Will China’s smart strategy in the South China Sea push things one step too far?

The situation in the South China Sea has changed markedly since tensions re-emerged in the spring of 2009, when Beijing submitted an official note to the UN in which it used the “nine-dash line” to support its claim that the South China Sea belongs to China. The recent discovery of the deployment of an advanced surface-to-air missile system on Woody Island is yet another development in a long chain of events marked by deteriorating relations between China and other regional stakeholders, namely Vietnam, the Philippines and the US.

READ MORE: Vietnam protests ‘serious violation of sovereignty’ after China deploys missile system to disputed island in South China Sea

China has an inherent advantage in challenging opponents with diverging interests. Claims made by Hanoi and Manila not only overlap with Beijing’s but also with each other. What both have in common is relative weakness vis-à-vis China, which leads them to solicit US support. However, Washington’s primary concern lies in safeguarding freedom of navigation rather than supporting dubious claims of concerned parties, even if one of them, the Philippines, is a US treaty ally.

The US responded to the Chinese island-building spree with freedom of navigation operations, which ostensibly challenge not only Chinese territorial claims. However, unsurprisingly, Hanoi and Manila do not protest against the US actions. China does protest, but it is doubtful that any number of freedom of navigation operations will make Beijing worry so much that it would reconsider its approach. If anything, these operations justify Chinese military deployment in the eyes of the Chinese people.

READ MORE: China may send anti-ship missiles to disputed South China Sea to beef up defence: analysts

The Association of Southeast Asian Nations, the region’s foremost integration project, does not cause great headaches for China, either. The interests of Vietnam and the Philippines to have Asean address Beijing’s actions in the neighbourhood are balanced by states with notoriously Beijing-leaning policies, such as Laos or Cambodia. This result is perhaps disappointing for everyone who wishes that Asean would speak with one voice, but quite understandable, considering China’s regional clout. The US-Asean Special Leaders’ Summit in Sunnylands was a great opportunity to respond to the latest development, but instead it produced yet another joint statement full of references to general principles.

In addition to divided opponents, Beijing has adopted a well-crafted approach in making its presence seen and felt. It is typically the Chinese coastguard, and not the PLA Navy, that patrols disputed waters, supported by Chinese fishermen, acting as agents of the state. The South China Sea’s militarisation is not an end game. It is a method of choice. Beijing seeks to have infrastructure in place that allows for force projection if the situation requires it. The island building was the game changer; deployments of surface-to-air missile systems, combat jets, or mobile anti-ship missiles represent the force posturing that the newly built infrastructure enables.

In that sense, it matters little whether the artificial islands built on Fiery Cross Reef or Mischief Reef have a permanent military presence or that the new airfields do not have combat jets present at all times. The infrastructure is in place, and no one should be surprised when Beijing starts moving advanced weapons around.