China is using the coronavirus as a cover to push territorial claims in the South China Sea through a surge in naval activity meant to intimidate other countries that claim the waters, the commander of US&nbsp;Forces in Japan said on Friday.

There has been a surge of activity by China in the South China Sea with navy ships, coast guard vessels and a naval militia of fishing boats in harassing vessels in waters claimed by Beijing, said Lieutenant General Kevin Schneider.

Also read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-navy-warship-again-challenges-beijings-south-china-sea-claims-301746">US Navy warship again challenges Beijing's South China Sea claims</a>

"Through the course of the COVID crisis we saw&nbsp;a surge of maritime activity," he said in an interview. He said Beijing had also increased its activity in the East China Sea, where it has a territorial dispute with Japan.

Beijing's increased level of activity would likely continue, predicted Schneider: "I don't see troughs, I see plateaus," he said.

Also read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/despite-coronavirus-japan-us-flex-their-military-muscle-in-south-china-sea-296663">Despite coronavirus! Japan, US flex their military muscle in South China sea</a>

US&nbsp;Secretary of State&nbsp;Mike Pompeo&nbsp;on Thursday criticized Chinese "coercion" in the&nbsp;disputed South China Sea, highlighting a divide with&nbsp;Beijing.

China says its maritime activities in the area are peaceful. The press office at the Chinese embassy in Tokyo was not immediately available to comment outside of normal business hours.

Japan hosts the biggest concentration of US&nbsp;forces in Asia, including an aircraft carrier strike group, an amphibious expeditionary force and fighter squadrons. In addition to defending Japan, they are deployed to deter China from expanding its influence in the region, including in the South China Sea.

The latest US&nbsp;criticism of China comes as relations have frayed amid accusations by Washington that Beijing failed to warn it quickly enough about the coronavirus. China has dismissed that criticism as an attempt by President Donald Trump's administration to cover up its own mistakes.

Beijing has built military island bases on reefs in the energy-rich South China Sea, in or near waters claimed by other countries, including the Philippines, Vietnam and Malaysia. It imposed a unilateral fishing ban until Aug 16.

China is using the coronavirus as a cover to push territorial claims in the South China Sea through a surge in naval activity meant to intimidate other countries that claim the waters, the commander of US Forces in Japan said on Friday.

China is using the coronavirus as a cover to push territorial claims in the South China Sea through a surge in naval activity meant to intimidate other countries that claim the waters, the commander of US Forces in Japan said on Friday. There has been a surge of activity by China in the South China Sea with navy ships, coast guard vessels and a naval militia of fishing boats in harassing vessels in waters claimed by Beijing, said Lieutenant General Kevin Schneider. Also read: US Navy warship again challenges Beijing's South China Sea claims "Through the course of the COVID crisis we saw a surge of maritime activity," he said in an interview. He said Beijing had also increased its activity in the East China Sea, where it has a territorial dispute with Japan. Beijing's increased level of activity would likely continue, predicted Schneider: "I don't see troughs, I see plateaus," he said. Also read: Despite coronavirus! Japan, US flex their military muscle in South China sea US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on Thursday criticized Chinese "coercion" in the disputed South China Sea, highlighting a divide with Beijing. China says its maritime activities in the area are peaceful. The press office at the Chinese embassy in Tokyo was not immediately available to comment outside of normal business hours. Japan hosts the biggest concentration of US forces in Asia, including an aircraft carrier strike group, an amphibious expeditionary force and fighter squadrons. In addition to defending Japan, they are deployed to deter China from expanding its influence in the region, including in the South China Sea. The latest US criticism of China comes as relations have frayed amid accusations by Washington that Beijing failed to warn it quickly enough about the coronavirus. China has dismissed that criticism as an attempt by President Donald Trump's administration to cover up its own mistakes. Beijing has built military island bases on reefs in the energy-rich South China Sea, in or near waters claimed by other countries, including the Philippines, Vietnam and Malaysia. It imposed a unilateral fishing ban until Aug 16.

China pushing territorial claims under cover of COVID-19, says US military commander

While the world is dealing with the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/china-may-have-four-times-more-covid-19-cases-than-reported-study-294601">COVID-19 </a>crisis, China earlier this month announced a new governance system for disputed islands in South China Sea that has irked not only its neighbours but has drawn sharp reactions from countries like US and Australia.&nbsp;

Earlier this month China approved the establishment of two districts to administer disputed Paracel &amp; Spratly island in the South China Sea. Each district will have a local government with the government for the Spratly island being located on Fiery Cross Reef, an area fortified by China by land reclamation. One of the new district created in Sansha city in Hainan province will administer Paracel island.&nbsp;

Before that Bejing had issued new names for 25 islands/ reef &amp; 55 undersea entities in the South China Sea in a bid to "reaffirm" its sovereignty in the region.

This has led to angry responses from the country's neighbourhood and from Washingon and Canberra. Vietnam strongly protests Chinese action saying it violates the country's sovereignty and are invalid. An angry Philippines filed a diplomatic protest at the Chinese embassy in Manila. Australian foreign minister Marise Payne while condemning China's action in South China Sea said it is "vital all countries ease tensions so they can focus on combating COVID-19."

Meanwhile, US slamming Bejing said the country is using COVID-19 distraction to further its hold in the South China Sea. US secretary of state Mike Pompeo said, "Even as we fight the outbreak, we must remember that the long-term threats to our shared security have not disappeared. In fact, they’ve become more prominent."

Explaining, "Beijing has moved to take advantage of the distraction, from China’s new unilateral announcement of administrative districts over disputed islands and maritime areas in the South China Sea, its sinking of a Vietnamese fishing vessel earlier this month, and its “research stations” on Fiery Cross Reef and Subi Reef."

He said,"important to highlight how the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is exploiting the world’s focus on the COVID-19 crisis by continuing its provocative behavior" and "The CCP is exerting military pressure and coercing its neighbors in the SCS, even going so far as to sink a Vietnamese fishing vessel. The U.S. strongly opposes China’s bullying and we hope other nations will hold them to account too."

Japan has also lodged a strong protest with the Chinese government ship crossing into Japanese territorial waters near Senkaku Island in East China sea. Tokyo says 4 Chinese coast guard vessels have sailed in the area for 90 minutes. China claims ownership over senkaku island and calls them as diaoyu.

While the world is dealing with the COVID-19 crisis, China earlier this month announced a new governance system for disputed islands in South China Sea that has irked not only its neighbours but has drawn sharp reactions from countries like US and Australia.

While the world is dealing with the COVID-19 crisis, China earlier this month announced a new governance system for disputed islands in South China Sea that has irked not only its neighbours but has drawn sharp reactions from countries like US and Australia. Earlier this month China approved the establishment of two districts to administer disputed Paracel & Spratly island in the South China Sea. Each district will have a local government with the government for the Spratly island being located on Fiery Cross Reef, an area fortified by China by land reclamation. One of the new district created in Sansha city in Hainan province will administer Paracel island. Before that Bejing had issued new names for 25 islands/ reef & 55 undersea entities in the South China Sea in a bid to "reaffirm" its sovereignty in the region. This has led to angry responses from the country's neighbourhood and from Washingon and Canberra. Vietnam strongly protests Chinese action saying it violates the country's sovereignty and are invalid. An angry Philippines filed a diplomatic protest at the Chinese embassy in Manila. Australian foreign minister Marise Payne while condemning China's action in South China Sea said it is "vital all countries ease tensions so they can focus on combating COVID-19." Meanwhile, US slamming Bejing said the country is using COVID-19 distraction to further its hold in the South China Sea. US secretary of state Mike Pompeo said, "Even as we fight the outbreak, we must remember that the long-term threats to our shared security have not disappeared. In fact, they’ve become more prominent." Explaining, "Beijing has moved to take advantage of the distraction, from China’s new unilateral announcement of administrative districts over disputed islands and maritime areas in the South China Sea, its sinking of a Vietnamese fishing vessel earlier this month, and its “research stations” on Fiery Cross Reef and Subi Reef." He said,"important to highlight how the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is exploiting the world’s focus on the COVID-19 crisis by continuing its provocative behavior" and "The CCP is exerting military pressure and coercing its neighbors in the SCS, even going so far as to sink a Vietnamese fishing vessel. The U.S. strongly opposes China’s bullying and we hope other nations will hold them to account too." Japan has also lodged a strong protest with the Chinese government ship crossing into Japanese territorial waters near Senkaku Island in East China sea. Tokyo says 4 Chinese coast guard vessels have sailed in the area for 90 minutes. China claims ownership over senkaku island and calls them as diaoyu.

China exploiting world’s focus on COVID-19, Pompeo on South China Sea dispute

The ‘incremental encroachment strategy’ of China exhibited in the South China Sea (SCS) is a serious concern not only to the countries directly affected by losing their influence over Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), but also to rest of the world as China can exert a&nbsp;monopoly over SCS Sea Lines of Communication (SLOC). Affected countries do not have the adequate muscle power to stand up to China, and hence, will have no choice but to succumb to a one-sided arrangement like China-driven “Code of Conduct” (COC).

Chinese adventurism, therefore, needs to be checked by other prominent maritime powers in the global interest. The Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (Quad) which comprises&nbsp;Australia, India, Japan, and the United States is often being looked at as a potential instrument to check further adventurism of China in the Indo-Pacific region.

The fact that China could build a military base in the SCS despite the presence of US Navy indicates that it does require global condemnation and effort of higher order to ensure that SCS does not become ‘China’s lake’.&nbsp;

Although Quad may not have requisite teeth as of now, but there is no other alternative than to have the potential arrangement of this kind between likeminded maritime powers having common strategic interests in Indo-Pacific Region.&nbsp;

The Quad has repeatedly been subjected to varying perceptions regarding its role, viability and prospects. Quad by nomenclature is a security dialogue forum and not a military alliance, hence the expectations from Quad have to be appropriately restricted for the time being.&nbsp;&nbsp;

Initially, the Quad appeared to be a military and maritime arrangement revolving exclusively around four democracies.&nbsp; 
&nbsp; 
Many give the credit of the idea of Quad to Prime Minister Shinzo Abe who mooted his proposal within the framework of the “confluence of the two seas”, joining the Indian and the Pacific Oceans. Japan felt that partnership with the US and Australia would be integrated into its ambit besides strategic partnership with India. The four democratic countries of the Quad project themselves to be committed to an open and transparent network which “Will allow people, goods, capital, and knowledge to flow freely”. Quad is, therefore, yet to acknowledge that it has a role to check the adventurism of China in the Indo-Pacific region and could ever operate jointly as a military force for it. In fact, Quad has chosen to be diplomatically correct to say that it is not directed towards any particular country.&nbsp;

To take the dialogue forward, the Quad needs to urgently converge existing divergences regarding their individual definitions of the Indo-Pacific. &nbsp;&nbsp;

All Quad members have different threat perceptions in the Indo-Pacific. This impacts their prioritisation in dealing with challenges in Indo-pacific, as well as, their areas of focus. An important issue for effective maritime security cooperation amongst the navies of Quad is while three of the navies (Australia, US and Japan) operate within NATO military alliance framework, India is not part of any military alliance, although a strategic partner of two of them. The trilateral dialogue between the three NATO allies is continuing since 2002 without India. India is the only country amongst Quad members which has unsettled land border with China, and therefore, will have a different approach in dealing with China.

The centrality of ASEAN in the Indo-Pacific has been emphasised by the Quad, hence their inclusion into it is another debatable issue, due to Chinese influence over them. There are differences within ASEAN grouping in response to Chinese claim over the nine-dash line in SCS. Some of the affected ASEAN countries have earlier raised a feeble voice against Chinese aggression, expecting world powers to check Chinese adventurism.

They have generally tried to maintain cordial relations with both the US and China without being seen to be taking sides. This has emboldened China to continue incremental encroachment in SCS.

The common focus of Quad is to implement its idea of a free and Open Indo-Pacific on a “rules-based” legal framework to secure freedom of navigation in the global SLOC needs some introspection and strengthening. Australia, India and Japan, have ratified the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS III), however, the US is yet to ratify the same. This ratification will be necessary to have a moral high ground to implement the same.&nbsp;

Considering the prevailing international strategic scenario, China is reasonably confident that the US or any other country will not use military force against it. Moreover, Beijing is also increasing its naval capability. In this context, it is necessary that Quad strengthens itself beyond Malabar exercises.&nbsp;

Quad members must continue freedom of navigation exercises and military posturing in Indo-Pacific as China continues to do so. The global community must continue to condemn Chinese encroachment. Quad, in its present form, may not be effective enough to check Chinese adventurism, but it certainly has potential to become one of the effective instruments to do so, provided the affected countries and the global community unite against their common concerns.

(Views expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

The ‘incremental encroachment strategy’ of China exhibited in the South China Sea (SCS) is a serious concern not only to the countries directly affected by losing their influence over Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), but also to rest of the world as China can exert a monopoly over SCS Sea Lines of Communication (SLOC).

The ‘incremental encroachment strategy’ of China exhibited in the South China Sea (SCS) is a serious concern not only to the countries directly affected by losing their influence over Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), but also to rest of the world as China can exert a monopoly over SCS Sea Lines of Communication (SLOC). Affected countries do not have the adequate muscle power to stand up to China, and hence, will have no choice but to succumb to a one-sided arrangement like China-driven “Code of Conduct” (COC). Chinese adventurism, therefore, needs to be checked by other prominent maritime powers in the global interest. The Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (Quad) which comprises Australia, India, Japan, and the United States is often being looked at as a potential instrument to check further adventurism of China in the Indo-Pacific region. The fact that China could build a military base in the SCS despite the presence of US Navy indicates that it does require global condemnation and effort of higher order to ensure that SCS does not become ‘China’s lake’. Although Quad may not have requisite teeth as of now, but there is no other alternative than to have the potential arrangement of this kind between likeminded maritime powers having common strategic interests in Indo-Pacific Region. The Quad has repeatedly been subjected to varying perceptions regarding its role, viability and prospects. Quad by nomenclature is a security dialogue forum and not a military alliance, hence the expectations from Quad have to be appropriately restricted for the time being. Initially, the Quad appeared to be a military and maritime arrangement revolving exclusively around four democracies. Many give the credit of the idea of Quad to Prime Minister Shinzo Abe who mooted his proposal within the framework of the “confluence of the two seas”, joining the Indian and the Pacific Oceans. Japan felt that partnership with the US and Australia would be integrated into its ambit besides strategic partnership with India. The four democratic countries of the Quad project themselves to be committed to an open and transparent network which “Will allow people, goods, capital, and knowledge to flow freely”. Quad is, therefore, yet to acknowledge that it has a role to check the adventurism of China in the Indo-Pacific region and could ever operate jointly as a military force for it. In fact, Quad has chosen to be diplomatically correct to say that it is not directed towards any particular country. To take the dialogue forward, the Quad needs to urgently converge existing divergences regarding their individual definitions of the Indo-Pacific. All Quad members have different threat perceptions in the Indo-Pacific. This impacts their prioritisation in dealing with challenges in Indo-pacific, as well as, their areas of focus. An important issue for effective maritime security cooperation amongst the navies of Quad is while three of the navies (Australia, US and Japan) operate within NATO military alliance framework, India is not part of any military alliance, although a strategic partner of two of them. The trilateral dialogue between the three NATO allies is continuing since 2002 without India. India is the only country amongst Quad members which has unsettled land border with China, and therefore, will have a different approach in dealing with China. The centrality of ASEAN in the Indo-Pacific has been emphasised by the Quad, hence their inclusion into it is another debatable issue, due to Chinese influence over them. There are differences within ASEAN grouping in response to Chinese claim over the nine-dash line in SCS. Some of the affected ASEAN countries have earlier raised a feeble voice against Chinese aggression, expecting world powers to check Chinese adventurism. They have generally tried to maintain cordial relations with both the US and China without being seen to be taking sides. This has emboldened China to continue incremental encroachment in SCS. The common focus of Quad is to implement its idea of a free and Open Indo-Pacific on a “rules-based” legal framework to secure freedom of navigation in the global SLOC needs some introspection and strengthening. Australia, India and Japan, have ratified the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS III), however, the US is yet to ratify the same. This ratification will be necessary to have a moral high ground to implement the same. Considering the prevailing international strategic scenario, China is reasonably confident that the US or any other country will not use military force against it. Moreover, Beijing is also increasing its naval capability. In this context, it is necessary that Quad strengthens itself beyond Malabar exercises. Quad members must continue freedom of navigation exercises and military posturing in Indo-Pacific as China continues to do so. The global community must continue to condemn Chinese encroachment. Quad, in its present form, may not be effective enough to check Chinese adventurism, but it certainly has potential to become one of the effective instruments to do so, provided the affected countries and the global community unite against their common concerns. (Views expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

South China Sea standoff: Can Quad check China's encroachment?

Vietnam said it hoped China would show restraint in the South China Sea next year after a Chinese <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/vietnam-says-deeply-concerned-about-developments-in-south-china-sea-244942">oil survey vessel</a> and its escorts spent months within Vietnam's exclusive economic zone in what Hanoi called a blatant violation of its sovereignty.

Vietnam, the region's most forceful challenger of China's extensive maritime claims to the busy waterway, will take on the rotating chairmanship of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) in 2020.

"I hope that during our chairmanship China will show restraint and refrain from these activities," Vietnam's deputy <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/indian-govt-denies-reports-of-sale-of-brahmos-missile-to-vietnam-19191">foreign minister</a>, Nguyen Quoc Dung, said at a lecture at The Institute of Southeast Asian Studies in Singapore.

"What China did is very alarming and also kind of threatening not only Vietnam but also other countries that see the potential of being <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-to-provide-ship-to-vietnam-to-boost-south-china-sea-patrols-263403">threatened </a>in the future," he said.

China's claims within its so-called "Nine-Dash Line" in the South China Sea are a source of friction with ASEAN members Malaysia, the Philippines and Brunei as well as with the United States.

But China's closest allies within the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-east-asia/southeast-asian-leaders-meet-expected-to-discuss-rohingyas-south-china-sea-229680">Southeast Asian bloc</a> have historically opposed taking tougher words or action against China, which is nonetheless negotiating a code of conduct with regional states.

The Vietnamese minister said it wasn't that other ASEAN countries supported China's actions, but that they did not protest in the same way.

More than $3 trillion a year in trade pass through the waterway, which also has oil and gas reserves and historic fishing grounds for the surrounding countries.

The Chinese oil survey vessel <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/chinese-ship-at-vanguard-bank-a-threat-need-to-address-it-collectively-vietnam-ambassador-at-wion-world-order-238428">Haiyang Dizhi 8</a> left Vietnam's extended economic zone in late October after more than three months there. Beijing said it had been carrying out a scientific survey in Chinese-controlled waters.

Vietnam said it hoped China would show restraint in the South China Sea next year after a Chinese oil survey vessel and its escorts spent months within Vietnam's exclusive economic zone in what Hanoi called a blatant violation of its sovereignty.

Vietnam said it hoped China would show restraint in the South China Sea next year after a Chinese oil survey vessel and its escorts spent months within Vietnam's exclusive economic zone in what Hanoi called a blatant violation of its sovereignty. Vietnam, the region's most forceful challenger of China's extensive maritime claims to the busy waterway, will take on the rotating chairmanship of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) in 2020. "I hope that during our chairmanship China will show restraint and refrain from these activities," Vietnam's deputy foreign minister, Nguyen Quoc Dung, said at a lecture at The Institute of Southeast Asian Studies in Singapore. "What China did is very alarming and also kind of threatening not only Vietnam but also other countries that see the potential of being threatened in the future," he said. China's claims within its so-called "Nine-Dash Line" in the South China Sea are a source of friction with ASEAN members Malaysia, the Philippines and Brunei as well as with the United States. But China's closest allies within the Southeast Asian bloc have historically opposed taking tougher words or action against China, which is nonetheless negotiating a code of conduct with regional states. The Vietnamese minister said it wasn't that other ASEAN countries supported China's actions, but that they did not protest in the same way. More than $3 trillion a year in trade pass through the waterway, which also has oil and gas reserves and historic fishing grounds for the surrounding countries. The Chinese oil survey vessel Haiyang Dizhi 8 left Vietnam's extended economic zone in late October after more than three months there. Beijing said it had been carrying out a scientific survey in Chinese-controlled waters.

Vietnam hopes for Chinese restraint in South China Sea in 2020

China has astounded the world with the speed and scale of its creation of artificial islands and military infrastructure in the South China Sea.&nbsp;

The first Chinese dredger initiated land reclamation in December 2013. Five years later, China has completed building its manmade islands and is now steadily ramping up its military assets in the South China Sea.

Even after an international arbitral tribunal invalidated its claims in the South China Sea through a ruling in 2016, China continued with the frenzied expansion of its frontiers. Yet, it has incurred no international costs for pushing its borders far out into international waters.

Today, China has consolidated its hold in a strategically crucial body of water through which $5.3 trillion in global trade flows every year. It has set up an interconnected array of radar, electronic-attack facilities, missile batteries and airfields there.

And by turning its manmade islands into military bases, it has virtually established permanent aircraft carriers, whose role extends to the Indian Ocean and the western Pacific.&nbsp;

The South China Sea, in fact, highlights that Beijing’s favoured frontier strategy is pivoted on “salami slicing”. This involves — as witnessed in the Himalayas since the 1950s — a steady progression of small actions, none of which serves as a casus belli by itself, yet which over time lead cumulatively to a strategic transformation in China’s favour.

And by camouflaging offence as defence, China presents a targeted state with a Hobson’s choice: endure the territorial loss or face a dangerous and costly war with great power.

As other Asian nations are discovering, including India in the Himalayas and Japan in the East China Sea, the China challenge centres on Beijing’s lack of respect for existing frontier lines. China is still working to redraw political boundaries, almost 70 years after communists seized power there and began expanding the frontiers.

China clearly has been emboldened by America’s muted response to its expansionism. The US has focused its concern merely on safeguarding freedom of navigation through the South China Sea, not on ratcheting up pressure on China to stop its territorial revisionism.

In fact, the US has refused to take sides in the territorial disputes between China and the other claimant-states in the South China Sea. The US has similarly stayed neutral on disputes elsewhere between China and its neighbours, including in the East China Sea and the Himalayas.

For example, President Donald Trump’s administration did not issue a single statement in India’s support, but stayed neutral during the 73-day military standoff between Indian and Chinese forces on the remote Himalayan plateau of Doklam in mid-2017.&nbsp;

The Trump administration also stayed silent when Chinese military threats forced Vietnam in March 2018 to halt oil drilling within its own exclusive economic zone.

To be sure, the Trump-led US has stepped up the so-called freedom of navigation operations, or FONOPS, in the South China Sea.&nbsp;

However, while the US has yet to provide strategic heft to its much-publicized strategy to ensure a “free and open” Indo-Pacific region, China has embarked on robust initiatives, such as the twin Silk Road projects, with the aim of changing the regional geopolitical map.&nbsp;

ASEAN disunity has also aided Beijing’s aggression. The South China Sea has emerged as ASEAN’s Achilles heel. ASEAN’s reluctance to take a unified stance may have delighted Beijing — its largest trade partner — yet, by conveying weakness, it allows China to do as it pleases.

China’s strategic aim in the South China Sea is to legitimise its control over this critical corridor. Through various actions, China is etching a lasting presence in the claimed areas. For example, to create an administrative base, including setting up a local civilian government in the South China Sea, Beijing has established “Sansha City” on Woody Island. Woody Island was in the news recently when China, for the first time, landed the nuclear-capable H-6K heavy bomber aircraft there.

There is a distinct possibility that, like it did in the Paracel Islands in 1996, China might declare “straight baselines” in the Spratly Islands. Such baselines, connecting the outermost points of the island chain, would seek to turn the sea within, including features controlled by other nations, into China’s “internal waters”.

Against this background, the South China Sea has emerged as the symbolic centre of the international maritime challenges of the 21st century.&nbsp;

The developments in the South China Sea — the world’s main maritime hotspot — hold the potential of upending the current liberal world order by permitting brute power to trump rules.

For India, the South China Sea, which connects the Indian and Pacific oceans, is of central importance. About 60 per cent of India’s seaborne trade passes through the Strait of Malacca, the link between the Indian Ocean and the South China Sea. China’s expansionism in the South China Sea directly impinges on India’s vital interests.

In fact, China’s establishment of a naval hub in Djibouti — its first overseas military base — and its increasing submarine forays into the Indian Ocean draw strength from its aggressive actions in the South China Sea.

Given the South China Sea’s centrality to the wider geopolitics, balance of power and maritime order, like-minded states must work closely together to shape developments there, including ensuring that aggressive unilateralism is no longer cost-free. Failure to do that will create a systemic risk to Indo-Pacific stability and the world order. 
 
(This article was originally published on DNA. Read the <a href="https://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/column-china-and-the-critical-corridor-2700381">original article</a>)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

China has astounded the world with the speed and scale of its creation of artificial islands and military infrastructure in the South China Sea. The first Chinese dredger initiated land reclamation in December 2013.

China has astounded the world with the speed and scale of its creation of artificial islands and military infrastructure in the South China Sea. The first Chinese dredger initiated land reclamation in December 2013. Five years later, China has completed building its manmade islands and is now steadily ramping up its military assets in the South China Sea. Even after an international arbitral tribunal invalidated its claims in the South China Sea through a ruling in 2016, China continued with the frenzied expansion of its frontiers. Yet, it has incurred no international costs for pushing its borders far out into international waters. Today, China has consolidated its hold in a strategically crucial body of water through which $5.3 trillion in global trade flows every year. It has set up an interconnected array of radar, electronic-attack facilities, missile batteries and airfields there. And by turning its manmade islands into military bases, it has virtually established permanent aircraft carriers, whose role extends to the Indian Ocean and the western Pacific. The South China Sea, in fact, highlights that Beijing’s favoured frontier strategy is pivoted on “salami slicing”. This involves — as witnessed in the Himalayas since the 1950s — a steady progression of small actions, none of which serves as a casus belli by itself, yet which over time lead cumulatively to a strategic transformation in China’s favour. And by camouflaging offence as defence, China presents a targeted state with a Hobson’s choice: endure the territorial loss or face a dangerous and costly war with great power. As other Asian nations are discovering, including India in the Himalayas and Japan in the East China Sea, the China challenge centres on Beijing’s lack of respect for existing frontier lines. China is still working to redraw political boundaries, almost 70 years after communists seized power there and began expanding the frontiers. China clearly has been emboldened by America’s muted response to its expansionism. The US has focused its concern merely on safeguarding freedom of navigation through the South China Sea, not on ratcheting up pressure on China to stop its territorial revisionism. In fact, the US has refused to take sides in the territorial disputes between China and the other claimant-states in the South China Sea. The US has similarly stayed neutral on disputes elsewhere between China and its neighbours, including in the East China Sea and the Himalayas. For example, President Donald Trump’s administration did not issue a single statement in India’s support, but stayed neutral during the 73-day military standoff between Indian and Chinese forces on the remote Himalayan plateau of Doklam in mid-2017. The Trump administration also stayed silent when Chinese military threats forced Vietnam in March 2018 to halt oil drilling within its own exclusive economic zone. To be sure, the Trump-led US has stepped up the so-called freedom of navigation operations, or FONOPS, in the South China Sea. However, while the US has yet to provide strategic heft to its much-publicized strategy to ensure a “free and open” Indo-Pacific region, China has embarked on robust initiatives, such as the twin Silk Road projects, with the aim of changing the regional geopolitical map. ASEAN disunity has also aided Beijing’s aggression. The South China Sea has emerged as ASEAN’s Achilles heel. ASEAN’s reluctance to take a unified stance may have delighted Beijing — its largest trade partner — yet, by conveying weakness, it allows China to do as it pleases. China’s strategic aim in the South China Sea is to legitimise its control over this critical corridor. Through various actions, China is etching a lasting presence in the claimed areas. For example, to create an administrative base, including setting up a local civilian government in the South China Sea, Beijing has established “Sansha City” on Woody Island. Woody Island was in the news recently when China, for the first time, landed the nuclear-capable H-6K heavy bomber aircraft there. There is a distinct possibility that, like it did in the Paracel Islands in 1996, China might declare “straight baselines” in the Spratly Islands. Such baselines, connecting the outermost points of the island chain, would seek to turn the sea within, including features controlled by other nations, into China’s “internal waters”. Against this background, the South China Sea has emerged as the symbolic centre of the international maritime challenges of the 21st century. The developments in the South China Sea — the world’s main maritime hotspot — hold the potential of upending the current liberal world order by permitting brute power to trump rules. For India, the South China Sea, which connects the Indian and Pacific oceans, is of central importance. About 60 per cent of India’s seaborne trade passes through the Strait of Malacca, the link between the Indian Ocean and the South China Sea. China’s expansionism in the South China Sea directly impinges on India’s vital interests. In fact, China’s establishment of a naval hub in Djibouti — its first overseas military base — and its increasing submarine forays into the Indian Ocean draw strength from its aggressive actions in the South China Sea. Given the South China Sea’s centrality to the wider geopolitics, balance of power and maritime order, like-minded states must work closely together to shape developments there, including ensuring that aggressive unilateralism is no longer cost-free. Failure to do that will create a systemic risk to Indo-Pacific stability and the world order. (This article was originally published on DNA. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

China’s expansionism in South China Sea impinges on India’s interests

Just as China has changed the status quo in the South China Sea through an island-building strategy, it is working to re-engineer cross-border flows of international rivers that originate in Tibet, which Beijing annexed in 1951.

No country will be more affected by China's dam frenzy than India because of one telling statistic: out of the 718 billion cubic metres of surface water that flows out of Chinese-held territory yearly, 347 billion cubic meters (or 48.3 per cent of the total) runs directly into India. Several major Indian rivers originate in Tibet, including the Brahmaputra, the Kosi, the Sutlej and the Indus.

China already boasts more large dams than the rest of the world put together. More importantly, it has emerged as the key obstacle to building institutionalised collaboration on shared water resources in Asia.

In contrast to the bilateral water treaties between many of its neighbours, China rejects the concept of a water-sharing arrangement or joint, rules-based management of common resources.

India has water-sharing treaties with both the countries located downstream to it: Pakistan and Bangladesh. These treaties govern the Indus and the Ganges.

By contrast, China, despite its unrivalled international status as the source of river flows to more than a dozen countries, stands out for not having a single water-sharing arrangement with any neighbour.

India's treaties with Pakistan and Bangladesh have actually set new principles in international water law. The 1996 Ganges treaty — which coincided with the 25th anniversary of Bangladesh's Indian-assisted independence — set a new standard by guaranteeing delivery of specific water quantities in the critical dry season.

The Indus treaty stands out as the world's most generous water pact, in terms of both the sharing ratio (80.52 per cent of the aggregate water flows in the six-river Indus system are reserved for Pakistan) and the total volume of basin waters for the downstream state (Pakistan gets 90 times greater volume of water than Mexico's share under a 1944 pact with the US).

China, in rejecting the 1997 UN convention that lays down rules on shared water resources, contended that an upstream power has the right to assert absolute territorial sovereignty over the waters on its side of the international boundary — or the right to divert as much water as it wishes for its needs, irrespective of the effects on a downriver state.

Today, by building mega-dams and reservoirs in its borderlands, China is working to divert the flows of major rivers that are the lifeline of lower riparian states.

Since the last decade, China's major dam building has moved from dam-saturated internal rivers to international rivers located in ethnic-minority homelands like Tibet.

On the Brahmaputra, China is racing to complete several additional dams located in close proximity to each other. This cascade of dams is likely to affect the quality and quantity of downstream flows into India and Bangladesh.

Only five rivers in the world carry more water than the Brahmaputra and only one — mainland China's Yellow River — carries more silt. The Brahmaputra is the world's highest-altitude river. It represents a unique fluvial ecosystem largely due to the heavy load of high-quality nutrient-rich silt it carries from forbidding Himalayan heights.

The Brahmaputra's annual flooding cycle helps to re-fertilize overworked soils in India's Assam plains and large parts of Bangladesh, where the river is the biggest source of water supply.

The silt-movement impediment by China's upstream dam projects constitutes a bigger threat to the biophysical vitality of the river and to the soil fertility of downstream plains than even the likely diminution of cross-border flows.

China's centralised, mega-projects-driven approach to water resources is the antithesis of the policy in India, where water is a state (not federal) subject under the Constitution and where anti-dam non-governmental organisations (NGOs) are powerful. India's Narmada Dam project, which remains incomplete decades after its construction began, symbolises the power of NGOs.

The largest dam India has built since independence — the 2,000-megawatt Tehri Dam on River Bhagirathi — pales in comparison to China's giant projects, such as the 22,500-megawatt Three Gorges Dam and the new mega-dams on the Mekong like Xiaowan, which dwarfs Paris's Eiffel Tower in height, and Nuozhadu, which boasts of a 190-square-km reservoir.

China's population is just marginally larger than India's, but its internally renewable water resources (2,813 billion cubic meters per year) are almost twice as large as India's. In aggregate water availability, including external inflows (which are sizeable in India's case), China boasts virtually 50 per cent larger water resources than India.

India's surface-water storage capacity — an important measure of any nation's ability to deal with drought or seasonal imbalances in water availability — is one of the world's lowest: Amounting to 200 cubic metres per head per year, it is more than 11 times lower than China's. The 2030 Water Resources Group, an international unit, has warned that India is likely to face a 50 per cent deficit between water demand and supply by 2030.

In the coming years, China, by ramping up construction of dams on trans-Himalayan rivers, could fashion water into a political weapon against India. 
 
(This article was originally published on DNA. Read the <a href="https://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/column-dragon-s-water-weapon-against-india-2694354">original article</a>)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Just as China has changed the status quo in the South China Sea through an island-building strategy, it is working to re-engineer cross-border flows of international rivers that originate in Tibet, which Beijing annexed in 1951.

Just as China has changed the status quo in the South China Sea through an island-building strategy, it is working to re-engineer cross-border flows of international rivers that originate in Tibet, which Beijing annexed in 1951. No country will be more affected by China's dam frenzy than India because of one telling statistic: out of the 718 billion cubic metres of surface water that flows out of Chinese-held territory yearly, 347 billion cubic meters (or 48.3 per cent of the total) runs directly into India. Several major Indian rivers originate in Tibet, including the Brahmaputra, the Kosi, the Sutlej and the Indus. China already boasts more large dams than the rest of the world put together. More importantly, it has emerged as the key obstacle to building institutionalised collaboration on shared water resources in Asia. In contrast to the bilateral water treaties between many of its neighbours, China rejects the concept of a water-sharing arrangement or joint, rules-based management of common resources. India has water-sharing treaties with both the countries located downstream to it: Pakistan and Bangladesh. These treaties govern the Indus and the Ganges. By contrast, China, despite its unrivalled international status as the source of river flows to more than a dozen countries, stands out for not having a single water-sharing arrangement with any neighbour. India's treaties with Pakistan and Bangladesh have actually set new principles in international water law. The 1996 Ganges treaty — which coincided with the 25th anniversary of Bangladesh's Indian-assisted independence — set a new standard by guaranteeing delivery of specific water quantities in the critical dry season. The Indus treaty stands out as the world's most generous water pact, in terms of both the sharing ratio (80.52 per cent of the aggregate water flows in the six-river Indus system are reserved for Pakistan) and the total volume of basin waters for the downstream state (Pakistan gets 90 times greater volume of water than Mexico's share under a 1944 pact with the US). China, in rejecting the 1997 UN convention that lays down rules on shared water resources, contended that an upstream power has the right to assert absolute territorial sovereignty over the waters on its side of the international boundary — or the right to divert as much water as it wishes for its needs, irrespective of the effects on a downriver state. Today, by building mega-dams and reservoirs in its borderlands, China is working to divert the flows of major rivers that are the lifeline of lower riparian states. Since the last decade, China's major dam building has moved from dam-saturated internal rivers to international rivers located in ethnic-minority homelands like Tibet. On the Brahmaputra, China is racing to complete several additional dams located in close proximity to each other. This cascade of dams is likely to affect the quality and quantity of downstream flows into India and Bangladesh. Only five rivers in the world carry more water than the Brahmaputra and only one — mainland China's Yellow River — carries more silt. The Brahmaputra is the world's highest-altitude river. It represents a unique fluvial ecosystem largely due to the heavy load of high-quality nutrient-rich silt it carries from forbidding Himalayan heights. The Brahmaputra's annual flooding cycle helps to re-fertilize overworked soils in India's Assam plains and large parts of Bangladesh, where the river is the biggest source of water supply. The silt-movement impediment by China's upstream dam projects constitutes a bigger threat to the biophysical vitality of the river and to the soil fertility of downstream plains than even the likely diminution of cross-border flows. China's centralised, mega-projects-driven approach to water resources is the antithesis of the policy in India, where water is a state (not federal) subject under the Constitution and where anti-dam non-governmental organisations (NGOs) are powerful. India's Narmada Dam project, which remains incomplete decades after its construction began, symbolises the power of NGOs. The largest dam India has built since independence — the 2,000-megawatt Tehri Dam on River Bhagirathi — pales in comparison to China's giant projects, such as the 22,500-megawatt Three Gorges Dam and the new mega-dams on the Mekong like Xiaowan, which dwarfs Paris's Eiffel Tower in height, and Nuozhadu, which boasts of a 190-square-km reservoir. China's population is just marginally larger than India's, but its internally renewable water resources (2,813 billion cubic meters per year) are almost twice as large as India's. In aggregate water availability, including external inflows (which are sizeable in India's case), China boasts virtually 50 per cent larger water resources than India. India's surface-water storage capacity — an important measure of any nation's ability to deal with drought or seasonal imbalances in water availability — is one of the world's lowest: Amounting to 200 cubic metres per head per year, it is more than 11 times lower than China's. The 2030 Water Resources Group, an international unit, has warned that India is likely to face a 50 per cent deficit between water demand and supply by 2030. In the coming years, China, by ramping up construction of dams on trans-Himalayan rivers, could fashion water into a political weapon against India. (This article was originally published on DNA. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Dragon's water weapon against India

Tokyo raised pressure on Beijing at an Asia-Europe summit today to respect an international tribunal&#39;s ruling that dismissed its claims to much of the South China Sea. 
 
At a retreat outside the Mongolian capital Ulan Bator, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe told the assembled leaders that the rule of law was &quot;a universal principle that the international community must firmly maintain&quot;, according to Japan&#39;s Jiji Press. 
 
&quot;I strongly hope the parties to the dispute comply with the award and lead to a peaceful solution of the dispute in South China Sea,&quot; he said. 
 
The Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague on Tuesday ruled that there was no legal basis for Beijing&#39;s claims to much of the South China Sea, which are embodied in a &quot;nine-dash line&quot; that dates from 1940s maps and stretches close to other countries coasts. 
 
The ruling has proved a boon to Tokyo, which is embroiled in a separate territorial dispute of its own with Beijing and vies with it for influence across Asia. 
 
China boycotted the PCA hearings, saying the court had no jurisdiction, and has reacted furiously, vowing to ignore the ruling and arguing that it misinterprets international law. 
 
It also said the subject should not be brought up at the Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM) in the Mongolian capital. 
 
But despite Chinese objections, the EU also weighed in on the subject, with President Donald Tusk telling reporters that the grouping &quot;will continue to speak out in support of upholding international law&quot;, adding that it had &quot;full confidence&quot; in the PCA and its decisions. 
 
&quot;It`s not so easy to agree with our Chinese partners when it comes to this issue&quot; he said. &quot;Our talks were difficult, tough, but also promising.&quot; 
 
The comments by Abe and Tusk today followed a blitz of meetings between the Japanese leader and officials from around the region, including his Vietnamese counterpart Nguyen Xuan Phuc and Philippine Foreign Secretary Perfecto Yasay, on the summit sidelines as he sought to build consensus on the issue. 
 
Both countries have competing claims with Beijing in the strategically vital South China Sea, where tensions have mounted over the Asian giant&#39;s construction of artificial islands capable of supporting military operations and its claims on the region&#39;s marine resources. 
 
Manila, which brought the PCA case, has promised not to &quot;taunt or flaunt&quot; the verdict. 
 
But Japanese foreign ministry spokesman Yasuhisa Kawamura told AFP that in his meeting with Abe, Yasay agreed to &quot;closely cooperate&quot; at upcoming ASEAN-related conferences to ensure that the &quot;parties to the dispute comply with the final award of the tribunal&quot;. 
 
Leaders of the Southeast Asian grouping have so far failed to issue a statement on the ruling, reportedly due to objections from member states with close ties to China. 
 
In Abe&#39;s meeting with Phuc, the two leaders agreed that the tribunal&#39;s ruling should be observed, and Abe offered to increase cooperation on building Vietnam&#39;s maritime law enforcement capabilities, Kawamura said. 
 
Abe also brought his argument directly to Chinese Premier Li Keqiang during a heated 30-minute meeting Friday. 
 
Kawamura described the exchange as &quot;frank and candid&quot; and Chinese state media accounts described the Chinese leader telling Abe that Japan should &quot;stop hyping up and interfering&quot; in the dispute. 
 
Beijing had hoped to use the ASEM summit official theme &quot;Partnership for the Future through Connectivity&quot;, as an opportunity to showcase its global initiatives, such as the One Belt, One Road programme, an ambitious plan to build infrastructure projects across the Eurasian region. 
 
China has sought to assert its claims in the South China Sea by building a network of artificial islands capable of supporting military operations, and this week reiterated its right to declare an Air Defence Identification Zone in the area, which would demand civilian flights submit to the authority of its military. 
 
While the summit&#39;s final communique made no specific mention of the South China Sea, it said that leaders &quot;reaffirmed their commitment&quot; to maritime security and settling disputes according to the UN Convention on the Law of Sea. 
 
(AFP)

The Hague's verdict has benefitted Tokyo, which is embroiled in a separate territorial dispute of its own with China

Tokyo raised pressure on Beijing at an Asia-Europe summit today to respect an international tribunal's ruling that dismissed its claims to much of the South China Sea. At a retreat outside the Mongolian capital Ulan Bator, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe told the assembled leaders that the rule of law was "a universal principle that the international community must firmly maintain", according to Japan's Jiji Press. "I strongly hope the parties to the dispute comply with the award and lead to a peaceful solution of the dispute in South China Sea," he said. The Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague on Tuesday ruled that there was no legal basis for Beijing's claims to much of the South China Sea, which are embodied in a "nine-dash line" that dates from 1940s maps and stretches close to other countries coasts. The ruling has proved a boon to Tokyo, which is embroiled in a separate territorial dispute of its own with Beijing and vies with it for influence across Asia. China boycotted the PCA hearings, saying the court had no jurisdiction, and has reacted furiously, vowing to ignore the ruling and arguing that it misinterprets international law. It also said the subject should not be brought up at the Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM) in the Mongolian capital. But despite Chinese objections, the EU also weighed in on the subject, with President Donald Tusk telling reporters that the grouping "will continue to speak out in support of upholding international law", adding that it had "full confidence" in the PCA and its decisions. "It`s not so easy to agree with our Chinese partners when it comes to this issue" he said. "Our talks were difficult, tough, but also promising." The comments by Abe and Tusk today followed a blitz of meetings between the Japanese leader and officials from around the region, including his Vietnamese counterpart Nguyen Xuan Phuc and Philippine Foreign Secretary Perfecto Yasay, on the summit sidelines as he sought to build consensus on the issue. Both countries have competing claims with Beijing in the strategically vital South China Sea, where tensions have mounted over the Asian giant's construction of artificial islands capable of supporting military operations and its claims on the region's marine resources. Manila, which brought the PCA case, has promised not to "taunt or flaunt" the verdict. But Japanese foreign ministry spokesman Yasuhisa Kawamura told AFP that in his meeting with Abe, Yasay agreed to "closely cooperate" at upcoming ASEAN-related conferences to ensure that the "parties to the dispute comply with the final award of the tribunal". Leaders of the Southeast Asian grouping have so far failed to issue a statement on the ruling, reportedly due to objections from member states with close ties to China. In Abe's meeting with Phuc, the two leaders agreed that the tribunal's ruling should be observed, and Abe offered to increase cooperation on building Vietnam's maritime law enforcement capabilities, Kawamura said. Abe also brought his argument directly to Chinese Premier Li Keqiang during a heated 30-minute meeting Friday. Kawamura described the exchange as "frank and candid" and Chinese state media accounts described the Chinese leader telling Abe that Japan should "stop hyping up and interfering" in the dispute. Beijing had hoped to use the ASEM summit official theme "Partnership for the Future through Connectivity", as an opportunity to showcase its global initiatives, such as the One Belt, One Road programme, an ambitious plan to build infrastructure projects across the Eurasian region. China has sought to assert its claims in the South China Sea by building a network of artificial islands capable of supporting military operations, and this week reiterated its right to declare an Air Defence Identification Zone in the area, which would demand civilian flights submit to the authority of its military. While the summit's final communique made no specific mention of the South China Sea, it said that leaders "reaffirmed their commitment" to maritime security and settling disputes according to the UN Convention on the Law of Sea. (AFP)

Tokyo pressures Beijing on South China Sea ruling

The United States is using quiet diplomacy to persuade the Philippines, Indonesia, Vietnam and other Asian nations not to move aggressively to capitalise on an international court ruling that denied China&#39;s claims to the South China Sea, several US administration officials said on Wednesday. 
 
&quot;What we want is to quiet things down so these issues can be addressed rationally instead of emotionally,&quot; said one official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe private diplomatic messages. 
 
Some were sent through US embassies abroad and foreign missions in Washington, while others were conveyed directly to top officials by Defence Secretary Ash Carter, Secretary of State John Kerry and other senior officials, the sources said. 
 
&quot;This is a blanket call for quiet, not some attempt to rally the region against China, which would play into a false narrative that the US is leading a coalition to contain China,&quot; the official added. 
 
The effort to calm the waters following the court ruling in The Hague on Tuesday suffered a setback when Taiwan dispatched a warship to the area, with President Tsai Ing-wen telling sailors that their mission was to defend Taiwan&#39;s maritime territory. 
 
The court ruled that while China has no historic rights to the area within its self-declared nine-dash line, Taiwan has no right to Itu Aba, also called Taiping, the largest island in the Spratlys. Taipei administers Itu Aba but the tribunal called it a &quot;rock&quot;, according to the legal definition. 
 
The US officials said they hoped the US diplomatic initiative would be more successful in Indonesia, which wants to send hundreds of fishermen to the Natuna Islands to assert its sovereignty over nearby areas of the South China Sea to which China says it also has claims, and in the Philippines, whose fishermen have been harassed by Chinese coast guard and naval vessels. 
 
Unknown Quantity 
 
One official said new Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte remains &quot;somewhat of an unknown quantity&quot; who has been alternately bellicose and accommodating toward China. 
 
Philippine Defence Secretary Delfin Lorenzana said that ahead of the ruling he had spoken to Carter, who he said that China had assured the United States it would exercise restraint, and that the US government made the same assurance. 
 
Carter had sought and been given the same assurance from the Philippines, Lorenzana added. 
 
China, for its part, repeated pleas for talks between Beijing and Manila, with Foreign Minister Wang Yi saying the it is time to get things back on the &quot;right track&quot; after the &quot;farce&quot; of the case. 
 
Today, the official newspaper of China&#39;s ruling Communist Party said China had shown it can fix territorial issues via talks, pointing to agreement reached with Vietnam over their maritime boundary in the Gulf of Tonkin and ongoing talks with South Korea. 
 
&quot;China is a faithful defender of the principle that countries large and small are equal and has consistently upheld using consultations to resolve border issues on the basis of sovereign equality and mutual respect,&quot; the People&#39;s Daily said in a commentary. 
 
Meanwhile, two Chinese civilian aircraft landed on Wednesday at two new airports on reefs controlled by China in the Spratly Islands in the South China Sea, a move the State Department said would increase tensions rather than lower them. 
 
&quot;We don&#39;t have a dog in this fight other than our belief ... in freedom of navigation,&quot; State Department spokesman Mark Toner told a briefing on Wednesday. &quot;What we want to see in this very tense part of Asia, of the Pacific, rather, is a de-escalation of tensions and we want to see all claimants take a moment to look at how we can find a peaceful way forward.&quot; 
 
Contingency Plan 
 
However, if that effort fails, and competition escalates into confrontation, US air and naval forces are prepared to uphold freedom of maritime and air navigation in the disputed area, a defence official said on Wednesday. 
 
Democrat Ben Cardin of Maryland, a senior member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said confrontation is less likely if the Philippines, Indonesia, Vietnam and other countries work with the United States rather than on their own. 
 
&quot;I don&#39;t think China wants a confrontation with the United States,&quot; he told reporters. &quot;They don&rsquo;t mind a confrontation with a Vietnamese fishing boat, but they don&rsquo;t want a confrontation with the United States.&quot; 
 
The court ruling is expected to dominate a meeting at the end of July in Laos of the 10-member Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), which includes the Philippines, Malaysia, Indonesia, Myanmar, Vietnam and Thailand.&nbsp;US Secretary of State John Kerry, and his Chinese counterpart, Foreign Minister Wang, will attend the ministerial. 
 
Sino-American relations suffered two fresh blows on Wednesday as a congressional committee found China&#39;s government likely hacked computers at the US Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and the United States challenged China&#39;s export duties on nine metals and minerals that are important to the aerospace, auto, electronics and chemical industries. 
 
(Reuters)

Confrontation is less likely if the Philippines, Indonesia, Vietnam and other countries work with the United States rather than on their own

The United States is using quiet diplomacy to persuade the Philippines, Indonesia, Vietnam and other Asian nations not to move aggressively to capitalise on an international court ruling that denied China's claims to the South China Sea, several US administration officials said on Wednesday. "What we want is to quiet things down so these issues can be addressed rationally instead of emotionally," said one official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe private diplomatic messages. Some were sent through US embassies abroad and foreign missions in Washington, while others were conveyed directly to top officials by Defence Secretary Ash Carter, Secretary of State John Kerry and other senior officials, the sources said. "This is a blanket call for quiet, not some attempt to rally the region against China, which would play into a false narrative that the US is leading a coalition to contain China," the official added. The effort to calm the waters following the court ruling in The Hague on Tuesday suffered a setback when Taiwan dispatched a warship to the area, with President Tsai Ing-wen telling sailors that their mission was to defend Taiwan's maritime territory. The court ruled that while China has no historic rights to the area within its self-declared nine-dash line, Taiwan has no right to Itu Aba, also called Taiping, the largest island in the Spratlys. Taipei administers Itu Aba but the tribunal called it a "rock", according to the legal definition. The US officials said they hoped the US diplomatic initiative would be more successful in Indonesia, which wants to send hundreds of fishermen to the Natuna Islands to assert its sovereignty over nearby areas of the South China Sea to which China says it also has claims, and in the Philippines, whose fishermen have been harassed by Chinese coast guard and naval vessels. Unknown Quantity One official said new Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte remains "somewhat of an unknown quantity" who has been alternately bellicose and accommodating toward China. Philippine Defence Secretary Delfin Lorenzana said that ahead of the ruling he had spoken to Carter, who he said that China had assured the United States it would exercise restraint, and that the US government made the same assurance. Carter had sought and been given the same assurance from the Philippines, Lorenzana added. China, for its part, repeated pleas for talks between Beijing and Manila, with Foreign Minister Wang Yi saying the it is time to get things back on the "right track" after the "farce" of the case. Today, the official newspaper of China's ruling Communist Party said China had shown it can fix territorial issues via talks, pointing to agreement reached with Vietnam over their maritime boundary in the Gulf of Tonkin and ongoing talks with South Korea. "China is a faithful defender of the principle that countries large and small are equal and has consistently upheld using consultations to resolve border issues on the basis of sovereign equality and mutual respect," the People's Daily said in a commentary. Meanwhile, two Chinese civilian aircraft landed on Wednesday at two new airports on reefs controlled by China in the Spratly Islands in the South China Sea, a move the State Department said would increase tensions rather than lower them. "We don't have a dog in this fight other than our belief ... in freedom of navigation," State Department spokesman Mark Toner told a briefing on Wednesday. "What we want to see in this very tense part of Asia, of the Pacific, rather, is a de-escalation of tensions and we want to see all claimants take a moment to look at how we can find a peaceful way forward." Contingency Plan However, if that effort fails, and competition escalates into confrontation, US air and naval forces are prepared to uphold freedom of maritime and air navigation in the disputed area, a defence official said on Wednesday. Democrat Ben Cardin of Maryland, a senior member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said confrontation is less likely if the Philippines, Indonesia, Vietnam and other countries work with the United States rather than on their own. "I don't think China wants a confrontation with the United States," he told reporters. "They don’t mind a confrontation with a Vietnamese fishing boat, but they don’t want a confrontation with the United States." The court ruling is expected to dominate a meeting at the end of July in Laos of the 10-member Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), which includes the Philippines, Malaysia, Indonesia, Myanmar, Vietnam and Thailand. US Secretary of State John Kerry, and his Chinese counterpart, Foreign Minister Wang, will attend the ministerial. Sino-American relations suffered two fresh blows on Wednesday as a congressional committee found China's government likely hacked computers at the US Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and the United States challenged China's export duties on nine metals and minerals that are important to the aerospace, auto, electronics and chemical industries. (Reuters)

US launches quiet diplomacy to ease South China Sea tensions