By Minxin Pei
Indeed, although the Clinton statement seems to have come as a nasty shock, Chinese officials should really have been paying more attention to recent statements coming from Washington on the South China Sea dispute—in February this year, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense Robert Scher stated essentially the same positions in his testimony to the US-China Economic and Security Review Commission, a Congressional-chartered body.
And if Scher failed to get Beijing’s attention, the remarks by US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates on June 5 should have. Addressing the Shangri-la Dialogue in Singapore, Gates declared that ‘the South China Sea is an area of growing concern…Our policy is clear: it is essential that stability, freedom of navigation, and free and unhindered economic development be maintained. We don’t take sides on any competing sovereignty claims, but we do oppose the use of force and actions that hinder freedom of navigation. We object to any effort to intimidate US corporations or those of any nation engaged in legitimate economic activity. All parties must work together to resolve differences through peaceful, multilateral efforts consistent with customary international law.’
Curiously, Gates’ remarks, more pointed than Clinton’s, elicited no howls of protest from China.
So Chinese officials needn’t read too much into Clinton’s recent remarks on the South China Sea, and they certainly shouldn’t overreact and pick a fight with Washington over a non-issue like this.
The best response from China instead would be to turn on their charm as a counter-offensive against Washington’s (belated) diplomatic efforts to restore its influence and prestige in South-east Asia. For the past decade, China has achieved great success in leveraging its economic influence and plying its diplomatic skills to reassure South-east Asian countries and improve its image in the region.
In fact, to quell this little diplomatic storm—and shut the Americans up—all Beijing has to do is to sign the South China Sea Code of Conduct with ASEAN.
Minxin Pei is an adjunct senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and a professor of government at Claremont McKenna College
Reddit
Digg
StumbleUpon
Delicious
Technorati
Yahoo
Google
Plurk
Tanda
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Vietnamese_War – “… the PRC also supported the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia. The PRC supported Pol Pot from fear that a unified Vietnam, in alliance with the Soviet Union, would dominate Indochina.”
Let’s the world see how much Chinese were as inhumane as was Pol Pot by creating Khmer Rouge massacring people.
mandrewsf
Geopolitics meant that the U.S. supported Peron in Argentina, Pinochet in Chile, and the Shah in Iran. All of them were murderous and oppressive regimes. Does that mean the U.S. is equally murderous and oppressive?
By the way, the Chinese war with Vietnam occurred with implicit U.S. support for China. Carter met Deng for this reason. Without U.S. backing, China would never have dared to go to war against Vietnam while millions of Soviet troops were encamped on its northern borders.
MollyMuses
Also, to “The Diplomat” editors, since you are ‘reviewing’ these comments for ‘approval’, by what standards are you “reviewing”? how do we know you are not censoring and controlling this conversation? are you going to censor me? This will be a test. If this appears, The Diplomat readers can be assured that their comments are being reviewed while still respecting their freedoms of speech in an age where all to many governments and power moguls are trying to censor us on the internet.
Chinese
Hmmmm …. interesting that you would ask that question. I thought you were saying only China censors the internet. (By the way, on the topic of Chinese censorship, I responded to your earlier comment)