CHINA-United States relations have hit a spot of turbulence again. Last week, five Chinese vessels shadowed and manoeuvred close to the USNS Impeccable, an unarmed ocean surveillance ship. The incident occurred 100km south of Hainan Island in the South China Sea. Beijing alleged that the Impeccable was conducting 'illegal surveying', a phrase understood to mean spying on Chinese submarines. Angry confrontations have occurred recently, but the incident is the worst dispute since China's detention of an American EP-3 spy plane and its crew in 2001.
Amid the flurry of protests from both sides, some perspective is called for. As an independent analysis points out, China maintains that the Impeccable's activities come under the marine scientific provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (Unclos), which require consent from Beijing. However, the US argues that the Impeccable was undertaking hydrographic and military surveys, which do not require consent. Their contrasting views represent interpretative differences of Unclos. China's view emphasises its need to deny access to what it regards as its sphere of influence in the South China Sea. America's view is informed by its need to assert freedom of navigation on the high seas.
There is also American complicity involved. The US has signed but not ratified Unclos. Put differently, the US expects China - which has ratified the Convention - to adhere to legal standards America itself does not adhere to. A rhetorical question would be illustrative: Would American naval ships behave likewise if a Chinese surveillance ship sailed close to the nuclear submarine facility at King's Bay in Georgia?
There fundamentally is a need for the two nations to move beyond the recurrent nature of such disputes and craft a regime for managing future confrontations. With the People's Liberation Army Navy expanding its reach, some friction with the US Navy can be expected. The 1972 US-Soviet Incidents at Sea Agreement greatly reduced friction between the two navies. Incidentally there is a 1998 agreement between the US and China that established a consultation mechanism to strengthen military maritime safety. But as the Hainan incident showed, this agreement proved inadequate or both sides wanted to show who was tougher. If any good should come of the episode, it would be that the two powers will rush to design a Sino-American agreement similar to the 1972 US-Soviet one. That absent, it would not be smooth sailing for merchant shippers and military ships in the Asia-Pacific region.
No comments:
Post a Comment