A provisional arrangement between China and the Philippines, intended to smooth their troubles in the South China Sea, has quickly unraveled. Now more than ever, Manila and the international community need to call Beijing’s “gray zone” activities in the contested waters what they are: Illegal, coercive, aggressive and deceptive. It would bring further transparency to a situation that has the potential to turn into a major global flashpoint.
The moniker, known as ICAD, was first coined by a Philippine general. Gray zone activities refer to provocative actions that are not so egregious they would demand a warlike response, but neither are they of a peaceful nature.
For Beijing, this has meant using water cannons to harass Manila’s vessels and intimidating collisions in the waterway. The most recent clash was on June 17 during a Philippine resupply mission to the BRP Sierra Madre, a rusty US World War II-era ship grounded on Second Thomas Shoal (Renai Shoal, 仁愛暗沙) with a few Philippine marines and service members on board.
Illustration: Mountain People
Manila said that a China Coast Guard crew used bladed weapons to puncture boats, seized guns and rammed Philippine vessels.
Deploying more forceful language for China’s behavior would not only enable Manila to press home the point that what Beijing is doing is wrong, but it could also help to focus the region on how to coordinate a better response.
It would enable countries to consider more concrete measures they can take if the international community deemed China’s actions to be deceptive, or coercive and aggressive, and it could merit a wider discussion about what regional alliances might come into play.
Right now, the Philippines is having to rely on its partner, the US, to help it ward off Beijing’s intimidation.
Bringing clarity to China’s gray zone activities would dispel the “ambiguity” around the term itself, Australian think tank the Lowy Institute says.
The phrase “gray zone” is open to misinterpretation, and allows for a degree of doubt regarding Beijing’s original intentions, it says.
It is not just the Philippines that has been the target of China’s coercive behavior. Earlier this year, a Chinese fighter jet intercepted an Australian helicopter in international waters. The incident prompted outrage, with Canberra saying it was an act that risked unsettling improving ties between the two countries.
The Philippines has been pushing for the term ICAD to be adopted because it has been the biggest target of Beijing’s assertiveness in the South China Sea. It could help from a legal perspective, said Ray Powell, founder and director of SeaLight, a maritime transparency project of Stanford University’s Gordian Knot Center for National Security Innovation.
“The Filipinos have grown uncomfortable with gray zone as a term. They want something more clarifying, and ICAD has the benefit of labeling these actions clearly,” Powell said.
The right name can make all the difference. Beijing knows this, and uses it to its advantage. The South China Sea is called Ren’ai Jiao (仁愛礁) in all official Chinese documentation and public communications, harking back to the name used centuries ago by several dynasties, a historical legacy that it uses to justify its present-day claims over the waters.
It insists on Taiwan being called Chinese Taipei in international sporting events. On Chinese maps, Beijing has renamed places on the border with India despite New Delhi firmly asserting its territorial rights over the area.
Manila, sensing the power of the name game, also decided to use its own for the parts of the South China Sea it claims.
In September 2012, then-Philippine president Benigno Aquino III signed an order requiring all government agencies to use the name West Philippine Sea. In 2016, he brought Beijing to an international tribunal. The Permanent Court of Arbitration at the Hague Tribunal found in the Philippines’ favor, but China simply ignored the ruling.
No doubt the Sierra Madre issue is top of the agenda for US Secretary of State Antony Blinken and US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin while they tour Asia.
Blinken and Austin arrived in the Philippines yesterday. It is a key stop for both diplomats, and it would be a chance to engage on the kind of support it needs. Words matter — now is the time to find the right ones.
Karishma Vaswani is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering Asia politics with a special focus on China. Previously, she was the BBC’s lead Asia presenter and worked for the BBC across Asia and South Asia for two decades.
This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
RSS