The Pentagon’s Great
Wall of Impotence
No one ever lost money betting on the Pentagon refraining from
exceptionalist rhetoric.
Once again the current Pentagon supremo, certified neocon Ash Carter,
did not disappoint at the Shangri-La Dialogue – the annual, must-go regional
security forum in Singapore attended by top defense ministers, scholars and
business executives from across Asia.
Context is key. The Shangri-La Dialogue is organized by the London-based
International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS), which is essentially a
pro-Anglo-American think tank. And it takes place in the privileged aircraft
carrier of imperial geostrategic interests in South East Asia: Singapore.
As expressed by neocon Carter, Pentagon rhetoric – faithful to its own
estimation of China as the second biggest “existential threat” to
the US (Russia is first) – revolves around the same themes; US military might
and superiority is bound to last forever; we are the “main underwriter
of Asian security” for, well, forever; and China better behave in the South
China Sea – or else.
This is all embedded in the much ballyhooed but so far anemic “pivoting
to Asia” advanced by the lame duck Obama administration – but bound to
go on overdrive in the event Hillary Clinton becomes the next tenant of 1600
Pennsylvania Avenue.
Real threats are predictably embedded in the rhetoric. According to Carter, if Beijing reclaims land in the Scarborough
Shoal in the South China Sea, “it will result in actions being taken by
the both United States and … by others in the region.”
What’s left for China, in Pentagonese, is just to be a member of a hazy “principled
security network”for Asia – which will also help protect the East against “Russia’s
worrying actions”. Carter mentioned“principled” no less than 37
times in his speech. “Principled” cheerleaders so far include
Japan, India, the Philippines, Vietnam and Australia.
So here’s an instant translation: we do a NATO in Asia; we control it;
you will answer to us; and then we encircle you – and Russia – for good. If
China says no, that’s simple. Carter proclaimed Beijing will erect a “Great
Wall of self-isolation” in the South China Sea.
If this is the best Pentagon planners have to counteract the
Russia-China strategic partnership, they’d better go back to the classroom. In
elementary school.
Navigate in freedom, dear vassals
Predictably, the South China Sea was quite big at Shangri-La. The South
China Sea, the throughway of trillions of US dollars in annual trade, doubles
as home to a wealth of unexplored oil and gas. Stagnated and increasingly
irrelevant Japan, via its Defense Minister Gen. Nakatani, even advanced the
Japanese would help Southeast Asian nations build their “security
capabilities” to deal with what he called“unilateral” and “coercive” Chinese
actions in the South China Sea. Cynics could not help to draw similarities with
Imperial Japan’s Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity
Sphere.
The Beijing delegation kept its cool – to a point. Rear Admiral Guan
Youfei stressed, “The US action to take sides is not agreed by many
countries.” Youfei – the head of the Chinese office of international
military cooperation – did not refrain though from condemning a “Cold
War mentality” by the usual suspects.
As for Japan, China’s Foreign Ministry detailed that “countries
outside the region should stick to their promises and not make thoughtless
remarks about issues of territorial sovereignty.” Japan has absolutely
nothing to do with the South China Sea.
Beijing’s reclamation work on reefs in the South China Sea naturally put
it in direct conflict with Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia and Brunei. So US
meddling – under the convenient cover of“freedom of navigation” –
had to be inevitable. “Freedom of navigation” operations are a
silly intimidation game in which a US Navy ship or plane passes by a
Chinese-claimed island in the South China Sea.
It was up to Admiral Sun Jianguo, Deputy Chief of the Joint Staff
Department of China’s Central Military Commission, to cut to the chase,
stressing “the provocation of certain countries” and adding that“selfish
interests” have led to the South China Sea issue becoming “overheated”.
He slammed the Pentagon for double standards and “irresponsible
behavior”. And he slammed the Philippines for taking the conflict to a
dubious UN arbitration court after breaching a bilateral agreement with China;“We
do not make trouble but we have no fear of trouble.”
U.S. Secretary of Defence Ash Carter meets with South Korea’s Minister
of Defence Han Minkoo (R) and Japan’s Minister of Defence Gen Nakatani for a
trilateral at the IISS Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore June 4, 2016. © Reuters
The Chinese position prefers dialogue and cooperation – and Jianguo re-stressed it,
calling for ASEAN to make a move. In fact China has already reached what is
called a four-point consensus with Brunei, Cambodia and Laos on the South China
Sea two months ago. The Philippines are a much harder nut to crack – as the
Pentagon is taking no prisoners to lead Manila “from behind”.
Even Vietnam, via Deputy Defense Minister Nguyen Chi Vinh, made it clear
– in the same plenary session as Admiral Jianguo – that Vietnam prefers
solutions via the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea as well as negotiation
between China and ASEAN.
Bend over to our rules – or else
After Shangri-La’s rhetorical excesses, the action moved to Beijing, the
site of the 8th China-US Strategic and Development Dialogue. That’s the
annual talkfest launched in 2009 by Obama and then Chinese
President Hu Jintao.
Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Zheng Zeguang painted a rosy picture,
stressing the exchange of“candid, in-depth views on important and sensitive
issues of shared concern.” Chinese Ambassador to the US Cui Tiankai
once again needed to point out that the relationship is just “too
important” to be“hijacked” by the South China Sea. And yet
this is exactly the Pentagon’s agenda.
Beijing though won’t be derailed. As State Councilor Yang Jiechi put it,
ASEAN-China dialogue is progressing via what Beijing calls the “dual-track” approach,
according to which disputes are negotiated between the parties directly
involved. That implies no Washington interference.
Beyond what is discussed either at Shangri-La or at the China-US
dialogue, the Big Picture is clear.‘Exceptionalistan’ planners have
molded a narrative where China is being forced to make a choice; either you
bend over to “our” rules – as in the current unipolar
geostrategic game – or else.
Well, Beijing has already made its own choice; and that entails a
multipolar world of sovereign nations with no primus inter pares. The Beijing
leadership under Xi Jinping clearly sees how the so-called international“order”,
actually disorder, is a rigged system set up at the end of WWII.
Wily Chinese diplomacy – and trade – knows how to use the system to
advance Chinese national interests. That’s how modern China became the “savior” of
global turbo-capitalism. But that does not mean a resurgent China will forever
comply with these extraneous “rules” – not to mention the
morality lessons. Beijing knows ‘Exceptionalistan’ would not
agree even to divide the spoils in a geopolitical spheres-of-influence
arrangement. Plan A in Washington is containment – with possibly dangerous
ramifications. There is no Plan B.
The bottom line – thinly disguised by the somewhat polite responses to
Pentagon threats – is that Beijing simply won’t accept anymore a geopolitical
disorder that it did not create. The Chinese could not give a damn to the New
World Order (NWO) dreamed up by selected ‘Masters of the Universe’. Beijing is
engaged in building a new, multipolar order. No wonder – alongside with
strategic partner Russia – they are and will continue to be the Pentagon’s top
twin threat.
0000
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.