Until the lion learns to write, every story will glorify the hunter. —African proverb
—o0o—
Several members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) are claimants to certain islands, shoals, reefs and rocks in the South China Sea. These are the Philippines, Indonesia, Brunei, Vietnam and Malaysia, and these countries necessarily have conflicting claims among themselves, on one hand, and against China and Taiwan, on the other.
Singapore, which is one of the major members of Asean, is geographically blessed that its distance from the troubled waters is quite considerable, and thus is not among the countries in the region which has a claim on any part of the SCS.
This peculiarity affords Singaporean leaders the freedom and privilege to view the conflicting claims of China and its neighbors with stark neutrality, and to support the path of caution and dialogue in resolving these potentially incendiary issues.
The late Lee Kuan Yew, the father of modern Singapore, noted in an essay in Forbes that the maritime dispute between China and its smaller neighbors, including the Philippines, faces an unlikely resolution because both sides operate from incompatible legal and historical frameworks.
Prime Minister Lee noted that Beijing’s claims can be traced back centuries to the Ming Dynasty, emphasizing that China’s assertive posture is driven by a deep sense of historical reclamation rather than just modern disputes over rocks and fish.
His son former PM Lee Hsien Loong was leader of Singapore when China and the Philippines engaged in a standoff in the Scarborough Shoal, which led to the Philippines’ withdrawal from the shoal and China’s present hold there. Lee Hsien Loong also monitored the whole Arbitral proceedings in The Hague, concluding with the 2016 ruling that was hailed by the Philippines as a “victory” despite China’s non-participation from the start.
The Singaporean leader could not help but react to the challenge and bravado of certain Filipino warmongers who seemed to display a false sense of nationalism by advocating war with China that only the far right in America were known to espouse.
Lee Hsien Loong has consistently maintained that Singapore does not take sides in the territorial claims in the SCS. In a regional forum, while commenting on the escalating maritime tensions, he cautioned Filipinos by asking: “Are you sure you want to get into a fight where you will be the battleground?”
This remark proceeded from the supposition that the real rivalry in these waters is with the United States and China, and it makes sense to warn smaller SE Asian nations against becoming proxy battlefields for superpowers.
Diplomat and public intellectual
The latest Singaporean leader to reiterate these concerns is Ambassador Kishore Mahbubani, who served twice as Singapore’s ambassador to the United Nations and president of the UN Security Council in 2001-2002.
He is also the author of several books about the Asian century, such as The Asean Miracle, Has China Won, The Asian 21st Century, The Great Convergence and Living the Asian Century.
Speaking recently at a lecture at the Ateneo de Manila University, Mahbubani warned that the Philippines must ensure that it does not become a “proxy battlefield” or a venue for a potential confrontation between the United States and China.
The Singaporean diplomat saw what many other political analysts in the region and even in the US have been citing for some time now: the strong possibility that Southeast Asia is fast becoming an arena or flashpoint of the two superpowers’ collision.
Mahbubani said small and middle-sized countries could be the first to suffer significant economic and security damage, as well as loss of life, if tensions escalate, while major powers have greater capacity to protect their own territories and interests.
It is worth considering Mahbubani’s idea of “strategic autonomy” for the Philippines, which means developing sufficient capacity and diplomatic space for the country to maintain important relationships with both sides while retaining the freedom to make its own decisions.
This is particularly important for the Philippines because of its deep security relationship with the United States, including the existing Mutual Defense Treaty and other defense arrangements, while China also plays an important role in the country’s trade and broader economic relations because of its geographic proximity.
Mahbubani believes that excessive reliance by a small country on a major power for security could become risky. What he described as “piggybacking” on a stronger country could carry consequences if the major power’s interests or strategic priorities change.
The role of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations is also important in this regard. Asean could serve as a model for the Philippines because of its ability to maintain dialogue and relations with countries that have different political systems and strategic interests, including major powers with competing interests.
Instead of forcing countries to choose between Washington, D.C., and Beijing, regional diplomacy could help preserve the strategic space needed to advance Southeast Asia’s own interests.
This approach could also have practical applications in the South China Sea.
Beyond territorial claims and maritime security concerns, there could be greater opportunities for cooperation in fisheries management, marine environmental protection, scientific research, information sharing and the protection of fishermen’s livelihoods.
As this time when Filipinos like Defense Secretary Gibo Teodoro, Coast Guard Commodore Jay Tarriela, and others of their insane ilk seem to be muddling the issues with their fog-covered eyeglasses, thereby pushing the nation to the uncertainties of US military misadventures, it is a welcome whiff of fresh air to hear the rational views of Ambassador Kishore Mahbubani on this maritime dispute.
#