With a ruling imminent in the arbitration case initiated by the Philippines against China over claims in the South China Sea, officials around Asia are bracing for the results, while analysts are busy handicapping the potential fallout.
As I wait for the verdict, I prefer to abide by Yogi Berra’s wise dictum: “It’s tough to make predictions, especially about the future.” Southeast Asia seems topsy-turvy at the moment—there’s a new and unpredictable president in the Philippines, and the usually domestic policy focused Indonesian president is thumping his chest (metaphorically, of course) on a warship in the South China Sea. For these reasons, I’m going to steer clear from making bold predictions or grand statements about how the arbitration case will determine the course of history in Asia.
But the issues at stake are significant and potentially explosive. And while one can’t fully predict what will happen, we know what to watch for in the days, weeks, and months after the ruling. Here’s a quick guide for viewers at home.
Regional Reactions
In the wake of the ruling, the Philippines and China will continue jousting with one another to shape the international reaction. The United States and others will continue to reaffirm the right of countries to use international legal mechanisms to resolve disputes and encourage both sides to abide by the ruling. Meanwhile, China will continue to maintain that the court has no jurisdiction over the South China Sea disputes—claiming that the case is a “political scheme by one party to insult the other”—and attempt to rally countries around the world to support Beijing.
While a flurry of principled statements will be released from capitals after the ruling, most will urge restraint on all sides and wait to see how the Philippines and China respond before taking any further actions. A tooth and nail battle will continue within ASEAN – as evidenced by the retraction of a hard-hitting ASEAN statement in June – when the group meets with countries from around the region for the ASEAN Regional Forum in late July.
Provocative Actions by the Philippines and China
This is the danger zone. With one side or the other immediately cast as “winner” or “loser,” the Philippines or China might feel the need to take actions on the ground (or water) to assert their claims. Both sides will be under pressure to defy an adverse ruling or make good on a favorable ruling, which could result in ships sailing through waters contested by the other side in order to make a point about sovereignty.
A number of possible Chinese provocative actions have been floated in the press in recent months, including periodic Chinese threats to forcefully remove the Philippines vessel Sierra Madre from Second Thomas Shoal or beginning to build Scarborough Shoal—taken from the Philippines in 2012—into an artificial island. Any of these scenarios could quickly spiral out of control. And any conflict has the potential to pull in the United States as a treaty ally of the Philippines.
China-Philippines Talks
Another space to watch is whether China and the Philippines see an opportunity to resume talks over the South China Sea. The Philippines claims that it initiated its arbitration case because years of bilateral talks with China had gone nowhere, while China has consistently called for the Philippines to return to the bilateral negotiating table.
The chances for diplomacy will of course hinge on leaders in Beijing, who seem uninterested in genuine negotiations on the South China Sea, and the new president of the Philippines, Rodrigo Duterte, whose comments on the South China Sea have been all over the place, veering from a willingness to be bought off by China to riding a jet ski to disputed islands to defend the Philippines sovereignty. While a resumption of bilateral diplomacy would be more about deciding to lower tensions than it would be about actually resolving the dispute anytime soon, both sides could spin it as a temporary victory.
Response from the United States
Since the Philippines initiated its case, the United States has repeatedly stated that it supports the ability of countries to use international legal mechanisms to address disputes in the South China Sea. The United States has already taken a position on perhaps the biggest issue at stake in the case by making clear that China has not explained the nine-dash line in a way that is in accordance with international law.
Beyond this, the United States should continue playing the role it has already been playing—encouraging both sides to abide by the ruling and to address disagreements through diplomatic means. A central part of the U.S. role in the aftermath of a ruling will be preventing a rhetorical spat from escalating into something more, which will require both deterring any Chinese provocations while coordinating closely with its treaty ally.
Good Timing?
With July 12th now set as the ruling date, the timing could help limit responses to enflamed rhetoric, at least for a while. Beijing’s hosting of the G-20 in early September is a built-in incentive for China to refrain from provocative actions that would cause things to get out of hand; otherwise, the G-20 might be hijacked by tensions in the South China Sea and feature scenes of foreign leaders criticizing China from podiums in Beijing.
The United States and the countries of the region, therefore, should have a couple of months after the ruling to keep tensions under control and perhaps even jumpstart a substantive regional diplomatic process to address some of the emerging issues in the South China Sea.
