All We Ask Is Trust
All that is needed is a spark to ignite the fire. With the recent update erupting flames of disruption in the committee, Tulica Bhattacharya, reporting from United Nations Security Council (UNSC), analyses the instability in the South China Sea that extends far beyond the international waters.
It was not long until all peace talks and multilateral cooperation with the People’s Republic of China (China) began walking on a tight rope. One isolated article of The New York Times revealed the true colours of the extent of mistrust that the South China Sea’s neighbouring countries possess. Calling each other examples of fat pandas gobbling dumplings created a rather graphic and precise imagery of what the nations perceive each other’s roles to be. If the underlining policies that aim to establish peace and harmony are struggling to maintain balance on the pillars of suspicion and skepticism, the reporter has but one question – what’s the point?
Let’s look into the series of happenings. A New York Times report stated that a Vietnamese ship was seized by naval ships of China. Accusing China of hindering the freedom of navigation and the freedom of passage, the Vietnamese government stated that the ship, which was heading towards the Republic of Korea with construction material was exercising its fundamental right and did not violate any of the clauses that the United Nations Convention of the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) imposed. Demanding an instant release of the vessel, the government of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam alleged arm twisting of smaller countries, fundamentally calling China a bully. However, Vietnam wasn’t the only nation to react so promptly and profusely. The Delegate of Philippines stated that the incident portrayed how China cannot be trusted since their proceedings in the committee and action beyond the same were in stark contrast. Furthermore, in the most un-shocking series of events, the Delegate of United States of America (USA) was assertive in its contribution to rely on the use of military forces to resolve matters and urged nations to not stand still as the bully planned to exploit its superiority in monetary and territorial aspects (quite ironically).
Enter China. Criticising the western media for having spread fake news, an official statement by the Ministry of State Security “agreed to have apprehended a ship flying a neutral flag, on grounds of piracy”. The statement mentioned that information from credible sources provided the state with reasons to believe that the ship was carrying a cache of contraband. Reassuring of “having acted well within the UNCLOS”, the incident left many red-faced.
Not just determining the importance of co-dependence and its flaws, the episode revealed a lot about human psychology as well. As if waiting for China to stumble on an obstacle, the nations jumped upon the false alarm and chose to represent themselves as innocent victims to the “traumatizing” China. There is no denial that the over-generous territorial claim made by China is indeed a matter of concern when it comes to determining the degree to which uncooperative measures can be executed under the tagline of ‘protection of domestic interests’. However, the reporter believes that this extent of uncertainty acts as a counter-productive measure when it comes to resolution of disputes. Establishing governmental bodies and policy reforms while a doubt in integrity persists is more or less a form of hypocrisy. After all, if one is able to question the integrity, there lies little hope of its existence.
The reporter strongly feels that the matter at hand must be addressed with proportioned equality. Each end struggling to disprove one another, refuses to make any accommodation for compromise, which is necessary at this stage. This disapproval and denial has left the nations involved at the brink of war. It is obvious that vested interests would leave all in a perpetual debate, leading to no consequences. Involvement of arms, ammunition and avoidable interventions would simply escalate the matter at hand.
To reduce the heightened cynicism, the laws and policies must be reevaluated in order to cater for the recent accusations and matters of distress that have been raised. Starting from scratch to establish a final understanding between nations has become inescapable rather than essential. Also, keeping in mind the rapid advancement of technology, reforms, and constant checks to ensure minimal loopholes must be implemented, the purpose of starting afresh would not guarantee a permanent solution. Nevertheless, it would ensure that the threshold of tolerance is not breached. Just as opening the lid of a pressurized vessel, the reporter believes it is time to start anew.
