The best approach to China’s increased maritime assertiveness is to reinforce U.S. military alliances in Asia. It’s the most cost-effective way, too.
U.S. President Barack Obama’s recent trip to Honolulu to attend the APEC summit is merely the latest step in what Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has dubbed a “pivot” or re-focus of U.S. interest in Asia. But as the United States looks to follow through on the pledge so clearly outlined by Clinton in her Foreign Policy essay in September, attention is again inevitably turning to Asia’s looming economic and military giant – China.
There has been much discussion and speculation in recent commentary over China’s rapid maritime rise and strategy for dominating large swaths of the Pacific, including one I recently penned for The Diplomat. China’s maritime rise is symbolized by the sea trials this summer of its first aircraft carrier, the ex-Ukrainian Varyag, the launch of which is part of a ship building program not seen since Kaiser Wilhelm II ordered Imperial Germany’s High Seas Fleet at the turn of the last century.
China’s naval buildup will soon give Beijing the means to use military force to back up its expansive territorially claims to essentially the entire Yellow Sea, East China Sea and South China Sea. In response, Southeast Asian nations, Japan, India and Australia have all embarked on significant defense force modernization programs of their own, increasing their budgets for major air and naval platforms. Submarines are in particular demand.
Despite using the term “peaceful rise” for almost a decade to describe its global diplomatic, economic and military growth, China hasn’t hesitated to support its territorial claims in the Pacific with what senior American officials have repeatedly labeled as “aggressive” naval action by the People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLA Navy), Air Force and auxiliary forces. While individual incidents at sea have been reported in regional, maritime, military or, on occasion, the mainstream press, the full extent of China’s efforts to exert control over nearby international waters hasn’t been widely covered in the West. Governments, on the other hand, are increasingly concerned about China’s naval behavior in the region. Indeed, Japan accused Beijing, for the first time, of “assertiveness” in an official government white paper issued in July. Japan’s characterization of Chinese action in an official government document is certainly blunt in “diplospeak.”
As China asserts its claims in the Pacific, it has made no secret of its opposition to U.S. freedom of navigation operations in nearby international waters, and it hasn’t confined its unhappiness to mere diplomatic protests. Instead, Chinese forces have confronted the world’s leading navy at sea in some well-publicized incidents.
Such challenges aren’t wholly new. The first major incident between U.S. and PLA forces occurred just several years after the fall of the Soviet Union. In July and August 1995 and March 1996, in response to certain measures in Taiwan interpreted by China as moves toward Taiwanese independence, China conducted “missile tests and other military exercises” near the Taiwan Strait. In March 1996, the United States responded by sending two carrier strike groups toward the region. China seemingly backed away from confrontation, but many analysts have suggested this was a turning point in PLA thinking.
Photo Credit: White House
View as Single Page
Reddit
Digg
StumbleUpon
Delicious
Technorati
Yahoo
Google
Plurk
Cecil
A prominent Chinese economist, Dr. Zhao Xiao was commissioned by his government to study the success of the American economy. He concluded that a moral foundation allowed the economy to flourish, argued that China’s economy would benefit from the spread of the Christian faith, and embraced Christianity himself. He continues to be a respected scholar and government advisor, speaking openly about the influence of Christianity on economics. Our first non-English speaking faculty member, he will lean on a gifted translator to share his thoughts on the relationship between morality and a market economy, the state of the Church in China, and the challenges of leadership as a Christian in a secular Communist country.
Toni
The best way to ensure China’s peaceful rise is to make sure China be China, and not like the West.
ari
This article is nothing but a China hit job with the writer selectively quoting incidents to justify his intention. The question is – Why the need to ensure the peaceful rise of China? Ensure to whose benefit? What do you actually, really mean by “ensure”? Isn’t that actually doublespeak for the Anglo-Saxon White race like America to control China? Why don’t you assess and examine the bad behaviour of the risen power – America? Why don’t you contain it and shape its behaviour? Like a rat in a box, or your prisoners in a prison or concentration camp? Or in a reservation?
That, basically is what the bl**dy American’s strategy is – Put China in a prison and control his behaviour and activities. The kind of control freak and power mad racial American behaviour exhibited to the Japanese in their infamous detention centres for ethnic Japanese Americans.
Last but not least, Indian politicians are liars. They are who-ever-is-in-power anywhere’s fourth column. I am surprise beijing kept quiet on this instead of calling a press conference and threaten New Delhi with war if that Indian Minister – Jaswant Singh – was not sacked forthwith.
Israel
I’m surprised the ASEAN conieruts are not criticized at home for not confining Obama to the APEC meetings and keeping the US out of the ASEAN, since it stands for Association of Southeast Asian Nations. He really did try to assert some weight at both meetings it looks like.I bet Roy will want to have something up for the Hillary Clinton visit to Burma. Which according to Google begins on Dec 1. I’m sure they’ll be rounding up all the dissents except for allowing Aung San Suu Kyi to meet with her
Yang zi
Just to show how S. Vietnamese exiles are out of touch with the reality, a new bit of data say Vietnamese prefer Chinese leadership than US, I admit it is a tie, but surprising. From now on, I going to sing praises about Vietnam :)
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1111/68667.html
Cam
@yang zi,
The data doesn’t tell you anything, yang zi. I am not scratching my head based on the result of the survey. The way of the survey (face to face interview) conducted is not going to work in Communist Vietnam. Under locals, this is viewed as political involved, communist China vs USA and remember Vietnam is still a communist country, and people are taught supposedly praising Communist China no matter what in the reality, otherwise it could land them to jail. My surprise is it is a tie as I expected it should have been tilted much in China favor. If I were a local, and you are considerably a stranger asking me that kind of question, what do you expect the answer given the communist police crackdown on China protest recently. Of course, the CCP is not naïve enough to believe this survey, just call and ask them yang zi
http://www.asianews.it/news-en/Hanoi-cracks-down-on-protests,-50-anti-Chinese-demonstrators-arrested-over-South-China-Sea-22429.html
Observer
Per Gallup Poll, a well respected and well know company, the US is still way ahead of china from the people of ASEAN.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/150830/leadership-approval-ratings-top-china-asia.aspx
Yang zi
@Liang1a, you need to relax.
China is not going anywhere. It is never been securer in its national sovereignty. Nobody can contemplate an invasion of China.
So why are you so worked up for? If I were you I would propose following
1. Make sure nuclear force is credible, whatever it may be, as long as China’s defense planners are competent.
2. Plenty of missile defence, air defense, turn old jets into UVAs
3. Plenty of subs and missile boats.
These probably only cost 10 bilion US, very easy to do. Then you focus on making good military hardware, try to take the bigger share of arms export market.
Lukman
As an Indonesian and part of the ASEAN community, one thing that i hope upon this issue, is that it might not led to a some sort of bipolar power concentration in the international politics again. Countries in Southeast Asia had experienced such a confusing era when the Soviet Union and United States compete to stick their influence in the region. It had left countries in Southeast Asia with abundant of traumatic memories.
I believe there is nothing wrong with China’s rise and i really support it as i support any countries that can balancing a single country powers and influences. However, a bipolar power concentration, to me, is even more damaging than letting a single country to preserve their dominance. So it is something that countries besides China and United States need to think of.
ASEAN existence and it’s main mission to create an East Asian cooperation with ASEAN itself as the central player, is one thing that i really support. This centrality means in the future, is not anymore a two states game in Asia Pacific. Countries like Cambodia, Lao PDR, Myanmar, Brunei Darussalam, or even East Timor have some aspirations to be heard, and these countries’ aspirations will only be matter if their having an effective way of diplomacy. ASEAN surely is the most possible and effective way in doing so.
However, regardless how many regional organizations took places it will going to be considered only if China and United States find it really reliable to be engaged with. Therefore ASEAN should be more active in building such relations with these two superpower and creating the region into a global game changer. Only one thing that ASEAN should be aware of, is to not letting ASEAN itself to be a central field in another influence competition between these two states.
Yang zi
@Lukman,
I don’t think China want to challenge US for world dominance, it want to challenge US’s dominace to China’s affairs. What China is encountering, is a natural development of a rising independent country. India will face it down the road, Indonesia will face it too in the future.
Truth will eventually come out, that is China has no stomach to invade another country, no stomach to behave like US, sending gunboat out for blackmailing. If that happens, I would be the first to protest.
Obama had a good trip, but I am not sure all this will stick. ASEAN China trade grows much faster than ASEAN US trade, China-Japan-S. Korea free trade probably succeeds much earlier than TPP.
a_canadian_observer
@Yangzi: china has already sent gun boats out to harrash Phillipino and Vietnamese fishermen in their EEZ zones. The only difference: those gunboats are disguised as marine surveilance and fishing boats.
Yang zi
@vietnamese-observer, the difference is, those areas are not your EEZs, those are Chinese claimed and administered areas that you have dispute with.
John Chan
@a_canadian_observer,
You must be mistaken the identities, recently there are plenty news about the aggressiveness of the S. Korean navy and marine enforcement units. SK sent war ships (not gun boats) to round up hundreds of hapless Chinese fishing boats in the Yellow Sea. SK media has a heyday to jeer China and cheer their courageous navy.
Observer
@ yangzi – still here and spew out clueless and ignorant statements.
Big bully china does NOT have any rights in the East Sea except the EEZ from the coast of its land, just like any other countries such as Vietnam and Phillipines, per the UNCLOS and The Law Of The Seas.
John Chan
@Observer,
Please be informed that UNCLOS are only applicable to outside of China’s nine-dotted line in the SCS. Philippines and Vietnam inside the nine-dotted line are squatters waiting to be evicted.
Observer
@ jc – should us the readers of the Diplomat take words from you? You know what I am talking about your statement of US F22s are made with china parts.
Should the readers take words from you that said Tianamen Square slaughter in 1989 did not happend? LOL
Big bully china is acting big with smaller neighbors but so afraid of big Russia because china is still unable to get back the land north of Amur River that Russia slaughtered chinese and took it.