Congressional Testimony: China’s Maritime Disputes

CSIS Senior Adviser Bonnie Glaser discusses China's strategy in the East China Sea. Source: Photo by Kaveh Sardari.

CSIS Senior Adviser Bonnie Glaser discusses China’s strategy in the East China Sea. Source: Photo by Kaveh Sardari.

On Tuesday, January 14, 2014, Bonnie Glaser, CSIS Senior Adviser for Asia within the Freeman Chair in China Studies testified before a joint hearing of the U.S. House Armed Services Subcommittee on Seapower and Projection Forces and the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on the Asia Pacific.  Bonnie and her co-panelists Peter Dutton of the Naval War College and Jeff Smith, American Foreign Policy Council, offered their perspectives on maritime sovereignty issues in the East and South China Seas and how the United States should respond to Chinese behavior.

Readers can watch Bonnie’s panel testimony here starting at the 58:10 mark or view it below. Her written statement is viewable here.

Bonnie S. Glaser

Bonnie S. Glaser

Bonnie S. Glaser is a senior adviser for Asia and director of the China Power Project at CSIS.


4 comments for “Congressional Testimony: China’s Maritime Disputes

  1. January 15, 2014 at 17:23

    First, there is no evidence in the past that China has designs on territory that it does not consider part of its original territory. To view China as a regional aggressive power might be self-projection on the part of the United States. It is only being aggressive today to ensure fishing territory since it is a primary need. (The only exception is some aspects of conflict with Vietnam, which is more caused by Vietnamese aggression than Chinese.) Second, peaceful means can be used to support China. Instead, the US is creating a military response for the sole purpose to justify its military budget and sell weapons in the region. China has signed cooperation agreements with Japan, South Korea and other nations on other regional problems and they will seek cooperation in this area if not provoked. Third, if China was provoked by the US military to making this a military issue, it would not end well for the region and the US. China has everything to gain by keeping trade flowing, using its resources to develop its nation, and avoid anything that would disrupt its growth, unlike the US which sees war and defense as a growth issue.
    If your only tool is a hammer then everything looks like a nail is my comment to the US Congress.

    • akira
      January 19, 2014 at 13:07

      Mr. Church,

      How do you suppose China’s territory reached its present-day size, if not by military expansion and annexation of neighboring nations though out history?

      Even without complete knowledge of regional history, rational thinking and empathy suffices when we deal with other fellow human beings. We are only as innocent as others, and others only as innocent as us.

      • January 21, 2014 at 06:26

        I was referring to current history of the last 40 years. My comment holds if you read them closely. I have lived and worked in SE and East Asia extensively for USG and other governments and I believe it is a major mistake to view the current China as an aggressive military power in the region. I stand by my opinion that this is sabre rattling on the part of US to sell weapons and justify military spending. Please note my other comment. A military conflict with China would not end well the United States. The US military is a shadow of former self after 13 years of war. The point position is peaceful negotiations. Instead the US flies bombers over disputed territory and confronts a Chinese naval ship.China’s main goal is secure food for its people and fish is a primary food. The region refuses to cooperate in conserving fish stock with China’s annual moratorium on fishing so they will do it now forcefully. China is actually being a good actor here.

      • January 28, 2014 at 09:34

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *