Some are urging India to play a more active role in the South China Sea. There’s no need – China has too much to lose by escalating territorial disputes.
The South China Sea issue – and China’s position on it – have been the subject of much deliberation, especially since the ASEAN Regional Forum Meeting in Hanoi last July. Indeed, it’s widely believed that the South China Sea will likely emerge as a conflict hotspot in the coming years.
Evidence of this can be found in the heated rhetoric exchanged between parties to the dispute – most notably, China, Vietnam and the Philippines. A declaration by the United States that it has a ‘national interest’ in the region, meanwhile, was seen as a commitment to take an active part, much to Chinese chagrin. In recent weeks, statements by Chinese officials reasserting China’s ‘indisputable sovereignty’ over the South China Sea, and warnings for India against investing in the region, are seen as signs of Chinese aggressiveness that could precipitate conflict.
Suggestions for greater Indian involvement in the South China Sea disputes are made on the grounds that India must be forceful in its dealings with China. The continuation of ONGC Videsh Limited’s (OVL) investments in Vietnamese energy fields is certainly advisable. In fact, there’s nothing to indicate that the Indian government is thinking otherwise. OVL’s presence in Vietnam isn’t a recent phenomenon. Its first joint venture for offshore oil and natural gas exploration in Vietnam’s Lan Tay field, along with Petro Vietnam and BP, became functional in 2003. Deals for the investments now in the headlines were signed in May 2006; this is a project that won’t be halted because of oblique Chinese statements.
But what’s worrying is the suggestion that Indian involvement should extend to taking an active part in the territorial disputes themselves, and that India should actively extend its naval presence – either to protect OVL’s investments or to protect the sea lines of communication. A closer bilateral relationship with Vietnam, Vietnamese rhetoric on the South China Sea disputes and its history of standing up to big powers are offered as the rationale for India to engage and arm Vietnam to win a war in the South China Sea.
These suggestions to recalibrate Indian policy towards the South China Sea and its relationship with Vietnam are premature at best. Despite the rhetoric, conflict in the South China Sea may well not be inevitable. If the history of dialogue between the parties is any indication, then current tensions are likely to result in forward movement. In the aftermath of statements by the United States, and skirmishes over fishing vessels, ASEAN and China agreed upon the Guidelines on the Implementation of the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea at the Bali Summit in July 2010. And recent tensions may well prod the parties towards a more binding code of conduct. This isn’t to suggest that territorial claims and sovereignty issues will be resolved, but certainly they can become more manageable to prevent military conflict.
There’s a common interest in making the disputes more manageable, essentially because, nationalistic rhetoric notwithstanding, the parties to the dispute recognize that there are real material benefits at stake. A disruption of maritime trade through the South China Sea would entail economic losses – and not only for the littoral states. No party to the dispute, including China, has thus far challenged the principle of freedom of navigation for global trade through the South China Sea. The states of the region are signatories to the UNCLOS, which provides that ‘Coastal States have sovereign rights in a 200-nautical mile exclusive economic zone (EEZ) with respect to natural resources and certain economic activities, and exercise jurisdiction over marine science research and environmental protection’ but that ‘All other States have freedom of navigation and over flight in the EEZ, as well as freedom to lay submarine cables and pipelines.’ The prospect of threats to SLOCS thus seems somewhat exaggerated.
Photo Credit: Vranitzky
View as Single Page
Reddit
Digg
StumbleUpon
Delicious
Technorati
Yahoo
Google
Plurk
chandrakant
china bigotry thinks vietnam is inferior therefore it cant never be true friends. look at china and russia they dont get along because they look down on each other
Linh My
@NguyenPTrung
What you describe is a reasonably accurate description of the Viet Nam I saw in 1995 on my first post war trip back. Still, even then, it was obvious that things were changing. Looking back, the implementation of “Doi Moi” in 1986 was enormously important and transformational. While NVA Col Bui Tin was very outspoken, he was far from the only one to realize the potential danger that China posed to Viet Nam and the rest of East Asia.
In 2011 Viet Nam is a far different country than it was in 1976. I spent all or part of the years from 1969-1972 fighting to defend the Republic of Viet Nam. We lost. I wish that we had won. What I wish doesn’t matter. What matters is the future of East Asia. China should be encouraged to take it’s rightful place in the world as a Great Power in a peaceful manner that respects China’s East Asian neighbors as equals.
It is true that China suffered greatly from Imperialism. That does not give China the right to subject the rest of East Asia to Chinese Imperialism. The time for Imperial Empires is over.
Kung Pao
@Linh My : “… that respects China’s East Asian neighbors as equals”
It’s like flogging a dead horse !
Leonard R.
@cravola cao
Your analysis is detailed and impressive.
Compared to you, I feel like a peacenik and an optimist.
Linh My
@Cravola Cao
It is nice to hear good sound professional military reasoning. What do they say, amateurs study tactics and professionals study logistics?
My experience in Viet Nam was as a Sailor, mostly down in the Mekong Delta in what is now called Dong Tap. After I returned to America I joined the US Army National Guard and eventually worked for the academy as an instructor for the old M-60A3 tanks. I am also familiar with the early XM-70/M-1 Abrams series of tanks. So I did retire as a Soldier, though all of my Active Duty was as a Sailor.
The thought of having a few thousand tank firing positions built on the Northern Border, shuffling a few hundred tanks in and out of the positions, setting up dummy tanks(they even make cheap inflatable ones), setting up heat sources to mimic a tanks thermo signature and all kinds of other stuff just makes me tingle all over. I’m absolutely sure that the Vietnamese High Command has already spent decades setting this sort of thing up. They were good at that during the war. The Serbs also did a pretty god job of that as well more recently. I just love the idea of tying up, wearing out and expending lots of very valuable Chinese resources on junk targets built for a few hundred $$$.
Another book that I think significant in the present situation is “Gathering Storm” by Winston Churchill. It describes the lead up to WWII and how it could have been bloodlessly prevented. No one listened to him, so Churchill had to lead England through the war that he had tried so hard to prevent. The book is out of copyright and can be downloaded for free. Hopefully, Viet Nam, ASEAN and the rest of the world will remain firm and this discussion will remain academic. I mostly live in Viet Nam these days. My wife and I have retired well. Between the Army, Social Security and investments, we can afford to maintain homes here in Viet Nam and America as well. My wife’s family is here in Viet Nam and Viet Nam has become a very friendly place for Americans, especially for those of us who shared a war.
I really have little to add to your last post. It covered things quite well. Are you familiar with Col Bui Tin? He had some very interesting things to say about China not long after the fall of Sai Gon.
Cravola Cao
@Linh My
I am glad that Vietnam now is sounded like your country, no longer a war. Here, a friend of mine, a retired US Army Colonel, he served in Mekong Delta during 1969 as a young Lieutenant Army Advisor for a South Vietnamese Unit, he too wishes to have a home in Vietnam. And, another was a key advisor for a 3-star South Vietnamese General who died from the helicopter accident in South Vietnam. You may racall that incident, at when South Vietnamese Army carried out a short-lived campaign in Cambodia. When he got back to the US, he suffered a stroke only a week after being promoted to Grenadier General by President Nixon. All have fond memories about Vietnam and their Vietnamese friends. Dear, Linh My, you are the luckiest one that I know.
I am delighted that you remind me about Sir Winston Churchill who started his carreer as a young war-correspondent in North Africa during World War I (My Dad gave me his bio-book when I was only 7 or 8 year old.) … Unfortunately, no one listened to Sir Winston Churchill, and so World War II did happen, and history witnessed the well- recorded “face-off” between Field Marshall Bernard Montgomery of the British Army and Field Marshall Irwin Rommel of the German Army. In my personal opinion, I still favor Field Marshall Rommel, even he lost his entire Africa Corp,… because all the German supplies cargoes sunk by the Allies before (if any) a few lucky reaching to him. Back to France, he later guessed correctly that the allies would attack Normandy not Pas De Calais as firmly believed by his superior, Field Marshall Von Rundstedt. The allies proved they were masters of Sun-Tzu by telling the Germans where they would attack, only the Germans did not believe until too late! It was a version of Sun-Tzu like a poker game.
You are right! Logistics played a key role. Another German Field Marshall surrenderd at Stalingrad, mostly because he did not get 600 tons/a day of ammunition among so many other grave mistakes. The Japanese too lost all its outer defense rings, a chain of islands, because no re-inforcements could reach them. All of these lead to the defeats of either advancing army or entrenchement army. The Chinese too, during 1979 Sino-Vietnam war, faced the same problem, they quickly run out of steam only after 17 days … No matter how “experienced” Chinese Generals (many were Korean War Veterans), they had to retreat immediately to avoid being bottled up and chopped off by Vietnamese militia and artillery bombardement. We have to give the Chinese credit for their timely decision. Because it could be a lot worse. Retreating operation is very tough and it requires a very professional staff to execute the retreat successfully. For example, very few did well like German General Kurt Student who re-organized the retreating Germans and defeated the allies’s Operation Market Garden. On the contrary, South Vienamese Army was at worst when it did the so-called “tactical retreat”. It did so poorly and that lead to the collapse of the entire army (1 million strong army plus 1 million Police + 1 million South Vietnamese civillian self-defense force) in a matter of weeks.
And, yes, for those lives had gone through wars, we all hope a shooting war will never happen. If one said, “war is an extension of the policy.” If it is true, then it seems like China’s policy now is pushing to make war happen. Or, if you think, the Chinese see the danger and they try to avoid? That is why they are the most vocal, the loudest, the most aggressive … because they are in fear now? And whom they fear? Remember, a barking dog rarely bites! But again.. its nature is unpreditable like a dying scorpion still stings! Rather waiting to get the surprise “sting” ASEAN now has to act to establish a central command center (similar the Pentagon) like “ASEAN-COM” built and headquatered in Indonesia ASAP (This way helps to “Save more money, build force fast”). Other local headquaters will need to work on “speacialized tasks” in case of war. For instance, Laos should concentrate on building “Speacial Force”, Thailand upgrades its airforce (its airport suitable strategic bombers), Vietnam works on “access denial” weapons (long range land-based missiles) and develop a swarm of “Piranha” naval force (high-speed missiles boats, submarines) against Chinese “Sharks” (frigates, air-craft carriers, etc.), Cambodia is a hub of longistics, land transport fleet, army engineers corps; other maritime countries get more advanced warships and more submarines. Philippines’ marines presumply the best (because of routine excercise and trained by US Special Forces.) More importantly, ASEAN will need more streamline weapons (could be produced by ASEAN in the future)… If some action taken (at least on the blue print) then China will no longer call Philippines as a “mosquito” anymore. China forgot ASEAN is more populous than the US… Calling a country in such a language shows that China lacks vision, and this short-sighted can lead to war, if not “tricked” into war.
Right?
So, you read about Col. Bui Tin? I don’t. What are interestings about his accounts? Can you explain China’s behavior as it is now? Why it suddendly departs from the wisdom of Deng Xiao Ping (a man named by Chairman Mao as “the steel needle hidden in a cotton pulp”)? China lost patience becase it took the American bait when attacking the South Vietnamese controlled Paracel islands in 1974? So, that attack happend to cause Vietnam and China will never again be as close as “lips and teeths” anymore? If so, it was very clever to sow distrust among the communists and win back Vietnam later. If it is true then US is the ultimate winner of the Vietnam war in 2011 (or 2010). And so, thousands of Americans did not die in vain despite the fact that North Vietnam won the war to unite the country in 1975. Would it be compared to Irag’s Saddam Hussein’s sudden attack against Kuwait (a apart of Basan Province when occuppied by the British around 1930 or so (if I am not mistaken!) Saddam Husein’s attack trigged the 1st Gulf War. Could it be Prime Minister Pham Van Dong’s trick as regard to the Paracel islands to lay a foundation for a new war? (It can’t be!) Anyway, either way, it looks like US is winning big by adopting “smart power” against Chinese “hard power” now. If so, it is a brilliant US strategy to roll back Chinese influence everywhere to its corner. Cheers.
Linh My
@Cravola Cao
Your well thought out response don’t leave much for me to add. China does have intelligent leaders and Generals. Still things can get out of control. Every time the German tried to put a leash on Hitler, the Allies gave him everything that he wanted. Eventually the German General Staff surrendered to the inevitable and WWII in Europe started. Though there were some similarities in Japan prior to WWII, I think that the pre WWII Japanese political situation may more useful in looking at China than pre WWII Germany. Mao is dead. Unfortunately, the workings of the Chinese Government are not very transparent. All we can do is guess. Guessing wrong can cause the very thing that we don’t want, War with China.
Opaque governance is something that today’s China does share with both pre WWII Germany and Japan.
So I’ll mostly comment on Bui Tin.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bui_Tin gives a pretty good biography
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bui_Tin
and
http://www.amazon.com/dp/155750881X
are a couple of his books
Mostly, I’m familiar with quotes from his books. Next time that I’m back in America, I’ll likely order one unless one of them is released on kindle first.
Cravola Cao
@Linh My
Being an “American warrior” living in Vietnam now, I bet you know your Vietnamese friends more than I do. Vietnam has a military tradition, so I think they respect “warriors” like you. Thank you for the “links”, I will search for those books.
Vietnam is a beautiful country.
Enjoy the peace, the sun, the beach and good Vietnamese cuisine.
Ur Septim
Why not claim the whole Philippines, eh China? It is laughable to read the argument of most of the people here defending China’s claim over Spratlys.
Havoc
@Ur Septim
Well, Spanish and American claimed it first.
RP Defender
why is the Philippines open why are we still in the 19th century what’s wrong with uou people?
NguyenPTrung
Red China should always treat Vietnam as its best friend. Don’t forget Vietnam used to fight and die to protect China from capitalism spreading in the 60’s and 70’s. Also remember both countries have a lot in common, specially the soviet style government led by communist parties.