China is flexing its muscles over sovereignty of the South China Sea. But it’s not the only country with a claim to these waters, says Simon Wilson.
What’s going on?
Tensions in the South China Sea have escalated dramatically in recent weeks as China has become more forceful in asserting its interests. Over the past couple of years there have been reports of Chinese vessels harassing shipping. But earlier this year, China announced that its claim to sovereignty of the entire sea, and the islands in it, was now a “core” national security interest. That is a phrase that the country had previously used only in relation to Tibet and Taiwan – and it ups the ante considerably. In response, the United States, which has long kept out of disputes over sovereignty in the region, decided to put down a marker in support of the south-east Asian countries. They contend China’s claims to a sea that stretches from Taiwan in the north to Singapore in the southwest.
How has America annoyed China?
A meeting in Hanoi last month convened the region’s top security summit – the Asean Regional Forum (ARF). It brought together foreign ministers of all the Asean nations, plus China and the States. Hillary Clinton worked with various delegates to spring something of a surprise on China by successfully demanding that the sovereignty issue be discussed at future international meetings. For 15 years, Beijing had managed to keep the South China Sea off the agenda at the ARF. It insists on treating the issue as a series of bilateral disputes with individual countries – a policy that the smaller nations increasingly view as a divide-and-rule tactic, which lets China bully them.
What’s at stake?
At the heart of the dispute are two island groups, the Paracels and the Spratlys. In 1974, China seized the Paracels by force from Vietnam, which has refused to give up its claim. In the more southerly chain, the Spratlys, the situation is even more delicate. Vietnam occupies 29 of the tiny islands claimed by China, the Philippines eight and Malaysia three. China has about nine tiny outcrops, but none are big enough for an airstrip. In 1988 the strategic importance of the region led to warships from China and Vietnam exchanging fire in the Spratly Islands; Vietnam lost several ships and many sailors.
So whose are they?
Clashes over sovereignty in this sea have been a periodic part of the region’s history for the simple reason that so many nations have a coastline bordering these waters. The South China Sea covers about 3.5 million square kilometres (1.4 million square miles), from Singapore in the southwest to Taiwan in the northeast. The disputed islands are claimed in whole by China and Vietnam, and in part by Malaysia, the Philippines, Brunei and Taiwan. In one form or another, the present disagreements over who owns which islands have been going on for centuries – although China’s claim to exclusive sovereignty is based on a necessarily Sino-centric view of history. Such a view down plays the fact that ethnic Malay seafarers (from whom today’s Malaysians, Indonesians, Filipinos and the Chams of Vietnam are all ultimately descended) dominated these waters centuries before China.
Why the big fuss now?
The South China Sea issue is partly about shipping and the protection of long-standing freedoms in crucial sea lanes. However, it also symbolises China and the United States testing each other as China’s power gradually increases. From the Chinese perspective, it is perfectly natural to resent the interference of a distant power in a region where China is seeking dominance.
As a Ministry of Defence spokesman put it in response to Clinton’s move, “China has indisputable sovereignty of the South Sea, and sufficient historical and legal backing” to underpin its claims. Beijing will resolutely oppose attempts to “internationalise” the issue, and called Hillary Clinton’s intervention “virtually an attack on China” that would not help solve the problem.
Will America back down?
It’s unlikely. Just as China has decided to flex its muscles over the issue, the US too has decided to draw a line in the sand and reassert robustly that it also has a strategic interest in the area. According to Hillary Clinton, “the United States has a national interest in freedom of navigation, open access to Asia’s maritime commons and respect for international law in the South China Sea.” The latter part of that claim is a moderately assertive way of telling China to rein it in a bit. But in part it is also a bald statement of geopolitical fact. The South China Sea is the maritime heart of South East Asia. It lies at the centre of major trade networks, which the US navy has helped to secure since World War II. America is a Pacific power, with territory in Hawaii and Guam, and five regional alliances (with Japan, South Korea, the Phillipines and Thailand) and vast trade and investment ties.
What’s under the South China Sea?
According to the US Energy Information Administration, some Chinese studies suggest the waters contain more oil than Iran and more natural gas than Saudi Arabia. As China has boosted investment in its navy in recent years it has become far more aggressive in projecting power in the region. The US and others were worried two years ago when Beijing reportedly warned off oil multinationals from developing prospects with other nations in the region, and were distinctly unimpressed last year when Chinese ‘fishing boats’ harassed two US naval vessels. All that, together with the “core interests” assertion, has caused America to take a harder line on the issue.