South China Sea: ‘alliance of democracies’ ready to counter Beijing aggression

Recent statements signal that the US, Australia and other countries will not back away from the right to freely navigate disputed waters
It is clear China’s assertiveness towards its neighbours is not only destabilising to the region but also becoming a global security concern

Patrick MendisandJoey Wang

Published: 1:30am, 8 Aug 2020

Why you can trust SCMP

In July 2016, an international tribunal rejected China’s claims of sovereignty over the territory within a vaguely-defined nine-dash line in the South China Sea, concluding that Beijing’s claim violated international law.

While the United States takes no position on the competing claims in the South China Sea, Washington does reject Beijing’s claim and has deployed two carrier strike groups in dual-carrier operations through the contested waters. Punctuating this position is US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s recent announcement that China’s claims are “completely unlawful”.

Likewise, Australia has rejected the Chinese claims. It declared in late July that Beijing’s consolidation of the Spratly Islands and the Parcel Islands was invalid as it was “inconsistent” with the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.

These actions not only challenge China’s claims, they are escalatory measures to signal that the United States, Australia and other countries will not back away from the right to freely navigate the South China Sea.

To understand the tensions in the South China Sea, one needs to see the broader geopolitical struggle taking place beyond simply access to the rich fishing grounds and energy reserves. The evolving Sino-American tensions also have a significant impact on regional and global stability.

02:32

Washington’s hardened position on Beijing’s claims in South China Sea heightens US-China tensions

China’s aggressive reclamation and militarisation of the Spratly and Paracel Islands in 2014 should have immediately made clear that Beijing’s objectives were not just about fish, gas and oil, for three reasons.

First, it is true that access to resources is part of the competing claims in the South China Sea. According to the Centre for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, the South China Sea accounted for 12 per cent of the fish caught globally in 2015. More than 50 per cent of fishing vessels in the world are believed to operate in the sea.

Second, China’s aggressive claims over the South China Sea would allow it to virtually seal off the body of water by interdicting strategic resources coming through the Malacca Strait. Chinese sovereignty over the sea would allow Beijing to exercise coercive diplomacy by controlling strategic resource flows with every country in the region.

Third, the most important issue relating to China’s resolve over the South China Sea is that it offers a glimpse into Beijing’s objective of seizing Taiwan and using it as a platform to expel Western influences from the region.

With military assets already in place in the Spratly and Paracel Islands, Chinese sovereignty over the South China Sea would allow its military to establish tactical and operational control as well as unopposed freedom in its approaches to Taiwan.

02:19

Taiwan military drill simulates coastal attack amid rising tensions with mainland China

Additionally, it would enable China to address some unfinished business with Japan from its colonial era. As far back as 1951, the US Central Intelligence Agency concluded in a now-declassified report that Taiwan was “the last stronghold of the Nationalist regime” and that the Chinese were resolute in “capturing Taiwan in order to complete the conquest of Chinese territory”.

Pompeo said in a speech on July 23 that, “maybe it’s time for a new grouping of like-minded nations, a new alliance of democracies”. The US is in good company as Britain, France and Australia have all transited the South China Sea in recent years in rejection of China’s claims. Germany, as a global trading partner, needs to play a participatory role in Asian security as well.

India, while remaining non-aligned, is being nudged towards the Western alliance, especially after its recent confrontation with China in the Galwan Valley in which at least 20 Indian soldiers were killed.

Significantly, India recently held a major exercise off the Andaman and Nicobar Islands in the Bay of Bengal – the entry point into the critical Malacca Strait. New Delhi is also looking into expediting the reinforcement of military forces in the Andaman and Nicobar Command.

As the Quad – the US-led military grouping with Australia, India and Japan – begins its trilateral exercise in the Philippine Sea and the Indian Ocean, Australia is poised to join the Malabar exercise and other Western naval forces making their presence known in the region.

The message is clear: China’s assertiveness towards its neighbours is not only destabilising for the region but is also becoming a global security concern.

03:23

The South China Sea dispute explained

In his recent memoir The Room Where it Happened, former national security adviser John Bolton wrote that US President Donald Trump compared the point of his Sharpie marker to the size of his desk as an analogy to the difference between Taiwan and China, downplaying the importance of US commitment to the democratic and strategic ally.

While the Trump White House has a decided preference for “deals” rather than “alliances”, Washington will soon find these deals are likely to fail the security interests of the United States, Asia and the West – just as Trump’s betrayal of the Kurdish rebels in Syria and the withdrawal of US military from Germany have strengthened Russia. This is probably why China would welcome four more years of the Trump administration.

As the People’s Republic of China approaches its centennial in 2049, President Xi Jinping is a man in a hurry. Part and parcel of this will mean the unification of Greater China and, implicitly, unopposed control of the South China Sea.

However, China should measure its historical grievances and ideological priorities against the costs. It cannot have the contradictory desires of peace on the one hand and retribution on the other. The world was forced to live through two devastating wars in the 20th century, and there is little interest in doing it again.

Patrick Mendis, a former American diplomat and military professor, is a Taiwan fellow of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of China and a distinguished visiting professor of global affairs at the National Chengchi University. Joey Wang is a defence analyst in the United States. The views expressed in this analysis are the authors’ own

Post