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
Trung
Great article. Just a minor typo: “Much has changed in the country since 1986, when the ruling communist party adopted a reform agenda known as doi mai”. In Vietnamese it is “doi moi”, not “doi mai”
Thanks,
Trung
mr obvious
Harry-
I don’t get what you mean by good? Again, China is being the aggressor and your attitude explains the Chinese arrogance.
nguoiphanbien
“…the United States is beginning to look beyond Afghanistan as it prepares to withdraw after a decade-long conflict…”
By saying this, the author of this article has said it all about the US. After its failed adventures in Vietnam, Iraq and the inevitable failure in Afghanistan, the US military industrial complex is looking for their next project in Southeast Asia. China is too big to take it on directly, so the US is up to its old trick again by: a) falsifying a threat and providing the necessary political cover (e.g. Gulf of Tonkin incident or the current South China Sea manipulations) for what comes next, b) recruit proxies, c) arm these proxies to the teeth to sustain the created threat, d) increase arm sales and the cycle repeats itself over every 10 to 20 year periods.
Ilovechina
I feel sick about the anti-china attitude from the west. The whole South-china sea belongs to China and that is the area of China. US can keep policing the rest of the world and China has never interfered with their business. On the other hand, the West always keep nosing around the domestic affair of China. Chinese can take care of themselves and their neighbors. We spend money on military for the same result that US and others spent on their military. Why can’t we? We used to be a greatest nation in the world and will soon once again be. I suggest the West should change their attitude before it’s too late.
Even more huh?
I see. So as long as China’s neighbors are willing to be lapdogs, its all good right? And then you wonder about the “anti-China” attitude of the “West”. I hope you realize this is not restricted to the “West”. China’s neighbors are a part of it too. They are less vocal because they are hedging their bets.
Tony Bui
The action of China is similar to Mussolini in the second World War. I firmly believe that China will face the same fate as Mussolini.
Namer
The US will make all Asian countries look like the bad guys to each and suck up to the US like the Vietnamese.
Ly Tran Le
It’s not unlike the Chinese used to kowtow to everyone from ying to yang… from the Mongols to the Manchus, from the Western powers to the Japanese empirial army?
It’s not unlike how the Chinese begged the US to help open up trade, by transfering technology, by allowing Chinese students to study at US universities?
One thing the US knows really well: As ex-enemy, the Vietnamese never threatened the security of the US, but the Chinese, once all the helps have been gladly taken, once China felt strong enough, would start to burn the hand that feed its economy.
Namer
Ying to yang, Mongols, Manchus, Western powers, Japanese??? Ever heard of the Boxer Rebellion and WWII? Nobody’s denying Vietnam the right to kowtowing. But, if that’s what it wants to be seen as then be it.
hector
U.S.Capitalist greed not help.Great power politics not begging.U.S. thought they could get cheap goods forever from China and send the unwanted polluting low technology factories to China to exploit the cheap labour.Mutual benefir not Kowtow ?The Manchus and Mongols were assimilated subsequently into the chinese culture after well fought battles which the respective chinese decaying dynasties lost.After helping Vietnam it is biting the china hands that help it resist U.S. invasion Vietnam invaded Cambodia when it was at its weakest to try to create a vietnamese Indo Chinese empire hence china assistance to Cambodia to resist vietnam hegemony.Vietnam after seeking china help to resist U.S. invasion now feels stong enough would stasrt to burn the hands that help it before.No protest by N.Vietnam when china asserted sovereignity over paracels occupied by S.Vietnam then????????
Ly Tran Le
hector, you have obviously never been to Cambodia, or the Killing Field, for that matter. You simply chose to repeat the same lies of Chicom propaganda and ignored the fact, which the UN documented. Pol Pot was a lunatic who not only killed 2 million of his own people (almost a third of the then Cambodian population) and then massacred most ethnic Vietnamese living in Cambodia. With China’s support, Pol Pot got even more carried away and sent troops into Vietnam, massacred people in villages near the border. China used Pol Pot to destabilize Vietnam only to see it backfired when Vietnam toppled them in weeks. Vietnam was the only country that stopped the GENOCIDE in Cambodia when the UN with China as a major member decided to do nothing.
harry
good, the more these countries pressure China the faster the Chinese military strength is going to grow.
Ace
Or was it the other way around?
Mr Obvious
I find it funny that the Chinese are the obvious aggressors in the South China Sea by claiming 90% of it as theirs. They enforce fishing bans and arrest Vietnamese fishermen that share this body of ocean. They attacked a peaceful South Vietnam that held the Paracel’s and claim that the Vietnamese were the aggressors. They attacked Vietnamese troops in the Spratly’s and kill unarmed soliders and they claim the Vietnamese were the aggressors. I am not an expert in politics and do not come from a military background. I see the obvious that the Chinese are the aggressors and when called upon of their actions, they claim they are the ones attacked and they are innocent. The bully can always pick on the smaller weaker one until one day the one being bullied takes a stand and pushes back. And when this happens, I laugh at the fact the Chinese will claim they are innocent and they are peacefully rising by pointing guns at their neighbors.
hector
Is it like the Gulf of Tonkin incident set by U.S.in the 1970s?
An Observer
@Hector: Correction: The incident was actually in 1964.
This is even worse. In the Tonkin incident, the US at least claimed they were under attack. When China invaded Vietnam in 1979, they called it a defensive war (and still call it as such). When China took Paracel and some Spratly islands by force (and bloodily), they called it getting the islands back. When China arrested Vietnamese fishermen, they called them pirates for violating their fishing ban in the South China sea. Yet, when Chinese fishermen were arrested way down the coasts of Indonesia for fishing and encroaching, their escorting gun boards even threatened to shoot at Indonesian coastguard ships if they didn’t release those fishermen (the very same gunboards that arrested or sank Vietnamese fishing ships)
And of course, China always wants bilateral talks whenever there’s a protest against them. Anything else will be seen as aggression against China and against the friendship with China.
hector
Is U.S.guile and lies more acceptable.I would hav thought U.S. is worse to provoke a massive attack on vietnam mainland in the Gulf of Tonkin incident.If yo facts ar correct has China attacked vietnamese mainland,China took paracels with the consent of N.Vietnam without any protest at all from N.Vietnam.Is vietnam trying to use agent orange (Americans)that has devastated millions of vietnamese in a roundabout way.Hav notlearnt the lessons yet?
An Observer
@Hector: Talking about lessons, in case you haven’t done your homework:
China invaded Vietnam for more than 1000 years, but failed to assimilate it (the consistent theme of China is expansion through conquering, followed by assimilation. There was originally no Han ethnic majority, and what is now modern China consisted of multiple kingdoms with multiple ethnics, all conquered and assimilated by the Qin dynasty around 220 BC). And it hasn’t stopped: look at China now, they have territorial disputes everywhere, land and sea.
And this is the key point: once China gains control of your territory (by force or other means), you can forget about getting it back (unless you’re Russia), and should start to worry about defending with tooth and nail what you have.
That is, unless you choose to be assimilated, Mr. Hector.
Michael
Mr Obvious, I wonder what your take on similar situations elsewhere in the world might be. What do you say to the US essentially controlling the gulf of Mexico, the Caribbean sea, the entire eastern half of the Pacific, and so on. The point is, powerful countries get their way and it is incredibly redundant and foolish to use playground metaphors to try and impose order in such situations.
If one wants to make “progress,” I suggest looking not at what people say, but at what they do. China has built a huge navy, acquired relevant ocean-exploration technology, and even built infrastructure on the Paracel islands. Is this something Vietnam can afford? Can any other claimant develop the South China Sea or make use of it as much as China? Sovereignty was never about written niceties, childish conceptions of fairness, but of power and projection. I think on this basis China has the strongest claim to the sea (as the US has the strongest claim to the gulf of Mexico.)
Huh?
I see. Development as an excuse to encroach on any nation’s territorial sovereignty. That sounds very very familiar. Oh wait, similar excuses were being given during the colonial era. If you can bring development to the “barbaric natives”, its all justified.
Although, I was really glad to see that you did not beat around the bush with revisionist claims, morality or other stuff. China is basically doing this because it CAN do it. At least you are being honest about it.
Ly Tran Le
Fortunately, the US never did declare the Gulf of Mexico as its own or drew a map declaring that other surrounding nations only have up to 12 miles from their shores. The US has the world’s most powerful navy but it is not cocky. China is only a regional bully pretending to be a great power, but they forgot “with great power comes great responsibility”. China is the real bully here and there is no argument. If might really makes right, then Nazi Germany would still be in power, so would the Soviet Union. The US still remain a great power because it aspire to become better despite its own flaws.
Pawned
A reason why China has not lost a war is because it is not Nazi Germany or a cocky power like the US. China knows that the US likes to make every Asian country submit to it. Vietnam is just another pawn.
Ly Tran Le
In 1979, the Chinese PLA was beaten badly by a bunch of old men and women in the militia (while the regular army was busy cleaning house in Cambodia -kicking China’s lacky Polpot’s butt). When hearing the regular troops were being sent back to reinforce the northern front, the PLA tucked their tails between their legs and ran back to the border. After that, the PLA declared victory.
So typical of afraid of losing face.
Namer
Bunch of old men and women? Your history lesson sounds like a children’s story book. The “lacky” Pol Pot you are talking about was strongly backed by the Vietnamese.