PASSIONS OVER ARCHIPELAGO

The Asia-Pacific region is going through another round of tension. A new air defence identification zone established by China in the East China Sea has again exposed contradictions between the leading states of the region: the People's Republic of China (PRC) itself, on the one hand, and the USA and its allies - Japan and South Korea - on the other. 

The new air defence identification zone [ADIZ] created by Beijing includes the disputed Diaoyu (Senkaku) Islands which are currently under Japan's control. The Islands located much closer to the mainland of China (250 miles) than to Japan (600 miles) are uninhabited but the sea around them is a rich fishing area and the seabed itself contains huge oil and gas reserves. China says the Diaoyu Islands called Senkaku by the Japanese were part of its territory for centuries until Japan annexed them during its imperialist expansion in 1895. Tokyo, in turn, defends its own historical right to possess the archipelago. It is not surprising that the PRC's decision caused a sharp protest from Japan.

China's Ministry of Defence has warned that its armed forces will apply defensive measures against any aircraft that are unresponsive and not obeying orders while in that area. To fly over the area, foreign aircraft must submit their flight plan in advance to the Chinese Foreign Ministry, respond to interrogation signals and have legible markings. Otherwise Beijing reserves for itself the right to use military measures.

Not only Japan refused to recognize China's decision but also the United States, South Korea and Australia. Washington said that the establishment of the new air defence identification zone by China is an illegitimate attempt to change the status quo in the region as this area is international airspace. Thus the USA made it clear that it supports Japan as its key ally in the region. As a sign of this support and an expression of the US position as a great power, US B-52 bombers deliberately passed through China's air defence identification zone giving no advance notice to Beijing. Japan and South Korea took similar steps, the former sending 10 US-made F-15 fighters to the airspace claimed by China. For its part, Beijing strongly reacted to these demarches sending Su-30 and J-10 military aircraft up into the air. 

Thus a strong smell of gunpowder appeared in the region. To avoid further complications, the Americans took the first step back. Washington recommended that US civil carriers should not ignore the air defence identification area imposed by China and notify Beijing in advance about civilian aircraft going to fly through the airspace in the region. The New York Times has attributed the White House decision to the fact that US aircraft passengers may be at risk "due to unforeseen incidents". At the same time the US Department of State said that the requirements to civil airlines do not mean that the US government has recognized "the air defence zone" of China.

The US decision was a complete surprise to the Japanese government. Tokyo took it as a de facto recognition by the United States of the air defence zone declared by China. Japan itself has flatly refused to recognize the new identification zone and released a memo recommending that its airlines ignore the Chinese side's demands.

The escalation of tensions and the mass of contradictions between China and the "triangle" of the USA, Japan and South Korea are being aggravated by the fact that the latter is also planning to expand its air defence identification zone. In particular, it is planned to include the airspace over Leodo Reef, a submerged rock 150 kilometers south-west of the South Korean island of Marado. Leodo can turn into a bad headache for the entire region as it is part of both the Japanese air defence zone and that declared by China. Official Seoul has made it clear that it will not allow encroachments by neighboring countries on the "space" of the Republic of Korea. 

Despite all these complications, the question of how far the confrontation in the region can go requires rather an optimistic answer. It is certain that no major military confrontation between the leading players of the Asia-Pacific region is going to happen. And there are good attendant reasons to think so.

First of all it should be kept in mind that the root of the conflict problems in the region is not at all in certain territorial claims by their parties. All the more so, the contradictions are not based solely on China's desire to establish a new air defence zone over the disputed territories. Beijing declaring its air defence zone not merely means struggle for the islands. It is a demonstration of strategic-scale ambitions called to bring China one step closer to the status of regional power number one. Basing on this, you can be sure that China will not abolish the air zone it proclaimed. 

On the other hand, the cornerstone component of the conflict situation is the US-Japanese alliance which ensures the dominance of Washington's interests in all processes related to security and, by and large, the entire foreign policy of Japan (and South Korea as well). In fact, this factor stands in China's way to regional hegemony. A serious armed confrontation between the rival Pacific powers is certainly out of the question for the reason that the US and China have nuclear weapons. So the parties are likely to sit down at the negotiating table. It is another question whether those negotiations succeed in settling the entire range of problems. 

However, one should also take into account purely economic factors that play a much more important role in all that story than it may seem at first glance. Regarding the Chinese-Japanese showdown it is important to note that the two countries maintain close economic ties. Japan is China's fourth trading partner (after the EU, the USA and ASEAN). As for China, it is the largest trading partner of Japan. Therefore, the aggravation of relations between Beijing and Tokyo could threaten economic losses to both of them. Japan would risk losing the lucrative Chinese market while China may lose Japanese investments and technologies. 

Even more interesting is the economic configuration in the region, considering the relationship between the US and China in the global business space. In this connection, we turn to the US online paper Information Clearing House: "The escalation of military tensions between Washington and Beijing in the East China Sea is superficially over China's unilateral declaration of an air defense zone. But the real reason for Washington's ire is the recent Chinese announcement that it is planning to reduce its holdings of the US dollar". 

What is meant here is that Beijing has decided to get rid of about 3.5 trillion dollar reserves which, combined with China's growing global oil trade for national currencies poses a mortal threat to the US dollar and the entire US economy. "This threat to US viability - already teetering on bankruptcy, record debt and social meltdown - would explain why Washington has responded with such belligerence to China setting up an Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) last week extending some 400 miles from its coast into the East China Sea," the periodical reads. 

However, even the economic background of the conflict currently observed in the Far East does not indicate to the likelihood of a military resolution of disputes over air defence zones and resource-rich islands. The USA and China are not only competitors but also close partners in the economic sphere. Therefore the opposed parties will have to negotiate in any event.