NPI Research Note
US-China Relations Study Group
Intensifying US-China Conflict and Southeast Asia
in the Midst of the Novel Coronavirus Crisis

Oba Mie
Professor of Kanagawa University
The novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has proved to be a major test for the world,
and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) countries are no exception. In
addition to the increasing number of people who have been infected with and died fromCOVID-19, the pandemic has placed enormous burdens on the countries of the world in theform of economic stagnation due to the interruption of trade, investment, and humanmovement, as well as in the form of worsening economic circumstances caused by major
financial outlays that were made in order to compensate for economic losses. Thus, theworld is experiencing what has come to be referred to as the “coronavirus crisis.” In the
midst of this crisis, the US–China conflict has intensified, and, as a result, both the UnitedStates’ and China’s involvement in Southeast Asia has increased. Thus, the ASEAN
countries have found themselves in an unprecedentedly difficult environment in which they
are forced to proceed with their development of a well-balanced diplomacy, which entails
maintaining their relationships with the major powers, such as the United States and China,
while simultaneously preserving diplomatic independence by ensuring that there is distance
between themselves and the major powers.

US and Chinese COVID-19 assistance measures and the ASEAN countries
Among the collaborative efforts to combat COVID-19, China’s proactive involvement withthe countries of Southeast Asia has been particularly prominent. By the end of January,
China had already begun cooperative efforts with ASEAN by providing specialists and-1-administrative assistance. In early February, an ASEAN Plus Three Senior Officials
Meeting, attended by government officials involved in health and medical care, was held.
On February 20, the China–ASEAN Special Foreign Ministers’ Meeting was held in thecity of Vientiane, during which there was discussion about ways to cooperate with regard to
COVID-19 measures. As specialists and experts in various fields engaged in technicalcooperation and shared information via the China–ASEAN framework, in March, theChinese government began to put major effort into supplying the countries of Southeast
Asia with masks, personal protective equipment (PPE), and testing kits and other medical
supplies, and they dispatched medical experts to various ASEAN countries in what came tobe called China’s “mask diplomacy.” Alibaba and other private corporations, as well as theIndustrial and Commercial Bank of China, also provided assistance. These highly “visible”
forms of public and private assistance gave the impression that China’s influence in theregion was increasing. Some ASEAN countries have expressed doubts regarding the qualityof the relief supplies sent by China, but overall they have welcomed China’s help.
The United States announced that by March it would commit US$1,000,000,000 of
COVID-19 assistance to countries throughout the world, US$76,900,000 of which was
earmarked for Southeast Asia. Nevertheless, in March, U.S. Secretary of State Mike
Pompeo stated that, because of the need to deal with the infection within the United States,
this funding would be for the purpose of training medical personnel, improving screening
capabilities, and making improvements in the recipient countries’ health systems, ratherthan for the purpose of providing medical supplies, such as masks. It was also indicated thatsome of these assistance measures would be provided through international organizations,such as the World Health Organization (WHO). When viewed over the mid- to long-term,
assistance designed to improve the capabilities of countries’ public health systems iscertainly important, but in comparison to China’s “visible” forms of assistance it made amodest impression. Furthermore, these forms of assistance were insufficient to remove theSoutheast Asian countries’ distrust of the United States due to the Trump administration’s
policies, such as refusal to participate in the South Asia Summit. In addition, President
Trump has repeatedly and forcefully criticized WHO for being “China-friendly,” and the-2-United States’ withdrawal from WHO was disappointing to the ASEAN countries.

Increasing friction over the South China Sea
However, it cannot be said that the COVID-19 crisis has led to China’s influence becoming
overwhelming in Southeast Asia such that ASEAN countries were swayed to China. The
ASEAN countries, in fact, were divided in their responses to China. Some countries, suchas Singapore, Viet Nam, the Philippines, and Indonesia, implemented strict measuresagainst China as a result of the COVID-19 outbreak by, for example, restricting travel fromChina; however, other countries did not, and in February prime ministers and otherministers from countries such as Thailand and Cambodia even made visits to China.
Furthermore, the fact that China expanded and strengthened its de facto control of theSouth China Sea even while the world was in the midst of the COVID-19 crisis led toincreased friction between China and some of the ASEAN countries.
At the beginning of April, a Vietnamese fishing vessel was struck by a Chinese Coast
Guard vessel and sank in the region surrounding the Paracel Islands. As a result, theVietnamese government released a statement of protest in which it demanded that China
take measures to prevent the reoccurrence of such an accident in the future and that China
compensate Vietnam for the loss. In late April, the Chinese government announced theestablishment of the Xisha and Nansha districts as a part of Sansha City in Hainan Province,
which is an administrative district established in 2012. In response, the Vietnamese Foreign
Ministry issued a statement of protest. The Philippines has taken a pro-China stance inrecent years under the Duterte administration, as President Duterte has demonstrated ananti-US position and has placed importance on assistance and investments from China.
However, even the Philippines has shown a slight shift in its stance toward China in regard
to the South China Sea issue. Philippines Secretary of Foreign Affairs Teodoro Locsinpresented a statement of protest to the Chinese Embassy in the Philippines with respect toChina’s establishment of the abovementioned Xisha and Nansha districts. On June 1, thegovernment of the Philippines informed the United States that it would postpone thetermination of the Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA), which was previously announced to-3-

be taking place in February, for a period of six months. Delfin Lorenzana, Secretary ofNational Defense of the Republic of the Philippines, attended the early June ceremonymarking the completion of a dock constructed by the government of the Philippines on theisland of Pag-Asa, which is one of the Spratly Islands, an island chain that is under thePhilippine’s de facto control. In his address at this ceremony, he mentioned plans foradditional construction on the site, including a runway. Indonesia, the largest of the ASEAN
countries, went on alert when China entered into the exclusive economic zone (EEZ)
around the Natuna Regency. Indonesia sent notice to the United Nations (UN) Headquartersin May that China’s insistence on the so-called “nine-dash line” was without any basis. Inlate July, Indonesia increased efforts to restrain China’s movements in the South China Seaby, for example, conducting military exercises in the region.
Intensifying US position on China and the ASEAN countries’ cautious stance
The United States, which was unable to dispel the image that its COVID-19 assistancemeasures for Southeast Asia were paltry in comparison to China’s, took a strong position
against China in light of the situation in the South China Sea. In early July, the US aircraft
carriers the USS Nimitz and the USS Ronald Reagan engaged in large-scale military
exercises in the South China Sea. On July 13, Secretary of State Pompeo stated that China’smaritime expansion into the South China Sea was illegal and that “The world will not
accept China treating the South China Sea as if it were part of its own maritime empire.”He emphasized that the ruling by the International Court of Arbitration in July 2016, which
rejected China’s insistence that it has territorial rights to the South China Sea, wasconsistent with the United States’ stance on the issue. On July 14, the US guided missile
destroyer USS Ralph Johnson conducted a “freedom of navigation” mission in the vicinityof the Spratly Islands. On July 15, Secretary Pompeo made it clear that the United States’
position was to provide support to all the countries of the world that were trespassed upon
because of China’s insistence on its territorial rights. This series of events was recognized
as a turning point in the United States’ stance on the issue of territorial rights in the South
China Sea, which previously had been one of neutrality. The United States, which has been-4-

intensifying its attempts to restrain China, has increasingly emphasized its Indo-Pacificstrategy and made clear that its stance is to prevent China from making moves into theSouth China Sea, while simultaneously reinforcing cooperation with countries in the region
with which it has alliances, such as Japan and Australia.
This US stance is seen as a kind of support for Viet Nam, the Philippines, and Indonesia,
which have been making their own attempts to prevent China from expanding its maritime
presence. However, it would be premature to conclude that the ASEAN countries, including
those indicated above, have welcomed the strict stance the United States has taken against
China and are following the United States’ lead. For example, in a policy speech deliveredin late July, President Duterte of the Philippines emphasized that the Philippines “has nointention of confronting either the US or China.” In addition, US attempts to pressureothers into not adopting China’s 5G technology and decoupling from involvement withChina are not in line with the economic realities of the ASEAN countries, which are
geographically close to China; have strong ties to China in the form of a cross-borderproduction network, investment, and human travel (e.g., tourism); and derive profits fromthese endeavors. One cannot overlook the fact that, in the midst of the COVID-19 crisis,trade between China and ASEAN has actually increased.

Toward ensuring independence and centrality
As both the United States and China have intensified their involvement in Southeast Asia
during the COVID-19 crisis, the ASEAN countries have been attempting to maintain theirtraditional balanced diplomacy by not showing a preference for either side, whilesimultaneously gaining what they can from both. While it may seem, at first glance, that theoptions available to the ASEAN countries have decreased, ironically, the more the UnitedStates and China show unwavering stances of increased involvement in the region and themore they attempt to align the ASEAN countries with themselves, the better positioned theASEAN countries are to gain increased influence on the order in East Asia, since theASEAN countries’ actions have a direct effect on the results of the strategies being
employed by the United States and China. For example, during the currently ongoing-5-

discussions between China and ASEAN on the formulation of a code of conduct (COC) togovern behavior in the South China Sea, rules that are consistent with the “ASEAN
model,” such as respect for sovereignty, compliance with international law, peacefulresolution to conflict, and non-use of force, have been included. In addition, while still
maintaining their relationships with the United States, the ASEAN countries have indicatedthat they will not cooperate with the United States’ intensification of its already excessive
criticism of China, and they have called for the United States to exercise self-restraint inregard to actions that may escalate the conflict between the two major powers in order tomaintain the stability of the regional order. ASEAN has involved extra-regional players in
its efforts to ensure the stability of the regional order. These efforts have taken the form ofthe East Asian Summit (EAS), ASEAN Plus Three (APT), the ASEAN Regional Forum(ARF), and the ASEAN Defense Ministers Meeting Plus (ADMM-Plus). These efforts have
utilized the ASEAN architecture to the fullest extent in order to facilitate the exchange ofviews among member states, as well as the sharing of information and the provision ofvenues for discussion and cooperation during this age of the COVID-19 crisis. It is difficultfor ASEAN countries to implement specific policies that maintain their independence andinfluence. Thus, it can be said that the ASEAN countries have reached a critical stage.

September 30, 2020-6-