High-seas tensions ebb, but for how long?
A headline in the China Daily yesterday declared that the 'Sino-US sea standoff appears to have ended'. While the claim from Beijing may well bring relief to regional capitals, most observing tensions in the South China Sea fear it will only be short-term.
Headlines with an air of permanence - 'Historic sea disputes solved, bold new era of peaceful co-operation begins' - remain the stuff of fantasy; the South China Sea, it should be remembered, remains a complex and fraught arena.
The standoff happened a fortnight ago between a US surveillance vessel and five Chinese vessels 120km southwest of Hainan Island, and was a bizarre affair. As mainland trawlers approached, the unarmed USNS Impeccable turned on its fire hoses. The Chinese sailors stripped to their underwear as their boats moved even closer.
Amid fierce rhetoric from Beijing, the Pentagon moved a destroyer into the area to patrol as the Impeccable continued its work, towing giant undersea radars to track submarines and gather data useful to America's submarine force.
While tensions may have ebbed, the incident has highlighted the issues at stake in a long-disputed stretch of sea. China has built a base in the south of Hainan for its expanding fleet of nuclear submarines, while the US appears determined to maintain its presence as the region's top military power.
One retired PLA general said the trawlers wanted to send a message to the US that the waters off Hainan were not the Gulf of Mexico 'where they could enter and exit freely'.
But international experts on the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea say they are exactly that. Just as China's navy could transit waters deemed to be part of a US exclusive economic zone, so could the US in the South China Sea, as it has for decades. The US knows, however, that China's military rise means any activities off its coasts will be scrutinised more closely. Both sides look set to intensify the mutual effort described in naval circles as 'watching their ships watching us'.
The incident has hardly happened in a vacuum. Less visibly, recent months have seen a flurry of activity involving the South China Sea - one of the world's busiest shipping lanes and a conduit for more than half the world's oil-tanker traffic. A good share of that oil heads to Japan, Washington's great strategic ally in East Asia.
To the south, US commercial interests have been expanding as neighbouring Vietnam continues to develop oil exploration in deals with international partners. China has quietly put the US and other foreign firms on notice that they risk harming future mainland business should they sign deals with Vietnam in waters it disputes. Some of these are around the Spratly Islands - claimed by Beijing and, in full or in part, by Taiwan, Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia and Brunei - and the Paracel Islands, which mainland China occupies but which Taiwan and Vietnam claim. The areas are seen as rich in oil and gas and with potential for fishing and tourism.
Washington has been active in recent months in nurturing its military and diplomatic relationship with its former enemy in Hanoi. Senior US diplomats have defended US oil activity in Vietnam, while US naval officials have discussed South China Sea security and the prospect of more ship visits. They have also discreetly encouraged Vietnam's own naval expansion - something being watched closely in Beijing.
One of the most recent visitors was Admiral Robert Willard, head of the US Pacific fleet. He was in talks in Hanoi just as Pentagon colleagues were making public the Hainan Island incident. Yesterday he was promoted to replace Admiral Timothy Keating as head of all US forces in Asia and the Pacific.
Admiral Willard, like his predecessor, has recently claimed a desire to work more closely with a growing Chinese military. The tensions in the South China Sea underscore how important that task has become - and how difficult it may be to achieve.
