Page 1 of
2 Broadsides sink South China Sea
peace By Chietigj Bajpaee
Recent years has seen security return to
square one in East Asia's maritime domain as
state-to-state rivalries supplanted non-state
security concerns as the most potent source of
instability.
This has come amid the
growing interest of regional powers to protect
their burgeoning seaborne trade and access
offshore energy resources.
Meanwhile, the
piracy threat has diminished in East Asia through
greater political stability and economic
opportunities in traditionally vulnerable maritime
states such as Indonesia and a process of improved
regional coordination, notably under the aegis of
the Malacca Straits Patrol initiative.
Economic lifeline Key to the
renewed focus on state-to-state security threats
is the
growing strategic
importance of the maritime domain. The South China
Sea has emerged as a bridge linking together the
Northeast, Southeast and South Asian sub-regions
given the growth of intra-regional trade, most of
which transits through maritime trade routes.
Over half of the world's annual merchant
traffic in tonnage passes through the Malacca,
Sunda and Lombok Straits with some 10 million
barrels of crude oil transiting the region
everyday. As well as being a vital transit route
the South China Sea is also a resource in itself
with an estimated seven billion barrels of oil and
900 trillion cubic feet (25 trillion cubic meters)
of natural gas.
Complementing the
importance of the maritime domain as an economic
lifeline to the region, a plethora of maritime
territorial disputes scatter the region, which are
tied to material goals of protecting freedom of
navigation and accessing offshore energy
resources, and more ideational objectives related
to acquiring "Great Power" status through
projecting power, protecting "spheres of
influence" and fulfilling national objectives of
protecting sovereignty and territorial integrity.
While these material and ideational goals
are not new, the growing strategic importance of
seaborne trade and dependence on imported energy
resources to fuel the economies of region, coupled
with the region's expanded military capabilities
and growing inter-regional inter-linkages have
increased both the likelihood and intensity of any
armed conflagration between states.
Some
maritime territorial disputes are more localized
in nature, such as between North and South Korea
over the disputed status of the Northern Limit
Line, which culminated in the sinking of a South
Korean destroyer, the Cheonan in March
2010, and a missile attack on Yeonpyeong Island in
November 2010.
Others have wider
implications for the freedom of navigation, such
as China's claim to the nine-dash line around the
South China Sea, which conflicts with Vietnam (and
Taiwan's) claim to the Paracel Islands and
Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia, Brunei (and
Taiwan's) claim to portions of the Spratly
Islands. [1] However, the growing involvement of
extra-territorial powers such as the United
States, Japan, and India, increases the strategic
significance of these disputes for ensuring
international peace and security.
State
vs non-state actors The silver lining is
drawn from the fact that sovereignty in the
maritime domain is more fluid or fungible and as
such, there will be more room for maneuver in
tackling maritime territorial disputes compared to
disputed continental territory, which can be more
permanently occupied. However, the players in the
maritime domain are also more diverse.
They include coast guards, local police,
fishing communities, provincial, state or
city-level authorities, and a plethora of
government ministries as well as a state's navy.
These multiple levels of interaction increase the
opportunity for collaboration but also fuel the
possibility for misunderstanding given that these
groups often pursue conflicting interests. This
increases the possibility for an escalation in
tensions in the absence of cordial bilateral
relations or adequate confidence building or
crisis management mechanisms.
For
instance, China's State Oceanic Administration,
which is under the Ministry of Land and Resources,
has jurisdiction over the administration of
territorial waters, which it shares with the
People's Liberation Army Navy. This has set the
stage for sometimes conflicting policy with
respect to China's maritime domain, as noted by
the frequency with which China Marine Surveillance
vessels stray into waters claimed by Japan.
Similarly, the dispute between South Korea
and Japan over the Dokdo/Takeshima islets has
flared up as local administrative units, namely
Shimane Prefecture in Japan, have attempted to
strengthen their claims to the disputed territory
while South Korea has asserted its claim through
educational initiatives and its Coast Guard.
Illustrating the destabilizing role of
non-state actors, fishing communities have come to
play a prominent role as triggers of regional
inter-state tensions in the maritime domain. This
is evinced by recent tension between Japan and
China over the disputed status of the
Daiyutai/Senkaku islands, which was sparked by a
rogue Chinese fishing vessel colliding with a
Japanese Maritime Self-Defense Force vessel in
September 2010. Several recent incidents near
Reed or Recto Bank, near the island of Palawan
between Chinese and Filipino fishing vessels and
military craft have also been the catalyst for
renewed tensions between the Philippines and China
in the South China Sea.
Tensions between
China and Vietnam have also been fueled by
frictions between state and non-state actors,
including incidents of Chinese naval vessels
damaging seismic cables of oil survey vessels
inside Vietnam's exclusive economic zone, as well
as the detention of Vietnamese fishing vessels and
fishermen by Chinese authorities. Some 155
Vietnamese fishermen were detained by Chinese
authorities in the Paracel Islands in 2009, with
the number rising to 400 in 2010.
Regional disputes go global The
growing frequency and intensity of rhetoric and
incidents by China with respect to maritime
territorial disputes in the South and East China
Seas signals an attempt by Beijing to challenge
the regional status quo while abandoning its
mantra of maintaining a low profile and not
"rocking the boat" in international relations.
At the same time, other claimants in these
disputes have become bolder in challenging China's
claims amid the adoption of a more coordinated
regional approach and growing engagement with
extra-territorial powers. This has come to the
chagrin of China that maintains a preference for a
bilateral, non-internationalized approach in
resolving these disputes.
Japan, Vietnam
and the Philippines have so far been the most
vocal in challenging China's position. For
instance, in October 2011 the Philippines and
Vietnam signed several bilateral maritime pacts,
which included information sharing and a
coordinated response to piracy and protecting
marine resources. This came months after the naval
chiefs of the ten-member Association of Southeast
Asian Nations (ASEAN) held their fifth meeting in
Vietnam aimed at improving regional maritime
coordination and cooperation.
Meanwhile,
the United States is taking an increasingly
pro-active role by asserting itself as a player in
maritime territorial disputes in the South China
Sea, as noted by US Secretary of State Hillary
Clinton declaring the peaceful settlement of the
dispute a "national interest".
The United
States has increasingly taken sides in the dispute
by echoing the Philippines' position on its claim,
referring to the South China Sea as the West
Philippines Sea, conducting war games with the
Philippines and Vietnam near the disputed
territory in 2011, and reaching an agreement to
modernize the Philippine Navy. [2]
Other
extra-territorial powers are also getting in on
the act by increasing their maritime engagement
with countries that face contested territorial
claims with China.
Head
Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East,
Central, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road,
Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
