How serious is the Asia-Pacific situation?

S P SETH

The ongoing tensions between China and its Asia-Pacific neighbours over contested sovereignty over a bunch of islands/islets in the South China Sea are creating a dangerous situation, with potential for escalation into an armed conflict. The US wants China to back off from its unilateral actions to change the status quo. China claims exclusive sovereignty and is taking steps to assert control of the islands. It is simultaneously dredging out new surface areas to build military facilities. Admiral Harris, the commander of the US Pacific Fleet, had earlier sounded an alarm in a speech in Canberra when he said, “China is creating a Great Wall of Sand with dredgers and bulldozers over the course of months.”  He added, “When one looks at China’s pattern of provocative actions towards smaller claimant states… and the deep asymmetry between China’s capabilities and those of its smaller neighbours---, well it’ no surprise that the scope and pace of building manmade islands [by China] raises serious questions about China’s intentions.” The issue also was the focus of the regional security dialogue in Singapore, with the US raising concerns and China reiterating its position of exclusive sovereignty.

It would appear that China seems unconcerned, on the surface at least, about what the US and its Asian neighbours are all about. It is pretty sure about its sovereignty over the islands and much of the waters in the South China Sea, making it into a virtual Chinese lake. Beijing feels confident hat it has the military capability to deter any military challenge to its “sovereignty” from the United States, which it believes is behind some of its neighbours’ counter claims. As China’s foreign minister, Wang Yi, has warned that “the determination of the Chinese side to safeguard our own sovereignty and territorial integrity is as firm as a rock, and it is unshakable.” Indeed, in its latest defence white paper, Beijing has signaled its intention to expand “offshore waters defence” to include “open seas protection.” China regards the US as an external power with no business to interfere in the region, which it regards, though not explicitly, as its own backyard.

During his recent China visit, the US secretary of state, John Kerry, urged Beijing to “reduce tensions and increase the prospect of a diplomatic solution.”  However, any diplomatic solution would require some flexibility regarding the claims and counter-claims from China and its regional neighbours and that is not forthcoming. If this tense situation persists, it is quite possible that this might develop into a nasty confrontation. The concern in the US is that China is seeking to create a de-facto situation where its control becomes unchallengeable. And it starts interfering with freedom of navigation in these busy sea-lanes for trade and other activities. In that event, the US might find itself eventually eased out of the Pacific region, where it has been, and still is, the dominant naval power. It is, therefore, keen to impress on China that its actions might have consequences.

It is reported that US military officials are drafting options for President Obama, including sending warships within 20 kilometres of the reclaimed reefs and rocks to make clear that the US considers them international waters. Some of it is already happening with warnings from China against US aerial surveillance. At another level, the US is planning to put long-range bombers in Australia to deter China. As David Shear, the US defence department assistant secretary for Asian and Pacific Security Affairs, has reportedly said that, “we will be placing additional air force assets in Australia as well, including B-1 bombers and surveillance aircraft.” Which has created a controversy here, with both Canberra and the US embassy saying that Mr Shear “misspoke”. Which would suggest that he probably spoke too soon and too clearly, even though the broad thrust of his statement was to the point.

A US embassy spokeswoman in Canberra clarified that “we [the US and Australia] are currently exploring a range of options for future rotations [of US forces] with our Australian counterparts, and the specifics of future force posture cooperation have yet to be finalized.” In other words, both the US and Australia are worried about Chinese activities in the regional waters requiring a coordinated response. At the same time, Australia doesn’t want to damage its relations with China, which is its biggest trading partner. It is, therefore, not surprising that Prime Minister Tony Abbot sought to brush aside the statement of the Pentagon official, maintaining that the Pentagon official “misspoke and that the US does not have any plans to base those aircraft in Australia.”

However, Peter Jennings, who chairs the Abbot government’s advisory panel for drafting the upcoming defence white paper, has reportedly recommended greater military cooperation between Australia and the United States, including sending military aircraft and ships to the South China Sea to stop China from asserting control across some of the world’s most important trading lanes. Jennings also said that to maintain its credibility, the US would have to puncture the Chinese claims by sending US vessels and aircraft through Chinese-claimed waters and air space, maintaining that Australia would need to follow suit. The Australian government, however, continues to believe that it can somehow reconcile its closer security relations with the United States to counter China’s projection of power while continuing to expand economic opportunities with China. That will become increasingly difficult as China continues to flex its muscles. And when you bring Japan into the picture, which has its own maritime sovereignty issue with China in East China Sea, the emerging strategic picture in the Asia Pacific region is quite disturbing, to put it mildly.

The US and Japan are entwined in a security alliance, with the US committed to its defence. But this is steadily changing its character, where Japan might also now be willing to help in regional defence and not just be the recipient of the US military protection. This triangular strategic counter to China, including the US Japan and Australia, would be designed to impress on Beijing that there would be consequences if it continued to press ahead with its plans. Under Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, US-Japan relations have become much more active. Indeed, Abe was the first visiting Japanese Prime Minister to recently address the US Congress, as well as attend a state dinner at the White House.

In his speech to the Congress, Prime Minister Abe strongly supported the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), a proposed free trade agreement between the US and other regional countries. China is excluded from the proposed TPP. While dwelling on the values of TPP, Abe thus emphasized its strategic value: “Long term, its strategic value is awesome… The TPP covers an area that accounts for 40 per cent of the world economy and one-third of global trade.” And he meaningfully added against the backdrop of China’s threat, “We must turn the area into a region for lasting peace and prosperity.” In other words, China must be contained and countered in a comprehensive way to include economic, political and military cooperation.

  

Note: This article was first published in the Daily Times.

Contact: sushilpseth@yahoo.com.au