U.S.-China Relations and
the Western Pacific
Maritime assertiveness in 2013
appears to have dashed hopes for a
“new kind of great power relations.”
By Denny Roy
January 16, 2014
The middle of 2013 brought the possibility of
a reset in U.S.-China relations, as new
Chinese President Xi Jinping spoke of his
desire for a “new kind of great power
Image Credit: REUTERS/Stringer
relations” as he enjoyed relaxed, heart-toheart talks with U.S. President Barack
Obama at a California resort. The year ended, however, with further evidence that strategic
friction between Beijing and Washington is serious and long-term. The Chinese declaration of
an air defense identification zone (ADIZ) in the East China Sea, a new demand that
foreigners get China’s permission before fishing in the South China Sea, and the incident
involving the U.S. Navy cruiser Cowpens and a Chinese naval vessel reinforced the suspicion
that despite explicit denials, Beijing intends to impose a sphere of influence over the seas off
the Chinese coast.
That intention is not surprising; it is typical behavior for a great power, and China sees itself
as a rising great power in a region where the long-dominant power, the United States, is
declining. Furthermore, China is a returning great power that for centuries dominated or
attempted to dominate its periphery. This sets expectations and provides a familiar pattern
for modern-day Chinese, who view the Sinocentric tributary system of the past as a
confirmation that China’s destiny is to lead the region in the future.
Neither, however, is China’s apparent intention a cause for celebration for most of the region.
Most Chinese have a sanitized view of China’s historical leadership in the region: that China
exercised influence through cultural, scientific and economic prowess rather than through
coercion or expansionism. Neighboring states – like Vietnam, forcibly occupied for a
thousand years by the Chinese – often have a different, darker view of historical Chinese
pre-eminence.
The promise that China will never seek hegemony or a sphere of influence has become a
mantra of PRC leaders and diplomats. Hegemony means domination: a strong country
forcing weaker countries to do what is in the strong country’s interest, as the Chinese often
accused the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. of doing during the Cold War. A sphere of influence means
a strong country has exclusive supervisory and veto power over international affairs in the
areas near its borders.
China’s declaration of an ADIZ in the airspace near its territory followed precedents set by
many other countries, including the U.S., Japan and South Korea. Thus it could be seen as
China trying to keep up with the Japanese. But the ADIZ also reinforces China’s claim to
some level of ownership over the East China Sea, as the ADIZ roughly encompasses the area
of sea that China demarcates as its exclusive economic zone, a claim that cuts deeply into the
half of the East China Sea bordered by Japanese territory. It is unfortunate that China chose
to announce its ADIZ at a time of high tensions with Japan caused by the ongoing standoff
over the Senkaku/Diaoyu islands. China’s act might have created a permanent new source of
regional conflict. As the U.S. immediately signaled by flying two B-52 bombers into the zone
without China’s approval, foreign governments predictably feel compelled to demonstrate
non-compliance by violating the ban, which in turn humiliates Beijing and creates pressure
for the Chinese to retaliate.
Effective January 1, Beijing is demanding that foreign vessels obtain prior permission from
the Chinese government before fishing in the South China Sea. A PRC Foreign Ministry
spokesperson said on January 9 that the purpose of the new regulation is “to strengthen the
operation, development and rational utilization of fishery resources to protect fishery
workers.” It sounds like another effort by Beijing to demonstrate administration and control
as a basis for claiming ownership of disputed territory. As with the ADIZ, how strictly the
Chinese attempt to enforce this unilateral law remains to be seen, but the PRC already has
plans to greatly step up patrols of the South China Sea over the next few years.
In November, the Cowpens was observing China’s Liaoning aircraft carrier battle group
while in international waters. According to a Chinese media report, the Cowpens was 30
miles away from the Liaoning. The Chinese position is that the presence of the U.S. vessel
violated a prior Chinese government declaration that foreign ships were not allowed in the
sector where the Liaoning group was exercising. As was well reported, the Chinese
responded with the familiar tactic of intentionally placing one of their ships on a collision
course with the U.S. ship. This was disturbing beyond the immediate issue of the Chinese
using dangerous seamanship to make a political point.
Beijing and Washington have a long-standing disagreement over the surveillance of China by
U.S. aircraft and ships outside China’s territorial waters and airspace, which ends 12 nautical
miles off the Chinese coast. China opposes such surveillance even though it is allowed by the
International Law of the Sea Treaty, of which China is a signatory. This dispute led to the
aerial collision near Hainan Island in 2001 that resulted in a Chinese fighter pilot losing his
life and China holding a U.S. aircrew hostage for 10 days while the two governments
negotiated a U.S. apology. The dispute resurfaced with the media reports of Chinese ships
harassing the U.S. Navy’s surveillance ships Victorious and Impeccable in 2009. During the
May 2013 Shangri-La international defense dialogue, a PLA officer revealed that Chinese
ships had recently surveilled U.S. Navy vessels near the American coast, raising hopes that
the Chinese had accepted the American view that both sides should tolerate surveillance as a
normal part of great-power relations. With the Cowpens incident, the Chinese position
seems to have retrogressed, opening the possibility of continued incidents at sea as well as in
the air.
Pages
1
2
Kimbo Y. Laurel
January 20, 2014 at 14:21
the 9 dash line is not sovereignty claim of China but the maritime strategy
to protect its interest for legitimizing the power of Communist Party of
China to their people just like the Nazi Party towards to the German
during the border dispute with Austria before World War 2. If China
wants its sovereignty on the South China Sea (or West Philippines Sea),
the country have to go to United Nation Convention Laws Of the Seas to
resolve and get accepted from the International Community. If reality is
any indicator, the world will not accept China’s claim of the South China
sea for it violates the rights of other countries in those disputes and it will
affect other countries that depends on maritime trade.
Reply
Tteng
January 20, 2014 at 07:50
The strategic implication of WU-14 HGV, whose example meant China is
near or at peer level (in technology, not deployment) of Prompt Global
Strike warfare with the US, are the following,
1. The A2/AD just got pushed beyond the 2nd-island chain, and more.
2. All THAAD deployment, either present or in the near future ( e.g.
Laser and railgun), are neutered if not obsolete.
3. The arm competition is already moved to near and outer space.
Everything below that ( e.g. Carriers, UCAV, 4/5th gen manned fighters..)
are just after thoughts- which means, there is a new arm race (i.e. the
survivable kind, not MAD nuke), and only US/Russia/China are in it.
4. Both the US and Russia will, first time, truly feel threatened, if not
scared, by China’s mil.tech progression on a global level. That means, ECS
and SCE are no longer the maximum confine the US thought any future
US/China conflict will be. This new realization is a double edge sword,
could either cut for, or against, China. OTOH, all the defensive armament
possessed by the first island chain nations just became very expensive
scrap metals.
Reply
Liang1a
January 20, 2014 at 06:46
The waters within the 9-Dotted Lines are China’s sovereign territorial
waters. China has claim over these waters for millennia since the time of
Tang Dynasty. China has maintained its sovereignty over these waters in
an unbroken chain since that time. Therefore, China’s sovereignty is not
based on “administration and control” over these waters but based on
historical evidence of sovereignty over these waters. However, China
needs to enforce “effective administration and control” to enforce its
sovereignty because it is China’s right to do so and to demonstrate its
sovereignty. In the eyes of the international law, effective possession and
control equals sovereignty. Or at least, a country not in effective
possession and control of a territory cannot assert sovereignty over it
especially when it obviously has the means to do so. Therefore, it is time
for China to demonstrate effective possession and control over the 9Dotted Lines. It is time not only for China to require foreign countries’
fishing boats to obtain permits from the Chinese authorities to fish within
the 9-Dotted Lines but simply to ban all foreign fishing boats from fishing
in China’s territorial waters as defined by the 9-Dotted Lines. China is not
constituting itself as maintaining order in the utilization of the fishery
resources within the 9-Dotted Lines for the benefit of the countries of the
region. China must enforce its sovereignty rights by excluding all foreign
fishing boats from the 9-Dotted Lines because it is China’s exclusive
rights to utilize the benefits of the fishery resources of the waters within
the 9-Dotted Lines. Exclusive rights to the benefits is the ultimate sign of
sovereignty. Therefore, China must not “share” the economic rights of the
waters within the 9-Dotted Lines because in the eyes of the international
law “sharing“ the economic benefits is the certain sign that a country does
not have sovereignty over the territory.
Deng Xiaoping had formulated the Chinese policy of “putting aside
disputes, joint development” some 40 years ago at a time when China was
weak and faced with many threats from all sides. Deng’s policy was
nothing more than a temporizing strategy to allow China time to develop
economically and deploy a powerful military to defend itself. Now China is
rich and powerful. China can grow even stronger by relying on its own
domestic development. Indeed, China can no longer advance by relying on
exports and FDI and exports and FDI have become stumbling blocks to
China‘s further progress. Therefore, China must shift its economic mode
of development by phasing out exports and FDI and increase domestic
development by relying on the indigenous technologies, the urbanization
of the rural residents and energy self-sufficiency. As a sign that it is
decreasing its reliance on foreigners and foreign trade and foreign
investments, China has recently published a new law banning promotion
for the “naked officials” who are those who have emigrated their whole
families to foreign countries while they remain in China to make more
money usually by unlawful means. Therefore, China now thinks it has
little to lose by “offending” powerful enemies such as Japan and the US.
China is strong enough to strike them down within 1,500 to 2,500 km of
China’s coast. And China no longer needs them for economic development.
Therefore, China’s new policy of enforcing laws requiring foreign fishing
boats to obtain permits from Chinese authorities is not enough. China
must simply ban all foreign fishing boats from the 9-Dotted Lines to
enforce China’s exclusive sovereign right to enjoy all benefits within the
9-Dotted Lines without sharing them with any other countries because
exclusive rights to benefits is the only way to reaffirm China’s sovereignty
over these waters beyond dispute. And sharing the exclusive rights will
undermine China’s claim to sovereignty in the eyes of international law.
And complaints from such as Japan and the US can be treated as
meaningless passing winds.
Reply
Liang2a
January 20, 2014 at 11:47
According to our great Mao theories, all china towns in the world
should belong to China as well.
Reply
tigerden
January 20, 2014 at 06:10
To Denny Roy,
It is a common misconception that the International Law of the Sea
Treaty, also known as UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, allows
complete freedom of navigation. As a matter of fact, UNCLOS only
provides for such freedom on high seas, which excludes EEZ per article 86
of the convention. The convention further stipulates that navigation in
EEZ should “comply with the laws and regulations adopted by the coastal
State” per item 3, art. 58. While the US is technically not bound by the
treaty because it is not a signatory state, it is hard to fault China, a
signatory state, to exercise its sovereign rights and right of jurisdiction in
its EEZ provided by the Convention. Cowpens was not simply conducting
innocent passage, but carrying out surveillance activities on high value
asset conducting sensitive military exercise in China’s EEZ against China’s
objection and prior warning. It would serve US national interest to heed
China’s call for mutual respect and give China some well deserved
breathing space by dropping such activities in China’s EEZ in the future if
the US is to do its part in building a “new kind of great power relations”
with China that is non-confrontational.
By the way, since most countries in the world have signed on to the
Convention, it’s long overdue that the US should also join the party lest it
will increasingly be considered an outsider of international law, furthering
unfavorable international perception of American Exceptionalism.
Reply
TDog
January 20, 2014 at 05:45
China is likely seeking to establish a sphere of influence in its maritime
neighborhood for two reasons: security and security. Domination for its
own sake is probably not a part of the equation given China’s hands-off
approach to everyone else it does business with.
If we look at the South China Sea, China’s aims become clear. Although it
isn’t brought up very often, Vietnam also claims pretty much the entirety
of the South China Sea. In this instance, if only Vietnam’s claims were
acknowledged by the international community, the lion’s share of China’s
maritime trade would go through Vietnam’s de facto territory.
Now mind you, as benign as this situation seems, the US not only
fomented a revolt in Colombia to gain dominion over the territory of
Panama so we could make the Canal, but we also invaded and occupied
Panama when American shipping was threatened with an embargo by its
leader Manuel Noriega. Given Vietnam and China’s past, one can see how
nervous this would make Beijing.
By laying claim over the entire area, China can guarantee the safety of its
own trade rather than relying upon a hostile nation (i.e., the United
States) for security. After all, if you can secure sea lanes, you can blockade
them.
That is not to say that China wouldn’t blockade Vietnam or the
Philippines in times of war, but that’s the main sticking point – they fear
having done to them what they would do to others in the event of war and
vice versa.
In this respect, the United States needs to do more to gain China’s trust
and China needs to stop being so paranoid. The world would have a hard
time working properly if both the US and China decided to start shooting
it out.
Oh sure, it might satisfy chickenhawks on both sides, but ultimately both
of us would lose. A conflict between China and the US would just leave
both sides so weakened that someone else would step in to pick up the
pieces.
Reply
Rocky
January 20, 2014 at 04:26
To Denny Roy,
It is a common misconception that the International Law of the Sea
Treaty, also known as UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, allows
complete freedom of navigation. As a matter of fact, UNCLOS only
provides for such freedom on high seas, which excludes EEZ per article 86
of the convention. The convention further stipulates that navigation in
EEZ should “comply with the laws and regulations adopted by the coastal
State” per item 3, art. 58. While the US is technically not bound by the
treaty because it is not a signatory state, it is hard to fault China, a
signatory state, to exercise its sovereign rights and right of jurisdiction in
its EEZ provided by the Convention. Cowpens was not simply conducting
innocent passage, but carrying out surveillance activities on high value
asset conducting sensitive military exercise in China’s EEZ against China’s
objection and prior warning. It would serve US national interest to heed
China’s call for mutual respect and give China some well deserved
breathing space by dropping such activities in China’s EEZ in the future if
the US is to do its part in building a “new kind of great power relations”
with China that is non-confrontational.
By the way, since most countries in the world have signed on to the
Convention, it’s long overdue that the US should also join the party lest it
will increasingly be considered an outsider of international law, furthering
unfavorable international perception of American Exceptionalism.
Reply
9 dashes, 4 dishes - 1 soup
January 19, 2014 at 19:21
Xi pledged no confrontations, no conflict at Sunnylands. Since that time,
there have been two comfrontations and one ADIZ.
The question needs to be eventually asked – even by foreign policy wonks
in academe. Was Xi lying? Or is he unable to control the PLA?
I’m guessing it’s the latter. If so, the US should expect and prepare for
war.
Reply
Manila Boy
January 19, 2014 at 19:15
China should keep on doing what it’s doing right now: antagonizing its
neighbors and creating enemies all along its periphery.
Reply
...
January 19, 2014 at 18:50
How far can the PRC push against its Pacific neighbours before peace
snaps? Every month, decision makers in the CCP seem to desire to push it
a little bit farther.
Perhaps “creeping war” could be a term for their foreign policy.
Reply
Jason
January 19, 2014 at 14:12
One thing is clearly evident – both spheres are hypocrites.
Reply
Julian
January 16, 2014 at 23:47
Denny Roy is on firm ground when he concludes that no proposals to back
away from support for Taiwan would do much to ‘harmonize’ US-China
relations, whatever Beijing says to the contrary. It’s also true that US
interests in the Western Pacific, including freedom of navigation in SCS
and ECS, and are congruent with those of Japan, South Korea, the
Philippines and other allies in the region.
Reply
thmak
January 17, 2014 at 06:26
Freedom of navigation doesn’t mean one can abuse that freedom,
violate international law, pose threatening military exercises in close
proximity, create dangerous and provocative. maneuvers, etc
Reply
Deck
January 19, 2014 at 14:37
Just a gentle reminder: out of the 12nm-territorial waters are
the international waters subject to the international law not
China’s own ‘jungle law’. Who on earth dares to give China the
right to own these global commons open to all nations in the
world? Remember this is the rules-based world of the 21st
century not the prehistoric one. Even the US, the most powerful
country in this world must also follow & respect the international
law, let alone a third-world country with just new found might
like China. Better behave!
KC
January 19, 2014 at 17:13
Exactly! You were referring to China, right?
Bertdel
January 20, 2014 at 06:41
China will play it cool with regards to US desire of free navigation in
the South China Sea. China will grab an island here, there, and
everywhere it can. Once the land grab is complete or near complete,
it will turn its attention to shutting down foreign navigation in the
South China Sea. Why try to challenge the United States now when
time is on its side?
Reply
Kom
January 16, 2014 at 13:49
Let them, the PRC, do what they want, even if they only create enemies
along their borders and beyond. Let’s see how long the age of China PRC
as the world superpower would last, and the consequences their
aggressive policies would bring. ^______^
Reply
thmak
January 16, 2014 at 12:46
To Denny Roy: The“new kind of great power relations” for a peaceful
world was intentionally spoiled by Japan’s illegal purchase of the Diaoyu
islands in dispute and its extension of its ADIZ deep into China’s EEZ.
America was hijacked by Japan to support its intransigence. The region
within the Nine-Dash-Line in the South China Sea was recognized
internationally for a long time as China’s territory and so China has the
legitimate right to administer fishing in that region. US was informed in
advance that Chinese carrier group was conducting naval exercises in the
region. U.S. Navy cruiser Cowpens intentionally intruded into the region
and was,therefore, forcibly intercepted by a Chinese naval vessel If
China’s destiny is to lead the region in the future, America’s destiny is
aspired to lead the world. It is nonsense to say that –Vietnam was forcibly
occupied for a thousand years by the Chinese. Japan first established its
ADIZ and later extended deep into China’s EEZ. China promptly counter
responded. Japan’s islands do not have continental self and so its EEZ is
limited according to UNCLOS. China’s continental self is separated from
Japan’s islands by a deep ocean trough and so cannot be claimed by
Japan. It should be noted that China’s ADIZ doesn’t cuts deeply into
Japanese territory or its EEZ. It is unfortunate that China was blamed for
the high tension and new source of regional conflict. which was originally
caused by Japan. AS we all know, US two B52 dared not cruise up and
down within China’s ADIZ. They just momentarily entered the zone and
left. All nations comply with China ADIZ regulation even JAPAN. It
should be noted that UNCLOS has jurisdiction only in economic issues, not
military operation such as that by US along China’s coastal waters. US
carrier group even imposes more than 30 miles to keep away foreign
naval forces when in exercise
Reply
Denny Roy
January 17, 2014 at 04:52
thmak, your comments are a fairly good representation of the
Chinese view and a good insight into why most governments in the
region are scared about the strategic implications of China’s rise.
Reply
thmak
January 17, 2014 at 06:37
No countries in the region are scared of China. They are scared of
USA and Japan for sure. They see that USA has been wrecking
havoc, both in terms of human lives, economies, social
infrastructures and societies, in the Middle East with no end in
sight. They don’t want that to happen in South East Asia. They
reject US TPP and refuse to form alliance with USA and Japan
against China. I hope you understand!
John Lone
January 17, 2014 at 06:27
Vietnam was forcibly occupied for a thousand years by the Chinese is
a nonsense? China invaded Vietnam (Annam) 17 times and illegally
occupied it for more than 1,000 years over last 2 millennium.
Vietnam will never forget it and still has a big score to settle with
china, perhap when Vietnam has nukes the playing field will be
leveled.
Reply
thmak
January 18, 2014 at 06:09
Each Chinese dynasty didn’t last 1000 years. Border disputes
were frequent at that time. So it can also be said that Vietnam
invaded China 17 times for more than 1,000 years 0ver the last 2
millenium.
Free_Pacific
January 19, 2014 at 15:43
“No countries in the region are scared of China. They are scared of
USA and Japan for sure.”
That has no grounding in reality. China is the only belligerent
aggressor state in the Pacific.
Reply
bawal
January 19, 2014 at 18:23
thmak, whoever and wherever in history or current affairs did it say
that China’s illegal and preposterous claim to the SCS(9-dashed line)
was ever RECOGNIZED anywhere except China?
China is feared at least where i came from, South East Asia. Noticed
the weapons buying spree by Nations who can barely feed their
people?
another point,The USA has been a benign Power at least in Asia;
guaranteeing stability, freedom of navigation in the waters it ply. We
at least in South East Asia for a while, until China’s peaceful rise,
didnt have to buy weapons to protect ourselves from the grabby CCP.
And NO, The US and Japan are not feared here in Asia. Far from that
they are welcome because they dont Poach our waters, overrunning
our fishing grounds with your destructive fishermen.
Remember, The Philippine Navy were going to arrest Chinese
poachers were caught in Scarborough shoal.
So how popular is China to it’s neighbors?
Vietnam is cozying up to it’s former enemy the USA, Singapore hosts
the USN, The Philippines is doing this going around the Constitution
to allow US to have bases in it, among recent developments coinciding
China’s “peaceful” rise.
and BTW, THMAK. your breath smells of Chinese Communist Party
Propaganda.
Reply
Manila Boy
January 19, 2014 at 19:28
“The region within the Nine-Dash-Line in the South China Sea was
recognized internationally for a long time as China’s territory…” -You
sir, are a liar! China, in its history, never exercised control of the
region, EVER. China also signed the UNCLOS, which obliges it to
recognize each country’s EEZ.
Reply
Jack
January 20, 2014 at 06:42
‘AS we all know, US two B52 dared not cruise up and down within
China’s ADIZ. They just momentarily entered the zone and left. All
nations comply with China ADIZ regulation even JAPAN!!’ Really?
Thmark, next time around that ‘floating casino’, Liaoning & its escort
group will be sent ….straight to the bottom of the SCS to celebrate
Mao’s & Deng’s birthdays there. & don’t scare people with your
‘boogeyman’DF21D & Junk 20 &31, please.
Reply
Denny Roy
January 17, 2014 at 04:58
Sorry, I didn’t intend to post the same thing three times. The first two
times it looked like the system rejected it.
Reply
Share your thoughts
Your Name
required
Your Email
required, but not published
Your Comment
required
Send