Hybrid ConferenceIndo-Pacific Strategies and the South China Sea - Views from the Region

PROF. DR. CARLYLE A. THAYER

Abstract

The title of my presentation is taken from remarks by a senior ASEAN diplomat at a recent seminar held in Southeast Asia. China and ASEAN members have been discussing and negotiating a Code of Conduct in the South China Sea for twenty-seven years. In August 2018, they reached agreement on a Single Draft Code of Conduct in the South China Sea Negotiating Text (SDNT).

This presentation will present an overview of this long journey with a particular focus on current negotiations on the SDNT. I argue that the long journey is more important than the final destination – a mutually agreed Code of Conduct – because ASEAN claimants can continually engage China on matters of immediate concern as part of the negotiation process. Because the final COC must be adopted by consensus individual claimants can continually pressure China by withholding their agreement. A quick agreement would shift to a focus on contentious issues such as applying the terms of the COC and adjudicating differences in interpretation.

My presentation concludes that a South China Sea COC is unlikely in the near future because a number of key issues remain unresolved: geographic scope, dispute settlement mechanism, enforcement measures, legal status of the COC, and the role of third parties.

Presenter

Carlyle A. Thayer is Emeritus Professor at The University of New South Wales (UNSW) at the Australian Defence Force Academy (ADFA) in Canberra. Thayer was educated at Brown University and after graduation in 1967 he served in South Vietnam with the International Voluntary Services (1967-68). He then earned an M.A. in Southeast Asian Studies from Yale, where he studied Vietnamese (1969-71), and a PhD in International Relations from The Australian National University (1977). Thayer joined UNSW in 1979 and taught at The Royal Military College-Duntroon. In 1985, he transferred to ADFA where he served as Head of the Department of Politics (1995-98). Thayer’s career includes three major periods on secondment: Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies, The Australian National University (1992-95); leave in the national interest, Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies, Hawaii (1999-2001); and academic-co-ordinator for Australia’s senior defence course, Centre for Defence and Strategic Studies, Australian Defence College (2002-04). In 2005, he was appointed the C.V. Starr Distinguished Visiting Professor at the School of Advanced International Studies, Johns Hopkins University. He then served as Director of Regional Security Studies at the Australian Command and Staff College (2006-07 and 2010). In 2008, he was appointed the Inaugural Frances M. and Stephen H. Fuller Distinguished Visiting Professor at Ohio University. Since retirement in 2010, Thayer has been active as Director of Thayer Consultancy, a small business registered in Australia that provides political analysis of current regional security issues and other research support to selected clients. Over the past eleven years he has presented papers at 151 international conferences and webinars (in person and virtual); written 1,604 Thayer Consultancy Background Briefs; and given 3,177 media interviews. Thayer is a Southeast Asia regional specialist with special expertise on Vietnam and the South China Sea. He is the author of over 500 academic publications.

PROF. DR. JEAN-PIERRE CABESTAN

Abstract

China has been opposed to the very notion of Indo-Pacific since its was crafted by late Prime Minister Abe Shinzo in 2016. This presentation will explore the reasons behind this opposition and China’s persistent promotion of the old and alternative concept of Asia-Pacific.

The US’s decision to endorse the notion of Indo-Pacific under the Trump Administration and the strategy attached to this decision have obviously fed China’s opposition. Later China has adopted a more moderate position towards France, Germany, the Netherlands and the European Union’s Indo-Pacific strategies after these strategies were made public in 2018-2021. The ASEAN’s importance, if not its “centrality”, in all European Indo-Pacific strategies has contributed to mitigating China’s criticism towards them.

Nonetheless, what China perceives in the notion of Indo-Pacific and the various strategies attached to it is a Western endeavour to encircle her and contain her growing ambitions both in the Pacific and the Indian Oceans with the help of like-minded countries as India, Australia and perhaps also Indonesia.  

Presenter

Jean-Pierre Cabestan is Senior Researcher Emeritus at the French National Centre for Scientific Research (Centre national de la recherche scientifique), attached to the French Research Institute on East Asia (IFRAE) of the National Institute of Oriental Languages and Civilisations, and Professor Emeritus at Hong Kong Baptist University. Prior to September 2021, he was Chair Professor of Political Science, Department of Government and International Studies, Hong Kong Baptist University. He was Head of the Department from 2007 to 2018. He is also Associate Research Fellow at the Asia Centre, Paris and at the French Centre for Research on Contemporary China in Hong Kong. From 1998 to 2003, he was Director of the French Centre for Research on Contemporary China (Centre d'études français sur la Chine contemporaine, CEFC) in Hong Kong and chief editor of Perspectives chinoises and China Perspectives. From 1994 to 1998, he was director of the Taipei Office of the CEFC. In 1990-1991, he was lecturer at the Politics Department of the School of Oriental and African Studies.

His most recent publications include La politique internationale de la Chine. Entre intégration et volonté de puissance (China’s International Policy. Between Integration and Will for Power), Paris, Presses de Sciences Po, 2010 (updated second edition published in 2015, third edition published in 2022); China and the Global Financial Crisis. A Comparison with Europe, New York, Routledge, 2012 (co-edited with Jean-François Di Meglio & Xavier Richet) and Secessionism and Separatism in Europe and Asia. To have a state of one’s own (co-edited with Aleksandar Pavkovic), Routledge, Oxon & New York, 2013; Le système politique chinois. Un nouvel équilibre autoritaire (The Chinese Political System. A New Authoritarian Equilibrium), Paris, Presses de Sciences Po, 2014; Political Changes in Taiwan Under Ma Ying-jeou. Partisan Conflict, Policy Choices, External Constraints and Security Challenges (co-edited with Jacques deLisle), Abingdon, Oxon & New York, Routledge, 2014; Tanzania-China All-Weather Friendship in the Era of Multipolarity, (with Jean-Raphaël Chaponnière), Saarbrücken, Lambert Academic Publishing, 2017; Demain la Chine: démocratie ou dictature? (China Tomorrow: Democracy or Dictatorship?), Paris, Gallimard, 2018 (Guizot Prize 2019), translated into English, updated and published under the title China Tomorrow: Democracy or Dictatorship?, Lanham, MD, Rowman & Littlefield, 2019 and Demain la Chine: guerre ou paix? (China Tomorrow: War or Peace?), Paris, Gallimard, 2021 due to be published in English by Rowman & Littlefield in 2022. He has also published numerous articles and contributions in English on China's political system and reform, Chinese law, China’s foreign and security policies, the relations across the Taiwan Strait, Taiwanese politics and Sino-African relations. He received his Ph.D. from the University of Paris 1 (Panthéon-Sorbonne). Click here for a more complete list of his publications. 

DR. FELIX HEIDUK

Abstract 

Since the 1950s the regional security architecture in Asia was underpinned by the U.S. led hub and spoke system of bilateral alliances. A multilateral security or defense architecture akin to NATO in Europe never took root. ASEAN-led multilateral security forums began to flourish since the 1990s, but they complemented rather than challenged (let alone attempted to replace) the hub and spoke system. China under Xi Jinping, however, has begun to openly challenge the existing, U.S. dominated, security architecture, calling for a security system by and for Asians with China – due to its sheer size and prowess – at its centre. Beijing has also launched numerous regional initiatives, including the militarization of the South China Sea and a hugh arms build-up, to buttress its objectives.

The concept of the Indo-Pacific is widely regarded as Washington strategic response to the so-called China challenge. How security is provided and maintained in the Indo-Pacific is crucial seeing that the region hosts numerous security hotspots, such as the South China Sea, Taiwan, or the Sino-Indian border conflict. Yet there is very little research to date on the Indo-Pacific’s emerging security architecture. Against this backdrop a number of questions are to be examined: Are we witnessing the emergence of a new regional security architecture? How will it be structured and which actors will play key roles? Which strategic objectives will the regional security architecture try to realise? 

DR. BILL HAYTON

Abstract

Since leaving the European Union, Britain has announced a ’tilt’ towards the Indo-Pacific region. It has become a dialogue partner with ASEAN, entered negotiations on joining the CPTPP trade agreement, announced the AUKUS defence technology deal with Australia and the United States and sent a naval flotilla to the region. But how substantial and sustainable is Britain’s engagement with the region likely to be, particularly following the Russian invasion of Ukraine?

Presenter

Bill Hayton is an Associate Fellow with the Asia-Pacific Programme at Chatham House (the Royal Institute of International Affairs) in London and the editor of the academic journal ‘Asian Affairs'. He is the author of four books on Asia, including ’Vietnam: rising dragon’ and ‘A brief history of Vietnam’ (2022). In 2019 he received his PhD from the University of Cambridge for work on the history and development of the South China Sea disputes. Bill Hayton worked for the BBC for 22 years until January 2021. He was the BBC’s reporter in Vietnam in 2006-7 and spent 2013-14 on secondment to the public broadcaster in Myanmar. He has written numerous articles about Southeast Asia and frequently briefs politicians, government officials and business executives about developments in the region.

DR. RODION EBBIGHAUSEN

Abstract

There are several approaches currently on the table to solve the disputes in the South China Sea. Just recently, scholar Bill Hayton published a reasonable and workable solution in the ISEAS Perspective: How to Solve the South China Sea Disputes. Hayton says there is enough knowledge about the history of the South China Sea to let 'Track Two Tribunals' sort out different claims which have to be disaggregated. In other words, the claimant states should not claim the entirety of entities like the Spratly Islands, but rather each rock, reef, and sandbank on an individual basis. Even though Hayton's approach makes sense, he admits that it would be difficult to convince the public in claimant states, and especially diehard nationalists, of this approach.

Obviously, there are different layers of challenges that need to be addressed if the disputes in the South China Sea are to ever be resolved. There are pending technical and legal questions, for example, related to the UN's law of the sea (UNCLOS), delimitation, and historic facts, which can be addressed with reason and argument. But there are more emotional and ideological questions related to nationalism which are, to a certain degree, resilient to reason and argument.

The presentation "Waving Flags and Claiming Waves" is intended to provide an overview of how nationalism factors in the strategy of various claimant states. What form does nationalism take in the respective countries? To what extent or how closely is it linked to the South China Sea conflict? What dynamic does it add to the disputes? Using this research overview, some considerations will then be made as to how nationalism is a major obstacle to resolving the conflict and what possibilities, if any, there might be to reduce its influence in the South China Sea.

Presenter

Rodion Ebbighausen is managing editor of Asia programs at DW, Germany's international broadcaster. He also hosts the independent podcast "Myanmar in a PodShell" and has authored several academic papers on Southeast Asia. Most recently, he published a German translation of Vũ Trọng Phụng's famous novel "Số đỏ".

DR. TAKASHI HOSODA

Abstract

The term "Indo-Pacific" has become a trend, even though the definition and expectations of the term, as well as the political will and available assets to allocate for it, vary widely among participants. European countries and the EU's Indo-Pacific Guidelines, point to a shifting geopolitical and geoeconomic center of gravity to the East and cite environmental issues, sustainable development goals, maintaining free trade systems, and maritime security as concerns. However, the primary concern of the Indo-Pacific countries is how to deal with a rising (or already raised) China although not pointed out directly. China has become so powerful and assertive, both economic and military term, some ASEAN countries that have adopted a policy of non-alignment and neutrality are beginning to choose to ensure their own security by bandwagoning with China. In addition, many countries are not taking a firm stance against China in the hope of gains from trade and direct investment. In addition, Russian invasion of Ukraine has had a variety of effects on the international community, and there is a growing concern within Asian countries that Russia's actions may serve as a model for China's unilateral behavior on the Taiwan issue. Furthermore, Beijing continues and deepens its strategic partnership of coordination with Russia and indicates the possibility of a sharpening challenge to U.S. hegemony. This challenge and confrontation will be first visible in the South China Sea (in the East China Sea, deterrence of the U.S.-Japan alliance is in effect. Taiwan also has the Taiwan Relations Act, although it is a domestic law of the U.S.). The phase of conceptualization of Indo-Pacific cooperation by each country is over. We are now in the phase of how to make the ASEAN approach of "inviting other external countries to neutralize the coercive projection of an external power" work. Protecting the "rule of law" principle from "rule of gun" or "rule of bills" approaches, Japan, the first advocator of Free and Open Indo-Pacific (FOIP), need to keep involvement and contribution of European countries that share our values in the Indo-Pacific, amid the Russian military threat is a real challenge for Europe.

Presenter

Takashi Hosoda, Ph.D., is a Japanese international political scientist and security studies scholar living in the Czech Republic. He is a lecturer at the Faculty of Social Sciences of Charles University. His research focuses on China's "Multi-domain Military-Civil fusion" warfare, Japan-European maritime security/space security cooperation, security observation of the Indo-Pacific theater including the East China Sea/South China Sea, as well as on possible Taiwan contingency.

His recent publications include:
“National Identity, National Pride, and ‘Armed force’ in Japan–How to verify the existence of pacifist culture in Japan-,” Identity, culture, and memory in Japanese Foreign Policy, PETER LANG, New York, February 2021.

"Considering New Geopolitical Analysis on Japan-China Equivocal Relations,"
Geopolitics in the Twenty-First Century, Nova Science Publisher, January 2021.