(BGF) – In recent interview by Tsuyoshi Sunohara of Nikkei, Joseph Nye, member of Boston Global Forum’s Board of Thinkers and distinguished service professor at Harvard University, shared his different view of China’s land reclamation in the South China Sea.
He believed that China’s works do not change its balance of power at all. These moves actually has made artificial islands into “vulnerable targets”.
Read the full story here or visit the Nikkei website.
China’s artificial isles are vulnerable, fixed targets
TOKYO (October 29, 2015) — China is not changing the balance of power by building islands in the South China Sea and they are in fact very vulnerable targets, Joseph Nye, distinguished service professor at Harvard University, told The Nikkei.
The U.S. does not recognize the islands as Chinese territory, and it sent a destroyer within 12 nautical miles of the islands to exercise its navigation rights and freedoms under international law, he said in an interview here Tuesday. Nye worked to strengthen the U.S.-Japan security alliance as assistant secretary of defense, and he has served as the chair of the National Intelligence Council.
Q: What tension exists between the U.S. and China now, following Chinese President Xi Jinping’s visit to Washington in September?
A: There were two big issues that were disturbing the U.S. about China. One was the issue of cyberespionage for commercial purposes, and the other was the South China Sea, freedom of navigation.
When Xi Jinping came to Washington, he reversed the traditional Chinese position and said that China would not engage in cyberespionage for commercial purposes. Now, whether they will follow through in practice, we don’t know. But, at least in terms of the summit meeting, it was a 180-degree change in China’s position.
The other issue, the South China Sea, there was no progress, and that’s why we’re going to see these freedom of navigation cruises near the disputed islands.
Q: How does the U.S. view China’s island-building in the region?
A: Our position has been that we do not take a stand on the sovereignty of the various rocks and shoals, but that we take a strong view that the sea should be governed by the Law of the Sea Treaty. And the Law of the Sea Treaty says that you can’t take a rock, pile sand on it and call it a territory and have a territorial sea or an exclusive economic zone.
Q: How do you respond to assertions that China’s buildup of those islands will shift the balance of power in the region?
A: I think not. I think, in fact, they are very vulnerable. People say it’s a “stationary aircraft carrier.” It’s also very easy to sink. It’s a fixed target.
Q: So, you don’t view the islands as drastically changing China’s position?
A: I don’t think so. As one former military friend of mine said, if we really wanted to, we could put certain rockets in the Philippines, which would mean that these [islands] were totally militarily useless. So, I don’t think it’s a game changer if we actually enforce freedom of navigation. And that means this exercise of sailing within 12 [nautical] miles of these artificial islands and flying over them is very important, and I think that’s what we’re going to see in the next weeks.
Q: If you recall, in 2001, a U.S. Navy EP-3 plane and a Chinese fighter collided over the South China Sea. Might stepping up activity in the region lead to further such incidents?
A: Well, it’s always possible that you could have another EP-3 incident. It’s also subject to accidents as well as to decisions in national capitals. Many people say that the EP-3 incident was caused by a Chinese pilot who was trying to show how tough he was.
But I think, if you look at the question of whether Beijing wants to have something like this escalate, I think the answer is no. If you have a China that is suffering an economic slowdown, the last thing it needs is a conflict with the United States. And I think that Xi Jinping would run considerable risks if he did get into a conflict with the U.S.
Q: How do you respond to those who say the People’s Liberation Army is slipping from Xi Jinping’s control?
A: China clearly has politics, and Xi Jinping has to worry about his political control. The anti-corruption campaign raises problems because while he can use it as a weapon against his enemies, it also frightens a lot of people who worry that they may be next.
So, he doesn’t have total control. But it’s also true, I think, from my impression, that he has more strength than anybody since Deng Xiaoping.
Interviewed by Nikkei senior staff writer Tsuyoshi Sunohara
Professor Sean P. Henseler, Director of Operations of Operational Level Programs, U.S. Naval War College, Newport, Rhode Island in BGF’s conference on October 16, 2015.
(October 17, 2015) – What are china objectives in the South China Sea? ” I think China has every intention to insert its control and sovereignty over the entire South China and East China Sea”, Professor Sean P. Henseler, Director of Operations at Operational Level Programs in the U.S. Naval War College, Newport, Rhode Island said during the Boston Global Forum conference Dangerous Situation and Solutions for Peace and Security
in the South China Sea which was held on October 16 at Harvard Faculty Club.
Professor Henseler also suggested the conducting of US’s frequent Freedom of NavigationOperations (FONOPS) with other claimants in the South China Sea in order to go against all excessive claims in the disputed waters. Another solution might be the continual of having military-to-military exchange with Chineses to build transparency, build trust, build relationship. However, the most important is to look at “what the nature of relationship we want with China? This is going to be a competitive environment…. How do we deal with China in a competitive environment in a way that it doesn’t lead to all armed conflicts?”, he added.
(Boston, Oct 17, 2015) – Bill Hayton, author of The South China Sea: the struggle for power in Asia (Yale, 2014), made his keynote speech about the South China Sea issue on Boston Global Forum’s conference “Dangerous Situation and Solutions for Peace and Security in the South China Sea” on October 16, 2015 at Harvard Faculty Club.
According to Hayton, the significance of China’s island building in the South China Sea lies less in what it has done so far than in what it might be about to do. In his view, the current concern should focus on three areas of sea: the Vanguard Bank, off the Vietnamese coast; the Reed Bank, off the Philippines coast; and around the Luconia Shoals and James Shoal, off the Malaysian coast.
“All three have significant oil and gas potential. That’s not to say that hydrocarbons are the sole reason for China’s island building. There are many motivations – reflecting China’s many security interests and its many internal lobbies.”, he said.
Hayton closed his speech by giving his view on the use of UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) as a solution: “…Beijing would prefer an ‘imaginative’ interpretation of customary international law that would recognize an historic claim to all the waters inside its self-proclaimed U-shaped line. It seems Beijing no longer regards UNCLOS as a neutral arbiter of disputes but rather as a partisan weapon being wielded to sever China from its historic rights.”
(Cambridge, October 20, 2015) – In recent conference on South China Sea disputes held at Harvard Faculty Club on October 16, Boston Global Forum has just proposed an initiative solution to keep peace and security in the South China Sea: establishment of the Pacific Security Alliance (PSA).
Boston Global Forum’s conference, “Dangerous Situation and Solutions for Peace and Security in the South China Sea”, held at Harvard Faculty Club on October 16, 2015
The PSA is proposed in the Boston Global Forum’s report, “Chinese Disputes in the South China Sea: Risks and Solutions for the Asia-Pacific”, which was mentioned by Professor Thomas Patterson, the co-founder of Boston Global Forum during the conference.
China’s influence-seeking efforts in the South China Sea are obvious. It uses its most advanced military techniques in support of these activities, and the resulting instability extends beyond Southeast Asia. China’s investment in cyber-weapon, artificial intelligence, drones, naval vessels, and its shrinking of Asian military distances through long-range weaponry, and most noteworthy, the construction of artificial island military air fields are threatening regional stability.
Governor Michael Dukakis, Chairman & Co-Founder, Boston Global Forum, moderates the discussion.
Concluding the discussion, Governor Michael Dukakis –Chairman of Boston Global Forum made the remarks:
Situation in Spratlys is becoming more serious with China’s violations of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) with land reclamation that includes turning reefs and atolls into artificial islands and, and posing a high potential of military clash in the Spratly Islands.
All the countries in the South China Sea do not have enough power to stop China from violating the terms of UNCLOS. United Nations also cannot stop China, as well. The International Court takes a long time and there is still no institution in the world with enough power to enforce decisions of the International Court.
To resolve this dangerous situation by applying the Framework for Peace and Security in the Pacific, Boston Global Forum propose an initiative of establishing the Pacific Security Alliance (PSA) to maintain peace and security in the Pacific, with its focus on the South China Sea. The Alliance will set up norms, rules and regulations to keep peace and security in the South China Sea; join patrols in the region and stop all actions violating UNCLOS and international law in the region immediately. As the first step, the Alliance should include the United States, Japan, South Korea, Australia, Philippines, Vietnam, and invite China to join it if China accepts the rules, and regulations of the Pacific Security Alliance (PSA).
The Boston Global Forums’s conference was moderated by Governor Dukakis and attracted participation of several leading experts in international relations and South China Sea, who are scholars, analysts, policymakers, journalists.
Keynote speech by David E. Sanger, Chief Washington correspondent, The New York Times; Senior Fellow, Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs; Adjunct Lecturer in Public Policy, Harvard Kennedy School
The notable experts include Harvard’s professor Joseph Nye and Thomas Patterson; Bonnie Glaser, CSIS’s senior adviser for Asia; David Sanger, Chief Washington correspondent, The New York Times; Bill Hayton, BBC World News TV journalist and author of “ South China Sea: The Struggle for Power in Asia”; Professor Sean P. Henseler, Director of Operations for Operational Level Programs at U.S. Naval War College, Newport, RI; and Brent Colburn, the former assistant to the U.S. Secretary of Defense for Public Affairs.
(BGF) – Boston Global Forum successfully hosted the conference on Solutions to peace and security in the South China Sea on October 16, 2015 at Harvard Faculty Club.
The discussion was moderated by Governor Michael Dukakis, Chairman of Boston Global Forum, and attracted participants of many remarkable scholars, politicians, and journalists.
Keynote speakers: David E. Sanger, Chief Washington correspondent, The New York Times; Bonie Glaser, Senior Advisor for Asia and Director, China Power Project, Center for Strategic & International Studies
Other notable speakers:
Bil Hayton, TV journalist, BBC World News TV; writer, reporter, producer and occasional media development consultant
Professor Sean P. Henseler, Director of Operations, Operational Level Programs, U.S. Naval War College, Newport, Rhode Island
Richard JavadHeydarian, Assistant Professor in political science, De La Salle University (Philippines); Author of “Asia’s New Battlefield: US, China, and the Struggle for Western Pacific” (Zed, London)
Brent Colburn, Fellow of Institute of Politics, Harvard University; Former Assistant to the Secretary of Defense for Public Affairs
