• Home
  • About RSIS
    • Introduction
    • Building the Foundations
    • Welcome Message
    • Board of Governors
    • Staff Profiles
      • Executive Deputy Chairman’s Office
      • Dean’s Office
      • Management
      • Distinguished Fellows
      • Faculty and Research
      • Associate Research Fellows, Senior Analysts and Research Analysts
      • Visiting Fellows
      • Adjunct Fellows
      • Administrative Staff
    • Honours and Awards for RSIS Staff and Students
    • RSIS Endowment Fund
    • Endowed Professorships
    • Career Opportunities
    • Getting to RSIS
  • Research
    • Research Centres
      • Centre for Multilateralism Studies (CMS)
      • Centre for Non-Traditional Security Studies (NTS Centre)
      • Centre of Excellence for National Security (CENS)
      • Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies (IDSS)
      • International Centre for Political Violence and Terrorism Research (ICPVTR)
    • Research Programmes
      • National Security Studies Programme (NSSP)
      • Studies in Inter-Religious Relations in Plural Societies (SRP) Programme
    • Future Issues and Technology Cluster
    • [email protected] Newsletter
    • Other Research
      • Science and Technology Studies Programme (STSP) (2017-2020)
  • Graduate Education
    • Graduate Programmes Office
    • Overview
    • MSc (Asian Studies)
    • MSc (International Political Economy)
    • MSc (International Relations)
    • MSc (Strategic Studies)
    • NTU-Warwick Double Masters Programme
    • PhD Programme
    • Exchange Partners and Programmes
    • How to Apply
    • Financial Assistance
    • Meet the Admissions Team: Information Sessions and other events
    • RSIS Alumni
  • Alumni & Networks
    • Alumni
    • Asia-Pacific Programme for Senior Military Officers (APPSMO)
    • Asia-Pacific Programme for Senior National Security Officers (APPSNO)
    • International Strategy Forum-Asia (ISF-Asia)
    • SRP Executive Programme
    • Terrorism Analyst Training Course (TATC)
  • Publications
    • RSIS Publications
      • Annual Reviews
      • Books
      • Bulletins and Newsletters
      • Commentaries
      • Counter Terrorist Trends and Analyses
      • Commemorative / Event Reports
      • IDSS Paper
      • Interreligious Relations
      • Monographs
      • NTS Insight
      • Policy Reports
      • Working Papers
      • RSIS Publications for the Year
    • Glossary of Abbreviations
    • External Publications
      • Authored Books
      • Journal Articles
      • Edited Books
      • Chapters in Edited Books
      • Policy Reports
      • Working Papers
      • Op-Eds
      • External Publications for the Year
    • Policy-relevant Articles Given RSIS Award
  • Media
    • Great Powers
    • Sustainable Security
    • Other Resource Pages
    • Media Highlights
    • News Releases
    • Speeches
    • Vidcast Channel
    • Audio/Video Forums
  • Events
  • Giving
  • Contact Us
Facebook
Twitter
YouTube
RSISVideoCast RSISVideoCast rsis.sg
Linkedin
instagram instagram rsis.sg
RSS
  • Home
  • About RSIS
      • Introduction
      • Building the Foundations
      • Welcome Message
      • Board of Governors
      • Staff Profiles
        • Executive Deputy Chairman’s Office
        • Dean’s Office
        • Management
        • Distinguished Fellows
        • Faculty and Research
        • Associate Research Fellows, Senior Analysts and Research Analysts
        • Visiting Fellows
        • Adjunct Fellows
        • Administrative Staff
      • Honours and Awards for RSIS Staff and Students
      • RSIS Endowment Fund
      • Endowed Professorships
      • Career Opportunities
      • Getting to RSIS
  • Research
      • Research Centres
        • Centre for Multilateralism Studies (CMS)
        • Centre for Non-Traditional Security Studies (NTS Centre)
        • Centre of Excellence for National Security (CENS)
        • Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies (IDSS)
        • International Centre for Political Violence and Terrorism Research (ICPVTR)
      • Research Programmes
        • National Security Studies Programme (NSSP)
        • Studies in Inter-Religious Relations in Plural Societies (SRP) Programme
      • Future Issues and Technology Cluster
      • [email protected] Newsletter
      • Other Research
        • Science and Technology Studies Programme (STSP) (2017-2020)
  • Graduate Education
      • Graduate Programmes Office
      • Overview
      • MSc (Asian Studies)
      • MSc (International Political Economy)
      • MSc (International Relations)
      • MSc (Strategic Studies)
      • NTU-Warwick Double Masters Programme
      • PhD Programme
      • Exchange Partners and Programmes
      • How to Apply
      • Financial Assistance
      • Meet the Admissions Team: Information Sessions and other events
      • RSIS Alumni
  • Alumni & Networks
      • Alumni
      • Asia-Pacific Programme for Senior Military Officers (APPSMO)
      • Asia-Pacific Programme for Senior National Security Officers (APPSNO)
      • International Strategy Forum-Asia (ISF-Asia)
      • SRP Executive Programme
      • Terrorism Analyst Training Course (TATC)
  • Publications
      • RSIS Publications
        • Annual Reviews
        • Books
        • Bulletins and Newsletters
        • Commentaries
        • Counter Terrorist Trends and Analyses
        • Commemorative / Event Reports
        • IDSS Paper
        • Interreligious Relations
        • Monographs
        • NTS Insight
        • Policy Reports
        • Working Papers
        • RSIS Publications for the Year
      • Glossary of Abbreviations
      • External Publications
        • Authored Books
        • Journal Articles
        • Edited Books
        • Chapters in Edited Books
        • Policy Reports
        • Working Papers
        • Op-Eds
        • External Publications for the Year
      • Policy-relevant Articles Given RSIS Award
  • Media
      • Great Powers
      • Sustainable Security
      • Other Resource Pages
      • Media Highlights
      • News Releases
      • Speeches
      • Vidcast Channel
      • Audio/Video Forums
  • Events
  • Giving
  • Contact Us
  • instagram instagram rsis.sg
Connect

Getting to RSIS

Map

Address

Nanyang Technological University
Block S4, Level B3,
50 Nanyang Avenue,
Singapore 639798

View location on Google maps Click here for directions to RSIS

Get in Touch

    Connect with Us

      rsis.ntu
      rsis_ntu
      rsisntu
    RSISVideoCast RSISVideoCast rsisvideocast
      school/rsis-ntu
    instagram instagram rsis.sg
      RSS
    Subscribe to RSIS Publications
    Subscribe to RSIS Events

    RSIS Intranet

    S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies Think Tank and Graduate School Ponder The Improbable Since 1966
    Nanyang Technological University Nanyang Technological University

    Skip to content

     
    • RSIS
    • Publication
    • RSIS Publications
    • CO05020 | China and the South China Sea: What Happened to ASEAN’s Solidarity?
    • Annual Reviews
    • Books
    • Bulletins and Newsletters
    • Commentaries
    • Counter Terrorist Trends and Analyses
    • Commemorative / Event Reports
    • IDSS Paper
    • Interreligious Relations
    • Monographs
    • NTS Insight
    • Policy Reports
    • Working Papers
    • RSIS Publications for the Year

    CO05020 | China and the South China Sea: What Happened to ASEAN’s Solidarity?
    Christopher Roberts

    26 April 2005

    download pdf
    RSIS Commentary is a platform to provide timely and, where appropriate, policy-relevant commentary and analysis of topical and contemporary issues. The authors’ views are their own and do not represent the official position of the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), NTU. These commentaries may be reproduced with prior permission from RSIS and due credit to the author(s) and RSIS. Please email to Editor RSIS Commentary at [email protected].

    Commentary

    ON 14 March this year, Vietnam, the Philippines and China announced an agreement to conduct joint exploration within certain parts of the South China Sea. This announcement has had the effect of isolating the remaining ASEAN claimants — Malaysia, Brunei and Indonesia — while raising the potential for ASEAN disunity. In addition, recent displays of discord – such as the tensions between Indonesia and Malaysia over the Sulawesi Sea – have the added risk of emboldening Beijing to be more assertive in its relations with ASEAN. It is only through greater unity that ASEAN will continue to exercise sufficient leverage to ensure that its relationship with China remains as economically and politically beneficial as possible.

    China, Taiwan and the ASEAN states of Brunei, Vietnam, Malaysia, the Philippines and Indonesia are all claimants to the South China Sea, in whole or in part. Unlike the ASEAN states, China and Taiwan have petitioned for the entire sub-region. This, in one way or another, encroaches upon all the remaining claims and reaches as far south as Indonesia’s Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), its continental shelf and the Natuna gas field. It is the actual and potential resources of the sub-region (such as oil) that have been a factor behind several military skirmishes. The worst involved China and Vietnam in 1988 where Vietnam lost three naval ships and 72 crewmen during an attempt to prevent Chinese construction on Fiery Cross Reef. Further incidents include the firing of artillery by the Taiwanese military in 1995; the arrest of Chinese fishermen by the Philippines in 1998; and in the same year, the firing by Vietnamese soldiers on a Philippine fishing boat near Tennant Reef. Interestingly, at least 80 percent of the publicly recorded incidents have in some way involved China.

    By 1995 China had constructed substantial facilities on Mischief Reef. To ASEAN’s credit, its members united and censured China. But in 1996 three Chinese vessels allegedly entered into a 90-minute firefight with the Philippines and by 1998, China had upgraded its facilities further. In hindsight, ASEAN’s censure of China represented the peak of the group’s cohesion on the issue. Thereafter, a growing sense of disunity developed during negotiations for a code of conduct. By 2002 these negotiations failed and the claimants instead signed a non-binding communiqué known as the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea. As regional analyst Barry Wain states, “disunity developed on the ASEAN side between Vietnam and Malaysia … In the end, you had the sad spectacle of China, which initially rejected the ASEAN approach to a code of conduct, being more enthusiastic about the final declaration than the ASEAN side”.

    ASEAN’s failure to implement an actual code of conduct enhanced China’s ability to acquire the region’s resources on its own terms while the way the communiqué was crafted also encouraged a general disregard for the respective interests of the ASEAN community. Consequently, in August 2003 China forged a deal with the Philippines for petroleum exploration in the area. This came as a prelude to several agreements for enhanced military and political cooperation as well as financial assistance from China (including an initial US$1 billion currency swap arrangement and US$400 million in soft loans). While the Philippine’s House of Representatives Speaker termed the deal a diplomatic breakthrough, at least one other claimant was not so impressed. In an apparent response, Vietnam announced its plan to build a Department of Fisheries logistics centre on one of the islands and later added its intention to commence tourist trips to the area and to renovate a disused airfield. Perversely, the tourist plan was condemned by China and criticised by the Philippines as a contravention of the communiqué. In all likelihood however, Vietnam was also responding to its concern over a prohibition against fishing throughout the South China Sea that had been made by China during the same month.

    Recent events have further evinced the desire of China to sustain, build and maintain its economy, military prowess and perceived territorial integrity. For example, on the eve of China’s new Anti-Secession Law president Hu Jintao ordered his military to prepare for war to “safeguard the country’s territorial integrity”. Thus, as China’s economic and military capacity has increased, there has been a parallel rise in its assertiveness. The basis for this burgeoning assertiveness is partially illustrated by its military expenditure. For example, whilst mandating the circumstances for the use of force over Taiwan, China’s parliament approved a further 12.6 percent increase in military expenditure. This is but a small part of a massive force modernisation programme that has been taking place since the end of the Cold War.

    While China may be justifiably concerned about the need to balance against American hegemony, nationalist sentiment also sheds some light on segments of elite thinking in China. As one Chinese academic argued, the “Spratly issue is about what is China, and what is China’s space”. More recently, and in a Chinese report reviewed by the US-China Economic and Security Review Commission, it was stated that “[w]ithout going to the Spratly (Nansha) Islands, you would not know the magnitude of the threat and challenge to China’s maritime territory and interests”.

    In Vietnam’s eyes, the China/Philippine agreement was, perhaps, the final straw. By this time, regional actors had proven that it could no longer expect solidarity within ASEAN. Consequently, it is unsurprising that Vietnam became more active in seeking improved relations with China and established, for example, a hotline to resolve both land and sea disputes. In this light, its trilateral agreement with China and the Philippines represented a ‘near final’ shift in Vietnamese foreign policy akin to ‘if you can’t beat them, join them’. For this reason, the ASEAN members should be reminded that in the absence of greater unity, China’s diplomacy and assertiveness will continue to be emboldened through a belief that it can, when necessary, divide ASEAN to its own strategic advantage.

    China’s actions and rhetoric manifest a continued desire to return to its former glory as the ‘Middle Kingdom’. By standing united, ASEAN will be in a better position to gently guide China towards this goal in a way that will not be detrimental to the group’s interests. In the past, mere ‘perceptions’ of cohesiveness have served ASEAN well and the group’s members should remember this when dealing with extra-regional actors. As a united entity, ASEAN has a far greater opportunity to influence events to an extent that ‘is greater than the sum of its parts.’

    About the Author

    Christopher Roberts is currently a Visiting Associate at the Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies. He is a recipient of the Endeavour Australia Cheung Kong Award and holds a PhD scholarship at the Australian Defence Force Academy (University of New South Wales.

    Categories: Commentaries /

    Last updated on 02/10/2014

    RSIS Commentary is a platform to provide timely and, where appropriate, policy-relevant commentary and analysis of topical and contemporary issues. The authors’ views are their own and do not represent the official position of the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), NTU. These commentaries may be reproduced with prior permission from RSIS and due credit to the author(s) and RSIS. Please email to Editor RSIS Commentary at [email protected].

    Commentary

    ON 14 March this year, Vietnam, the Philippines and China announced an agreement to conduct joint exploration within certain parts of the South China Sea. This announcement has had the effect of isolating the remaining ASEAN claimants — Malaysia, Brunei and Indonesia — while raising the potential for ASEAN disunity. In addition, recent displays of discord – such as the tensions between Indonesia and Malaysia over the Sulawesi Sea – have the added risk of emboldening Beijing to be more assertive in its relations with ASEAN. It is only through greater unity that ASEAN will continue to exercise sufficient leverage to ensure that its relationship with China remains as economically and politically beneficial as possible.

    China, Taiwan and the ASEAN states of Brunei, Vietnam, Malaysia, the Philippines and Indonesia are all claimants to the South China Sea, in whole or in part. Unlike the ASEAN states, China and Taiwan have petitioned for the entire sub-region. This, in one way or another, encroaches upon all the remaining claims and reaches as far south as Indonesia’s Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), its continental shelf and the Natuna gas field. It is the actual and potential resources of the sub-region (such as oil) that have been a factor behind several military skirmishes. The worst involved China and Vietnam in 1988 where Vietnam lost three naval ships and 72 crewmen during an attempt to prevent Chinese construction on Fiery Cross Reef. Further incidents include the firing of artillery by the Taiwanese military in 1995; the arrest of Chinese fishermen by the Philippines in 1998; and in the same year, the firing by Vietnamese soldiers on a Philippine fishing boat near Tennant Reef. Interestingly, at least 80 percent of the publicly recorded incidents have in some way involved China.

    By 1995 China had constructed substantial facilities on Mischief Reef. To ASEAN’s credit, its members united and censured China. But in 1996 three Chinese vessels allegedly entered into a 90-minute firefight with the Philippines and by 1998, China had upgraded its facilities further. In hindsight, ASEAN’s censure of China represented the peak of the group’s cohesion on the issue. Thereafter, a growing sense of disunity developed during negotiations for a code of conduct. By 2002 these negotiations failed and the claimants instead signed a non-binding communiqué known as the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea. As regional analyst Barry Wain states, “disunity developed on the ASEAN side between Vietnam and Malaysia … In the end, you had the sad spectacle of China, which initially rejected the ASEAN approach to a code of conduct, being more enthusiastic about the final declaration than the ASEAN side”.

    ASEAN’s failure to implement an actual code of conduct enhanced China’s ability to acquire the region’s resources on its own terms while the way the communiqué was crafted also encouraged a general disregard for the respective interests of the ASEAN community. Consequently, in August 2003 China forged a deal with the Philippines for petroleum exploration in the area. This came as a prelude to several agreements for enhanced military and political cooperation as well as financial assistance from China (including an initial US$1 billion currency swap arrangement and US$400 million in soft loans). While the Philippine’s House of Representatives Speaker termed the deal a diplomatic breakthrough, at least one other claimant was not so impressed. In an apparent response, Vietnam announced its plan to build a Department of Fisheries logistics centre on one of the islands and later added its intention to commence tourist trips to the area and to renovate a disused airfield. Perversely, the tourist plan was condemned by China and criticised by the Philippines as a contravention of the communiqué. In all likelihood however, Vietnam was also responding to its concern over a prohibition against fishing throughout the South China Sea that had been made by China during the same month.

    Recent events have further evinced the desire of China to sustain, build and maintain its economy, military prowess and perceived territorial integrity. For example, on the eve of China’s new Anti-Secession Law president Hu Jintao ordered his military to prepare for war to “safeguard the country’s territorial integrity”. Thus, as China’s economic and military capacity has increased, there has been a parallel rise in its assertiveness. The basis for this burgeoning assertiveness is partially illustrated by its military expenditure. For example, whilst mandating the circumstances for the use of force over Taiwan, China’s parliament approved a further 12.6 percent increase in military expenditure. This is but a small part of a massive force modernisation programme that has been taking place since the end of the Cold War.

    While China may be justifiably concerned about the need to balance against American hegemony, nationalist sentiment also sheds some light on segments of elite thinking in China. As one Chinese academic argued, the “Spratly issue is about what is China, and what is China’s space”. More recently, and in a Chinese report reviewed by the US-China Economic and Security Review Commission, it was stated that “[w]ithout going to the Spratly (Nansha) Islands, you would not know the magnitude of the threat and challenge to China’s maritime territory and interests”.

    In Vietnam’s eyes, the China/Philippine agreement was, perhaps, the final straw. By this time, regional actors had proven that it could no longer expect solidarity within ASEAN. Consequently, it is unsurprising that Vietnam became more active in seeking improved relations with China and established, for example, a hotline to resolve both land and sea disputes. In this light, its trilateral agreement with China and the Philippines represented a ‘near final’ shift in Vietnamese foreign policy akin to ‘if you can’t beat them, join them’. For this reason, the ASEAN members should be reminded that in the absence of greater unity, China’s diplomacy and assertiveness will continue to be emboldened through a belief that it can, when necessary, divide ASEAN to its own strategic advantage.

    China’s actions and rhetoric manifest a continued desire to return to its former glory as the ‘Middle Kingdom’. By standing united, ASEAN will be in a better position to gently guide China towards this goal in a way that will not be detrimental to the group’s interests. In the past, mere ‘perceptions’ of cohesiveness have served ASEAN well and the group’s members should remember this when dealing with extra-regional actors. As a united entity, ASEAN has a far greater opportunity to influence events to an extent that ‘is greater than the sum of its parts.’

    About the Author

    Christopher Roberts is currently a Visiting Associate at the Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies. He is a recipient of the Endeavour Australia Cheung Kong Award and holds a PhD scholarship at the Australian Defence Force Academy (University of New South Wales.

    Categories: Commentaries

    Last updated on 02/10/2014

    Back to top

    Terms of Use | Privacy Statement
    Copyright © S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies. All rights reserved.
    This site uses cookies to offer you a better browsing experience. By continuing, you are agreeing to the use of cookies on your device as described in our privacy policy. Learn more
    OK
    Latest Book
    CO05020 | China and the South China Sea: What Happened to ASEAN’s Solidarity?

    Commentary

    ON 14 March this year, Vietnam, the Philippines and China announced an agreeme ...
    more info