U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, speaking to the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) foreign ministers’ meeting on July 23, 2010, declared that the United States had “a national interest in freedom of navigation, open access to Asia’s maritime commons, and respect for international law in the South China Sea.”^1.

     For this reason, Mrs. Clinton expressed that the United States “would be willing to facilitate multilateral talks on the issues.”^1. While pretending to be helpful to China’s territorial issues with the neighboring countries, the United States, in fact, for the first time is trying to “internationalize” the disputes. According to the New York Times, the U.S. stand “amounts to a sharp rebuke to China,” and “a significant victory for the Vietnamese.”^1.

     Indeed, internationalizing the South China Sea issues is actually Vietnam's strategy, which aims “to pry away these islands from China.”^3.  Notwithstanding the fact that the government of Vietnam has recognized and supported China’s territorial claims which include all islands of the South China Sea as far back as 1958.^2. Part of Vietnam's strategy is to take advantage of their position as Chair of the Association of Southeast Asia Nations for 2010, to press for a multilateral solution to the problem.

     Militarily, Vietnam has concluded an arms deal with Russia to buy 6 kilo class submarines to be deployed in the South China Sea.^3. Diplomatically, the Vietnamese government has attached great importance to improving relations and even expanding their defense links with the United States who is perceived to be China’s rival and who was Vietnam’s former enemy.

     Accordingly, the Vietnamese defense minister visited Washington on December 15, 2009. In the Pentagon, U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates and General Phung Quang Thanh agreed “to enhance military to military engagement, as they eye the rising influence of China in the region.”^4. Both countries want “a strong Southeast that could balance China.”^4. The United States is interested in Vietnam providing facilities to supply and maintain U.S. vessels as well as potential weapon sales.^4. The relationship has increasingly been close as “once-reticent Vietnamese military chiefs have been flown out to U.S. aircraft carriers in the South China Sea and been invited aboard U.S. submarines in Hawaii. And Vietnam has allowed U.S. warships to be repaired in local ports.”^10. U.S. officials have called U.S.-Vietnamese ties a “priority relationship”.^4.

     To further advance this “priority relationship” and cement military ties between the two countries, Admiral Robert F. Willard, Commander of the U.S. Pacific Command, visited Hanoi in June, 2010. The Admiral stated during the visit that the United States strongly objects to any nation which takes sole control over the South China Sea and “using methods against international conventions.”^5.

     The problem arises when the interpretations of international conventions are different, as in the case of the Impeccable Incident in 2009. Impeccable, a U.S. surveillance vessel was on a spy mission in China’s Economic Exclusion Zone (EEZ). Its main mission was “to MAP the South China Sea floor to make the task of detecting and (in event of conflict) destroying Chinese subs more easy.”^6. The U.S. maintained that under the Law of the Sea Treaty, it is lawful for the Impeccable to enter China’s economic zone even when the purpose of such a mission is to spy and degrade China’s naval capabilities. However, this contravenes the Law of the Sea Treaty provisions which clearly prohibit activities that are for military purposes.

     While upholding its sovereign rights on the issue of U.S. surveillance, China has not taken any resolute action that would deter future U.S. intrusion. Not surprisingly, the similar incidents were repeated in 2010 when the Impeccable once again intruded into China’s economic zone.^6.

     China’s weak response to the incidents also led her Southern neighbors to conclude that they could act with impunity, blatantly violating her sovereignty as China’s Global Times frankly admitted: “China’s tolerance was sometime taken advantage of by neighboring countries to seize unoccupied islands and grab natural resources under China’s sovereignty.”^6.

     China’s weakness was obviously interpreted by Washington to indicate that her sovereignty can be violated, as witnessed by the repeated intrusions into her sea territories and Hillary Clinton’s declaration at the ASEAN foreign minister meeting. This is a great affront to the Chinese people, as China’s sovereignty over the South China Sea Islands of Spratly and Paracel was accepted by the international community including the United States and China’s neighboring countries in the wake of Japan's defeat in the Second World War. Moreover, the maps and encyclopedias of Japan, Germany, Britain and the United States all recognize these islands as part of China.^2.

     Clinton’s declaration was immediately heralded by the Wall Street Journal as “another step in a positive evolution of Obama administration’s approach to Asia.”^7. Clinton’s declaration was immediately followed by Defense Secretary Robert Gates’ visit to Indonesia to restore military relations with the once-notorious special force of that country. According to the Washington Post, this is “a hedge against China’s rise. And China's rise is also a significant factor in the Obama administration's move to strengthen ties with traditional allies such as South Korea and Japan, as well as with Malaysia and Laos and even with Vietnam, a former foe. It also was a factor in the recent opening to Burma.”^8. Thus, the formation of alliances to meet an imaginary threat, classic behavior of an imperial state, is all too apparent and real.

      Moreover, the American media is freely admitting that the Obama administration is embarking on a getting tough policy with China, especially in the area of human rights. This is a stark contrast to its behavior toward China before the Obama Nuclear Security Summit in Washington and the agenda of Iran sanctions before the UN Security Council when the U.S. needed China’s cooperation.

      Shortly after entering office, the Obama administration initiated a series of strategic moves against China. These moves included the approval of a $6.4 billion arms sale to Taiwan and Obama meeting with the Dalai Lama despite China’s warning. The United States also unilaterally imposed tariffs on imported Chinese tires and has used China as a scapegoat for the failure of the Copenhagen Summit. As a result, Sino-U.S. relations fell into disrepair.

     To repair damaged relations with China and to win Chinese acquiescence to the new Iranian sanctions and the Chinese president’s presence in the Summit, Obama dispatched the U.S. National Security Council’s Jeffrey Bader and the State Department’s James Steinberg to Beijing in March 2010. In exchange for China’s president attending the Washington Summit and China’s commitment to the UN sanctions against Iran over its nuclear program, Washington reaffirmed its One-China policy; respecting China’s territorial integrity and China’s core interest in Taiwan, Tibet and the South China Sea. The agreement was reached between the presidents of the two countries over the phone.^6.

    Unfortunately, the agreement is not worth the paper it was written on as, after a mere three months, the United States is openly rejecting China’s claims over the South China Sea Islands when Secretary Clinton declares that the China Sea is America’s national interest.

     While Clinton pretended to be helpful in resolving issues in the interest of peace and stability in Asia, she and Defense Secretary Robert Gates have just attended a conference in South Korea and formalized a large scale U.S.-South Korea military exercise in the Sea of Japan, close to China’s northeast region, thereby threatening China’s security and increasing tension in the region. Originally this military exercise was to have been located in the Yellow Sea with the participation of the nuclear-powered aircraft carrier USS George Washington. The location was changed after it ignited a storm of protest in China.

     For many years, even prior to the Obama administration, political discourse in America has been centered on China, the perceived rising power and America's next potential rival, imagined or otherwise. Two outstanding issues in Washington have been the Iranian and North Korea nuclear programs. The Iranian problem is essentially in part aimed at denying oil to China. The issues of American policy in Asia, as clearly enunciated by one of U.S. China experts, are as follows: “The North Korean threat is a problem on its own, but it also stands in for the China threat. Administrations talk about the security of sea lines of communication, but the real problem is not pirates in the Straits of Malacca, but Chinese territorial claims in the South China Sea. Weapons sales to Taiwan are about an imbalance in arms strongly in favor of the Chinese. The trilateral dialogue among the U.S., Japan, and Australia was about China. The U.S.-India relationship is in large part about China. Engagement with the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) is about China.”^9.

      For these reasons, Washington political elites, alarmed with the declining influence of the United States in Asia, have voiced concern about China. They viewed Obama’s “strategic reassurance” policy, in which the U.S. reassured China that it would not contest China’s great power status, as disastrous. Thus, an outcry for reining in China’s ambitions in Southeast Asia has been strident in the American press. They asked Pentagon to back U.S. diplomacy with American military might and “come up with a plan that adequately balances China's rising military presence in the region.”^10. America, it claims, should “build a tighter network of allied cooperation in Asia,” and build an institution to carry out the new policy.^10.

        Unfortunately, this “new policy” is nothing new as Asians are all too familiar with the history of United States in Asia. The formation of an alliance against China, as John Foster Dulles did with the establishment of SEATO in the 50s, is bound to end in failure. It is folly for any Asian leader in exchange for American military aid or other verbal support to start a conflict with China over resources, especially when those resources are solely for the benefit of American oil giants. Asian problems can only be solved by the Asians themselves; foreign interferences will only make the situation worse. For China, it is time to reexamine China-U.S. relations, as well as the policy of “shelving disputes and going in for joint development” as a solution for the disputes over the South China Sea, as advocated by the Chinese government.^2.  An aggressive imperial power like America has no respect for any country that easily sacrifices her national interests in exchange for empty promises. It is time for China to stop financing U.S. military expansion as she herself is the one destined to receive the brunt of U.S. aggression. Hillary Clinton’s outburst in Hanoi which was remarkable for her total disregard for history, international conventions and China’s economic, political and strategic interests should be a clarion call for China’s policymakers. One should always remember that a policy of appeasement towards an imperial power will produce more aggression which inevitably leads to war.

Notes:

1.      Landler, Mark: “Offering to Aid Talks, U.S. challenges China on Disputed Islands”,  July 23, 201l  New York Times 2

2.      Chinese Ministry of  Foreign Affairs: “ About the Issue of South China Sea”,  June 2000

3.      Wong, Edward: “Vietnam Enlists Allies to Stave off China’s Reach”,  February 4, 2010  New York Times

4.      Gienger V.: “Vietnam, U.S. Will Expand Military Links, Hold Talks Next Year”, December 15, 2009  Bloomberg

5.      Trang, T. Phuong H.: “U.S., Vietnam tighten military relationship”,  June 9, 2010 dt News.vn

6.      Lee, Peter: “U.S. goes fishing for trouble”,  July 27, 2010  Asia Times

7.      Blumenthal, Dan: “Reining in China’s Ambitions”,  July 27, 2010  Wall Street Journal

8.      Pomfret, John: “U.S. Continues Effort to Counter China’s Influence in Asia”  July 23, 2010  Washington Post

9.      Lohman, Walter: “Managing Alliances in an Upside-Down World”,  May 10, 2010  Heritage Foundation

10.  Torode, Greg: “How the U.S. ambushed China in its backyard, and what happens next”,  July 25, 2010  South China Morning Post