Dog whistle

“ China claims neutrality in the Ukraine war, yet its support of Russia raises serious questions.

China’s hosting of the Western Pacific Naval Symposium presents a scene of bewildering dissonance, with senior officials like Vice Chairman Zhang Youxia serenading the world with soothing melodies of “friendly consultation” and “maritime peace.”

This while Beijing simultaneously brandishes the cacophony of military drills and veiled threats — glaring contradictions that have been the hallmark of China’s approach to the South China Sea. The forum exposes a truth as clear as the turquoise waters the country claims: Beijing’s actions drown out its peace rhetoric.

Zhang’s claims of prioritizing “friendly consultation” fall flat when viewed in the light of China’s aggressive maneuvers. In 2016, an international tribunal, acting on a complaint by the Philippines, decisively rejected China’s sweeping claims to the South China Sea. This legal rebuke, however, has been met with a deafening silence from Beijing.

China continues to build artificial islands on disputed reefs, transforming them into military outposts bristling with weaponry. These actions reek of coercion, not friendly conversation.

The very act of hosting a naval symposium while simultaneously being embroiled in territorial disputes with several attendees showed the performative nature of China’s calls for peace.

The general’s veiled threats of “reasonable countermeasures” in response to “groundless provocations” further undermine China’s claims of peaceful intentions. This language is deliberately ambiguous, a dog whistle designed to paint any resistance to China’s actions as a provocation, thereby justifying further military escalation.

Of course, a dog-whistle tactic is a form of coded communication, often with the intent of bypassing the notice of others. It’s like a special whistle that only dogs can hear.

Amid this symposium, the ongoing military exercises conducted by the Philippines and the United States stand as a necessary counterpoint to China’s narrative. These drills are a legitimate exercise by the Philippines of its sovereign rights and are a measured response to China’s assertive behavior. They provide the necessary counterpoint to China’s bombastic pronouncements.

China claims neutrality in the Ukraine war, yet its support of Russia raises serious questions about its commitment to peaceful resolutions of conflicts in other regions. This perceived hypocrisy further weakens the credibility of China’s pronouncements on the South China Sea. It’s like a supposed advocate for peaceful coexistence cheering on a schoolyard bully.

While recent talks between the US and China’s defense chiefs offer a glimmer of hope for increased communication, true progress hinges on China’s willingness to move beyond doublespeak and embrace genuine dialogue. Respecting international law, adhering to the tribunal’s ruling, and de-escalating military activities are essential first steps.

The countries bordering the South China Sea deserve true cooperation, not Chinese military expansion. China must choose diplomacy over coercion and work towards a rules-based order in the region. Only then can the promise of genuine maritime peace be realized.

However, the challenges are not without their complexities and nuances. China perceives the South China Sea as its historical backyard, a perception fueled by ancient maps and historical narratives.

Addressing these concerns requires acknowledging the legitimacy of these narratives, even while challenging China’s expansive territorial claims. Finding common ground will necessitate a delicate dance between respecting history and upholding international law.

Furthermore, the economic stakes in the South China Sea are immense. The region is a vital shipping lane, and the potential for undersea resources is significant.

These economic realities fuel China’s assertiveness, making it reluctant to relinquish control over vast swathes of the sea. Devising a framework for joint exploration and development could be a potential solution, but it would require a high degree of trust and transparency, qualities currently in short supply.

As a major power, China has a particular responsibility to lead by example. It must move beyond the empty rhetoric of “friendly consultation” and embrace the true spirit of dialogue — a genuine conversation where all voices are heard and respected.