|
South China Sea all
PRC’s, op-ed claims
BETWEEN THE LINES: Some analysts have begun to
question whether opinion pieces appearing in official media represent Beijing’s
position or internal debates
By J. Michael Cole / Staff Reporter
An op-ed in the Chinese-language editions of People’s Daily and Global Times
says there are no international waters in the South China Sea and that China
should act with strength to repel US interference in the contested area.
In the article, which appeared last week, Pan Guoping (潘國平), a law professor at
China’s Southwest University of Law and Politics, disputes the claim that the
South China Sea comprises gonghai (公海), or “high seas,” as the term is
translated in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).
According to Article 86 of the convention, “high seas” refer to “all parts of
the sea that are not included in the exclusive economic zone [EEZ], in the
territorial sea or in the internal waters of a State, or in the archipelagic
waters of an archipelagic State.”
By denying the presence of high seas in the South China Sea, China would deny
freedom of navigation and use of airspace to other countries over the entire
area, which Pan made clear.
“The United States is only a passer-by in the South [China] Sea ... As a country
that has no sea coast in the region, does the United States have freedom of
navigation and flight in the South [China] Sea? The answer is no! There is no
international water in the South [China] Sea,” he wrote.
“China should act with stronger force ... to resolutely repel [US] interference,
defend China’s nine-dotted line area that history has bestowed to us,” Pan
wrote, referring to the large U-shaped swathe of territory claimed by China that
encompasses most of the South China Sea.
Miles Yu wrote in the Washington Times that the article was “the clearest
statement to date indicating the official Chinese Communist Party mouthpieces
are specifically denying international freedom of navigation in one of the
world’s busiest and most crucial waterways that China claims as its exclusive
sovereign water.”
However, China analysts remain divided on the extent to which editorials
appearing in official Chinese media truly reflect official policy in Beijing.
Some have said that unless a piece appears in print, electronic articles
appearing on the People’s Daily, the Global Times and Xinhua news agency Web
sites are of variable influence and quality, and part of an internal debate
rather than a statement of official policy. Pan’s article appeared in print in
the international edition of the People’s Daily.
Sources close to Pan said he was “patriotic” and nationalistic on some
international issues, but doubted his views on the South China Sea were
“mainstream” among international law experts and Chinese government officials.
It remains to be seen, therefore, whether Beijing has embraced a policy shift on
the applicability of the “high seas” in the South China Sea.
An op-ed in Global Times in September warned of a “sea of fire” if claimants to
islands in the South China Sea continued to oppose China’s claims.
Asked to comment on Pan’s article, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Taipei
refused to go into detail, but reiterated the government’s long-held position
that the Republic of China (ROC) has sovereignty over the region, that all
claimants should set asides disputes and that the country would like to work
with other countries to explore the region’s resources to jointly pursue peace
and reciprocity.
James Tien (田中光), director-general of the ministry’s Department of East Asian
and Pacific Affairs, said the ROC government’s assertion of sovereignty in the
region was not in contradiction with US concerns over freedom of navigation.
“We are never opposed to freedom of navigation,” Tien said.
At the request of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Legislator Herman Shuai (帥化民),
a project to draw up and publish a new map of the South China Sea where the
country has sovereignty is currently underway, Tien said.
Tien said the Ministry of the Interior would present a detailed report on the
country’s territorial position and its line of reasoning after it completes the
map.
The government bases its sovereignty claim on a map developed in 1947 using 11
interrupted lines drawn in a “U-shape” showing that the Spratly Islands (南沙群島),
the Paracel Islands (西沙群島), the Macclesfield Bank (中沙群島) and the Pratas Islands
(東沙群島) were within the territory of the country with reference to history,
geography and international law.
Also last week, Major General Luo Yuan (羅援), a researcher at China’s Academy of
Military Science of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), said countries disputing
China’s claims to the South China Sea would be making a mistake in interpreting
Beijing’s “goodwill” and “self-restraint” for “softness” and “weakness.”
Countries that made such a mistake “can only get the opposite of what they wish
for,” the South China Morning Post quoted the analyst as saying.
In a clear warning to what China sees as external interference in its backyard,
Luo said Washington and Tokyo would only make things more complicated by getting
involved in the overlapping claims over a series of islets in the South China
Sea, which involves five of the 10 ASEAN member states as well as Taiwan.
These developments occured as Vietnamese Prime Minister Nguyen Tan Dung said for
the first time on Friday that China had used military force to occupy the
disputed Paracels in 1974.
China, he said, “used force to occupy all of the Hoang Sa [Paracel] Islands” in
1974, when the islands were jointly controlled by China and then-South Vietnam.
In related developments, the PLA said last week it had set up a strategic
planning department as the army is rapidly modernizing to undertake more
sophisticated operations.
The report, which appeared on the People’s Liberation Army Daily’s Web site,
said the department, which will be administered by the General Staff
Headquarters, will study critical strategic issues, draft plans and reform
proposals for the PLA’s development, submit suggestions on the allocation of PLA
strategic resources and examine and evaluate the implementation of PLA
development plans.
Luo told the China Daily the move was in response to “increasingly sophisticated
military operations in the future that might involve multiple combat forces and
headquarters.”
“The new department will become an authoritative and comprehensive planning
center,” Luo said.
Asked for comment, China watcher Gordon Chang (章家敦) expressed alarm at this
development.
“Notice this is the same Luo Yuan who just threatened to use China’s military to
enforce Beijing’s expansive claims to the entire South China Sea,” he told the
Taipei Times.
“There are few coincidences when it comes to the PLA. They are planning to wage
war and China’s flag officers are not shy in telling us how far they will go to
achieve their objectives,” he said.
Additional reporting by Shih Hsiu-chuan
|
