A structure for cooperation on the Spratly islands

With the issue of who owns the Spratly islands heating up, it may be helpful to look into how countries in other parts of the world settled territorial differences peacefully. Europe, like Asia, is composed of several sovereign states that often skirmished or worse gone to war for political and economic advantage for years. But in time they found the structure through which they could continue to differ without going to war. The key was the structure and this eventually led to a community and finally to a union.

*      *      *

It was not surprising that President Benigno Aquino III took up the Spratly dispute with Brunei’s Sultan Hassanal Bolkiah. Brunei is another claimant of the Spratly islands. It makes sense for the Philippines to have as many allies to forge a common position on the disputed islands to meet the challenge of China, the biggest claimant and the superpower of the region.

As usual we have warmongers and peaceniks. The warmongers say we are being too soft on China. With reports that Chinese vessels are ferrying construction materials to islands already claimed as Philippine territory, we are in a quandary. The Department of Foreign Affairs conveyed to China through the Chinese charge d’affaires its concern that Chinese vessels were seen in the vicinity of Iroquois Reef-Amy Douglas Bank in the West Philippine Sea. It asked for explanations since the Iroquois Bank is Philippine territory, southwest of the Recto Bank (Reed Bank) and east of Patag Island (Flat Island). It is a mere 200 nautical miles within its exclusive economic zone.

Foreign Affairs Secretary Albert del Rosario categorically stated that “such construction by China in the vicinity of the uninhabited Iroquois Bank is a clear violation of the 2002 Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN)-China Declaration on the Conduct of Parties (DOC) in the South China Sea.”

Still, the peaceniks are in agreement, and that includes the Sultan of Brunei, that we continue the peaceful dialogue with China.

However much the small claimants agree with each other that going to war is not the answer, the fact is they are being pushed to the wall. Brunei and the Philippines are just two of the small claimants. The others are Malaysia and Vietnam, Taiwan and China.

The skirmishing between the Philippines and China for ownership of the islands has been going on for years but the recent one erupted when two Chinese ships were said to have harassed a Philippine surveillance ship. The proper diplomatic protests have been made.

The Spratlys was also taken up with Chinese Defense Minister Liang Guanglie when he visited Manila. In the discussion, President Aquino warned that continued Chinese provocations in the disputed territories could lead to an arms race in the South China Sea region. The Aquino statement was laughed out by independent Spratly watchers.

How could the Philippines get into an arms race with China? It may be a slip of the tongue but it has some truth if he meant an arms race between China and a US-backed Philippines in the region.

The carrot and stick approach of the Aquino diplomacy has its limitations. Maybe it is time to look at other options.

ASEAN members and China are bound by the DOC, a document designed to reduce tensions, and to peacefully resolve claims over the South China Sea. But recent events show that a document is not enough.

*      *      *

 There are models for structures for cooperation other than the euphemistic “peaceful dialogue”. The history of how the belligerent countries of Europe were brought together into a union is one such model. It should be studied both by the Philippines and other claimants if we are to succeed in engaging China into an effective peaceful dialogue over the Spratly islands.

There must be enough men with vision in the region to match the Europeans who saw that the only way to peace would be to create a formal structure. It may be time to move another step for the Asean plus three that includes China into a strong Asian Economic Community patterned after the European Economic Community with the Spratly dispute as its lynchpin.

Jean Monnet, a Frenchman was obsessed by this vision. The Jean Monnet Association continues to propagate Monnet’s idea.

In a short biographical note, the association says that when Monnet became a member of the National Liberation Committee, the free French government in Algiers he told the committee: “There will be no peace in Europe if the States rebuild themselves on the basis of national sovereignty, with its implications of prestige politics and economic protection.

The countries of Europe are not strong enough individually to be able to guarantee prosperity and social development for their peoples. The States of Europe must therefore form a federation or a European entity that would make them into a common economic unit.”

The Jean Monnet Association has continued to propagate his vision. “In his house in Houjarray, he and his team conceived the idea of the European Community. On 9 May 1950, with the agreement of Chancellor Adenauer, Robert Schuman made a declaration in the name of the French government.

The declaration proposed placing all the Franco-German production of steel and coal under a common High Authority open to the other countries of Europe, “JMA adds.

“Through the consolidation of basic production and the institution of a new High Authority, whose decisions will bind France, Germany and the other countries that join, this proposal represents the first concrete step towards a European federation, imperative for the preservation of peace,” declared Robert Schuman. Thus did the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) come about and later the European Community. Jean Monnet became the first President of the High Authority.”

“Until even his last days, Jean Monnet was firm in his conviction that the European nations had to unite in order to survive. “Continue, continue, there is no future for the people of Europe other than in union,” he repeated constantly. Throughout his life, he had one objective: “Make men work together show them that beyond their differences and geographical boundaries there lies a common interest.”

“We are not forming coalitions of states, we are uniting men, to create Europe is to create peace” he said. A similar version could be done for Asia.