Panel discussion on the shifting strategic balance in Southeast Asia: the South China Sea disputes

On Thursday, the 9^th of July, a panel discussion on the “Shifting strategic balance in Southeast Asia: the South China Sea disputes” took place within the context of the three week training programme for mid-career diplomats from Indonesia.

For the occasion, the Clingendael Institute welcomed Dr. Frans Paul van der Putten (Senior Research Fellow, Clingendael Institute, expert on China and international security), Prof. dr. Alex Oude Elferink (Director of the Netherlands Institute for the Law of the Sea of Utrecht University and professor in the law of the sea at the University of Tromsø, Norway) and Drs. Garrie van Pinxteren (Journalist, Sinologist and Senior Visiting Fellow, Clingendael Institute). The panel members presented positions from different perspectives (note: these positions were not necessarily their own, but posited to stimulate the discussion).

Background: the South[[{"type":"media","view_mode":"media_preview","fid":"5514","attributes":{"height":180,"width":180,"style":"width: 180px; height: 180px; float: left; margin: 5px;","class":"media-image media-element file-media-preview"},"link_text":null}]] China Sea disputes

The South China Sea disputes touch upon sovereignty over the largely uninhabited island groups Paracels and Spratlys and sovereign rights and jurisdiction over the waters of the South China Sea. In January 2013, certain aspects of the competing claims in the South China Sea were submitted to arbitration under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) in a case the Philippines brought unilaterally against People’s Republic of China. The arbitral tribunal has decided that as a first step it will look at the questions whether it has jurisdiction and the case of the Philippines is admissible.

First perspective: legal dimension

The first perspective presented by Prof. dr. Alex Oude Elferink focused on the legal dimension of the disputes. He suggested the following points for discussion;

• To what extend is public international law is relevant for dealing with the disputes?
• To what degree will the outcome of arbitration between the Philippines and China have an impact on future developments in the South China Sea?
• Could a provisional regime that freezes the status of the disputed islands  and their territorial sea and applies different provisional arrangements to specific areas of the South China Sea be the way forward?

Second perspective: geopolitical

From a geopolitical perspective, Dr. Frans Paul van der Putten posited a position that focused on the power struggle between China and the US, of which the South China Sea is geographical locus. The points for debate put forward were;

• What is the likelihood that China will compromise its nine-dashed line?
• What is the potential for conflict as the US-China pressure increases?
•  Does the US has an exit strategy from the South China Sea?
• Is rebalance of the regional order the only solution?

Third perspective: position of Indonesia

Finally, drs. Garrie van Pinxteren explored the position of Indonesia either aligning itself with the US or with China and presented both pro-China (historical ties and potential for economic cooperation) and pro-US (contain Chinese imperialism) arguments.

Discussion

During the discussion, the necessity of the involvement of the US in the disputes was questioned, the need for Indonesia to choose sides between China and the US challenged and the role of ASEAN highlighted. The discussion on the South China Sea concluded the last full day of training for the Indonesian diplomats participating in the training programme Managing Foreign Policy Making in Indonesia.

- 20 July 2015