Will There Be War in Asia?

[MrG]

Part of a piece in Forbes dated Oct. 2.

If there is any truth in this, it's a good example of my own and probably the world's suspicions coming true. Any fears of China using control of water supplies as a weapon against Thailand and the rest of SE Asia?

"...Six nations maintain competing claims to island groups in the South China Sea; the most expansive assertions of sovereignty are China's. Beijing's maps show the entire body of water as an internal Chinese lake, and it claims as its own the continental shelves of the Philippines, Brunei, Malaysia, Indonesia and Vietnam.
While Beijing has shown surprising flexibility in settling land borders with neighbors this decade, it has remained intransigent about its extensive--and mostly unjustifiable--sea claims. Why? Many point to the hydrocarbons under the South China Sea, but energy is not the real reason for China's determination to control that body of water. The real reason is that it views sea lanes as strategic.
Because territorial claims are zero-sum in nature, they tend to be flashpoints. So far, the U.S. has ignored Beijing's outsized notions of its sovereignty and has brushed off a series of hostile Chinese acts against American planes and vessels in international airspace and waters in the Yellow and South China seas. Although China's claims impinge on America' s role as the final guarantor of international commerce, successive administrations in Washington have hoped that, as China developed its economy, it would come to accept international norms and compromise on its outlandish claims.
Yet the Chinese, as they have become more powerful, have become more aggressive. Seeing little resistance from others, they naturally believed they could do what they wanted to advance their interests. In the middle of last year, for instance, Beijing threatened ExxonMobil because it had entered into a preliminary joint exploration venture with state-run PetroVietnam. The area covered by the pact, although off Vietnam's central and southern coast, is claimed by the Chinese as their historic waters. This bullying followed Beijing's harassment of BP for a similar deal with Vietnam.
Up to now, none of this friction has mattered because commerce has glued Asia together.... Yet Chinese exports have been declining every month since last November as global demand slumped, and its imports have also consistently fallen in the same period. Slumping demand will eventually hit intra-Asian trade hard, perhaps even the now-booming commerce between China and India. As a result, we are seeing the beginning of currency wars in East Asia as nations seek to make their exports more competitive with China's. The risk is that Asia's leaders will see less need to cooperate with each other as their economies decouple. Small disputes, which would have been settled or died away in the prosperous past, could now have more severe consequences. Asian nations have not come to terms with their neighbors, the institutional links among rising powers remain weak, and disagreements in the region are sharpening. We can all guess what happens next.

http://www.forbes.com/2009/10/01/war-in-asia-trade-opinions-columnists-gordon-chang.html

Any fears of water from China as a weapon against SE Asia?

[Norton]

Control of the Mekong would be the only weapon the Chinese could use to effect the economies of Thailand, Lao, Cambodia and Vietnam. China has three dams on the Mekong with five more planned.

Should China decide to use these dams to restrict the flow of the Mekong entering Thailand/Lao it would have negative economic impact on all countries depending on Mekong water. I doubt it would be enough impact to leverage major concessions from the Mekong countries.

With the exception of Singapore, water is an abundant resource in all SE Asian countries. Should the Chinese decide "wage war" on SE Asia they would use their superior economic power to do so. A method they had great success with in the past when all SE Asian countries/kingdoms paid tribute to China's emperors.

[PlanK]

Depends where India stands in all this. They lost land in the Kashmir region in conflicts with China. They might like to have it back. With America that's three economic power houses (and Russia prolly making threats but no one taking them seriously) in the fray.

The prospect of America backing Vietnam would be funny, mind.

[chassamui]

as they have become more powerful, have become more aggressive. Seeing little resistance from others, they naturally believed they could do what they wanted to advance their interests.

Sounds a bit like US imperialism to me.

The Chinese have fvcked up their own water supplies and this could make them a danger to surrounding countries.
The article rambles from oil to water to territory and seems to come from someone with a vested interest in baiting the Chinese.
The only think we have to fear, is fear itself.
Shit stirring american right wing methinks.

[MrG]

Sounds a bit like US imperialism to me.

Sure does. We didn't invent the disease or the attitude that gives it rise.

Shit stirring american right wing methinks.

Maybe yes. Maybe no. Could be the author is just trying to flog his book. But China's a big brute and can afford not to play nice with the small countries to the south if they don't want or have to. Considering what can reasonably be predicted, the radically changed shape of the world not too far from now, I'm not ready to write it off as pot-stirring. As you say in your post:

The Chinese have fvcked up their own water supplies and this could make them a danger to surrounding countries.

[Rural Surin]

as they have become more powerful, have become more aggressive. Seeing little resistance from others, they naturally believed they could do what they wanted to advance their interests.

Sounds a bit like US imperialism to me.

The Chinese have fvcked up their own water supplies and this could make them a danger to surrounding countries.
The article rambles from oil to water to territory and seems to come from someone with a vested interest in baiting the Chinese.
The only think we have to fear, is fear itself.
Shit stirring american right wing methinks.

Correct you are, Chuck. American vested interest throughout Asia is historically paramount.

[Wayne Kerr]

Read a good book on this some time back ... worth a gander

[Rattanaburi]

There's bound to be conflict oneday if populations continue to rise as they are. Babies = war!!!

[chassamui]

Maybe yes. Maybe no. Could be the author is just trying to flog his book. But China's a big brute and can afford not to play nice with the small countries to the south if they don't want or have to. Considering what can reasonably be predicted, the radically changed shape of the world not too far from now, I'm not ready to write it off as pot-stirring. As you say in your post:

It will be very interesting if China manages to become as powerful as some seem to think she will.
The communists complained for years about imperialist adventurers, and now it seems they will be in a position to dictate terms to the rest of the world in the near future.
They have already inflated the economy at home by making aspirational goods cheaper for chinese to buy.
They hold a mountain of debt against the USA, but it is not in their interests to undermine the biggest markets for their goods, once home consumption dries up.
They also have some very serious environmental problems to deal with at home.
Pollution, extravagant use of fossil fuels, coal in particular, and the desertification of some of their best farmland is rapidly weakening them.
China is only now beginning to understand the problems and responsibilities that come with industrial success. I hope they have all read their history books.

[Loy Toy]

China already controls most of South East Asia so you will witness strong pockets of underground support (not resistance) and if the motherland decides to spread her boundries.

[robuzo]

"Yet the Chinese, as they have become more powerful, have become more aggressive." Who could have predicted that? Currency wars. . .wonder if China has anything to do with Vietnam's troubles now in that regard. . .no love lost there. Beijing probably was never all that keen on Vietnam being referred to as "China plus 1" (is that expression used outside Japan?).

[Rural Surin]

"Yet the Chinese, as they have become more powerful, have become more aggressive." Who could have predicted that? Currency wars. . .wonder if China has anything to do with Vietnam's troubles now in that regard. . .no love lost there. Beijing probably was never all that keen on Vietnam being referred to as "China plus 1" (is that expression used outside Japan?).

Historical cycles. It's China's turn again.....

[Norton]

Beijing probably was never all that keen on Vietnam being referred to as "China plus 1" (is that expression used outside Japan?).

I have not heard it used. Must be a Japanese thing. A long history of conflict between the two countries. Japan can thank the divines for a big breeze or they would be a part of China today.

In the last 60 years, China has gone through extreme political upheaval. For the last 20 years there has been progress in undoing the devastation caused by Mao's crazier moments. This progress has been achieved by establishing economic relationships with nations where they can obtain the goods needed to drive Chinese economy. So far the military option or threat to bring nations under Chinese control has not been used.

Changing a proven formula of economic engagement which has been the engine of China's considerable economic growth and international influence would be folly.

China has several domestic issues to deal with as Chassamui points out. Huge amounts of money will be required but over time the economy will allow the funds to fix them.

Military adventurism in SE Asia is not an option at this point and would certainly plunge China into conflict with other powers, in turn undoing the progress they have made so far.

[Norton]

It's China's turn again.....

Probably is if they don't isolate themselves as they did when they were at their peak governing the largest empire in history.

[robuzo]

Beijing probably was never all that keen on Vietnam being referred to as "China plus 1" (is that expression used outside Japan?).

I have not heard it used. Must be a Japanese thing. A long history of conflict between the two countries. Japan can thank the divines for a big breeze or they would be a part of China today.

Googled it, apparently Vietnam made up the expression itself: AmCham Vietnam | Vietnam benefits from "China plus one" strategy