China’s new border law meant to intimidate

On 23 October, China’s National People’s Congress approved a new border law asserting that the sovereignty and territorial integrity of China are “sacred and inviolable”. The new border law which becomes operational from 1 January next year, stipulates that “the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the People’s Republic of China are sacred and inviolable”.

Under the law, the state shall take measures to safeguard territorial integrity and land boundaries and guard against and combat any act that undermines territorial sovereignty and land boundaries, Chinese state-run Xinhua news agency reported.

The law also promulgates that the state shall take measures to strengthen border defence, support economic and social development as well as opening-up in border areas, improve public services and infrastructure in such areas, encourage and support people’s life and work there, and promote coordination between border defence and social, economic development in border areas.

The new law could be meant to intimidate neighbouring countries with which China still has ongoing land and sea border disputes – mainly India, with whom negotiations over a disputed area of 3,488 km along the Line of Actual Control, have been unfruitful so far.

India protested China’s new law blaming China for its “unilateral” decision to bring about a new land border law and said it is a matter of concern as the legislation can have implications on the existing bilateral pacts on border management and on the overall boundary question.

China has, so far, resolved land boundary disputes with 12 of its neighbours. Its border disputes with two others, namely India and Bhutan (which it has 400-km of disputed boundary with), are yet to be resolved.

China has said, in the aftermath of the law, that the state shall, following the principle of equality, mutual trust and friendly consultation, handle land border-related affairs with neighbouring countries through negotiations to properly resolve disputes and long-standing border issues.

But it is not unlike China to presume tacitly that it will go to the negotiations table bargaining an advantageous outcome for itself, at the cost of the adversary. As it did with a major power like Russia, who capitulated to China in its border disputes with the latter, after Russia yielded Argun, Amur, and Ussuri rivers, Zhenbao Island (or Damansky Island), Bear Island (also known as as Bolshoi Ussurisky or Heixiazi Dao) and vast swathes of other lands. This happened through three border agreements signed in 1991, 1994 and 2005 by Beijing and Moscow.

In 1963, through the `Boundary Agreement’ between Pakistan and China, Pakistan had ceded approximately 5,300 km of territory to China, of a land that was already in dispute between Pakistan and India, much to India’s consternation.

China has been very territorial in its land and maritime disputes with its neighbours, nothing short of predatory. In fact, China has a list of maritime disputes with a host of its East Asian and South-east Asian neighbours.

With the Philippines, China disputes the Scarborough Reef and the Spratly Islands. Even as China offered to negotiate, the Philippines declared these territories as non-negotiable. With Indonesia, there is a dispute over the Natuna Islands and other parts of the South China Sea. With Malaysia, it is over the Spratly Islands. With Japan, it is over the Senkaku Islands (or Diaoyu Islands) and Ryukyu Islands. With South Korea, it is over the Socotra Rock (Ieodo or Suyan Rock) in the East China Sea. With Brunei, it is over some parts of the Spratly Islands. With Singapore, it is over some parts of the South China Sea. And with Taiwan, over the Macclesfield Bank, Paracel Islands, Scarborough Shoal, parts of the South China Sea and the Spratly Islands.

The Spratly Islands and the Paracel Islands (or Xisha Islands) are the two primary contentions in the sea. The first is a dispute between China, Taiwan, Malaysia, the Philippines, Vietnam and Brunei, while the second is between China, Taiwan and Vietnam.

China has, over the past decades, displayed exceptionable conduct by continued and relentless military aerial sorties over disputed areas, in its naval war ships trespassing these areas, and in its exercising fishing rights over troubled waters.

China, in fact, has made expansive and unjustified claims on the South China Sea. It claims 90% of the South China Sea as its sovereign territory, but is opposed by south-east Asian countries including Taiwan. The South China Sea is a region of tremendous economic and geostrategic importance. One-third of the world’s maritime shipping passes through it, carrying over US$3 trillion in trade each year. Huge oil and natural gas reserves are believed to lie beneath its seabed. It also contains lucrative fisheries, which are crucial for the food security of millions in South-east Asia.

On 12 July 2016, The Permanent Court of Arbitration at The Hague dismissed Beijing’s claim to much of the South China Sea. It stated that there was no evidence that China had exercised exclusive control historically over the key waterway.

China has repeatedly said it does not accept the Court ruling and has continued to expand its South China Sea presence over the past five years.

Since 2020, China has become more aggressive in increasing its military presence in the South China Sea, prompting the US, in June 2020, to formally reject most of China’s claims in the South China Sea. While the US does not claim rights over any territory in the region, it supports the claims of various South-east Asian countries and has historically vindicated that by conducting Freedom of Navigation Operations (FONOPs) in the South China Sea.

Another fallout of China’s increasing belligerence in the region has been the formation of the AUKUS. AUKUS is a new three-way strategic defence alliance between Australia, the UK and US, initially to build a class of nuclear-propelled submarines, but also to work together in the Indo-Pacific region, where the rise of China is seen as an increasing threat, and develop wider technologies.

As for Taiwan, Xi Jingping perceives the existence of an independent Taiwan, as a contravention to his `China Dream’ of making his nation the apex power in the world today and in future. He has not stopped short of implying that China would take Taiwan forcibly.

The Taiwan Relations Act, does not bind the US to defend Taiwan. It propounds that the US will provide Taiwan with the capacity to defend itself. Over the past decade, the US has announced more than $20 billion in arms sales to Taiwan.

China sees democratic Taiwan as a breakaway province. But Taiwan perceives itself as a sovereign state, with its own constitution, military, and elected leaders. In September 2020, as Taiwan warned of the imminent danger of being invaded by China, China sent 19 aircraft including nuclear-capable bombers, into Taiwan’s “air defence identification zone” on the eve of Taipei’s annual war games exercises.

If China presumes the historicity of Greater China, with its imperious suzerainty over Tibet and Xinjiang and the East and South China seas, as pertinent today, then by the same reckoning the Mongol Empire and the Holy Roman Empire should be re-established today. China simply can’t legitimise the expanse of its present and future, on the basis of the past. And it has displayed no compunction over the cultural genocide and other atrocities it has committed in Tibet and Xinjiang. Besides the crushing of political dissent in Hong Kong.

Perhaps, China sees itself at the helm of the global stage in future, heralding a New World Order, with itself dictating terms to the rest of the world. However, it is the duty of current major powers to book it for megalomania, and to serve it notice that one cannot arrive at greatness through bullying, terrorising, intimidation and tyranny.