India to Asean: We will not intervene in China dispute

A+
A
A-

NEW DELHI—Southeast Asian countries on Thursday urged India to intervene to help resolve bitter territorial disputes with China in the West Philippine Sea (South China Sea), saying it was “crucial” to maintaining peace and stability.

But India’s foreign minister insisted the territorial disputes between China and Southeast Asian nations did not require India’s intervention.

The 10-member Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) called on India—which vowed to promote cooperation on trade and maritime security with the countries—to take a more decisive stance in the region.

Vietnamese Premier Nguyen Tan Dung asked for New Delhi’s direct intervention over West Philippine Sea territorial disputes while Burmese President Thein Sein said India’s role was “crucial” to ensuring peace and stability in the region.

China is in an increasingly angry dispute with several of its neighbors over claims to parts of the oil- and gas-rich sea. It claims almost of the whole sea, including waters close to the shores of its neighbors. These areas also include major sea-lanes through which nearly half of global trade passes.

China’s claim is contested by the Philippines as well as Brunei, Malaysia, Taiwan and Vietnam, which have overlapping claims to some or all of those same areas.

Insisting on its claim, China has issued a new passport with a map that shows all parts of the sea that it says are its territory, including parts disputed by its Southeast Asian rivals.

The Philippines and Vietnam protested the new passport and refused to put their stamps on it, while India issued a new passport with a map showing border territory it is disputing with China.

New border rules

Three weeks ago, China’s southern Hainan province announced new regulations that would authorize Chinese border patrols to board, search and expel foreign ships that would enter what China considered its territorial waters.

It is believed that the new rules, which will come into force on Jan. 1, have Beijing’s approval, and Asean members the Philippines and Vietnam are worried Chinese action according to those rules could lead to clashes in the sea.

Wu Sichun, head of the Hainan foreign affairs office, said in early December that the new rules were partly a response to an increase in Vietnamese fishing boats operating around the Paracel Islands, which both countries claim.

Vietnam condemned China’s claims as a serious violation of its sovereignty after saying it was setting up patrols to protect its fisheries and accusing Chinese boats of sabotaging a Vietnamese survey vessel in the disputed sea.

The Vietnamese foreign ministry said the sabotage and the new Chinese maritime rules “complicated” the territorial dispute between the two countries.

China, the Vietnamese foreign ministry said, must respect Vietnam’s sovereignty and “immediately stop all this wrong actions and make sure they are not repeated.”

Standoff

The Philippines remains in a standoff with China at the Panatag Shoal (Scarborough Shoal), a resource-rich reef within the Philippine exclusive economic zone.

Triggered by Chinese poaching on the reef, the standoff between Philippine and Chinese maritime law enforcement vessels began in early April and ended in mid-June when stormy weather forced President Aquino to order Manila’s ships home.

But Mr. Aquino promised to send the ships back unless the Chinese vessels withdrew from the shoal.

They never did. The Philippine Coast Guard is waiting for orders to deploy from Malacañang.

US wants clarification

The United States is seeking clarification on the new Chinese border rules. US Ambassador to China Gary Locke told Reuters in early December that the new rules were unclear as their extent and purpose.

“The US government very much wants clarification of what these rules mean, how they will be interpreted by the Hainan government and marine enforcement agencies and the purpose of these rules,” Locke said.

The United States has taken a neutral stand on the territorial disputes between China and its allies in Southeast Asia. But Washington has made it clear that it has “national interest” in freedom of navigation in the disputed seas.

The disputed waters link India to Southeast Asia and the Pacific, but India already has its own border dispute with China and does not seem keen about concerning itself with the territorial disputes between China and Southeast Asian nations.

India’s foreign minister, Salman Khurshid, said the West Philippine Sea disputes did not require his country’s intervention.

“Doing something about it includes not doing something about it,” Khurshid said, adding that issues of sovereignty “need to be resolved between the countries concerned.”

“China knows it, India knows it that there is too much to lose if we don’t overcome issues from time to time,” he said.

Broadening trade

Relations between India and China are often prickly and marked by mutual distrust—a legacy of a brief border war in 1962—but they are trying to broaden trade ties despite political tensions.

China’s trade with Asean countries is far greater than India’s, but 20 years after the latter launched a “Look East” policy New Delhi’s trade with Southeast Asian nations is increasing.

Trade between the two was $80 billion last year compared with $47 billion in 2008.

Disclaimer: The comments uploaded on this site do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of management and owner of INQUIRER.net. We reserve the right to exclude comments that we deem to be inconsistent with our editorial standards.

  • mountainecho

    Both Lapu Lapu and HABAGAT read and quoted too selectively one-sided biased propaganda.  Fact is, shortly after the 1962 war with China, the Indian government commissioned a government study of the circumstances surrounding the war, but has kept it under wraps (so much for democracy) even till now in order to keep the Indian people from knowing the truth.  Instead, the people were fed with one-sided claims of the sort you just made here on this forum.  Truth be told, it was Nehru’s “forward policy” of setting up military outposts in disputed territory that provoked the Chinese counter-offensive.  For authoritative 3rd party account of this conflict, read up on British journalist Neville Maxwell. 

    In the last year or so, more and more Indian media have learned to reexamine their old stand, and questioned the Indian government’s role in this conflict.  But it will be a monumental task for people on the street to learn and modify their long-held beliefs.  It’s always much easier to blame the other party than to blame yourself, especially where nationalism is involved.

    Nationalism is a double-edged sword.  And democracy is not a panacea for all problems.  Hitler was democratically elected.  See where German nationalism led the country in WWII.

  • mountainecho

    No need for Brahmos.  China will not waste its $100m warship on the PH.  You see China always use its force in a low-key and deliberate way.  In both naval conflicts with Vietnam, China only used equal force.  In the Scarborough Shoal standoff, China sent in unarmed maritime surveillance vessels to face down the 3200 ton Gregorio del Pilar equipped with a 76mm main gun.  The way China does things, it will use ropes to seal off islands before sending in big warships.  There are many options in between, such as sending in fishing fleets proteted by unarmed civiloian government ships.  By the time China gives the PH an excuse to use its missile on its navy, you can bet that Gregorio del Pilar would have already been sunk to the bottom of the sea.  China would be careful in escalating the conflict, and only in response to perceived provocation, to keep US navy at bay and an ear on world opinion.  Problem for the PH is that no matter how much weapon it procures, China always has an edge on the ability to escalate.

    • topolcats

      Your comments are fairly learned compared to the rest of the blogger’s here. 
      You make some very good points, specially about the proportionate use of force by Chinese forces in any provocative actions the US puppet state called the PH may instigate.
      Of course China will insure the use of subtle defence as it has shown in the past when dealing with the diplomatically clumsy PH.  
       
      Incidentally I am totally perplexed as to why some of the PH blogger would think the PI may acquire an Brahmos????????

      It just not on the cards for several reasons,

      1. The very first is that any export license has to be approved by both Russia and India……Jointly!……..it is extremely unlikely Russia will approve a license to the PH. 

      Which is the reason none have been exported so far except to each other.

      2. Moreover the weapon is intertwined with the Russian Glasnost satellite system 

      3. Russia and indeed India if it sold to the PH would know for sure the missile would be shipped to Washington for inspection, despite the export license prohibiting such intrusion on its secrets.

      4. China being Russia’s number one trading partner and friend in an event of its use by hostile forces,,,,, the source codes may well be compromised by Russia to help China, as Israel helped Russia with source codes in the Georgia invasion of Ossetia, Russia’s ally.         

      I keep hearing Filipinos talking about the Brahmos as a panacea for all ills,but all the talk about the Bramos being acquired by the Flips is simply pure Rubbish!

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_2UMHGIG2H4KOHCAOA5H7VMKLQY CAJUN

    Are you telling us? AND WHY NOT ? The Chinese are greedy, so we need all efforts to pressure them back to their country!

    • topolcats

      History dictates thus far with empirical evidence is that “the most greedy nation on earth is the USA!”  

To subscribe to the Philippine Daily Inquirer newspaper in the Philippines, call +63 2 896-6000 for Metro Manila and Metro Cebu or email your subscription request here.

Factual errors? Contact the Philippine Daily Inquirer's day desk. Believe this article violates journalistic ethics? Contact the Inquirer's Reader's Advocate. Or write The Readers' Advocate:

c/o Philippine Daily Inquirer Chino Roces Avenue corner Yague and Mascardo Streets, Makati City,Metro Manila, Philippines Or fax nos. +63 2 8974793 to 94

editors' picks

advertisement
advertisement