|
\u003cp\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0022background-color: #ffffff; color: #222222;\u0022\u003eSpeaking at the recent Shangri-La Dialogue, Singapore Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong used an oft-spoken aphorism: “When elephants fight, the grass is trampled; when elephants make love, the grass also suffers.” \u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan class=\u0022opinion-article__body article-details-type--span content--span c1\u0022 style=\u0022background-color: #ffffff; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; color: #222222;\u0022\u003eOver the weekend, I counted at least three other instances in which the statement was used. It shows one thing: Sino-American competition has intensified, and has indeed become a dialogue of the deaf.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDuring the meeting, acting US Secretary of Defence Patrick Shanahan and his Chinese counterpart, General Wei Fenghe,\u003ca href=\u0022https://www.scmp.com/week-asia/geopolitics/article/3012887/us-china-rivalry-will-continue-roil-asia-even-beijing-and\u0022\u003e took potshots\u003c/a\u003e at each other. Both were keen to push their visions for regional security. They dug into their respective positions and were in no mood to negotiate.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eShanahan spoke eloquently about the “universal principles” behind the US’ free and open \u003ca href=\u0022https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy/article/3012010/united-states-about-ramp-its-indo-pacific-strategy-contain\u0022\u003eIndo-Pacific strategy\u003c/a\u003e: respect for sovereignty; peaceful resolution of disputes; free, fair and reciprocal trade; and the adherence to international rules and norms.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eOne does not need to be a political scientist to understand the subtext. Washington has labelled China a “\u003ca href=\u0022https://www.scmp.com/news/china/article/2160339/trump-increasingly-takes-aim-malign-power-china\u0022\u003erevisionist power\u003c/a\u003e”. In his speech, Shanahan spoke about states that sought to “undermine the rules-based order”. Indeed, the US is conducting a full-court press of China – in realms such as tariffs, technology, human rights and cyber espionage.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0022background-color: #ffffff; color: #222222;\u0022\u003eIn his corner, Wei gave as good as he got, stressing the peaceful nature of China’s rise and contribution to international security. While the general sounded tentative initially, he grew increasingly confident during his solo plenary, and at times asked Dr John Chipman, director general of the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS), if he could answer more questions.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0022background-color: #ffffff; color: #222222;\u0022\u003eTo raised eyebrows, the general said China has never invaded other countries, and that its militarisation of the disputed South China Sea was purely defensive. Speaking in Mandarin, he fired a broadside at the US: “A talk? Welcome. A fight? Ready. Bully us? No way.”\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0022background-color: #ffffff; color: #222222;\u0022\u003eSino-American competition and the risk of conflict will not go away any time soon. As Lee noted in his speech, there are deep wells in China and America’s domestic politics fuelling the tensions. In America, neither Republicans nor Democrats want to risk being seen as soft on China. In China, no leader wants to be seen succumbing to Western pressure, given China’s long history with the West.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0022background-color: #ffffff; color: #222222;\u0022\u003eOne, however, should not be quick to draw the conclusion that the two titans are destined for war. The South China Sea might be apposite here.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0022background-color: #ffffff; color: #222222;\u0022\u003eA chapter in the recently released IISS Asia-Pacific Regional Assessment takes aim at three areas of conventional wisdom about the maritime area: “China wins”; “a calmer South China Sea”; and “China and the US headed to war”.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0022background-color: #ffffff; color: #222222;\u0022\u003eNone of the three gives the complete picture. China is not winning, as many foreign navies now ply the South China Sea and disputant states have not given up their claims. The area is not calmer, given the number of tension-generating incidents, largely driven by US-style \u003ca href=\u0022https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy/article/3010316/us-naval-chief-says-freedom-navigation-exercises-south-china\u0022\u003efreedom of navigation operations\u003c/a\u003e in the South China Sea. The US and China are not heading for war, as it is in neither side’s interest to start one.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0022background-color: #ffffff; color: #222222;\u0022\u003eIn short, as China consolidates its position in the South China Sea, the US and like-minded allies are moving to counter its advances there. Writ large, the same situation applies to the Asia-Pacific: a continuous contestation in a new cold war.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp class=\u0022opinion-article__body article-details-type--p content--p\u0022 advertzone=\u0022comment/insight/article\u0022 style=\u0022color: #222222; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 2.35714rem; margin-left: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px;\u0022\u003eHow then could open conflict be avoided? Thomas Schelling, the Nobel Prize-winning economist, was known for his insights into bargaining and strategic behaviour. In his classic \u003cem class=\u0022opinion-article__body article-details-type--em content--em\u0022 style=\u0022color: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px;\u0022\u003eThe Strategy of Conflict\u003c/em\u003e, he raised the concept of “focal points” – an unambiguous solution that stands out as the natural answer when participants do not have a chance to coordinate their responses.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp class=\u0022opinion-article__body article-details-type--p content--p\u0022 advertzone=\u0022comment/insight/article\u0022 style=\u0022color: #222222; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 2.35714rem; margin-left: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px;\u0022\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0022color: #131313;\u0022\u003eHis students were asked where and when two people could meet in New York City if they could not communicate in advance. The common solution was to meet under the clock in Grand Central Terminal at noon.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp class=\u0022opinion-article__body article-details-type--p content--p\u0022 advertzone=\u0022comment/insight/article\u0022 style=\u0022color: #222222; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 2.35714rem; margin-left: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px;\u0022\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0022color: #131313;\u0022\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0022color: #131313;\u0022\u003eIn his keynote speech, Lee raised one obvious focal point in Sino-US relations: that China’s growth must be accommodated, and that other countries and China have to adjust. This is worth pursuing. Lee said that if both sides look at the trade and technology issues on their own merits, this could form a basis of trust.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp class=\u0022opinion-article__body article-details-type--p content--p\u0022 advertzone=\u0022comment/insight/article\u0022 style=\u0022color: #222222; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 2.35714rem; margin-left: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px;\u0022\u003eIn the South China Sea, the US can avoid staking its credibility on ensuring that a non-coercive process is followed in every instance. Michael Swaine, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, has suggested that, in return, China could declare areas outside territorial waters and exclusive economic zones as open seas. On Taiwan, there could be an agreed-on limitation on US arms sales, in exchange for verifiable limits on China’s deployments towards Taiwan.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp class=\u0022opinion-article__body article-details-type--p content--p\u0022 advertzone=\u0022comment/insight/article\u0022 style=\u0022color: #222222; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 2.35714rem; margin-left: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px;\u0022\u003eIt remains to be seen whether China and the US could find such focal points. Washington announced last week that it planned to sell US$2 billion in weapons to the island, angering Beijing.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp class=\u0022opinion-article__body article-details-type--p content--p\u0022 advertzone=\u0022comment/insight/article\u0022 style=\u0022color: #222222; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 2.35714rem; margin-left: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px;\u0022\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0022background-color: #ffffff; color: #222222;\u0022\u003eSpeaking at the dialogue, Delfin Lorenaza, the defence secretary of the Philippines, quoted Barbara Tuchman, the American historian. In \u003c/span\u003e\u003cem class=\u0022opinion-article__body article-details-type--em content--em\u0022 style=\u0022color: #222222; background-color: #ffffff; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px;\u0022\u003eThe Guns of August\u003c/em\u003e\u003cspan style=\u0022background-color: #ffffff; color: #222222;\u0022\u003e, a magisterial work on the outbreak of World War I, Tuchman observed how great power conflict took place “in the midst of crisis where nothing is as clear or as certain as it appears in hindsight”.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eA more apt work by Tuchman is The March of Folly, which chronicles “wooden-headedness” – the common phenomenon throughout history when the policies of governments ran contrary to their national interests. The leaders of Troy dragged the “suspicious looking wooden horse” inside their walls; Napoleon and Hitler invaded Russia despite the failures suffered by their predecessors; King George III opted to coerce rather than conciliate with the new American colonies.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eGiven what is at stake in Sino-American ties, it is the earnest hope of many countries that Washington and Beijing can shed the wooden-headedness and march away from folly, not towards it.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis article was originally published by the \u003ca href=\u0022https://www.scmp.com/comment/opinion/article/3014029/us-china-rivalry-over-south-china-sea-especially-may-be-continuous\u0022\u003eSouth China Morning Post\u003c/a\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","className":"richtext reading--content font-secondary"}), document.getElementById("react_x6rPu1lU0uPlhyA3ZxvAw"))});
While China consolidates its position in Asia, its neighbours and the US are adjusting accordingly. William Choong explains that war serves neither side’s interests, especially if they can find ‘focal points’ for negotiation.
|
|
