The Tributary States – China needs to treat neighbours as Sovereigns

CHINA’s relations with its neighbours have got worse under President Xi Jin-Ping, in part because he is beset by a host of internal problems, but China is shooting itself in the foot in the South China Sea, says former American career diplomat, Christopher Hill . . .

CHINA, as one of the stakeholders, needs to develop a more strategic view of the world system, and the United States needs to do a better job of understanding the China of today, according to former American career diplomat,Christopher Hill.

Hill also says China should stop treating countries in Southeast Asia as “tributary” States, and respect them as sovereign States.

Hill served as a four-time Ambassador under three US Presidents, most recently (until 2009) as an Assistant Secretary of State to East Asia
and Pacific Affairs. At the time, he was also Head of the US delegation to the Six Party Talks on the North Korean nuclear issue. 

Hill, who is currently promoting his just-published book, Outpost: Life on the Frontlines of American Diplomacy: A Memoir, speaks frankly of ‘China misbehaviour” in its dealing with its neighbours in the South China Sea disputes. 

He had hoped that China’s relations with its neigbours would improve under President Xi Jin-ping, but instead, he says, they have got worse. “China is a country beset by internal problems,” he says. “Xi has to deal every day with a nasty inbox of issues to try to preserve the political structure of China — and yet try to deal with some of the corruption issues. It is going to be very difficult for him to do.

“You can imagine that every morning he looks at his problems, and public opinion (of him and China) in the Philippines is not his number one problem.

Consequently, under his watch the situation in the South China Sea has got worse.” Chinese foreign policy is, to a certain extent, shaped by public opinion in China.

Hill speaks of the half a billion Internet users, some of whom have been calling for tough national leadership.

China has been involved in several diplomatic skirmishes — with the Philippines, Vietnam and Japan — over territorial claims in the South China and East China Seas. These simmering disputes have been going on for some time, with no signs of China taking a conciliatory approach (see report page 18).

When China chose to deploy an oil rig in contested South China Sea waters in May this year, it sparked a riot in Vietnam against Chinese businesses.

The Philippines has been at loggerheads with China over the Spratly Islands. 

Hill says the Chinese leadership is probably under pressure from its own security advisers to act tough. He does not believe that Xi was not aware of the deployment of a billion-dollar oil rig to Vietnam’s economic waters.

What is happening in the South China Sea, he says, adds up to “very nasty dynamics”, with Beijing shooting itself in the foot. 

Not all Chinese agree with the Government’s approach. The Chinese academic class in Shanghai, for example, does not like to see this type of behaviour towards China’s neighbours, he says. “The Chinese come with so many centuries of relationship with tributary States. My hope is that they will stop dealing with these (neighbours) as tributary States and deal with them as sovereigns.” Given the current mindset, he does not believe China is yet ready to contribute to global security.

Hill says the US must become more engaged with China. “I am of the view that the United States needs to do a much better job of understanding, and recognise that, in a few years time, China will be a huge player.”

When President Obama announced the US “pivot” to Asia in 2011, it led to some unintended consequences, he says, creating three misconceptions about US foreign policy.

First, he says, talk about rebalancing to Asia was read as the United States getting out of the Middle East .

The second misconception was that Europeans thought Washington was downgrading its alliance with Europe.

The third misconception, the ‘pivot’ was taken as US confrontation with China.

Hill blames the misrepresentation on the role of US media — for linking the need to pay more attention to Asia as essentially the US looking to confront China. “We need to be careful not to be seen to engage in a confrontation with China,” he says.

Hill speaks of a number of events at the time which added to the false impression. The Secretary of State, Hilary Clinton, visited the Philippines and said that  the US would work more with the Philippines to confront China on its encroachment in the South China Sea. Then there was the visit to Australia by US marines, and the decision to train them in Darwin.

“These events were put into this “maelstrom that somehow we were looking to confront China – at a time of a deteriorating relationship with China”.

Hill says Clinton visited Burma (for the ASEAN Summit) to see how the US relationship with that country could be improved. But, unfortunately, every step of the way was seen — by some — as (poking) a finger in the eyes of the Chinese, and that there was a more pugnacious approach to China.

“In diplomacy, when you try to do those kinds of big muscle movements, you shouldn’t be surprised that there would be a lot of wrong guessing as to what we are trying to do,” he told an audience at the US Consulate-General in Sydney.

Later, when asked by ATI for his view of the situation in North Korea, Hill said: “My current take is that Kim Jong-un is not sufficiently motivated to be interested in doing away with his nuclear arsenal. I think Kim Jong-il had a somewhat different interest. He was willing to keep his mind open to the idea of doing away with nuclear weapons.”

Hill adds that the son has basically decided it is good for North Korea to keep its nuclear weapons. Compounding the problem is the fact that China has taken its eye off the North Korean issue. “I believe that if China wanted to get rid of these weapons, they would. And to me, they are not so prepared right now (to do this). When you look at all the problems that Xi has, this is not number one, unfortunately.”

Washington is prepared to deal with Pyongyang, he says, if it is prepared to get rid of its nuclear weapons. “We put out everything on the table for the North Koreans. If they want a treaty, we are prepared to do a treaty, if they want diplomatic relations, we will do that, if they want economic or energy assistance, mutual co-operation, we will be prepared to do the lot, but not with a nuclear North Korea.”

On Japan, Hill says the correct policy direction is to try to hold the Japanese close.

“I for one welcome Australia’s plan to buy Japanese submarines. It is important to keep Japan in these alliance relations. They will be better to deal with if they work with us than if they don’t.“ While he is aware of comments from some quarters that the position taken by Japan over the Senkaku islets is provocative, he does not see the issue as Japan returning to its 1930s-style militarism.

Touching on the development of shale gas in the US, Hill says this will affect how Americans think of the Middle East. “Increasingly, there is a perception in the US that we don’t need their oil any more,” he says. “That is going to be a big game changer in the next 10 to 20 years.”