Worried about China’s strengthening navy and South China Sea claim, the former adversaries are setting ideology aside.
The great Victorian era statesman and British Prime Minister Lord Palmerston once said: ‘Nations have no permanent friends or allies, they only have permanent interests.’ He would presumably have loved to live long enough to see the USS John McCain visit Danang port in Vietnam last month.
This visit, along with one a few days earlier by the aircraft carrier the USS George Washington, marked the 15th anniversary of the establishment of Vietnam-US diplomatic relations, when two former Cold War foes started on the journey toward friendship.
It’s an interesting irony that the United States is extending the hand of strategic co-operation to Vietnam as it remains mired in a modern-day version of Vietnam— the war in Afghanistan. But the increased interest in the region also suggests that the United States is beginning to look beyond Afghanistan as it prepares to withdraw after a decade-long conflict.
The big question is what has prompted this intensification of interest now. But it’s a question with an easy answer—Beijing’s increasingly aggressive posture in South-east Asia generally, and in the mineral-rich South China Sea in particular.
The apparent shift in US policy came to global attention in July, with US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton stating at the ASEAN Regional Forum that the United States saw the South China Sea as a global commons; she also suggested that China should peacefully settle sovereignty issues with contending nations.
In effect, she was hinting that the US has its own national interests in the South China Sea. But this shouldn’t have come as too much of a surprise. After all, Clinton had said a year earlier at the same forum that the US would return to South-east Asia. This was seen at the time as a confidence building gesture among US partners in the region. But there was also a clear strategic element to her follow-up remarks in Hanoi a year later—Vietnam has now been drawn into a huddle with the United States, not least because it occupies more of the contentious Spratly Islands than any other nation.
Clinton’s move followed Chinese claims that the South China Sea, including the Spratly Islands, were now a ‘core interest,’ making it on par with Tibet and Taiwan, and thus making any outside interference taboo in Chinese eyes. In response, Clinton proposed that the US help establish an international mechanism to mediate the overlapping claims of sovereignty between China, Taiwan, the Philippines, Vietnam, Indonesia and Malaysia that now exist in the South China Sea.
Photo Credit: USAID
View as Single Page
Reddit
Digg
StumbleUpon
Delicious
Technorati
Yahoo
Google
Plurk
Peter
Transfer nuclear technology to Viet Nam ?
You must be crazy.
China called ” Hooligans” in 1979.
Viet Nam claim ” We gave you 2 islands already for payment ”
Viet Nam under communist DCSVN with captitalism are nothing more than
“VietCongs” with new suits .
They are Mafia who: Humantrafficking, Money laundering, Drug trafficking, human export, land “reform” to the party members only,repress religion and freedom of speech of their own people.
What make you so sure they won’t sell your technology to the highest bidder?
“Cash is the King in Viet Nam” especially cash under the table and free cash from “Economy aid”
Corruption run 20% as 2010.
DCSVN won’t even do not mind if China offer them a high price for Viet Nam. They will sell and get out.
Communist Viet Nam must go if you want a stable, healthy , truthly Vietnam.
Do not judge the book by its cover, READ IT.
Beware ” Hooligans”
We do not have one Marcos of Phillipine but 100 with Mafia style.
Bye bye your money.
mr obvious
Pawned:
If you think Vietnam is a pawn, then you must realize they play the game very well. They already have partnerships with India, USA, and are on the same page with other ASEAN counties outside of Manila. They do not have a backbone to stand up to China.
Think of Vietnam during the cold war. You don’t think they were a pawn that leveraged China and Russia to get what they needed? Although, I do not agree with what transpired during the Vietnam War, I am of South Vietnamese decent, I realize that the current Vietnamese regime played the game well to get what they wanted.
Take a look at a world map and you can point out how many countries have issues with China. After awhile you will realize if all those counties such as South Korea, Japan, Russia, India, Vietnam, and so on have disputes and concerns with China, it is obvious the trouble maker is China.
China’s arrogrance will be their downfall. Why is China a permanent UN security council member when they were not a super power?
If you take away Russia as China’s main arms supplier, China will not have a military that will be able to sustain a prolonged war.
Again, I am not an expert and would appreciate feedback.
kai pan
The geo-political events taking place in South-East Asia are normal. A new, rising power (China) is placing its markers in the area.
This action is coming into conflict with the previous markers set by a relatively declining power (USA).
In fact, the US established its primary role in the area more than 100 years ago with its Open Door policy Statement of US foreign policy toward China issued in 1899.
China was in political and economic disarray at the end of the 19th century. China was weak, poor, and technically backward. All the major powers at that time were busy elbowing one another for trading privileges and plotting how the country could be partitioned.
After the US took possession of the Philippines in 1898, the US played a more serious role in the “management” of Asia. The US stated its desire for the creation of an “open door” that would allow all trading nations equal access to the Chinese market.
Well, those days are long over. China is calling an end to the century-long domination of the US in Asia.
Unfortunately, China, I believe, is making a mistake by moving too fast. The US is weak and will get weaker but China is not strong enough to challenge it. China should be more patient.
Little countries like Vietnam are doing what they have to do in order to survive in a struggle between two giants – maneuvering.
The situation in South-East Asia is normal. Alles klar.
CA
US will be weaker? Next year, we will see how strong the chinese economy will be. With the current exodus of foreign companies and an increase in the tax tariff, chinese economy will transform into a self produced, self consumed society. US generous policies has enlarged chinese arrogance! They already forget the boss-employee relationship.
The current chinese youths are not interest in the communist ideology; they are fed by capitalist materialism. We do need time to bring democracy to Middle east, africa and south america countries; the trade off? feed up chinese greedy with green dollar.
You are trapped now. Don’t underestimate US power.
Let give chinese people a chance to enjoy more freedom as US let china enjoys material good.
Gengis
The US is weak? Hahaha… You must be dreaming or watched too many movies.
Do you know the US Navy is stronger than the next 12 countries with a navy combined? And we haven’t even mentioned the Air Force yet.
nguoiphanbien
Talking about the tenuous relationship between the US and Vietnam, here’s what the official Vietnam People’s Army Daily has to say about the US on the occasion of its withdrawl of its combat troops from Iraq:
The VN People’s Army Daily on August 30/2010 describes the withdrawal of the US combat troops from Iraq “a miserable collapse of the American Pre-emptive Strike Doctrine” (…Báo Quân đội Nhân dân gọi cuộc rút quân của Mỹ khỏi Iraq là “sự sụp đổ thảm hại” cho học thuyết Đánh phủ đầu…) and it further states that the pre-emptive strike doctrine has exposed itself the danger of implosion right from the start, because the doctrine has been based on the premise of over-estimating the might of the American military firepower (…Chủ thuyết Đánh phủ đầu ngay từ đầu đã “bộc lộ tính chất nguy hiểm khi được xây dựng trên tư duy tuyệt đối hóa sức mạnh quân sự của Hoa Kỳ…)
Ly Tran Le
Cái tên nguoiphanbien là thằng ngốc mà bày đặt nói chuyện quân sự. Tụi Mỹ nó đâu có đánh phủ đầu đứa nào ngoài cách dằn mặt Trung Quốc?
How could it be a failure when: In the 1980s, it took the Soviet Union up to 1.5 million troops fighting conventional warfare for 10 years with the lost of 50,000 men or more? In 2001, the US used no more than 1000 special forces who would call in the might of US Air Force fighters/bombers and defeated the Taliban in 16 days? After 10 years, the US loss is 4,400. Now the Taliban is a fraction of what it used to be hiding like rats in the deep caves of the mountains between Afghanistan and Pakistan. Depite all the media BS, the US spends a fraction of its military keeping these terrorists at bay. It would be a serious mistake for North Korea and China to think that the US is too bogged down in the Middle East.
Whoever called it a failure ought to have their head examined.
An Observer
I am amazed by the ignorance and stupidity of that article’s author. Does he know 50,000 US military advisers/soldiers remain in Iraq in non-combatant roles ? By his argument – consider it a failure when US troops withdrawn, Germany, Japan should all be US’s miserable failures.
nguoiphanbien
@LyTranLe
“…Cái tên nguoiphanbien là thằng ngốc mà bày đặt nói chuyện quân sự …”
My answer: Chỉ có những thằng mắt dạy cùng cực mới có cách nói chuyện như thế trong tranh luận.
People seem to get quite confused between winning battles and winning a war.
Andrei C.
China’s ocean claims are based on the international norm that the CONTINENTAL SHELF is the basis for international sea claims.
.
The USA ignores this and instead sides on the basis of whatever is antagonistic to China.
.
**
In addition, the USS Impeccable incident occurred within 200 miles of China’s EEZ (Economic Exclusion Zone).
.
International law stipulates that NO foreign military vessels may enter the EEZ of another country…The US’s USS Impeccable was on an a military-intelligence mission to spy on China’s submarine base (Hainan Island), AND chart the sea floor so that US submarines can patrol more efficiently…But neither are foreign submarines area allowed within a country’s EZZ!!!!
.
Therefore, the USS Impeccable incident was an act of unjustifiable US military aggression against China.
.
Ly Tran Le
It is silly to claimed somebody’s islands as your own and then try to justify your 200 mile EEZ from the edge of those islands. By that measure, China false claimed the entire Southeast Asian Sea.
The USS Impeccable was in international water. No argument about it.
Mr. Bui
How much did you and your government know about Continental shelf and International norm? Which is your reference when you wrote “International norm?” Do you know 12 nautical miles in “United nations convention on Law of the Sea” ?
Your government still can not explain the legal basis of your claims in South China Sea (East Sea in Vietnamese, which Vietnamese called “line of caw’s tongue”.
You, shame China, just only invaded and illegally occupied Vietnamese territory, brutally shot to poor Vietnamese fishermen.
Shame on You, china!
USS Destroyer
Shame on Vietnam for having the biggest illegitimate claims of 20 islands vs. China and Philipines 9 and 8 islands. For such a distant country as Vietnam from the islands, that is shame. Shame on Vietnam for being the greediest one.
Ly Tran Le
How could it be a shame when despite all the threats and false proofs it claimed to have, China wouldn’t dare to take the entire island chain yet?
China is going to rely on its might to invade, steal and blunder. Vietnam is going to use wit to defend what is theirs. History has proven the righteous will always be right.
Vietnam is no Tibet, which is another country China invaded and pretended it was theirs.
Namer
Ly – “Vietnam is not Tibet.” No one ever said it was. Your comparison is as ambiguous as saying North Korea is not part of China. Actually Vietnam tried to use its might to capture the islands but predictably lost the battle – this is not wit. There hasn’t been a war for many years and most countries including China is not looking for war to resolve this as negotiations have been going on for the past couple decades.
Ly Tran Le
Namer… Don’t twist history. The Vietnamese had already administered the Paracel Islands since the handover by the Japanese and the French. China waited till South Vietnam was in a weak position to invade and took the island in 1974. To say that the Vietnamese used its might to capture the island and lost is a pathetic attempt to distort the truth.
China is doing the same thing again by pretending to protest that the US is “returning to Southeast Asia” and “butting into China’s sphere of influence”. The US Navy had been patrolling the Southeast Asian Sea for many decades. It is China that is butting into other countries’ business, not the other way around.