mead cohen berger shevtsova garfinkle michta grygiel blankenhorn
Asia's Game of Thrones
China Says It’s Done Building Islands

Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi has announced that his country has stopped its land reclamation works in the Spratly islands, which have so far yielded it seven islands comprising hundreds of acres of prime territory for building such things as military bases, runways, and seaports. Reuters has more:

Wang’s remarks at a regional meeting in Kuala Lumpur appeared designed to defuse tensions with other countries that lay claim to parts of the sea, through which $5 trillion in ship-borne trade passes every year. […]

When asked by a reporter whether China would temporarily halt reclamation work in the strategic waterway, he replied: “China has already stopped. You just take an aeroplane to take a look.”

Philippine foreign ministry spokesman Charles Jose said China had stopped reclamation because it had already formed its new islands.

“At the same time, China announced they are moving on to Phase 2, which is construction of facilities on the reclaimed features. The Philippines views these activities as destabilizing,” Jose said.

This news fulfills the promise of China’s June announcement that it would be finished with the land reclamation shortly, but it wouldn’t be wise to take it as a sign that tensions in the South China Sea will go away any time soon. In the first place, China can now use the islands themselves and station military aircraft on them, which is a big plus for the country. But even that’s not the prize Beijing is after.

What China really wants is official or de facto acceptance of its claim to the territory around the islands, the right to implement exclusive economic zones, and the ability to set up an ADIZ that neighbors and the U.S. will all respect. Moreover, Beijing is seeking mineral rights both to the seabed around the islands and through the roughly 90 percent of the South China Sea it claims as its own.

Even though Beijing is past building the islands (we hope), the pursuit of these further goals, especially the next big issue of the ADIZ, is likely to keep temperatures high in the region.

Features Icon
Features
show comments
  • Jacksonian_Libertarian

    The push back must be getting to them, that they are now trying to consolidate their outrageous and treaty violating territorial claims. China’s extreme strategic weakness is that all of the nations it is enraging sit on its only shipping lanes. A strategic blockade would permanently end decades of rising economic success, costing China most of its world market share overnight in a very decisive way.

    • Dhako

      So, tell us, dear lad, who do you think, other than you, is going to “strategically blockade” China? I mean, is one thing to shoot the breeze with a particular delusion of the kind that says American’s exceptional-ism is what other country are envious off, even, if half of America will be happy to exchange the bogus assumption of their country’s exceptional-ism with a decent growth of their stagnant take-home-pay, which they have been dealing with since early 2000s.

      But, to talk that China is one economical blockade away from total economical disaster, presumes that there is a country in this world who is sufficient military and economical hyper-power, that nation could do inflict such a pain on China without even getting any thing of a equal pain in return.

      Now, you and others of the Neo-Con’s school of thought may think Uncle Sam could do such, but in the real world out there, particularly the one that has no truck with any self-serving delusion, will inform anyone, that Uncle Sam is not in a position to imposed this sort of blockade on China without getting seriously bloodied in return to point of running the risk of starting a third world war.

      Consequently, fortunately for US, apart from the usual bluster by some, it’s the case, that a sensible and sober folks seems to be the ones running the strategy of the US towards China.

  • Fat_Man

    They got 18 more months free.

© The American Interest LLC 2005-2016 About Us Masthead Submissions Advertise Customer Service