2016年7月13日 星期三

南海仲裁或強化對抗 中國仍爭取和平解決

<轉載自2016713 明報 社評>
荷蘭海牙常設仲裁庭就菲律賓提出的「南海仲裁案」作出裁決,菲律賓獲得全面勝訴,中國被置於十分不利位置。中國雖然重申不承認、不接受仲裁的一貫立場,但是可以預見的是,涉及南海爭議的各方和聲索國都會利用仲裁結果對中國施壓。因此,未來中國面對環繞南海的政治、外交、輿論鬥爭,以至海上軍事行動的對峙,不僅是常態,而且會十分尖銳。值得注意的是,中國對於裁決,除了重申擁有南海諸島主權的立場,仍然釋出爭取和平解決爭議,維護南海和平穩定的信息;暫時不知道各方如何體待中國的意願,若爭議各方及時把握,現在或許是南海從最壞時刻走向最好時刻的契機。
裁決把中國踢出南海 予人有政治操作聯想
仲裁庭對中國最不利的裁決,是認為中國在南海劃設的「九段線」沒有法理依據,違反了《聯合國海洋公約》,云云。這是徹底否定中國在南海的主權和權益。仲裁庭若不否定中國的九段線主張,則南海八成主權都屬於中國,菲律賓的聲索主張就無從談起。其實,中國就南海諸島主權可以追溯到2000多年前,由上世紀40年代起的每一個階段,中國都在對南海諸島行使主權,包括二次大戰後收復日本侵華戰爭期間曾經侵佔的島嶼,以至中共建政之後一系列對南海領土主權和海洋權益的行為。因此,中國擁有南海領土主權和海洋權益,有無可爭辯的歷史事實,不過,仲裁庭對此完全無視。
仲裁庭的裁決還有令人費解之處,就是把南沙群島所有「海上地物」都裁定為岩礁,連南海最大的島嶼、由台灣實際控制的太平島都劃為岩礁,不能擁有周邊200浬的專屬經濟區或大陸架的權利。台灣的馬英九總統卸任前曾經特地到太平島,展示島上擁有淡水、可養殖動物等維持人類居住生活的條件,現在仲裁庭卻將之等同其他「水漲而沒、水退才露」的岩礁,實在有點可笑。不過,若非如此,則不能把中國從南海諸島清除出去。從這個角度而言,仲裁庭的裁決讓人有更多政治考慮和政治操作的聯想。
在這次單方面裁決,中國無論得到多麼不合理的對待,基於在國際的話語權處於劣勢,未來處境將十分不利。首先,裁決改變了爭端各方,特別是當事國的利益訴求和戰略目標,而菲律賓獲勝多了籌碼,會否鼓勵其他當事國效法,值得注意;若它們都向仲裁庭尋求加持,按菲律賓案例,中國處境更不利。其次,美國、日本操作南海議題,對中國與東盟的關係實施「離間戰略」已有一定效果,東盟一貫採取較「獨立、中立」對外政策,有向美日傾斜之勢,加上「仲裁結果」這張牌,若東盟利用來對付中國,美日將更有操作空間。
至於美國,在這次裁決之後,對於以南海爭議為抓手的「亞太再平衡」戰略則如虎添翼,可預見美國將更加利用和操作南海議題,在政治與外交層面進一步擠壓中國,以強固它在亞太的領導地位。日本視跟隨美國介入南海事務,為重塑政治、軍事影響力,尋求成為「正常國家」的重要依託,日本將利用裁決增加對東盟的影響力,排擠中國。事實上,菲律賓、越南等國若非得到美日撐腰甚或鼓動,難以與中國對抗,因此在「後仲裁時期」的美日取態仍然起到關鍵作用,而迄今所見,看不到美國和日本會輕易放棄處心積慮經營所得。中國在這場博弈的艱困,顯而易見。
菲律賓新任總統杜特爾特與其前任阿基諾三世比較,表面上不同,例如他一再表示願意與中國直接談判,也表達了美國介入可能帶來混亂的戒懼。不過,菲律賓已經表示裁決結果公布之後,會先諮詢美日和澳洲等盟國,然後再與中國談判。這般態勢,顯示若美日不放手,菲律賓仍然是它們的棋子。杜特爾特的意圖和目的尚待觀察,現在他未就裁決高調叫陣,沒有逼迫中國即時應對,也算是一種善意。
就共同開發互利共贏 華願作實際臨時安排
中國政府在裁決後發表聲明,除了重申擁有南海領土主權和海洋權益的長期歷史實踐理據,聲明宣示的處理取態更值得注意。其中表示「願同直接當事國盡一切努力作出實際性的臨時安排,包括在相關海域進行共同開發,實現互利共贏,共同維護南海和平穩定」,並「尊重和支持各國依據國際法,在南海享有的航行和飛越自由,願與其他沿岸國和國際社會合作,維護南海國際航運通道的安全和暢通」,這是中國向爭議當事國和國際社會宣示,願意和平解決爭端,共同維護南海穩定。一隻手掌拍不響,且看各方,特別是當事國會否與中國相向而行。聲明中提到的「實際性的臨時安排」,點明包括共同開發和互利共贏;和則兩利,這是中國向當事國發出的清晰信息。
仲裁庭的裁決,客觀上使南海爭議更複雜化,若各方埋首纏鬥,得到好處的或許只有域外國家,當事國極可能各敗皆傷。現在中國的主觀意願若獲得合理回應,則仲裁庭裁決可能導致的對峙對抗局面,會轉化為當事國與中國直接解決紛爭的契機;若各方讀懂中國的意願,屆時「南海行為準則」一併制訂,那麼仲裁結果使南海爭議陷於最壞時刻,也有可能是最好的時刻。這個最壞與最好時刻的出現,存乎一念之間,期望東盟諸國領袖展示政治智慧,為南海的穩定、和諧、發展和繁榮奠基。

China aims at peaceful settlement
THE PERMANENT COURT OF ARBITRATION AT THE HAGUE, THE NETHERLANDS, has handed down its ruling on the case about the South China Sea filed by the Philippines. It found for the Philippines, leaving China greatly disadvantaged. China has reiterated the position it has always held - that it will not recognise or accept any such awards. However, it can be foreseen that all claimants having to do with the South China Sea disputes will make use of the ruling to put pressure on China.
The arbitral tribunal's decision that is most unfavourable to China is that there is no legal basis for the "nine-dash line" on its maps and it is in violation of the United Nations Convention of the Law of the Sea. It has flatly denied China has sovereignty over or rights or interests in the South China Sea. If it had not rejected China's "nine-dash line" claim, it would have had to ascribe 80% of it to China, and the Philippines could not possibly have begun to talk about its claim.
However unreasonably China may have been treated in relation to the unilateral ruling, it will be very unfavourably placed, given the poor say it has in the world community. First, the ruling has changed the disputants' claims to interests and strategic aims, especially the claimants'. Having won, the Philippines has now more bargaining counters. It is noteworthy whether that will encourage other countries to follow suit. If all of them seek help from the arbitral tribunal, China will be even worse circumstanced because of the Philippine precedent. Second, the US and Japan have, by making use of the South China Sea issue, achieved some success with its strategy of driving a wedge between China and ASEAN (the Association of Southeast Asian Nations). ASEAN's foreign policy has always been "independent, neutral", but it tends to be partial towards the US and Japan. If it uses the "arbitration ruling" card to do China, the US and Japan will have even greater room for operation.
After the ruling had come out, the Chinese government issued a statement. It says there are grounds of long history of practice for its claim to sovereignty over and maritime interests in the South China Sea. However, the manner the statement says China will adopt in dealing with the issue is more noteworthy. It says China is willing to make every effort in concert with the claimants to make provisional arrangements of a practical nature, including those for having joint development in the waters in question, bringing about a mutually beneficial win-win situation and working together to maintain peace and stability in the South China Sea. It also says China respects and upholds the freedom of navigation and overflight enjoyed by all states under international law and is willing to work with all the countries bordering the South China Sea and the international community to ensure that the sea lanes there will remain safe and unimpeded. China has, by issuing the statement, declared to the claimants and the world community that it is willing to end the disputes peacefully and make joint efforts to maintain stability in the South China Sea. There is no clapping with one palm. It remains to be seen whether the stakeholders, especially the claimants, and China will move towards one another.
The arbitral tribunal's ruling has actually further complicated the South China Sea disputes. If all immerse themselves in fighting one another, perhaps only countries outside the region will profit, and all the claimants will suffer. If China receives sensible responses to its wish, the confrontation the arbitral tribunal's ruling may bring about may transform into an opportunity for the claimants' settling the disputes directly with China. If China's wish is correctly read and a code of conduct in the South China Sea is drawn up, the worst time into which the arbitral tribunal's ruling has plunged the South China Sea disputes may turn out to be the best time. Whether it will be the worst time or the best time depends just on one thought. It is hoped that ASEAN leaders will display political wisdom and lay a foundation for stability, harmony, development and prosperity in the South China Sea.
南海仲裁或強化對抗 中國仍爭取和平解決
荷蘭海牙常設仲裁庭就菲律賓提出的「南海仲裁案」作出裁決,菲律賓獲得全面勝訴,中國被置於十分不利位置。中國雖然重申不承認、不接受仲裁的一貫立場,但是可以預見的是,涉及南海爭議的各方和聲索國都會利用仲裁結果對中國施壓。
仲裁庭對中國最不利的裁決,是認為中國在南海劃設的「九段線」沒有法理依據,違反了《聯合國海洋公約》,云云。這是徹底否定中國在南海的主權和權益。仲裁庭若不否定中國的九段線主張,則南海八成主權都屬於中國,菲律賓的聲索主張就無從談起。
在這次單方面裁決,中國無論得到多麼不合理的對待,基於在國際的話語權處於劣勢,未來處境將十分不利。首先,裁決改變了爭端各方,特別是當事國的利益訴求和戰略目標,而菲律賓獲勝多了籌碼,會否鼓勵其他當事國效法,值得注意;若它們都向仲裁庭尋求加持,按菲律賓案例,中國處境更不利。其次,美國、日本操作南海議題,對中國與東盟的關係實施「離間戰略」已有一定效果,東盟一貫採取較「獨立、中立」對外政策,有向美日傾斜之勢,加上「仲裁結果」這張牌,若東盟利用來對付中國,美日將更有操作空間。
中國政府在裁決後發表聲明,除了重申擁有南海領土主權和海洋權益的長期歷史實踐理據,聲明宣示的處理取態更值得注意。其中表示「願同直接當事國盡一切努力作出實際性的臨時安排,包括在相關海域進行共同開發,實現互利共贏,共同維護南海和平穩定」,並「尊重和支持各國依據國際法,在南海享有的航行和飛越自由,願與其他沿岸國和國際社會合作,維護南海國際航運通道的安全和暢通」,這是中國向爭議當事國和國際社會宣示,願意和平解決爭端,共同維護南海穩定。一隻手掌拍不響,且看各方,特別是當事國會否與中國相向而行。
仲裁庭的裁決,客觀上使南海爭議更複雜化,若各方埋首纏鬥,得到好處的或許只有域外國家,當事國極可能各敗皆傷。現在中國的主觀意願若獲得合理回應,則仲裁庭裁決可能導致的對峙對抗局面,會轉化為當事國與中國直接解決紛爭的契機;若各方讀懂中國的意願,屆時「南海行為準則」一併制訂,那麼仲裁結果使南海爭議陷於最壞時刻,也有可能是最好的時刻。這個最壞與最好時刻的出現,存乎一念之間,期望東盟諸國領袖展示政治智慧,為南海的穩定、和諧、發展和繁榮奠基。

沒有留言:

張貼留言