China's failure at special summit with ASEAN

China may have made it difficult for ASEAN to come up with a common voice on the East Sea issue, but it has failed to carry out its grand plans.

Special meeting between ASEAN and Chinese foreign ministers. Photo: Reuters

Writing about the ASEAN-China foreign ministers' meeting in Kunming, China this week, the Diplomat's Southeast Asia columnist,Prashanth Parameswaran,China has once again intervened to prevent ASEAN from issuing a joint statement on the South China Sea, just as it did in Cambodia in 2012.

Some may argue that this is another success for China in its divide-and-conquer strategy, as it curry favor with some ASEAN countries to erode unity within the bloc.However, according toPrashanthWhen studying in depth China's intentions before the meeting as well as the reactions of ASEAN in general and member countries in particular, it can be seen that in this incident, Beijing failed to achieve its original intended goal.

From what Chinese officials have repeatedly mentioned and pointed out before the meeting, Beijing clearly wants the meeting's outcome to emphasize three main points.

First, Beijing wants to demonstrate that China and each ASEAN country are capable of handling differences in the South China Sea issue without outside interference, including the upcoming ruling by the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA), which is hearing the Philippines' lawsuit against China's unilaterally-made "nine-dash line" sovereignty claim in the South China Sea.

Second, China wants the East Sea issue not to be "blown up" and affect China's relations with some Southeast Asian countries, because this is just an issue in the successful dialogue relationship between China and ASEAN, when both sides are celebrating the 25th anniversary of relations.

Ultimately, China wants the South China Sea to be not an issue between China and the entire ASEAN bloc, but a bilateral issue between Beijing and four Southeast Asian countries with overlapping claims, including Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia and Brunei.

Failure

Parameswaran believes that mAlthough China succeeded in making it difficult for ASEAN to issue a joint statement, it could not achieve all three points mentioned above.

In the first objective – demonstrating that China and individual ASEAN countries are capable of handling their differences on the South China Sea issue without outside interference – the Kunming meeting itself was the clearest demonstration that ASEAN and China cannot handle this issue successfully on their own, as Beijing continues to deliberately undermine ASEAN unity and prevent the bloc from taking its own stance, while criticizing individual ASEAN countries when they seek other ways to resolve their differences, and criticizing countries outside the region such as the United States when Washington expresses legitimate concerns.

According to a Southeast Asian diplomat familiar with the Kunming situation, ASEAN had prepared a statement like Malaysia’s, and China knew about it in advance. But instead of letting ASEAN announce its agreed position, Beijing pressed for a withdrawal after it had been made public to some media outlets. Instead of working with ASEAN to resolve the issue, with each side either conciliating or stating its position, China chose to undermine ASEAN’s ability to make its own case.

The second objective – to stress that the South China Sea issue should not be “blown away” as it is just one issue in the otherwise successful dialogue relationship between China and ASEAN in the context of the 25th anniversary – was also not achieved. The joint statement that Malaysia said should be withdrawn was a pretty strong message. It was essentially divided into two parts – the first one was about ASEAN-China relations in general and the preparations for the 25th anniversary. Parameswaran suggested that this was included only to temper criticism of the second part, which was all about the South China Sea issue.

The second part of the statement not only mentions major principles such as peace and stability, freedom of navigation and overflight, or efforts to develop a code of conduct, but also specifically mentions the negative impact of the East Sea issue on ASEAN-China relations. The second part of the statement is quite long, consisting of many paragraphs. The length of this part and the frankness in the language of the document are considered the toughest ever, almost directly criticizing China on the East Sea issue.

Typically, ASEAN joint statements have limited concerns about the South China Sea to one or a few short paragraphs, without directly addressing the grievances of the most vocal ASEAN members. The Kunming event, however, was a special meeting of ASEAN-China foreign ministers rather than a regular ASEAN summit, and the South China Sea was the main topic of the meeting. Malaysia’s statement was much tougher than the soft approach Beijing had hoped ASEAN would adopt.

Parameswaran said that despite Malaysia’s withdrawal, it was clear that most Southeast Asian countries had reached enough consensus on a formal document to convey their concerns to Beijing on the South China Sea issue with unprecedented forcefulness. Therefore, the appearance of this document should be appreciated regardless.

The third point – emphasizing that the South China Sea is not an issue between ASEAN and China as a whole but a bilateral issue between Beijing and four Southeast Asian countries with overlapping claims – is not only weak, but also clearly contradictory. This is most clearly demonstrated by the nature of the meeting itself – a special meeting between ASEAN and Chinese foreign ministers, focused primarily on the South China Sea issue.

The responses of non-claimant states, such as Singapore and Indonesia, are also noteworthy. Singapore plays a key role as coordinator between China and ASEAN. It called for the special meeting and expressed its displeasure at Beijing’s efforts to divide ASEAN ahead of the PCA’s ruling. Singapore even issued its own press release—a clear signal of its displeasure. Like Malaysia’s retraction, eight of the 13 lines of Singapore’s statement focused on concerns that ASEAN foreign ministers had conveyed to China about the South China Sea.

Indonesia, Southeast Asia’s largest country and one that has been less vocal about the South China Sea issue, issued a separate statement at the event, saying that it would be difficult to achieve peace and freedom without respect for international law. These moves by non-claimant countries show that Beijing has been unsuccessful in its attempt to show that the South China Sea dispute is only between it and the four Southeast Asian countries with overlapping claims.

Although the three points China sought to achieve were not advanced at the Kunming meeting, that did not stop Beijing from “declaring victory.” At a press conference on June 15, where about six out of 15 questions were about the Kunming meeting, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Lu Kang said there was no joint statement and there were no sharp disagreements between ASEAN countries and China on the South China Sea issue.

However, Parameswaran commented that the quick and decisive responses of Malaysia issuing an initial joint statement, the countries involved issuing separate statements, and no joint press conference after the meeting clearly refuted China's argument.

“The important point at the Kunming summit was not China’s attempt to divide ASEAN, but rather the effort by a majority of Southeast Asian countries to both express their concerns at an unprecedented level and push back against Beijing’s efforts to prevent them from doing so,” the writer wrote.

According to VNE