The challenge, however, is that the geopolitical backdrop to the US-China agreement is significantly different from its Cold War antecedent. In 1998, the US and China agreed to the Military Maritime Consultative Agreement, which copied many of the successful parts of the Soviet agreement, including the annual meeting between their admirals to discuss concerning incidents. The US attempted to replicate their Soviet agreement with China. Read more: Japan signals a 'sense of crisis' over Taiwan - this is why it is worried about China's military aims The bad news: these incidents will continue As the meetings were between the two nations’ top professional naval officers, there was a high degree of mutual respect and a genuine attempt to make the seas a safer place for their sailors. The agreement didn’t eliminate incidents at sea, but it did create a mechanism for the two parties to vent their frustrations, voice their protests and work constructively on solutions. The superpowers also committed to an annual meeting between their senior naval officers, with the hosting responsibility alternating between them. The agreement spelt out the “rules of the road”. Indeed, potentially dangerous interactions were common enough that in 1972 the Americans and Soviets signed the Incidents at Sea (INCSEA) agreement. Few forward deployments occurred without some contact with the opposing forces that may have included overflights, shadowing or dangerous manoeuvring. During the Cold War, the warships of the United States and the Soviet Union frequently sparred. Third, although confrontations aren’t common, they are also far from unprecedented. It was nothing more than a chance run-in. The reality, however, was the Chinese ship was deployed semi-permanently to the South Pacific as a satellite relay and regularly came in-and-out of Suva (Fiji’s capital) for supplies. In our research on Australia’s naval diplomacy, for instance, the team at Macquarie University investigated reports a Chinese ship had spied on HMAS Adelaide visiting Fiji. More ships means more total days at sea, which means more opportunities for the navies to come into contact. This includes most encounters with the Chinese navy.Ī second, and related, point is that both the Chinese and Australian navies have grown significantly in size over the past decade. The warships of different navies are constantly operating in close proximity with each other and most of these interactions are professional and even courteous. There are three reasons why the significance of these events shouldn’t be exaggerated.įirst, Asia’s seas are among the world’s busiest. When they do occur, it’s important to place them within their broader historical and geopolitical context and not sensationalise them – we must not frame them as if we’re on the brink of war. While there are good reasons not to exaggerate these events, the bad news is these incidents are almost certain to continue.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |