As one of the highlights of his current Asian tour President Obama is signinga new defense agreementwith the Philippines. During the cold war the US maintained a large military base at Subic Bay when policy was guided by the domino theory. It held that unless the Chinese communists were contained in Asia they would be landing on the beaches of California. Now of course Chinese industrialists are buying up beach front property in Malibu. So why is the US making rather vague commitments about an increased military presence in the region? Ultimately it comes down to oil.
This is the South China Sea.
It is an international waterway surrounded six nations all of which are engaged in
long running disputes over maritime boundaries and territorial claims to tiny islands that are scattered over the area. Fishing rights are one of the issues involved, but the high stakes matter is the potential for oil and gas extraction from the sea bed. In addition to the substantial economic advantage of staking such claims, there are very serious environmental risks and concerns. Remember the BP oil disaster in the Gulf of Mexico?
Energy and environment are becoming ever more important drivers of international relationships and conflicts. Russia's dominant position in natural gas is a key lever in the present face off between Russia and the west over the crisis in Ukraine. The long simmering spat between Argentina and the UK over the Falklands/Malvinas is not really about the sheep. Oil rights in the surrounding sea is really what is at stake.
The prevailing international agreement on the oceans and their management is the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea While the US participated in the conference which developed this treaty and signed it, the US senate has never ratified it. It takes its place along with other international agreements which the US thinks should apply to other nations but shouldn't be allowed to impinge on US interests. Even for the nations who might have the terms of the treaty enforced on them, its provisions for international regulation of oil and gas extraction leave lots of loop holes.
It is difficult enough to sort out territorial claims on land that has people living on it. The problems arise from complex history about occupation and political alliance. However, the disputes over islands in the South China Sea are for the most part about barren rocks and reefs that have never been occupied by people. The history of claims and counter claims can be traced back for well over a century. In addition to the growing importance of energy resources, what is contributing to a rise of tensions in the area is the reality that China has decidedly become the big kid on the block. They have been devoting their economic resources to building up their military capacity. The nervous neighbors are harking back to the cold war era and looking to the US military for protection of their interests.
The US has entered an era of declining military budgets. China and Russia are both prepared to expand their military expenditures and upgrade their capacities. This is not on anything like the scale of the cold war arms race, but it is significant enough to tip the scales of international diplomacy and politics. In the case of China the maritime military disputes come in the context of a broader US effort to contain the growing power and influence of the Chinese. The Obama administration typically denies that it is attempting to contain China. It just wants to promote trade. However, the exclusion of China from the super secret Trans Pacific Partnership trade treaty really doesn't support that claim.