• Sun
  • Dec 21, 2014
  • Updated: 6:45am
My Take
PUBLISHED : Thursday, 05 December, 2013, 4:27am
UPDATED : Thursday, 05 December, 2013, 4:27am

Security, not power, is Beijing's goal in air defence zone dispute

"The gains from control over a few uninhabited rocks are vastly outweighed by the risks."

Here's a comment by a respected British commentator that perfectly summarises the bafflement of outsiders about China's territorial disputes in the South and East China Seas. Face, nationalism, historical grievances, anti-Americanism, anti-Japanese sentiments, regional dominance or hegemony ... Critics have marshalled one or more of these elements to explain China's behaviour. Or, China is Germany 1914 all over again. Funny how no one ever cited Bismarck's unified Germany after 1870, whose diplomacy secured European peace for a generation.

To a disinterested observer, all those China "explanations" must seem unconvincing or unsatisfying. First, is Beijing staking its foreign policy on nationalist feelings over the Diaoyu Islands? Or is it the other way around: the nationalist/historical issue over the Diaoyus is only part of an overall foreign policy - but doesn't drive or explain it? One thing you know for sure is that imposing an "air defence identification zone" that includes the Diaoyus is not an ad hoc, one- step-at-a-time dumb chess move. It's part of an overall strategic conception with its own goal, purpose and rationale.

Let's start with the Hobbesian thesis: every country feels threatened or insecure; China especially so. Despite its new-found wealth, its military can't fight overseas other than invading Taiwan. Its shipping and supply lanes are patrolled by a powerful rival, the US, and it's encircled geographically by countries allied to the US. Its hold on Tibet and Xinjiang are constantly challenged. It can buy client states in Africa and Latin America but has no genuine defence allies. The overwhelming foreign policy goal of Beijing is therefore not dominance but security. Within this framework, sometimes it goes along with other world powers, such as over Iran's and North Korea's nuclear ambitions; sometimes it provokes them, such as with the air defence zone. Sometimes, it just miscalculates. So is China a status quo or revisionist power? The best answer is: it doesn't want to overthrow the US-led international security and economic architecture, but demands adjustments within it.


For unlimited access to:

SCMP.com SCMP Tablet Edition SCMP Mobile Edition 10-year news archive



This article is now closed to comments

Ah, Pierce m'boy, old habits die hard. I see you're completely reverted to your usual state, where you say very little with many words. And 2 posts within a minute of one another, that are nearly verbatim copies of each other! Was it so nice that you had to say it twice? I wouldn't have thought so, but then you do operate by somewhat lower standards...
You know what else amuses me about you: you need to keep telling me that I have "losing arguments". It harkens back to childhood days in schoolyards, when playmates would debate each other with resounding conviction that "I'm better / NO I'm better". You're great for nostalgia. Ah Pierce m'boy, I'm finding more and more uses for you. I wonder what form of usefulness you'll conjure up next. I look forward to it.
And you know what I'm not looking forward to? Your explanation of why the ADIZ is important for Chinese security, or for its sovereignty claims. By now, we know you have no answers. And truth be told, as befits a CCP apologist, I was never expecting you to have any.
A devil won’t be a devil without coherence
After losing arguments, 666 has lost his soul
Worst than a devil, his self-portrayal shows
disintegrating garbage
Your “disorientation” is well publicized
no need to keep whining “Pierce m’boy”
and mumbling your stock of tiresome rubbish
DNA, apologist, fun, laugh …
But of course need is not your concern
What we observe is involuntary exhibition of your mental condition
that explains why you may never realize
that you asked and answered your own “questions”
You keep begging because
subjectively they’re “important” to you
but objectively like their questioner
they’re nothing if not worse than nonsense
I have no qualm to tell you 過主
which you should enjoy with another good laugh
So 過主 and good laugh it’d be
See below that 666 still can't see why 66
and why a ? after 66
The ? after 66 was for him to fill in his id
What a studpid 666 !
And he dares to ask further silly questions
and want anwsers for those rubbish
No wonder why he is so shameless!
Well Pierce m'boy, going with the triple 6's now, hey? Better late than never, and even funnier that I had to help you out with your own smack talk. Your capabilities truly are limitless.
Asked and answered? Well, I have the answers, certainly. Does the ADIZ increase China's security? Not unless you're on glue. Does the ADIZ change China's position regarding the sovereignty claims of the Diaoyu's? Not unless you're on crack. You, on the other hand, haven't answered them. Sure, they're rhetorical questions, meant to expose you as the typical CCP apologist who has no answers but lacks the character to acknowledge it. So mission accomplished there. But that comes as no surprise to anybody.
Hey, if you don't want to answer questions, don't worry about it. I like finding places where you're intellectually bankrupt, then poking a stick at it repeatedly. They're not hard to find, of course, but pastimes aren't meant to be hard work. I ask questions of you with the expectation that you can't, and won't, answer them. You're just my daily self-fulfilling prophecy. It seems you are becoming more useful by the day. You should be so proud.
You still can't see why 66
and why a ? after 66
The ? after 66 was for your to fill in your id
What a studpid 666 !
And you dare to ask further silly questions
and want anwsers for those rubbish
No wonder why you're so shameless!
Ah Pierce m'boy, I knew it couldn't last. With CCP apologists, it never does. Any momentary lapse into intelligent thought and sanity is invariably followed by a downward spiral back into the depths wherefore they came.
Indeed, no one need worry what I think about the funny angles of China's new ADIZ. But remember, you seemed to suggest that this ADIZ was supposed to increase China's security. The question is how. No number of straw men can obscure the fact that you haven't provided an answer. That, of course, is nothing new, for when a CCP apologist is presented with a question they can't answer, their DNA and training demands that they obfuscate...and you're right on cue.
Your other assertion was that the ADIZ would somehow renew China's sovereignty claim over those islands. Hence, i asked if anyone was of the opinion that China had relinquished such claims...cuz y'know, if those claims were in force all along, then this ADIZ does bupkis in that regard. Again, the silence is deafening from Pierce m'boy here. Again, no surprise...but I always enjoy pointing out the things that CCP apologists can't answer...and they are varied and numerous.
Anyhow, i am grateful for your time, as you do amuse me so thoroughly, and as I've suggested previously, the laughter you provide is just so good for my health. Less tasty than malbec, of course, but good for me nonetheless. So cheers, m'boy. A la sante.
So you make yourself more secure by making your neighbors less secure. Good idea, Alex. You earned your paycheck from the Ministry of Propaganda this week.
With advance in computational operations
what used to be acceptable proofs
are found to contain a lot of overlooked steps
One can’t be too sure of one’s correctness
Many are trapped in the vicious cycle of bigotry <-> ignorance
Nevertheless, there are standards
Wittgenstein’s “I don’t know” isn’t the same as yours
But your intellectual enlightenment may begin
when you learn to say ”I don’t know”
China took Japan’s self-restraint in its “administration” of Diaoyus
as Japan’s tacit recognition of sovereignty dispute
though formally Japan never recognizes de facto disputes
Security was a non-issue
when both sides shelved their sovereignty disputes
Japan changed the status quo
when it unilaterally “nationalized” the islands
thus bringing security to the front page
and incurring China’s response with its ADIZ covering the Diaoyus
In fact Japan is trying to copy China’s strategic success
that was thoroughly impressive from beginning to end
over a river island if only because of its lack of publicity
A Russian officer once disclosed part of it in Foreign Affairs
As far as the bell curve is believable
where no immediate personal interests are affected
intellectually you’d do better by following cerebral superiors
I recognize writers by their ideas
Ideas and not the writers' id show me their standards
Borelli could be tinker, tailor, soldier, SV, ... or whATever
I won't care less

Sovereignty is a two way street. Someone has to assert it, then others have to recognize and accept it. Clearly, with these islands, that's not happening soon, in any/either direction. Yes, Japan moved the needle somewhat by "nationalizing" the islands, but that hardly equates to sovereignty since nobody recognizes and accepts Japan's claim. Did people feel that, prior to this ADIZ, China had relinquished her claim to those islands? If not, then how far does this ADIZ move the needle? And remember, on a literal level, this ADIZ doesn't confer ownership of the airspace, let alone the surface topography. So what does it accomplish, apart from telling us what we already know?
And what does security have to do with it? Seriously, an airspace with a funny-angled perimeter increases Chinese security? How? Like I said, all the other stuff is just window dressing and a waste of time, +/- some amusing exercise for nationalist hotheads to get their jollies. The ultimate objective is still oil and gas, and the answer still lies in cooperative exploration.
But anyway, you're on a roll. Two posts in a row with some actual discernible content. And I'm not the one around here with difficulty recognizing and acknowledging limitations. You must still be in denial if you think otherwise.




SCMP.com Account