Calm words on oil and troubled waters

Worth a look is this balanced take by the Carnegie Endowment's Douglas H. Paal (16 Oct) on the disputes in the South China Sea and the East China Sea.

He reminds us:

"The common media narrative is that China is being more aggressive. But if you trace back the origins of the latest flare-ups—in the South China Sea, East China Sea, and there’s even a China-South Korea rock that they’re arguing about—they actually all started outside of China. What we’re seeing from China are exaggerated reactions, and people notice that more than what was done by the Philippines, Vietnam, Japan, or South Korea..."

His advice:

"This is a time when we need to get past elections, past transitions, and allow some cool diplomacy to go to work...

"My own view is that a lot of the fuel from the flames of these tensions in the East China Sea and the South China Sea would be taken out if we could divert the competition for energy and the competition for marine resources into separate dialogues...

"But what would be really difficult is to try to settle the sovereign claims. With China rising, Japan in a difficult period, and Southeast Asia going through all sorts of change, countries are not going to willingly give up their claims on sovereignty. They might settle in the end to leave things as they are. With changing ratios of power among the various parties out there, they’re not likely to settle claims—history suggests they won’t do it...

"As a practical matter, let’s just do what they’ve done for the last forty years in the region and shelve the territorial sovereignty issues and work on the functional problems. I hope that after we get past elections and transitions in East Asia, maybe we can move in that direction."

Much of this resonates with the advice from Sam Bateman that I flagged up a little while ago.

All worth remembering as the November summit season looms...

The passing of a "great survivor"

Milton Osborne chronicles the "remarkable odyssey of Norodom Sihanouk", as do many other obituaries. Osborne's Sihanouk: Prince of Light, Prince of Darkness (1994, Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press) is still a great introduction to this complex figure.

The Bangkok Post interestingly catalogues reactions and background, as does Albeiro Rodas's blog.

Sanchita Basu Das on the ASEAN Economic Community

It is "highly unlikely", writes Sanchita Bas Das, the ASEAN Studies Centre's lead researcher on the ASEAN Economic Community (AEC), "that ASEAN can achieve its target of building an AEC by 2015."

She substantiates that claim by working her way through the achievements and challenges of the four "pillars" of the AEC.

But nil desperandum. A foundation has been laid, and though time presses, "ASEAN economic integration efforts will not be derailed easily".

She concludes with some eminently sensible advice on the way forward:

"One way for ASEAN is to focus on 'core' elements of integration and implement them earnestly in the shortest possible time. This may include trade liberalisation, services liberalisation (at least the tourism sector), and measures to enhance connectivity, transparency and predictability in the region. The rest of the process, as envisaged in the AEC Blueprint, can follow beyond 2015."

"Cautious optimism" for the southern Philippines

The "Framework Agreement on the Bangsamoro" may be the breakthrough that is needed to terminate a long-running insurgency in the southern Philippines.

This would be good news not only for the Philippines but also for the region.

Hopes on previous occasions have been dashed, but Joseph Franco explains why this time could be different, while reminding us that this is just one step on a much longer path to lasting peace.

UPDATE 10 October and 22 October: See also Steven Rood's insightful commentaries for The Interpreter and for the Asia Foundation.

Farish Noor urges regional spirit

I have given up apologizing for my inadequacies as a blogger...

But here's an article I have to draw attention to.

I, too, look forward to the "rise of pan-ASEAN global citizens"...

Sam Bateman and the South China Sea

Bit of a blogging pause again…

But I had to draw attention to this eminently sensible piece by Sam Bateman. He concludes his analysis with some recommendations:

“The game of ‘tit for tat’ in the South China Sea benefits nobody and has to end…

“Attempts to define ‘areas of dispute’are futile. Even the search for a Code of Conduct will not succeed if it places emphasis on dispute resolution and concessions on sovereignty as confidence-building measures rather than on cooperation. Cooperation must be put back on the agenda…

“A cooperative management regime is required based on a functional approach that exploits the common interests of claimant countries. A first step would be to set up a management body for the South China Sea comprised of all bordering countries. ASEAN and China should negotiate the establishment of such a body. The US can bring the ‘carrots’ of experience in oceans management to the table rather than the ‘sticks’ of increased military engagement.”

More on the non-communiqué

So we don’t have a communiqué, but we do now have a statement on “ASEAN’s Six-Point Principles on the South China Sea”.

The dust has still to settle, however.

Bunn Nagara adopts a phlegmatic stance, accusing us all of worrying far too much over this blessed communiqué.

I disagree with him here – I think it’s an important wake-up call to all ASEAN’s member countries to keep a sharp eye out for divide-and-rule and unite-and-rule tactics, both from inside and outside the Association.

But I do agree with him on this point:

“Cynics predicting doom-and-gloom scenarios for ASEAN forget that its watchword has always been ‘resilience’, as supported by its near-half-century record. ASEAN is made of sterner stuff, to which its experience testifies. But ASEAN is also not immune to the pitfalls of complacency. Failure to do what is needed now can escalate current challenges and lead to more problems in the future.”

His pull-no-punches comments on Philippines diplomacy (to some extent backed by domestic players) also make a refreshing change from the “it’s all China’s fault” narratives.

And in his conclusion, he’s surely right on the money:

“Disputes are also best settled, or can only be settled, through negotiations or arbitration. Souring the atmosphere by making diplomacy difficult only makes things worse for everyone. With China, it has been said that upping the ante only strengthens the hand of hardliners in Beijing. Most ASEAN countries are wise enough to steer clear of that approach, however much of a rush it may give some politicians playing to the gallery at home.”


UPDATE 24 July: Simon Tay always strikes a good balance on this issue. He suggests agreeing on “a form of words about the South China Sea” – something akin to the form of words over the “one-China” principle, which “has helped frame a range of differences that is understood (but not conceded) by each party”. Such a move would reduce the likelihood that communiqués would be held hostage by a single issue, as has so painfully been the case recently. But he also warns that “each ASEAN member must be willing to keep the group's interest as a whole in view, and not focus solely on its bilateral ties with China or America. Otherwise ASEAN will not only fail to be neutral, but be ineffective and indeed neutered.”