Actions to Reinforce Common ASEAN Position on South China Sea Issue

Mdm Speaker, this question comes at a sensitive moment because the arbitral tribunal will be publishing its findings tomorrow. I hope Members will appreciate that I have to be extra careful in my reply.

ASEAN's last consensus position on the South China Sea was reflected in the Chairman's Statement following the ASEAN Foreign Ministers' Retreat in Vientiane in February this year. The Chair, Lao PDR, had emphasised that all 10 ASEAN Foreign Ministers remained seriously concerned over the recent and ongoing developments in the South China Sea and reaffirmed the need to enhance mutual trust and confidence. In addition, there is a need for all stakeholders to exercise self-restraint in their conduct of activities and to pursue peaceful resolution of disputes in accordance with international law.

This sentiment was most recently conveyed by the ASEAN Foreign Ministers during the Special ASEAN-China Foreign Ministers' Meeting which we held in Kunming, China, on 14 June. We had a very frank and robust exchange of views on issues of mutual interest, including the situation in the South China Sea. The ASEAN Member States and China broadly reaffirmed the importance of our multi-faceted and mutually beneficial relationships. We also underscored the importance of ASEAN unity and centrality on issues of common interest to ASEAN, including the absolute need for peace and stability and freedom of navigation and overflight in the South China Sea.

The media attention that occurred after that meeting on the failure to issue an ASEAN Joint Press Statement, in fact, reflects the importance that the international community places on ASEAN's unity and the developments in the South China Sea. The 49th ASEAN Foreign Ministers' Meeting is scheduled in two weeks' time and I am sure this issue will arise again.

On our part, I just want to emphasise that Singapore is not currently the Chairman of ASEAN and we are also, very importantly, not a claimant state in the South China Sea. We have consistently stated that Singapore takes no position on the merits of the specific territorial claims, and the Philippines' arbitration proceedings against China was a national decision undertaken by the Philippines without consultation with the rest of us. Singapore's position on this matter has been clearly articulated in January 2013 by my predecessor, Minister K Shanmugam, here in Parliament. In brief, our position is that the overlapping sovereignty claims in the South China Sea should be settled by the parties concerned. However, this should be done in accordance with international law, including the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). All parties should refrain from provocative behaviour that could raise tensions in the South China Sea.

Territorial claims could be resolved by negotiations, adjudication or arbitration. The Six-Point Principles on the South China Sea that was adopted by ASEAN in 2012 clearly states that ASEAN supports the peaceful settlement of disputes, in accordance with international law, including the 1982 UNCLOS. In fact, seven out of the 10 ASEAN Member States have used adjudication and/or arbitration to resolve disputes in the past. ASEAN, at the highest levels, has also consistently reaffirmed the principle that disputes should be settled peacefully, with full respect for legal and diplomatic processes, and this was most recently issued by our Leaders in the Sunnylands Declaration after the Special ASEAN-US Leaders' Summit in February 2016.

As the current country coordinator for ASEAN-China relations, Singapore will fully support and we will facilitate the existing ASEAN-led processes to manage or to help manage the tensions in the South China Sea. We will continue to perform this role in a transparent and objective manner, with the aim of preserving ASEAN unity and credibility whilst simultaneously advancing our multi-faceted and mutually beneficial relationship with China. This includes the full and effective implementation of the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea (DOC) and the expeditious conclusion of a legally-binding Code of Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea (COC).

We have made some, albeit slow, progress in confidence-building and conflict-prevention measures. At the recent ASEAN-China Senior Officials' Meetings on the Implementation of the DOC that were co-chaired by Singapore and China, we adopted the MFA-to-MFA hotline for maritime emergencies, which will be manned on a 24/7 basis. This hotline will help build confidence amongst parties to the DOC and, hopefully, help prevent ground accidents. We have also started preliminary discussions on a proposed Code for Unplanned Encounters at Sea (CUES), to be applied in the South China Sea, on which I had previously briefed Members. We hope that the observance of CUES will send a positive signal and help manage the situation at sea and prevent miscalculations.

Our officials have also begun looking at possible elements of the Code of Conduct but, quite frankly, this will take time. Progress has been extremely slow on this front. As the country coordinator for ASEAN-China dialogue relations and as the co-chair of the DOC process, Singapore will continue to work closely with all stakeholders to advance ASEAN unity, credibility and centrality.

I thank the Minister for his comprehensive reply. I have a few supplementary questions.

Firstly, in light of the expected ruling tomorrow, will there be or will Singapore be pursuing a joint ASEAN position on the expected rulings of the Permanent Court of Arbitration?

Secondly, what would be Singapore's stand on the expected ruling?

Thirdly, if China does, indeed, not abide by the ruling of the Permanent Court of Arbitration, as it declared earlier, what would be Singapore's reaction to that?

Finally, will the Minister share with this House his assessment of how China's military deployments in the South China Sea or, indeed, the position that China has been taking regarding the South China Sea may affect Singapore in respect of shipping and overflight issues across the South China Sea?

Let me deal with the first question: will there be a joint ASEAN statement? First, we will have to see what the ruling is tomorrow. I am not privy to it and I think all of us, all stakeholders and all interested parties, will have to study it in great detail. That is the first point.

Secondly, it would be ideal that ASEAN speaks with a common voice but on the basis of consensus, because that is a key tenet by which ASEAN arrives at decisions. So, I cannot at this point in time give an answer with any certainty on whether there will be a joint ASEAN statement. It depends on the ruling, the respective analysis and assessments by the sovereign countries and whether there is a consensus. So, we will have to wait and see. I am going to be quite busy for the next few days.

Where does Singapore stand? As I have said, first, we are not a claimant state, fortunately, so we have no dispute with China. We have no overlapping claims with any ASEAN member in the South China Sea. What we stand for is we believe in a rules-based world order where decisions are made on the basis of law, on the basis of international law and not on the basis of might or size. We believe in a peaceful resolution of disputes and, as I have said earlier in my answer, including negotiations, adjudication or arbitration. In the case of Singapore, we have, on more than one occasion, used adjudication or arbitration to successfully settle disagreements. It has worked for us.

Third, we need freedom of navigation and overflight in the South China Sea because the South China Sea is a crucial avenue through which at least five trillion dollars' worth of global trade flows through it. It is not enough to just talk about freedom of navigation and overflight but we all know that there needs to be a sense of security and stability, so that people who are transiting goods, services, flowing through the South China Sea will be able to do so with some certainty and clarity. This, therefore, makes it very important that all stakeholders do not unnecessarily escalate tensions in order to make a point because such escalation of tensions will have a profound impact on global trade and will affect even non-claimant states like us.

The other question on what will we do if China does not comply, I will consider that to be a hypothetical question and, with due respect, I do not wish to engage in speculation at this point.

As for the Member's fourth supplementary question on military activities, I would say I have addressed it earlier on. The key point is to reduce tensions and to look for peaceful resolution of differences. We believe this is still possible and we hope that cooler heads will prevail.