Opinion

China negotiations: Next step

BREAKTHROUGH - Elfren S. Cruz - The Philippine Star

August 11, 2016 | 12:00am

As the Philippines begin to look for ways to resume negotiations with China, there is a growing apprehension that Chinese foreign policy might be constrained or even dictated by certain internal factors.

As expected, the Chinese had very strong negative reaction to the ruling of the Arbitration Tribunal against Beijing’s claims in the South China Sea. However, despite the sabre rattling, there has not been any real military moves by China that could lead to an escalation of tension that could result in a direct clash between the different forces now present in the region.

Immediately after the ruling, there seems to be a wave of populist nationalism across China. It was reported that the Chinese Communist Party’s Publicity Department even launched a massive online campaign calling for defending Chinese sovereignty over the South China Sea. Even the state run Xinhua news agency said that the United States and the Philippines “...have conspired for a long time to blackmail China” and they are doing that now “ ...through a tribunal that tramples on international justice.”

One observer, Richard Bernstein recently wrote:

“ A couple of days ago, the [China]nightly television news reported that the American navy was making aggressive moves in the South China Sea, part of a longer range strategy to encircle China. The broadcast showed stock footage of American ships presumably cruising in the disputed area, while again resolutely declaring China’s readiness to defend every inch of its territory. A group of Chinese with whom I watched the broadcast were emphatic in their anger at the United States and support of their government.

Among the arguments I heard: The United States had no business maintaining large-scale naval forces in waters so close to China. By goading the Philippines into bringing its case, the United States had worsened bilateral relations and made the Chinese people angry. And in any case, the tribunal – which consisted of judges from Ghana, France, the Netherlands, Germany and Sri Lanka – was clearly bought off by the United States, and decided the case on political rather legal grounds. For many Chinese, this last assumption is less surprising than it may seem, in view of the absence of an independent judiciary. It is simply hard for people here to imagine that any judges anywhere can act free of political control.”

At the same time, the Chinese seems to have taken precautions to ensure that the escalation of tensions do not lead to any direct clashes with the other parties in the region. Beijing apparently may be willing to get the talks back on track. But the question is how to handle the increasing wave of nationalist sentiment. Is the surge of nationalism in China under the control of China’s leaders or are China’s being forced to tailor their policies to adjust to the nationalist feelings of the Chinese people?

There are also reports that the Communist Party leadership is being pressured by certain military groups to have a more forceful response to the Arbitration Tribunal rulings. An international news agency recently reported a source with military ties said: “ The People’s Liberation Army is ready...We should give them a bloody nose like Deng Xiaoping did to Vietnam in 1979.” This statement was made in reference to China’s invasion of Vietnam in 1979 reportedly to punish Hanoi for forcing China’s ally – the Khmer Rouge – from power in Cambodia.

China has not shown any signs that it is ready to soften up its attitude towards the different countries involved in the territorial disputes in East Asia. Even before the Arbitration Tribunal ruling, President Duterte had publicly stated that the Philippines was willing to talk and look for a negotiated agreement. However, Foreign Secretary Perfecto Yasay, after returning from an international conference, revealed that the Chinese foreign ministry had demanded that any talks must take place without reference to the Arbitration Tribunal’s ruling. Chinese foreign ministry officials have also repeatedly warned the Philippines and other nations not to use the ruling to pressure China into any form of negotiation.

In a recent visit to Beijing by US Navy head Admiral John Richardson, his Chinese counterpart Wu Shengli publicly said “We will never stop our construction on the Nansha [ Spratly] islands half way, no matter what country or person applies pressure.”

Just days ago, the tension between China and Japan has also escalated because of the presence of Chinese vessels in the disputed maritime region between Japan and China. This is the competing sovereignty claims over the Diaoyu/Senkaku Islands in the East China Sea.

The possibility of a clash between China and Japan is actually higher than in the South China Sea. Both countries are strong powers with relatively equal military and naval capabilities. There are very strong nationalist sentiments growing in both countries. There is also a long history of conflicts between the two countries.

According to Richard Bernstein: “One option open to China...would be to quietly observe the tribunal’s decision, refraining from building any more artificial islands, for example, and ceasing to block Filipino fishermen from their fishing areas. But the intensity of feelings on the South China Sea...China may be too locked into a nationalism of grievance and its cult of national humiliation to allow for any public compromise, and this would make any settlement of the disputes that bedevil the country’s relations with its neighbors and the United States all the more difficult.”

We can only hope that all sides will “hold their fire” and transform the South China Sea and the West Philippine Sea into a region of peace and economic development.