Source:Global Times Published: 2015-11-2 23:28:01
Illustration: Liu Rui/GT
A provocative patrol by the USS Lassen within the 12 nautical miles of Chinese islands in the South China Sea has made headlines for days. For major powers who usually maintain a delicate relationship with each other, sending warships to test the other or sail by their territorial waters is not unheard of.
International laws, mostly focusing on generic terms instead of detailed provisions, have left space for different interpretations. Thus, from this perspective, a strong reaction by the Chinese side seems to have made no difference.
However, from a diplomatic perspective, a stern protest is necessary and justifiable. Washington's assertive deployment of a warship in the South China Sea, under the disguise of an action endorsed by international law, is politically provocative.
For one reason, countries with amicable ties don't employ brinksmanship to make politically sensitive, although legal, moves toward each other. For another, Washington's sabre-rattling comes soon after a talk between both leaders, and can more accurately reflect US' strategic orientation to China than the fancy words in the meeting. It is the fixed "China cannot be trusted" mind-set and the accompanying negative strategy that drove USS Lassen to this controversial mission.
Washington's biggest argument, to protect the freedom of navigation and aviation, is mainly political, because China, during the reclamation of the islands, has not shown any intention to demand greater sovereignty, nor has it taken actions to impede the freedom of navigation in the sea.
Washington's biggest concern lies in China's growing strength, and with such a threatening patrol, Washington can reveal its determination and leverage.
Thus, even though USS Lassen's patrol was arguably acceptable with respect to international law, it is still a dangerously inappropriate movement from political and diplomatic angles, which evinces nothing but hostility to China. Washington is still obsessed with the strategic rebalance toward Asia-Pacific in a bid to contain China's rise.
Look at what is going on in the Middle East and Europe. Russia's intervention in the Ukraine crisis and air raids in Syria against the Islamic State, much tougher than China's island-expansion, are slaps in the face of the US. But Washington bit the bullet, because it believes China, rather than Russia, is more likely to threaten it as a global power.
Whether it be Ukraine's territorial integrity, Syrian rebels' appeals for freedom and democracy, freedom of navigation, they are simply pieces on Washington's chessboard.
Subtle relaxations are happening along the western coast of the Asia-Pacific region, as China, Japan and South Korea reinstated a three-party summit after three years' suspension, and Chinese President Xi Jinping is likely to be present in the Philippines for the APEC Summit in November amid long-standing tensions between both countries. However, at this critical moment, Washington has sent a clear signal to its allies in the region: Stop improving relations with China, I am leading you to oppose it.
Beijing and other stakeholders should keep a clear mind when facing Washington's trouble-making. China doesn't have to react to every move by the US, because Washington's favorable position in the region will grow stronger if tensions simmer.
If Washington's actions have infringed on China's sovereignty, Beijing should respond correspondingly. But China should be noted that it must put immediate efforts in gaining an edge in the disputes over international law, which shouldn't be manipulated by the US for its own good.
It is likely that Washington will continue reinforcing its military presence in the South China Sea in the short term.
If that is the case, China will be forced to make military arrangements on these newly reclaimed islands as threats on its security and sovereignty ramp up.
Every real stakeholder in the region should believe that negotiations can serve the solution of disputes.
Peaceful resolution needs to be embedded as the essential principle for problem-solving, based on which each side should enhance mutual and bilateral understandings and learn how to compromise for the greater good, instead of sticking to their own guns. Stalemates and antagonism in this region serve nothing but the hegemony of the US.
The author is an associate research fellow at the Institute of International Relations, Shanghai Academy of Social Sciences. opinion@globaltimes.com.cn
