Politics

Jak se vyhnout konfliktu v Jihočínském moři

Jun 3, 2015 Joseph S. Nye, Jr.

OXFORD – Když poblíž útesu Fiery Cross Reef na Spratlyových ostrovech v Jihočínském moři nedávno prolétl výzvědný letoun P8-A patřící americkému námořnictvu, čínské námořnictvo ho osmkrát varovalo, aby opustil oblast. Čínský ministr Wang I prohlásil, že „odhodlání Číny zabezpečit vlastní suverenitu a územní celistvost je pevné jako skála“. Americký ministr obrany Ashton Carter na to odpověděl, že by „v této věci nemělo dojít k mýlce: Spojené státy budou létat, plavit se a působit všude tam, kde nám to mezinárodní právo umožňuje, tak jako to děláme po celém světě“. Hrozí tedy bezprostředně americko-čínský konflikt v Jihočínském moři?

Když jsem v roce 1995 sloužil v Pentagonu, začala Čína budovat objekty na útesu Mischief Reef, na který si dělaly nárok Filipíny a jenž leží mnohem blíže filipínského nežli čínského pobřeží. USA tehdy vydaly prohlášení, že nezaujímají žádné stanovisko ke konkurenčním nárokům pěti států na soubor přibližně 750 skal, atolů, ostrůvků a korálových útesů, které tvoří Spratlyovy ostrovy a v Jihočínském moři zaujímají obrovskou rozlohu 425 000 čtverečních kilometrů. Přitom jsme naléhavě vyzvali k tomu, ať zúčastněné strany urovnají své spory pokojně.

USA ovšem zaujaly silné stanovisko, že Jihočínské moře, přes které vedou významné námořní trasy pro zásilky ropy z Blízkého východu a kontejnerové lodě z Evropy a nad nímž běžně létají vojenská i obchodní letadla, podléhá Úmluvě OSN o mořském právu (UNCLOS).

To continue reading, register now.

Subscribe now for unlimited access to everything PS has to offer.

As a registered user, you can enjoy more PS content every month – for free.

Already have an account? Log in

Subscribe to PS Digital

Access every new PS commentary, our entire On Point suite of subscriber-exclusive content – including Longer Reads, Insider Interviews, Big Picture/Big Question, and Say More – and the full PS archive.

Subscribe Now

new comment has been posted. new comments have been posted.

0 Comments on this paragraph, 10 Comments on this article

Ting Mak Jun 9, 2015

China's ADIZ over the East China Sea is a response to Japan's more intrusive ADIZ. Freedom of navigation has not been a problem so far. For USA to bring this issue up indicates that USA has a hidden agenda. UNCLOS has no jurisdiction on sovereignty.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Adrian Lucas Jun 9, 2015

Much as the US had nothing to gain from negotiating with Britain during the first half of the twenty century, China has nothing to gain from negotiating with the US. Whether one likes it or not, the world is transiting from Yankee exceptionalism to Han exceptionalism, and the transition will take another 50-100 years. Just as the British (and French) were forced, and as much by the US as by pro-independence movements, to give up their British and French empires, the US will be forced, by China, to give up its hegemony in the East Pacific. What is crucial to China is not the sovereign rights of this or that rock or island, but the principle that China will never again be told what to do. Like Israel, China has a traumatic history, but it learned to stand up for itself. China is not the equal of the US, and the Chinese leadership knows it. But neither is the US the equal of China, only the US leadership does not know this, because US leadership, from Roosevelt to Obama, went from political contest to Facebook contest. It was the West's choice to allow neoliberalism to disempower its mandarin civil servants, and replace long-term mandarin planning by short-term market opportunism. But to expect China to be equally incentivized by short-term opportunity is not to understand imperial China, and the origin of mandarin planning, and therefore not to understand that the Communist Party of China sees itself as a new Imperial dynasty. The facts on the ground that truly focus the minds of Chinese mandarins are these: what Britain did to China in the nineteenth century with its gunboat diplomacy and opium wars, and what Japan did to China with its brutal massacres of Chinese people. It is not China that must ask for forgiveness, but Britain and Japan.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Eusebio Manuel Vestias pecurto vestias Jun 9, 2015

I agree with the philosophy of International standards and comply with international laws with international laws protecting the Oceans is not globally can make a boycott of Chinese garbage that killing the environment Diplomacy of peace
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
hari naidu Jun 6, 2015

The UN Law of the Sea Convention was signed/sealed in my time in 1970s. The first SG was my colleague. US Congress at the time was demonstrating its might(!) by refusing to ratify or recognize UNCLOS 200 mile economic zone - now the down payment has finally come due in SCS. There is no face saving devise under international law for US to invoke its sovereign rights - not being a signatory to the Convention.

I posted elsewhere (PS) on China's White Paper on Defense which was officially issued on 29 May. There is no q' that PLA will invoke its territorial rights under UNCLS...and may even declare a no fly zone within its 200 mile economic zone.

The underlying strategic problem for Defense Secretary Carter (a physicist!) is to avoid putting your feet in your mouth! US containment policy of PRC is becoming more and more manifest in SCS - yet US claims it is not party to the claims by Vietnam, Philippines and others in the region.

Who is fooling whom in SCS? China has declared it has no intention to intervene in the flow of international shipping in SCS. However it will defend its territorial sovereignty under UNCLOS.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
j. von Hettlingen Jun 5, 2015

Joseph Nye urges China and the US to avoid any conflict in the South China Sea, by resorting to "properly managed diplomacy" and upholding the United Nations convention on the law of the sea (UNCLOS). The UNCLOS has made clear, what constitutes an island with territorial water, which should exclude such man-made structures. Yet in recent years Chinese dredging vessels have been filling in reefs and building islands "in at least five locations." Moreover a "10,000-foot (3,000-meter) runway" on Fiery Cross Reef in the Spratly Islands is said to be in the making, that can support military flights.
Admiral Harry Harris, the US commander in the Pacific, says, China is building a new “great wall of sand” in the South China Sea, in an effort to “create facts on the ground,” and assert its sovereignty over these disputed rocks and lay the ground to claim the territorial waters around them. It's obvious that Vietnam and the Philippines, which also claim the same islets, are deeply concerned. So are other states in east Asia!
They say it is the apparent casualness with which China asserts its claims that is disconcerting. It appears that the ruling Communist party has never allowed the law to restrict what it can do. It has imposed its will on other states, disregarding international law. If China insists that "military flights cannot cross its 200-mile economic zone without its permission," it may create "a fait accompli that could close off large parts of the South China Sea," transforming it into a "Chinese lake". This reminds us of a territorial dispute with Japan in the East China Sea, when China unilaterally declared in 2013 an Air Defense Identification Zone "without prior warning."
Indeed, it is in the world's interest to protect the freedom of navigation, the US Senate needs to "ratify UNCLOS." Failing to do so the US cannot take China to the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) over "its efforts to convert reefs into islands and claim exclusion zones that could interfere with the right of free passage".
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Augusto Sakihara Jun 5, 2015

¿Evitar conflictos? Pero, quien las crea? y quien/es deben defender su soberania territorial , derechos de transito en mar abierto y espacio aereo. Recordar: 1974 China tomo en el mar meridional los archipielagos (reclamadas por 5 paises) de: PARACELSO , siendo Vietman el mas legitimo reclamante y luego China contruyo en el isla Woody (hoy: Sansha) un aeropuerto militar. Archipielago de SPRATLY, a partir de 1992 toma el arrecife de coral de Fiery Cross (hoy: Yongshu Jiao), frente a territorio de Filipinas que es su mas legitimo reclamante y hoy ese "coral" es un complejo militar aereo maritimo. En 2013 China declaro el Mar de China como Zona de Defensa Maritina, convirtierdolo en una "piscina China". Las siguientes invasiones seran: la isla Senkaku (Daiyou para China y disputada por Japon y Taiwan) y China tendra acceso al Oceano Pacifico y no pararan hasta las Islas Hawai. El pretexto es el petroleo (hoy improductivo y altos costos) y la ayuda del "Banco de Infraestructura Asiatico de China". Luego seran dueño de medio Oceno Pacifico. Tendran poder por la construccion futura de sus propios portaaviones nucleares y aviones furtivos : cazas y bombarderos de 5º y 6º generacion. Y, ¿las potencias occidentales? Bien, gracias al poderoso caballero don yuan/dinero. La estrategia es: La diplomacia no funciona y lo que no se dobla se rompe. Ademas es miembro permanente del Consejo de Seguridad de la ONU.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
MASUD MONI Jun 5, 2015

conflict is not good for health !
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
M Mrmccaffery Jun 5, 2015

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result, like diplomacy. Sorry Joe, but you and the panda hungers got the U.S. Into this mess by encouraging China that the U.S. would respond to their aggression with more talk. It's time for,the hard man to take a turn in order for the administration to create something which the fossils in Beijing will understand.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Petey Bee Jun 4, 2015

Direct conflict between US and China is, of course, completely impossible for both sides.

Fortunately, the good news is difficulties in the US relationship with China does not appear to cause a reflexive higher brain function shutdown the way US relationship with Russia does. This alone should make things better.

The bad news is that several southeast Asian countries, perhaps Vietnam, and especially the Philippines in this case, just got their ticket to become a future playground for proxy conflict. The US should try to provoke China into alienating these countries, and China should try to provoke the US into doing the same.

Although the usual path in playground countries is supporting "the forces of freedom and democracy" and "reform", followed by "benevolent interventions", I wonder if something different will be invented this time.

Unfortunately, we will need patience to find out.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Cam Jennings Jun 3, 2015

Thanks to the writer for providing an interesting article that presents some facts regarding China and the South China Sea. The conclusion is a rather optimistic one and I find the last sentence " With properly managed diplomacy, a US-China conflict in the South China Sea can and should be avoided " to be a concern. It is a rather bold statement that conflict can be avoided with diplomacy. China will continue to expand and grow in the East China Sea and the South China Sea and there will be no conflict unless America decides to use a military option. The reason that China will continue to expand & grow in this region and globally is due to the strength of three men - Xi Jinping , Li Keqiang & Chang Wanquan. Nye creates a very strong factual picture in this article but the ending is weak. American foreign policy has had some success post 1945 but it has also had failures. To make the assumption that U.S. foreign diplomacy will work regarding the regional tensions that exist is rather wild. The "String of Pearls" was set up for several reasons, one of these is to counter any blockade in the S.C.S region. Hainan Island is the most important strategic location in this region which will support the Chinese expansion. One of the driving forces behind the American pivotal shift is purely an economic one. The protracted global issues (Middle East, Africa, Europe) and U.S. domestic issues such as systemic problems within the economy and government, render the U.S.A. as a wounded Eagle in the 21st Century. This is the Asian Century and for America to be an effective global leader with credibility this century there has to be a transformative approach taken. Truth, trust and transparency need to be adopted because the 20th Century diplomacy of the threat of a threat and my bombs are bigger than yours will not succeed this century. Further to this America does not understand the animal that they fear and wish to either retard or restrain. Even if everything that I have presented here is incorrect or flawed I leave the reader with my conclusion.
The P.R.C. Minister for Defence is Chang Wanquan who was born 1949 in Nanyang City, Henan Province,
home of ancient strategist, Zhuge Liang. Chang (along with the Xi-Li team) believe in this strategist . Chang’s rhetoric often is close to that of Zhuge. Chang advocates certain strategies such as the importance of Shih in Chinese military strategy. “Instead of using military force to subjugate another society or to defeat an enemy’s army, Shih operates to convince an opponent to yield without battle.
I would like to know what form of diplomacy is going to work and how it will be applied to avoiding conflict in the South China Sea.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.

https://prosyn.org/UwakneJcs

Jak se vyhnout konfliktu v Jihočínském moři

Subscribe to PS Digital

New Comment

Contact us

Log in/Register

Jak se vyhnout konfliktu v Jihočínském moři

Subscribe to PS Digital

Edit Newsletter Preferences

Set up Notification