Unpacking South China Sea dispute
In November, Kieran Ireland participated in a young leaders programme as part of the 8th South China Sea Conference in Nha Trang City, Vietnam. In this article, he describes the conference and what he learnt by attending it.
Kieran Ireland (pictured): "I initially despaired at the gap between the magnitude and severity of the challenge and what states seemed willing to do to resolve it peacefully."
The conference brought together academic, diplomatic, military and other professionals engaged in the South China Sea issue. The objective was to unpack the dispute and better understand how to defuse the region’s status as a flashpoint for international tension.
Participants of the conference outlined an array of challenges, from the creeping militarisation to the environmental challenges this region faces, but also provided practical ideas on how to navigate these nascent crises.
The conference took a comprehensive approach to the South China Sea tensions. First, the origins and likely short-term prospects of regional disputes were detailed, before examining in turn:
the impact of international law on the issue
its politico-economic significance
its security, political, and diplomatic dimensions
the issue of coordinating and negotiating the myriad maritime encounters that lend themselves to conflict
the mechanisms for managing tensions and their potential for success.
With all of these issues laid out before me, I initially despaired at the gap between the magnitude and severity of the challenge and what states seemed willing to do to resolve it peacefully.
If the disputes of the region are to be understood as a result of the extension of littoral states’ discrete national interests, with limited space for compromise, how could one expect anything to be done? This moment of pessimism was, however, offset upon reflection on the rest of the conference.
Although it was true that the speakers laid out a series of convincing points about how concerning the South China Sea issue is, at no point did any of them seem to conclude that this made the situation hopeless. Indeed, the general mood was one of cautious optimism in the face of an apparently intractable conflicting interests.
Yes, the disputes in the South China Sea are complex, the consensus went, but that did not mean that there was no way forward.
Very few people in the room wore rose-tinted glasses about the prospects for peace and cooperation in the South China Sea, but they made every effort to be realistic about the small, practical steps which could be taken to get closer to that goal.
For instance, while Dr Sébastien Colin’s frank statement that, failing drastic action, “When we meet here again in five years’ time, we will all be eating farmed fish” due to the complete collapse of regional fisheries was a grim prognosis, his talk also focused on the possibilities for averting this catastrophe.
My own place at the conference, as a member of the young leaders’ group, furthered this thought process, as we were called upon to propose our own ideas on avenues for cooperation in the South China Sea. It was a condensed version of the Track-II system in itself, as a group of disparate young academics met, exchanged ideas, and workshopped what could be done.
We were expected to come up with out-of-the-box approaches to the dispute and were encouraged to be optimistic; the idea being that our solutions should be long-term goals. I’d like to think that we did so, promoting measures like the establishment of a regional network of young leaders and a regional mechanism for coordinating fisheries regulations that offered ways to minimise the misunderstandings underpinning those tensions.
This is where I drew a major conclusion from the conference: the value of Track II exercises. While my initial response to the incremental solutions advocated at the conference table was one of impatience and frustration, it dawned upon me as the proceedings progressed that this slow and steady approach is perhaps the purpose of the exercise.
That is, participants came away with a fuller picture of the situation by removing hard and fast goals, and simply allowing academics, government officials, and military figures from across the globe to meet and discuss the issue, often debating points civilly and agreeing in many cases to disagree.
The participants compressed into that room for two days could properly engage in the business of unofficial diplomacy and the free exchange of ideas and information. It is not and was not as glamorous a task as the tropical backdrop against which it took place, but it is a vital one that I am grateful to have been able to witness.
When the USS Wiliam P. Lawrence approached Fiery Cross Reef as part of a freedom of navigation operation in May 2016, Chinese fighter jets were scrambled to demand the destroyer leave immediately.
Kieran Ireland is undertaking a Masters in Strategic Studies at Victoria University of Wellington. His Master's thesis is on the South China Sea disputes and their significance to New Zealand as an interested player in the Asia-Pacific region. His participation in the conference was supported by the Asia New Zealand Foundation, which coordinates New Zealand’s Track II (informal diplomacy) engagement in the Asia region.
The South China Sea conference was organised by the Diplomatic Academy of Vietnam – a Track II partner of the Asia New Zealand Foundation.
