ON September 28, I was privileged to speak at the China (Hainan)-Asean 2024 Think Tank Forum in Haikou, China. Centered around the theme “New Quality Productive Forces, New Drivers for China-Asean Maritime Cooperation,” the event brought together experts from the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) and China to discuss pressing issues such as climate change, fishery cooperation and the blue economy, with an emphasis on science and technology’s role in these areas. My session, “Public Product Supply and Marine Infrastructure Construction in the South China Sea (SCS),” focused on fostering sustainable, cooperative maritime development across the region.
In my remarks, I was a bit provocative, challenging conventional perspectives and inviting deeper reflection on these critical issues. The audience’s openness and engagement transformed the dialogue, enriching the discussions and underscoring the value of pushing intellectual boundaries in such settings. I’m excited to share the core insights of my intervention with my readers/audience, encouraging further reflection and discourse on these vital topics.
Today, we gather to explore a nuanced and complex issue that has far-reaching implications for the geopolitical landscape of our region and beyond. Part of our discussion is on China’s provision of public goods and its marine infrastructure construction in the SCS, a topic that stands at the intersection of cooperation and contestation. It is a subject matter that warrants careful examination because of its immediate impact on regional peace, security and stability, and its broader implications for international maritime law, sovereignty and regional power dynamics.
On understanding public products and marine infrastructure from a regional perspective, I think we have a good understanding that regional public goods, by definition, are services and infrastructure accessible to all and beneficial to multiple stakeholders. In the context of the SCS, these include a range of activities, such as constructing lighthouses, establishing weather stations and providing navigational aids, search and rescue operations, and meteorological information. These initiatives appear to be noble endeavors aimed at ensuring the safety of navigation and assisting vessels in distress, which are crucial in one of the world’s busiest maritime routes, the SCS.
China has framed these activities as contributions to regional stability and safe navigation, portraying itself as a responsible actor willing to provide these essential services. This narrative emphasizes the tangible benefits of such infrastructure, suggesting that it enhances the collective maritime safety of all users of the SCS, from commercial vessels to fishing boats and coast guards.
Double-edged sword?
However, as the saying goes, “The road to hell is paved with good intentions,” or, more accurately, “Good intentions are not enough.” China’s provision of public goods and construction of marine infrastructure in the SCS is not without controversy. While these actions may offer tangible benefits, they raise fundamental questions about intent, control, maritime rights and sovereignty issues.
Some claimant states perceive these actions as not merely or necessarily benign contributions to maritime safety. There is a prevailing perception that these are China’s strategic moves designed to strengthen its presence over the contested areas of the SCS where it has claims of territorial sovereignty.
Hence, there is this dual perception of some claimant states on China’s initiatives of providing regional public goods and marine infrastructure construction in the SCS, where, on the one hand, these public goods that China provides serve a functional purpose, potentially improving safety and aiding in emergency response; on the other hand, they allegedly simultaneously act as instruments of China’s asserting its claims on the SCS that impact on the territorial and maritime claims of other claimant countries.
In many ways, these conflicting perceptions further entangle the already complex dynamics surrounding the SCS disputes, complicating efforts to sustain diplomatic efforts aimed at conflict resolution and management between China and other claimant states. This duality in perception fosters misunderstanding and mistrust, and elevates the risks of miscalculation and unintended conflict. If left unaddressed, such tensions threaten the fragile balance of peace, security and stability in the SCS, underscoring the need for clearer communication and cooperative frameworks among all parties involved.
A path forward
In retrospect, China’s pivotal challenge lies in effectively communicating to other claimant states that its provision of public goods is genuinely intended to serve the broader regional interest. While China’s initiatives aim to foster cooperation, peace, security and stability in the SCS, the perception of these efforts as sincere and constructive hinges on deeper trust-building and confidence-building measures. For these efforts to be embraced as mutually beneficial, China must further engage inclusively, fostering an environment where cooperative and joint development projects and regional public goods provision can be viewed as steps toward shared stability rather than unilateral influence.
Conversely, a critical challenge for other claimant states lies in recognizing that China’s provision of public goods aims to foster shared regional cooperation and stability. Embracing this perspective, however, will require substantial trust and confidence-building efforts, particularly between China and other claimant states. Only through sustained engagement and transparent dialogue can all claimant states develop mutual confidence and trust, where shared benefits are acknowledged, and cooperative initiatives are seen as genuine steps and commitment toward a peaceful, stable and secure SCS. Such efforts mitigate entrenched mistrust, misinterpretations and misperceptions that fuel tensions, reducing the risk of conflict over the contested waters and creating a pathway toward a more stable, sustainable and peaceful SCS.
Addressing the tension
To address SCS tensions effectively by employing a multifaceted strategy, let me offer some of my perspectives for the claimant states’ consideration:
1. Strengthening multilateral engagement: A unified stance via Asean could push for a binding Code of Conduct in the SCS, offering a clear framework to manage disputes and clarify contentious issues.
2. Direct dialogue: Complementing multilateral efforts, targeted bilateral and trilateral dialogues with China could address specific concerns, fostering a more tailored approach to the complex issues at play.
3. Public diplomacy and strategic communication: Claimant states should consistently emphasize their commitment to international law and peaceful dispute resolution, utilizing effective communication to reinforce a collective commitment to regional peace, security and stability.
4. Multidimensional diplomacy: Asean claimants can expand diplomatic channels beyond political talks to include cultural, educational and economic exchanges with China. These relationships build mutual understanding, fostering a more resilient foundation for peace and mutual understanding.
Conclusion
Achieving a sustainable and peaceful resolution in the SCS depends on a committed, multifaceted approach blending multilateral and bilateral dialogues with innovative cooperative frameworks. Beyond traditional diplomacy, shared regional interests — such as marine environmental protection, sustainable resource management and disaster response — offer pathways for collaboration that can build trust and confidence among claimant states. By focusing on these “regional commons,” claimant states can establish pragmatic mechanisms that serve mutual interests, fostering a stable, peaceful and cooperative regional order.
Transforming the SCS into a zone of peace and cooperation rather than conflict requires all parties’ open-minded, constructive and committed stance. Recognizing our shared responsibility to uphold the region’s peace, security and stability, governments, think tanks, stakeholders and people must advocate for peace-driven policies. Only through these efforts can the SCS evolve into a sea of peace and cooperation, ensuring the welfare and prosperity of the entire region.
Source: The Manila Times
https://www.manilatimes.net/2024/10/05/opinion/columns/chinas-public-goods-provision-and-marine-infrastructure-in-scs-catalyst-for-cooperation-or-double-edged-sword/1979345
