Reacting to the invalidation of its ludicrous nine-dash-line claim over the South China Sea, Beijing has warned other countries against turning the waters into a “cradle of war.”
Instead of dwelling on the likelihood of war as a result of the ruling handed down by the UN-backed Permanent Arbitration Court or PAC in The Hague, we should focus on the opportunities for peace offered by the landmark decision.
The Duterte administration has correctly avoided rubbing it in. Beijing can be more easily persuaded to abide by the PAC ruling if Manila sounds a conciliatory note. We cannot just toss away our centuries of friendship, cultural and even blood ties. Most Filipinos, including President Duterte and his predecessor Noynoy Aquino have Chinese roots.
There is so much common ground for peaceful co-existence and fruitful cooperation between the two countries. We should dwell on these rather than war.
China has reportedly accused the Philippines of bribing the arbitral tribunal, whose ruling was unanimous. One look at the rusty war vintage BRP Sierra Madre, which we have parked as our rampart on Ayungin (Second Thomas) Shoal, shows how laughable this accusation is.
In fact the story making the rounds in the months leading up to the ruling was the other way around – that China was dangling carrots such as massive development aid, investments and trade opportunities to the countries whose citizens were on the PAC to junk the Philippine case.
Precisely because we can’t use armed force to defend our maritime claims or even stop the Chinese from shooing away Zambales fishermen from Panatag (Scarborough) Shoal, our government turned to the United Nations for a peaceful delineation of our maritime entitlements, under an existing convention governing such matters.
In fact there are only two countries that may launch a full-scale war over the South China Sea: China and superpower the United States.
* * *
South Korea has its own problems and has stayed out of the conflict in the Spratlys. North Korea may attack Seoul and US targets, but not over the South China Sea.
Japan, which still has Asia’s most powerful naval force, may provide military assistance to its treaty ally the US in case of an armed external threat. But despite recent policy pronouncements that tend to modify its pacifist Constitution, Japan maintains a defensive military posture. Tokyo has intensified defense cooperation with Manila in recent years, but we are not treaty allies.
The Association of Southeast Asian Nations has been disgracefully inutile in a matter that affects several of its members.
The United States’ economy has become so inextricably linked with China’s that a full-scale war between the two countries could be tantamount to economic suicide. Leaders of the two countries will be under tremendous pressure from their respective local business and labor sectors not to do anything foolish over spits of rock and coral in a small sea.
Of course Americans and Chinese are also very patriotic. They have repeatedly shown that they can set aside differences and unite when they face an existential threat, rallying behind their flag and making great personal sacrifices.
Will China go to war? Surely Chinese officials understand the dividends of peace. China became the world’s second largest economy during three decades of peace in its neighborhood and the absence of a world war.
War is costly, and the Chinese economy continues to decelerate, with second quarter growth projected at only about 6.6 percent. Chinese officials had fretted when their annual GDP growth rate slowed to 8.8 percent – a figure other countries could only dream of, but worrisome for a nation used to double-digit growth over two decades.
Much will depend on the reaction of the Communist Party and its leader Xi Jinping. With the economic slowdown, Xi and his party may think the loss of a maritime claim, no matter how bizarre, will be a hard sell to their citizens.
Then again, the Chinese are used to strong, central leadership and tend to listen to the party chairman. The Chinese also understand the idea of seeing opportunity in adversity. Peace is good for the neighborhood, and what’s good for the neighborhood tends to be good for China.
How China will handle the PAC ruling will define Xi’s leadership.
* * *
Manila will have to deal carefully with another unhappy party. Taipei is reportedly furious over the ruling that declared Taiwan-held Itu Aba, the largest natural feature in the Spratlys, a “rock” rather than an island, which means it cannot have a 200-nautical-mile exclusive economic zone.
The buzz in legal circles is that Taipei sought Manila’s support during the arbitration to have Itu Aba declared an island, with one lowlife (now acting like an epal) earning a pile as broker for Taiwan.
It’s good to remember that China started what evolved into the nine-dash-line claim under the leadership of officials who broke away from Mao Zedong’s communist forces and formed the “Republic of China,” a.k.a. Taiwan.
Despite the fury, we are in generally good terms with the Taiwanese, and it’s doubtful that they will launch an armed attack over Itu Aba.
Incidentally, it would be a good idea to initiate a name change for the South China Sea, to discourage any country from thinking that having an eponymous sea gives it a historic title to the area. How about the Southeast Asian Sea?
The Indians are not claiming nearly the entire Indian Ocean. But not all nations are like India, which readily accepted a ruling by the same arbitral court in July 2014, awarding Bangladesh sovereign rights over a vast expanse of the Bay of Bengal that India had also claimed. India also participated in the arbitration.
In March 2012, Bangladesh also won an arbitration case before the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, delineating its maritime boundary with Myanmar. Yangon also accepted the ruling.
Such is the way responsible nations settle their disputes. Not by waking up one morning and deciding to draw an imaginary nine-dash line that clearly encroaches on reasonable maritime boundaries in the neighborhood, but by bowing to international rules.
China has said it wants maritime disputes settled peacefully. But that is exactly what international arbitration is all about – a peaceful, rules-based resolution, without a single shot fired, without even any heated verbal confrontation.
The arbitration ruling, based on an international convention that both parties have ratified, is a good takeoff point for resolving maritime disputes peacefully.
Cradle of war? It would be better to talk about how to turn the South China Sea into a cradle of peace.