Deng Xiaoping ’s South China Sea resolution could work again
Amid South China Sea tensions, China’s policy of “shelving differences and seeking joint development” could ensure peace in the region, says Chinese academic Han Heyuan.
On 31 May, the 21st Shangri-La Dialogue opened in Singapore. More than 550 representatives from over 40 countries took part in the three-day dialogue to discuss global and regional hot-button issues. During the event, the rising tensions in the South China Sea has once more become a popular topic, catching the attention of the world.
Exercises targeted at China
The Philippines and China have had a war of words for several months now over the issue of sovereignty in the South China Sea. There was even a small-scale conflict, with the Second Thomas Shoal (known as the Ayungin Shoal in the Philippines) becoming a key hotspot. The Chinese recently used water cannons several times to drive away and block Philippine vessels that were attempting to send supplies to a grounded vessel at the Second Thomas Shoal, and such conflicts are worsening.
As the relatively weaker party, the Philippines is actively seeking international support to oppose Beijing’s stance on the South China Sea issue. Against the backdrop of intensifying China-US competition, the US capitalised on the opportunity to increase their involvement in Asia-Pacific’s security issues. The US and Philippines hit it off quickly, collaborating to counter China’s influence in the region.
As a key component of cooperation, the US-Philippines Balikatan joint military exercise this year in particular caught the attention of observers. Held from 22 April to 10 May, the drills involved a simulated sinking of a target vessel, regaining control of an island and so on — showing strong signs of targeting Beijing.
An article carried by the Lowy Institute, an Australian foreign policy think tank, highlighted that for the first time, the Balikatan military drills took place outside of the Philippines’ 12 nautical miles “territorial waters”, thus directly challenging China’s expansive claims across the South China Sea.
The Nikkei also reported on 8 May that Germany, France and other European countries are deploying ships and aircraft to the Pacific at “an unprecedented scale”, joining Japan and the US on exercises in the South China Sea, in a show of force to counter China and Russia. Besides the US, Japan and Australia, India and South Korea also showed support for the Philippines, seemingly forming an alliance with the aim of defending the rules-based international order framework.
In April, India officially delivered the first batch of its BrahMos anti-ship missiles to the Philippines, while South Korea expressed grave concerns over the Chinese coast guard’s “repeated use of water cannon in the South China Sea”, damaging Philippine vessels and injuring their crew.
Conflict in the South China Sea would certainly have a far-reaching impact — not only would it cause damage to the Philippines, it would also create instability for Southeast Asia as well as other regions.
Becoming Asia’s Ukraine?
In April, Philippine President Marcos Jr warned during a forum in Washington that if a “foreign power” caused the loss of life of any Filipino, it would be equivalent to an act of war against the Philippines, which could invoke the Mutual Defense Treaty (MDT) between Philippines and the US.
Marcos Jr added that US Defence Secretary Lloyd Austin had assured that with the escalation of tensions in the South China Sea, Washington would commit to the MDT.
With the Asian version of NATO slowly forming, the risk of conflict in East Asia is increasing. The current tensions in the South China Sea surpasses even the situation in the Taiwan Strait. Hence, Nanfang Daily carried a commentary on 8 May that pointed out that with tensions escalating, observers were worried that the South China Sea might become “Asia’s Ukraine” and war could break out.
If the South China Sea does indeed become Asia’s Ukraine and all the stakeholders are dragged into war, not only would it be detrimental to China, it would also be a disaster for the Philippines and even ASEAN.
For the Philippines or even the entire Southeast Asia, a dispute in the South China Sea would escalate into an open conflict. If that happens, the damage would be akin to that suffered by Ukraine. Conflict in the South China Sea would certainly have a far-reaching impact — not only would it cause damage to the Philippines, it would also create instability for Southeast Asia as well as other regions.
The Southeast Asian countries would also become a pawn in big power rivalry, forced to pick a side and in turn damaging ASEAN unity and its core position.
As for China, it is very likely that it could follow in Russia’s footsteps — not only would it fall into a war of attrition and have its limited resources across the board be committed towards fighting a war, it could also raise the suspicions of its neighbouring countries, in turn causing a worsening of the geopolitical situation. Even more crucially, it could once more stymie the progress of China’s modernisation.
Getting the Philippines to return to the negotiating table would be a test of Beijing’s political wisdom and the bearings of a great power.
Focus on cooperation instead
Negotiation is undoubtedly the best way to prevent the South China Sea from becoming Asia’s Ukraine. While it is not in the strategic interests of the US to do so when it comes to containing China, it aligns with the interests of the Philippines, China and ASEAN.
Indeed, Marcos Jr is unlikely to show weakness in the short term given his domestic political interests. Getting the Philippines to return to the negotiating table would be a test of Beijing’s political wisdom and the bearings of a great power.
In fact, China does not lack political wisdom. To achieve reunification, this country confronted history and reality, introducing “one country, two systems” and innovatively advocating “shelving differences and seeking joint development” to resolve territorial disputes with other countries.
On 16 January 1980, Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping made a speech titled “The Present Situation and the Tasks Before Us” at a cadre meeting held by the central government. It expounded the three main tasks that China must perform in the 1980s: one, “oppose hegemonism and strive to preserve world peace”; two, “work for the return of Taiwan to the motherland, for China’s reunification”; and three, “step up economic construction”, that is, stepping up China’s four modernisations.
... parties involved can choose not to decide which side has sovereignty over the disputed territory but shelve the dispute first. This does not mean giving up sovereignty, but simply putting the dispute aside for the time being.
The four modernisations for economic construction were at the core of the three major tasks. In order to advance economic construction and international integration, China needed a peaceful and stable neighbouring environment. Against this backdrop, Deng proposed the innovative policy of putting aside differences to prevent the worsening of disputes.
The essence of “shelving differences and seeking joint development” is: one, when it comes to territorial disputes, in the absence of conditions for a definitive solution, parties involved can choose not to decide which side has sovereignty over the disputed territory but shelve the dispute first. This does not mean giving up sovereignty, but simply putting the dispute aside for the time being.
Two, the parties involved can jointly develop some of the disputed territories. Three, the goal of joint development is to improve mutual understanding through cooperation, thereby creating the conditions for a conclusive and rational settlement of the sovereignty dispute.
Ensuring peaceful and stable environment
On 25 October 1978, Deng visited Japan in his capacity as vice-premier, stressing in his dialogue with Japan Prime Minister Takeo Fukuda that both sides should consider the big picture with regard to the Diaoyu Islands (known as the Senkaku Islands in Japan).
Subsequently, he pointed out with great foresight at the press conference, “This sort of thing is an issue that we need not bring out in a meeting like this one. I said it as well to Foreign Minister Sonoda in Beijing: Our generation may not have enough wisdom to resolve it, but the next generation will probably have more wisdom than us and be able to resolve this issue. It is necessary to see this issue from the whole situation.”
China today must see advancing Chinese-style modernisation as its biggest political task. To do so, China needs a peaceful and stable neighbouring environment.
In dealing with the South China Sea dispute (China calls it the Nansha Qundao dispute), Deng again reiterated that the Nansha Qundao has historically been China’s inherent territory and had not been disputed until the 1970s. To maintain friendly bilateral relations, China prefers to shelve the dispute and propose a resolution that both sides find acceptable later on. He also emphasised that both sides should pursue joint development instead of having the dispute turn into a military conflict.
During Philippine Vice-President Salvador Laurel’s visit to China in June 1986, Deng said, “This issue can be shelved for now… We shall not let this issue stand in the way of our friendly relations with the Philippines and with other countries.”
And during Philippine President Corazón Aquino’s visit to China in April 1988, Deng reiterated, “For the sake of the friendship between our two countries, we can shelve the issue for now and pursue joint development.”
Both Aquino and Laurel later responded positively to Deng’s initiative.
There is much to learn from this approach of territorial dispute resolution when it comes to the present South China Sea dispute between China and the Philippines. The reason is simple: China today must see advancing Chinese-style modernisation as its biggest political task. To do so, China needs a peaceful and stable neighbouring environment.
This article was first published in Lianhe Zaobao as “搁置争议仍是解决南中国海争端恰当方式”.
