(by Gregory Poling)
As recently as 2012, the U.S. Navy has engaged in freedom of navigation operations in the Spratly Islands, of which Subi Reef is a part. (File photo)
In a statement
issued Tuesday, the country's Foreign Ministry warned that U.S. actions had "threatened China 's
sovereignty and security interest, and has put the safety of personnel" in
danger.
The statement was
issued in response to the U.S.
decision to dispatch the guided missile destroyer USS Lassen for several hours
on a "freedom of navigation" operation near the disputed waters of
Subi Reef, which has drawn international attention since China began
constructing an artificial island there.
But although the
Lassen was deliberately sent to within 12 nautical miles of the feature (12 miles
being the hypothetical width of territorial sea around Subi), and despite China warning against the use of
"gimmicks," the U.S.
decision should not be seen as a provocation or even deterrence.
Instead, this
week's move was part of a regular program of U.S. military activities around the
globe intended to assert the rights of military and civilian vessels to operate
anywhere allowed by international law.
The Pentagon
oversees dozens of freedom of navigation operations every year targeting
excessive maritime claims made by countries ranging from outright antagonists
to some of the United States '
closest allies.
In 2014, the U.S.
military used these operations to contest claims made by nearly all the
countries surrounding the South China Sea, meaning not just China but also the
Philippines — a treaty ally — and Indonesia, Malaysia and Vietnam.
Why now?
This also isn't
the first time the U.S. Navy has engaged in freedom of navigation operations
near Subi Reef — as recently as 2012, it did so in the Spratly Islands ,
of which Subi Reef is a part.
Indeed, as U.S. officials have insisted throughout the
surprisingly public debate on whether to engage in such operations around
Chinese-occupied features in the South China Sea, these activities by the Navy
are not new, and they do not unfairly target Beijing .
But why now, and
why at Subi Reef?
Navy and Pentagon
officials have been urging the Obama administration since early summer to
green-light freedom of navigation operations around some of China 's features in the South
China Sea , but the White House had been hesitant.
More cautious
voices in the administration worried that a Chinese overreaction could provoke
a crisis without offering much payoff, and they argued that engaging in such
activities would reduce the possibility of finding a diplomatic solution to the
rising tensions in the region.
But the apparent
inability of President Barack Obama to make any headway on the South China Sea
issue with his counterpart Xi Jinping during the Chinese leader's visit to Washington in late
September swung the argument in favor of those pushing for such operations.
Xi's visit
actually seems to have convinced many holdouts that there is no diplomatic
solution given Beijing 's current intransigence
(an extremely ambiguous statement from President Xi about China 's
"intention" not to "militarize" the features it occupies
notwithstanding).
Subi Reef was one
of two likely candidates for the latest freedom of navigation operations in the
Spratlys, the other being Mischief Reef.
Both have proven
controversial because the Chinese-occupied features were indisputably
underwater before Beijing
launched its massive island-building campaign last year, and both are too far
away from any potential island or rock to fall within another feature's
territorial sea.
Seabed, not land
So Subi is
legally part of the seabed, and not entitled to any territorial waters.
The
just-concluded operation was not a challenge to China 's
claim to Subi Reef itself, but rather to what kind of waters and rights China thinks
the reef grants it. It was a case study aimed at challenging the excessive and
ambiguous claims that China
makes throughout the disputed South China Sea
more generally.
After the U.S. move, China
responded that "if relevant parties insist on creating tensions in the
region and making trouble out of nothing, it may force China to draw
the conclusion that we need to strengthen and hasten the buildup of our relevant
capabilities." But despite the apparent seriousness of such warnings,
escalating tensions are not inevitable.
How can conflict
be avoided?
The best hope for
a long-term peaceful solution in the South China Sea is to convince Beijing that it is
undermining its own wider interests by maintaining unlawful claims in disputed
waters.
And the responses
from different parts of the Chinese government to the recent operation are
telling. Beijing
is effectively expressing anger over the Lassen's operations near Subi, but it
is struggling to come up with a legal rationale for its objections.
Of course, a
one-off operation will not persuade Beijing
to clarify its claims. In fact, that would actually undermine the United States '
position that these activities are normal and not provocative. That means that
whatever the protestations from Beijing and
others, this will no doubt be just the first of many freedom of navigation
operations in and around the Spratly
Islands .
http://cnnphilippines.com/world/2015/10/28/US-not-provoking-Beijing-in-South-China-Sea.html
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.