Wujin text attack: the United States to enlist experts, control think tank to put pressure on China's South China Sea

Home > Military

Wujin text attack: the United States to enlist experts, control think tank to put pressure on China's South China Sea

2016-07-21 21:39:31 516 ℃

The first military special recommendation: everyone knows that behind the South China Sea issue complex is the United States control. From promote called the South China Sea "arbitration", to sailing in the South China Sea frequent military flight, even sent the aircraft carrier formation towards the direction of the South China Sea, the United States seems to have tended to use the hands of the "arms" of a trend. However, attention to observe the ocean is a famous Chinese view think tank through comprehensive public opinion monitoring and analysis, reveals the struggle of the South China Sea on the other side: the United States through the hand distorting has also resulted in to China is very unfavorable international public opinion. Against the threat of a military threat to the United States insisted on the "threat" of the hat buckle to the head of China, in the face of the "text" of the United States, how should we respond?

The author, in view of the first military think-tank researcher: Tian Qiubao

Around the South China Sea issue, an international public opinion on China's unfavorable environment in the United States under the impetus of the formation. The environment of public opinion by media and think tanks in the United States initiated and led, from Japan, India, Australia and other American regional allies and partners booing and solidarity for contrast.

And as directly when the country such as the Philippines and Vietnam indirect parties, although not stupid enough to directly with the hardcore wrestling, but look forward to in the "arbitration" as a starting point and get the idea of greater interest is obvious.

One, the South China Sea issueTo the endHow hot is it?

On July 12, Permanent Court of arbitration at the Hague announced the Philippines unilaterally instituted the arbitration case on the South China Sea called "verdict", almost meet all demands of the Philippines, a serious violation of the sovereignty of China in the South China Sea and the relevant rights. Once announced, immediately triggered a hot international public opinion, especially active overseas think tanks. Less than 10 days, the national think tank monitoring of the overseas think tank will publish more than and 50 articles related to arbitration, so the frequency of the South China Sea, the frequency of the case shows a huge international impact.

Two,American LEDpublic opinionalmost"One sided"

The following conclusions can be drawn from the monitoring and analysis of the international think tank on the international think tank:

First, the US led international public opinion on China's opposition is unfavorable, China International Media stir. On the whole, the US led international public opinion showing "leaning to one side", for China to "hostile" or "vigilant" position of Article 34 articles, 70% of the total. Overseas think that the arbitration tribunal made a legal ruling, and the Chinese side does not accept the position is not implemented, known as the boycott of international law, the behavior. The so-called "arbitration results" since the announcement, the justice of our statement were repeated interpretation of the overseas think tank. I make the case of policy of diplomacy was also called "the differentiation of ASEAN have an ulterior motive" and "cut sausage tactics" etc.. Overseas think tanks on the follow-up to the prediction, the majority of "angry after the drastic action", "advised" China to "exercise restraint, accept the arbitration." However, international public opinion to our "denounce" in sharp contrast with the relevant national official "cautious", this difference worth pondering.

Second, American think tanks and academics dominate, affecting the overall trend of international public opinion. Published an article 19 think tank, the U.S. think tank accounted for 9; 50 articles, the U.S. think tank accounted for 19; and the regional think tank published articles, the United States scholars also accounted for a large proportion. In addition, American scholars this time overseas in the mainstream media also has a high appearance rate, their article is reproduced in the media rush.

From the content, so-called South China Sea arbitration case actions in the South China Sea and the subsequent impact of American think tanks and scholars focus attention, trumpeted the so-called "South China Sea arbitration award on the legal effect of" consensus ", rendering the so-called China" against international law "international impression. Throughout American think tank the, almost all scholars are in the standpoint of criticism of China "does not accept" no ", advocates the United States stepped up to the Chinese military deterrence, especially in the 12 nautical miles of the Nansha Islands in" freedom of navigation operations, to cater to the arbitration tribunal "Nansha Islands does not have a 200 nautical mile exclusive economic zone" of the ruling. Such as legal blogs in the United States the United States may respond to the arbitration case on the South China Sea: offensive "sailing free action", at the Heritage Foundation in the face of China's hard line stance on the South China Sea arbitration, the United States should how to deal with? Foreign Relations Committee of the United States, "no matter how China's attitude, the results of the arbitration are legally binding on China," and so on, are expressed in the above views. Due to historical reasons, the United States think tank of the article views often have the role of the whole international public opinion, in a certain extent, shape the international public opinion on the so-called South China Sea arbitration overall understanding".

Third, the United States and the United States allies and partners reacted strongly, Japan, India, Australia, KoreaThink TankTough talk.Regional allies and partners in the United States also concerned about the South China Sea arbitration, and the same as the United States expressed a strong attitude. They and the difference between the American think-tank, is particularly concerned about their own use of the case of the South China Sea issue involvement and further discuss how to cooperate with the United States to strengthen military operations in the South China Sea and its purpose is nothing but expand its influence in the region by the United States. Such as the Institute of Strategic Studies in Japan after the Chinese government for maritime hegemony, "and South Korea asan Institute of policy studies in the South China Sea arbitration case, South Korea China" dilemma "deepening", of the center for policy research in India the Chinese challenge to the law of the sea "and Australian strategic Policy Research of the articles, express the content. In addition, above the national think tank to pay special attention to the ASEAN as a whole on the South China Sea arbitration case participation, especially stir fried dishes, "differentiation in China ASEAN" issues that China has made a series of diplomatic efforts to "undermine ASEAN consistency". Some think tanks also encourage their own political and military support for ASEAN countries, maintaining the regional "proper order", such as the India Policy Research Center on the India authorities put forward the above recommendations.

Fourth, Southeast Asia regional think tank focused on the impact of follow-up action on regional order.South East Asia, the main concern of the South China Sea arbitration case for ASEAN as a whole and the actual impact on some relevant countries, including Philippines and Vietnam is the focus of the country.

Philippines as the protagonist of this farce, its subsequent actions by the nature of the overseas think tank, the hot debate, especially the new president of Philippines, the possible policy changes, triggering speculation overseas think tank. And, an American think-tank, blindly urged the Philippines to Huaqiang hard, think tank and scholars in Southeast Asia to the Philippines, President of the Walter has a look forward to more complex, many Southeast Asian scholars recognize Dutt Stewart's China policy change brings positive effect, such as the Philippine scholar Hedley (Richard JavadHeydarian) in the CSIS Asia maritime transparency initiative issued the Manila in the arbitration of the hard choices, "a text that Dutt Stewart intends to avoid military conflict with China, to revive investor relations, especially in the field of infrastructure recovery frustrated with China bilateral relations. The author believes that the United States and China are in a dilemma between China and America, but no matter how, has not been like Aquino and China, the dead carry in the end".

In Vietnam, some overseas think tank that the so-called South China Sea arbitration to Vietnam brought a effective legal weapons, that Vietnam can "follow" the Philippines with China in arbitration representations, also actively integrate ASEAN power; but there are also scholars believe that Vietnam and the Philippines, in the cracks of the strategic game between China and the United States, should have a correct understanding of the negative impact of the arbitration mechanism, properly handle the relations with China. Anyway, from the overseas media think tank, the Philippines and Vietnam are unlikely to be by arbitration means too much challenge China's core interests, but not to the exclusion of the arbitration legal advantage as leverage in negotiations with the US. For example, the Singapore Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, the results of the arbitration case will be beneficial to Vietnam in the negotiations with Beijing, the profit will hold this view.

Three, international public opinion is not monolithic,There is also public opinionThink the arbitration is over"

Crisis management and control is the most think tank to explore the South China Sea arbitration case". Although the overseas think tank support the arbitration tribunal of the so-called "verdict" has the "force of law", but there are also a considerable part of the think tank said on the arbitration tribunal "deprivation" China "the Nine Segment Lines" lawful sex "unexpected", that the ruling too broke between the Philippine standoff balance, stimulate China's rebound. Some think tank to recognize the negative effects of the case on the South China Sea issue, the two sides think the Philippines should correct view of the arbitration process, to maintain calm and restraint, and strive to return to the negotiating process. Such as Australia the Lowy Institute for International Policy Institute of the South China Sea: the need for a course correction, "a text that of parties in the South China Sea requires solution of a complex, high adaptability, and is not a general rule of thumb and one-sided lawsuits, cannot in the South China Sea disputes through litigation lawyers to solve. The author points out that the key problem is to put aside the dispute and seek economic cooperation, which is a precedent in the history of negotiation and settlement of the dispute over the scope of the Convention.

Visible, the so-called South China Sea arbitration results, international public opinion is not monolithic, even those of the case to extreme views of scholars, but also often in finally called on all parties to remain calm and exercise restraint, negotiations to end the case. Some articles even put forward the common development of the specific way, showing its stability in the South China Sea, the desire to.

Four, low costcontrolInternational public opinion, is the United StatesConventional"Soft containment" means

Overseas think tanks on China's criticism and accusations, and the official cautious remarks related to the country formed a sharp contrast. This shows that international public opinion as an indirect means of low costs, has become the United States to avoid direct conflict with China and take the "soft containment" of the other hand. In fact, over the years the United States has been using the "soft kill" shame on China, the so-called "China Threat Theory", that is, the United States, Japan and other think tanks and the media repeated speculation topic. This is further evidence that our country after the "South China Sea arbitration" in a series of diplomatic and military activities is very necessary, from the country's official statement, we have a series of action reached due effect. We do not have to change the strategic route because of the different opinions of the international public opinion.

This article is the author of the original. Without authorization, shall not be reproduced.