Internal divisions and historical wariness mean ‘Asian NATO’ not on cards
| Global Times | 2013-10-31 22:58:01 By Global Times |
 E-mail  Print |
Illustration: Liu Rui/GT
A recent article published by the Sankei Shimbun stated that the US-Philippine alliance is likely to see revitalization in the South China Sea, and such an alliance is supported by Japan since Okinawa served as a staging ground for the recently held US-Philippine joint military drill.
Therefore, the author concludes, a US-Japanese-Philippine alliance will be forged, with India, Australia and other member states of ASEAN possibly joining in the foreseeable future, which could perhaps develop into an Asian version of NATO.
The Philippines has claimed eight islands under China's sovereignty. To counter this rising power, Manila declared that the nine-dash line was totally groundless, and brought the South China issue to the Arbitral Tribunal under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea earlier this year. And the Philippines needs assistance from its allies.
US President Barack Obama's "pivot to Asia" strategy has not fundamentally changed despite his absence from three recent meetings in Southeast Asia because of the federal government shutdown.
At both the popular and governmental level, the US will not accept China replacing its leadership economically or militarily in the South China Sea.
Now that China has become the biggest trading partner of ASEAN, Washington is prioritizing competing with Beijing in this strategically important area through a series of maneuvers, including the proposal of the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement and the decision to deploy 60 percent of its naval power in the Asia-Pacific region by 2020.
Tokyo has its own interests in the South China Sea. For one, some 80 percent of crude oil import is transported via sea lanes in the South China Sea that is crucial to its trade growth.
High-level officials of the Abe administration have paid several visits to Southeast Asian nations, save for China's close friends Cambodia and Laos, since the beginning of this year.
Some have posited a Vietnamese role in these alliances. But although Vietnam has considerable territorial disputes with China over 29 islands in the South China Sea, Vietnam cannot afford the tremendous loss it will suffer if it completely turns against China.
Vietnam, ruled by the Communist Party of Vietnam, is committed to a socialist path, constituting a political advantage for its relations with China.
Apart from that, most Vietnamese tend to have a kind of intimacy with China because of historical and geographical ties, and therefore will be reluctant to ally with Washington. Moreover, Vietnam is enjoying an increasing trade volume with China.
External factors also play an important role in Hanoi's hesitation to seek alliance with Washington, Tokyo and Manila.
To begin with, the agreement between China and Vietnam to establish a maritime work group for joint development at sea will calm down the territorial contentions, at least, for a while.
In addition, the US has been competing with Russia over the use of Vietnam's Cam Ranh Bay, which is viewed as the heart of the whole South China Sea, since it takes only an hour from the bay to major sea routes on the Pacific Ocean and the Indian Ocean.
In the light of historical grudges against the US, the Vietnamese government would not rent the strategic bay to it, but promised to provide sealifts for its ships and vessels.
Russia has also attempted to return to the bay after withdrawal in 2002 due to a lack of funds. Given its close military cooperation with Hanoi including weapon sales and personnel training, Vietnam must consider such critical collaboration when deciding on the future of the bay. This may help China.
The likelihood of a widespread alliance is therefore small, but China should still stay vigilant.
The article was compiled by Global Times reporter Wang Xiaonan, based on an interview with Wu Shicun, President of the National Institute for South China Sea Studies. wangxiaonan@globaltimes.com.cn
Posted in: Viewpoint Top OpEd Articles
No comments:
Post a Comment