi.
The U.S. Navy’s guided-missile destroyer， USS William P. Lawrence， started a routine patrol in international waters in the South China Sea on May 2. On May 10， the vessel was reported to have conducted a “routine freedom of navigation operation，” sailing near China’s Yongshu Reef.
The United States also made efforts to encourage the leaders of some Southeast Asian countries to discuss the South China Sea issue at ASEAN meetings， trying to rally the whole of ASEAN against China. As a result， differences inside ASEAN have accumulated due to the yawning gaps among the positions of its member states on the South China Sea issue.
With support from the United States， the Philippines made up its mind to go back on its bilateral agreements with China to resolve the South China Sea issue through negotiations and instead initiated an arbitration case against China over the maritime disputes at an international tribunal in The Hague in early 2013 under the UNCLOS. With the so-called arbitration award being just around the corner， the United States claimed in a warning tone that China would pay a great price if it refused to comply with the award.
This well indicated that the United States has supported certain claimant countries not to address the disputes through bilateral consultations but rather has encouraged them to seek confrontation with China. This is not unexpected if we connect the dots， because the United States has been staying behind the arbitration case as the manipulator and doing whatever it can to ensure that the Philippines wins the case. It is also highly odd， to say the least， to see the United States， which is not even a signatory to the UNCLOS， keep asking the countries， China included， that already accede to the convention to respect international law.
Creating and playing up an issue
For a long time， there has never been an issue concerning the freedom of navigation in and overflight above the South China Sea. These rights have never been affected. The so-called issue of navigation and overflight freedom was totally fabricated and kept being played up by the United States. Since 2015， under the name of safeguarding freedom of navigation and overflight， the United States has become a frontrunner， rather than a backstage manipulator， on the South China Sea issue. The U.S. version of navigation and overflight freedom， in essence， means U.S. warships freely going anywhere all around the world.
The risk of militarization does exist in our region， but it merits careful study on who should be held accountable for that.
As early as 2011， the United States claimed to deploy 60 percent of its military resources in the Asia-Pacific region. In recent years， with its rebalancing strategy put into practice， the United States has tightened its military ties with allies in the region， expanded the arms build-up and flexed its muscle through military exercises， thus generating tension in the South China Sea.
To cite just a few examples out of many： the United States beefed up its military aid to the Philippines and Viet Nam and signed the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement with the Philippines， regaining a right lost over two decades ago to station troops and weapons in the Philippines’ military bases. The United States has also repeatedly dispatched naval vessels to approach the 12-nautical-mile waters of， and military aircraft to fly over， relevant islands and reefs of China’s Nansha Islands.
Furthermore， the United States always practices double standards when it comes to the South China Sea issue. While pointing fingers at China and criticizing China’s construction activities on its own islands and reefs， the United States chose to ignore the facts that the Philippines and Viet Nam had illegally occupied， all in all， 42 islands and reefs in the South China Sea and carried out land reclamation on relevant islands and reefs starting from as early as the 1980s.
Blinded by illusions
The United States’ rebalancing strategy has blinded some claimant countries with illusions. They are wishfully thinking that， with the United States’ backing increasing， they can deal with the South China Sea issue through confrontation instead of consultation.
The United States has become used to acting as a policeman or judge on global issues and indulges itself in making rules and dictating ways to execute them. It cannot tolerate others challenging its global hegemony and believes that all issues should be dealt with as it pleases. It does not always practise democracy in international relations but is dictatorial and overbearing. What the United States has been doing has been often criticized， which is quite well known to some American political figures. However， bad habits die hard. It is no coincidence that the changes in U.S. policy have been followed by some Southeast Asian countries making changes to their policies on the South China Sea issue. The tensions in the South China Sea were intentionally churned and hyped. What the United States has been and is now doing will end up in a more split ASEAN.
China is a strong supporter of a rules-based international order. However， the international rule of law is what the entire international community follows， it is not a tool to be exploited by a handful of countries to pursue their political agenda. All regional countries should work together to safeguard the regional peace and stability and prevent our region from gradually sliding into the “South China Sea Trap.”
China and the ASEAN should stick to the dual-track approach in addressing the South China Sea issue， which highlights that the disputes should be addressed properly through friendly negotiations and consultations among countries directly concerned， and the peace and stability in the South China Sea should be safeguarded by China and ASEAN countries.
Nowadays， the South China Sea issue has become a hot topic， disturbing ASEAN leaders’meetings and the East Asia Summit， and has been hyped as a security issue affecting peace and stability in East Asia.
From this perspective， it seems that the United States might have succeeded in fishing in troubled waters. But in the longer run， no-one will ever gain from increasing the tension in the South China Sea.
On several recent occasions， Admiral Harry B. Harris， Commander of the United States Pacific Command， and Daniel Russell， U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs， have made comments on the South China Sea issue， accusing China of threatening neighboring countries and undermining regional stability.
China and some littoral countries of the South China Sea have had disputes over territorial and maritime interests for more than three decades， but China and relevant claimant countries have managed to address differences and control risks， not letting the issue hinder the sustained growth of bilateral ties among them and China-ASEAN relations at large. In November 2002， China and ASEAN countries signed the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea （DOC）， stipulating that signatories will resolve their territorial and jurisdictional disputes by peaceful means through friendly consultations and negotiations. They were also committed to maritime cooperation.
However， since the United States adopted the so-called rebalancing strategy in the AsiaPacific region， the South China Sea issue has become increasingly prominent. Since 2009， some senior U.S. officials have repeatedly made irresponsible remarks about China’s policy， rendered support to the countries that have disputes with China， and gone even further to drive wedges between China and Southeast Asian countries. I would argue that 2009 marked the watershed of the South China Sea issue and that the United States has acted as the main driving force behind the tensions in the South China Sea. This conclusion is based on the following foundations.
Abetting regional countries
After Hillary Clinton’s first visit as U.S. secretary of state to Asia in February 2009， some Southeast Asian countries made considerable changes to their policies on the South China Sea issue. Shortly after， in March， the Philippines passed a new baseline law to claim sovereignty over Huangyan Island and some of the Nansha Islands that belong to China. In May， Viet Nam completed its submissions on the outer limits of the continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles from its “territorial waters” to the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf， claiming sovereignty over China’s Xisha and Nansha islands. Thanks to the abetting by senior U.S. officials， the South China Sea issue gradually evolved into a disturbing regional hotspot. In May 2012， at a hearing of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations， Clinton said that China’s claims in the South China Sea exceeded what was permitted by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea（UNCLOS）. During her July visit， she reaffirmed U.S. support for Viet Nam in Hanoi.
The U.S. Navy’s guided-missile destroyer， USS William P. Lawrence， started a routine patrol in international waters in the South China Sea on May 2. On May 10， the vessel was reported to have conducted a “routine freedom of navigation operation，” sailing near China’s Yongshu Reef.
The United States also made efforts to encourage the leaders of some Southeast Asian countries to discuss the South China Sea issue at ASEAN meetings， trying to rally the whole of ASEAN against China. As a result， differences inside ASEAN have accumulated due to the yawning gaps among the positions of its member states on the South China Sea issue.
With support from the United States， the Philippines made up its mind to go back on its bilateral agreements with China to resolve the South China Sea issue through negotiations and instead initiated an arbitration case against China over the maritime disputes at an international tribunal in The Hague in early 2013 under the UNCLOS. With the so-called arbitration award being just around the corner， the United States claimed in a warning tone that China would pay a great price if it refused to comply with the award.
This well indicated that the United States has supported certain claimant countries not to address the disputes through bilateral consultations but rather has encouraged them to seek confrontation with China. This is not unexpected if we connect the dots， because the United States has been staying behind the arbitration case as the manipulator and doing whatever it can to ensure that the Philippines wins the case. It is also highly odd， to say the least， to see the United States， which is not even a signatory to the UNCLOS， keep asking the countries， China included， that already accede to the convention to respect international law.
Creating and playing up an issue
For a long time， there has never been an issue concerning the freedom of navigation in and overflight above the South China Sea. These rights have never been affected. The so-called issue of navigation and overflight freedom was totally fabricated and kept being played up by the United States. Since 2015， under the name of safeguarding freedom of navigation and overflight， the United States has become a frontrunner， rather than a backstage manipulator， on the South China Sea issue. The U.S. version of navigation and overflight freedom， in essence， means U.S. warships freely going anywhere all around the world.
The risk of militarization does exist in our region， but it merits careful study on who should be held accountable for that.
As early as 2011， the United States claimed to deploy 60 percent of its military resources in the Asia-Pacific region. In recent years， with its rebalancing strategy put into practice， the United States has tightened its military ties with allies in the region， expanded the arms build-up and flexed its muscle through military exercises， thus generating tension in the South China Sea.
To cite just a few examples out of many： the United States beefed up its military aid to the Philippines and Viet Nam and signed the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement with the Philippines， regaining a right lost over two decades ago to station troops and weapons in the Philippines’ military bases. The United States has also repeatedly dispatched naval vessels to approach the 12-nautical-mile waters of， and military aircraft to fly over， relevant islands and reefs of China’s Nansha Islands.
Furthermore， the United States always practices double standards when it comes to the South China Sea issue. While pointing fingers at China and criticizing China’s construction activities on its own islands and reefs， the United States chose to ignore the facts that the Philippines and Viet Nam had illegally occupied， all in all， 42 islands and reefs in the South China Sea and carried out land reclamation on relevant islands and reefs starting from as early as the 1980s.
Blinded by illusions
The United States’ rebalancing strategy has blinded some claimant countries with illusions. They are wishfully thinking that， with the United States’ backing increasing， they can deal with the South China Sea issue through confrontation instead of consultation.
The United States has become used to acting as a policeman or judge on global issues and indulges itself in making rules and dictating ways to execute them. It cannot tolerate others challenging its global hegemony and believes that all issues should be dealt with as it pleases. It does not always practise democracy in international relations but is dictatorial and overbearing. What the United States has been doing has been often criticized， which is quite well known to some American political figures. However， bad habits die hard. It is no coincidence that the changes in U.S. policy have been followed by some Southeast Asian countries making changes to their policies on the South China Sea issue. The tensions in the South China Sea were intentionally churned and hyped. What the United States has been and is now doing will end up in a more split ASEAN.
China is a strong supporter of a rules-based international order. However， the international rule of law is what the entire international community follows， it is not a tool to be exploited by a handful of countries to pursue their political agenda. All regional countries should work together to safeguard the regional peace and stability and prevent our region from gradually sliding into the “South China Sea Trap.”
China and the ASEAN should stick to the dual-track approach in addressing the South China Sea issue， which highlights that the disputes should be addressed properly through friendly negotiations and consultations among countries directly concerned， and the peace and stability in the South China Sea should be safeguarded by China and ASEAN countries.
Nowadays， the South China Sea issue has become a hot topic， disturbing ASEAN leaders’meetings and the East Asia Summit， and has been hyped as a security issue affecting peace and stability in East Asia.
From this perspective， it seems that the United States might have succeeded in fishing in troubled waters. But in the longer run， no-one will ever gain from increasing the tension in the South China Sea.