If developments observed in the South China Sea over the recent months are of any indication, it simply means that the situation has worsened. China’s continued aggression towards its neighbors – the Philippines and Vietnam in particular, has continued unabated. Over the past couple of months, China has continually harassed the Philippines in the South China Sea (SCS), well within the latter’s legitimate exclusive economic zone. Chinese maritime forces, including coastguard and maritime militia, blocked Philippine resupply missions to the Second Thomas Shoal. China Coast Guard has loitered near Vietnam’s hydrocarbon blocks, well within the latter’s EEZ, near Vanguard Bank.
Until recently, Vietnam has been the most vigorous of all Southeast Asian SCS parties to push back against China. Lately, the Philippines has joined the fray, with a somewhat unique difference. While Hanoi has largely sought to avoid the limelight when pushing back against Beijing in the SCS, choosing instead to respond firmly on the ground against Chinese maritime transgressions with its own limited forces, Manila has taken on a more “public” tack. It chose to publicize Chinese behavior in the SCS, with the express intent to internationalize the disputes and bring to world attention Beijing’s aggression.
This is a typical asymmetrical action that a smaller and weaker state can undertake against the strong. While there is no sign to indicate that the Philippine move to publicize Chinese behavior in the SCS has had any effect on Beijing, it is at least not presumptuous to make the preliminary observation that this “publicity” could have compelled China to rethink those possible consequences to its own interests, and thus recalibrate future moves. The Philippine Coast Guard observed that Chinese forces appeared to be “less aggressive” knowing that media personnel were present on Filipino government vessels during the recent flareups, the first documented instance in July and September.
In Southeast Asian SCS parties’ “David versus Goliath” struggle against China, the first instinct of any interested extra-regional stakeholder would be to dispatch the “big guns”, namely, warships to show the flag and hopefully, signal to Beijing that its actions are under watch and the sending government is backing China’s weaker rivals in the disputed waters. The U.S. Navy conducted a “remarkable prototype operation”, in the words of the Secretary of Navy Carlos del Toro, back in 2020 to support Malaysia during the standoff with China over oil drilling ship West Capella off Sarawak. That said, American maritime forces – both the navy and coastguard – cannot be omnipresent at any one time.
Perhaps European naval forces would find this even more of a stretch given the present capacity. Under the European Union’s coordinated maritime presence arrangements, only a handful of European powers are able to project and sustain naval presence in the Indo-Pacific region at any point of time. Because the Indo-Pacific is such a vast geographical area, it is neigh impossible to expect European naval forces to be present in the SCS 24/7, despite the bloc’s desire to do so.
France maintains one of the most extensive naval presence in the Indo-Pacific, but its forces are scattered across a wide region, including the southernmost of the Pacific Ocean. The United Kingdom currently has a pair of offshore patrol vessels in sustained, years-long Indo-Pacific deployment. But even these two warships, while optimal in undertaking low-intensity peacetime operations such as those typical of grey zone types in the SCS, are not always on station in the SCS. At best, these European naval forces, alongside their American counterparts (and for that matter, the other extra-regional powers such as Australia and Japan), maintain intermittent presence at best.
In order to cope with China’s grey zone challenge in the SCS, Southeast Asian countries have relied on a mixture of approaches. Diplomacy is the most preferred for regional governments that continue to stress upon the need for peaceful settlement of the disputes. The economic stakes at hand also mean that Southeast Asian SCS parties try assiduously not to rock the boat and not allow the SCS disputes dominate the much broader bilateral relations with Beijing, especially where it concerns trade and investments. At the same time, diplomacy is also a vital tool of the weak against the strong, as characterized by how Manila lodged a legal challenge against Beijing in The Hague back in 2013, and for which the tribunal handed a stunning legal victory to the Philippines three years later. In the wake of recent flareups, Manila is now considering a fresh legal challenge against Beijing.
The second approach, which has until recently been kept so low profile, is Southeast Asian SCS parties deploying their maritime forces, even if they are outnumbered, outsized and outgunned by their Chinese counterparts, to put up counter-presence postures. These forces may not maintain sustained presence in the concerned areas of disputes like the Chinese do, but the very act of having even an intermittent, albeit not optimal, counter-presence is aimed at signaling to Beijing these countries’ resolve in not yielding their sovereignty and rights.
These two approaches are only effective if certain prerequisite conditions are met. The first is that diplomacy must always be backstopped by the “stick”. Legal challenges have to be supported by properly documented evidences of Chinese aggression in the SCS. The Southeast Asian SCS parties certainly need more offshore-capable maritime assets to maintain a more robust presence that can counter that of China, but funding constraints often militate against the ability to induct sufficient materiel in time and at reasonable cost. In any case, one could argue that there is no way for any Southeast Asian party to match the Chinese ship for ship, aircraft for aircraft. Beijing has tapped its shipbuilding preponderance to outbuild its Southeast Asian SCS rivals combined.
In order for Southeast Asian countries to maintain the option of legal challenge against China – like what Manila had done back in 2013 and is now thinking of doing again – and to optimize the employment of limited maritime assets as a counter-presence in the concerned waters, it goes without saying that maritime domain awareness (MDA) is critically important. MDA is not a panacea to Southeast Asian maritime security problems, whether one is talking about the SCS disputes or transnational crimes such as smuggling and piracy. It does not replace the perennial need for mobile assets to prosecute lawless at sea, or to assert maritime sovereignty and rights.
However, while MDA has become a major itinerary for extra-regional stakeholders’ maritime security capacity-building efforts at sea, it has largely been confined to two broad approaches. The first concerns the transfer or sale of MDA assets, be it drones or radar systems. The second involves providing access to one’s MDA tools. The EU’s CRIMARIO project and the U.S.-led Indo-Pacific Partnership for Maritime Domain Awareness (IPMDA) are major examples. The party providing such access to less endowed partners such as those in Southeast Asia could avail the latter to a comprehensive array of tools to improve MDA, not just those based on automatic identification systems (AIS) so commonly utilized for vessel tracking and identification, but even such niche associated areas as “dark” shipping (or vessels that switch off their AIS). A recent agreement for the Philippines to gain access, free of charge, to Canada’s satellite-based MDA tool to detect and track “dark” shipping is a good example.
In view of the Philippines’ recent approach to publicize Chinese behavior in the SCS, perhaps MDA has to take on a new role. Based on the abovementioned second approach, which entails the contributor party providing beneficiary country access to requisite tools, the new role will involve the “crowdsourcing” of MDA in the SCS. This “crowdsourcing” MDA will also be different from the official institutions designed to foster information-sharing in the region, such as the case of the Information Fusion Centre in Singapore. This “crowdsourcing” MDA platform can be an online portal that is made available for access to friendly institutions – not just governments, maritime agencies but also the academia, media and civil society organizations (CSOs).
Essentially this platform is targeted at promoting awareness of grey zone aggression. All registered users can contribute information – hence the idea of “crowdsourcing” – that can be duly corroborated, validated and then shared on the platform. The user in question can be a coastguard vessel engaged in the thick of a faceoff with a maritime militia boat. It can also be a fisherman who observes and captures a photograph of a grey zone transgression in the SCS. The information can come in various forms – photographic, video footages, audio recording, etc. Government agencies that share high-fidelity information such as electro-optical images may be concerned about revealing too much of their capabilities to potential adversaries. Hence, this platform should also endeavour to “sanitize” these data that can be made available for public access and use. All in all, this “crowdsourcing” MDA portal serves as a repository of information that can serve real-time maritime prosecution purpose, or contribute evidence to help concerned parties build a strong legal case for international arbitration processes.
One may ask, why not tap existing regional information-sharing centres? The problem is that geopolitical sensitivities often impede open-sharing of information pertaining to grey zone aggression. For example, the IFC based in Singapore is able to draw its strengths on a multitude of international liaison officers. This very strength, which fosters maritime security information-sharing, constitutes a weakness as well – it becomes sensitive to share grey zone aggression which may be perpetuated by a certain member country of the centre. Moreover, the Singapore IFC’s regular MDA products also do not document grey zone aggression, instead mainly transnational crimes and navigational accidents.
Therefore, this “crowdsourcing” MDA platform would be one that involves a wider pool of stakeholders, both within and outside government bodies. Tackling grey zone aggression requires a whole-of-society approach, and should not be the exclusive province of government organizations. This platform thus also serves as a check-and-balance of sorts; for example should governments choose not to publicize the said instance of grey zone aggression due to geopolitical sensitivities, other organizations such as the academia and CSOs can help shed light on such incidents and bring them to international public attention.
The EU could be the most ideal candidate to implement this “crowdsourcing” MDA initiative, tapping its vast pool of expertise, financial means and technological capabilities. It is also less encumbered with geopolitical baggage in getting wider “buy-in” by regional actors, unlike the U.S. for example which is embroiled in a tense rivalry with China. As a reflection and an extension of its strategic autonomy, the EU is better positioned to helm this initiative.
In a way, enabling and empowering concerned Southeast Asian SCS parties especially the ability to stand up against grey zone aggression is a more sustainable long-term solution. It also fits nicely with the preference of regional countries to police their own waters and customize approaches in manners that suit their national interests. It is also much more helpful than having European navies dispatching assets to show the flag in the region – especially if such presence is at best intermittent and hence not taken seriously by the prospective grey zone aggressor, in this case China. This “crowdsourcing” MDA initiative helps exposes grey zone aggression, involves much wider stakeholdership across segments of the society, and can potentially serve as a credible tool to deter such malign acts and to prevent escalation of crisis situations at sea.
What we observe in China is a population reduction strategy paired with the socio-economic transition. In my view it’s not a crisis, but it is a very challenging transition.Lauren Johnston
"We are at an inflection point in this century. Many of our traditional arrangements are failing. To achieve stability in this century we need to discover new solutions" - Interview with Samir Saran - Senior Fellow and Vice President at the Observer Research FoundationKrzysztof Zalewski
An interview with Mr. Meirzhan Yussupov, Chairman of the Board of the “National Company” KAZAKH INVEST” JSC - Member of the Board of Directors of the CompanyMagdalena Sobańska-Cwalina
Peace and development as the call of our day again face severe challenges on a global scale, with more prominent instability, uncertainty and complexityYiwei Wang
Polish women do not often become the heroines of media reports in Central Asia. In February 2020, however, it was different. The story of Agnieszka Pikulicka-Wilczewska, a journalist, "heated up" the headlines of local news portals. More importantly, "between the lines" she talked a lot about contemporary Uzbekistan and the role of women in politics.Magdalena Sobańska-Cwalina
Intensive modernization and the desire to catch up with the armed forces of the United States made chinese interest in the military application of futuristic technologies grow bigger.Paweł Behrendt
"Cooperation and investments – we are absolutely up for it. However, we prefer to keep a certain degree of caution when it comes to entrusting the transfer of technology and critical infrastructure to external investors. The security of Poland and the EU should be considered more important than even the greatest economic gains..."
Interview with Uki Maroshek-Klarman - Academic Director of the Adam Institute for Democracy and Peace in Israel. Founder of "Betzavta" method, which was created with intention of streghtening people's participation in society and making conflicts easier to solve.Patrycja Pendrakowska
Ada Dyndo conducts an interview with Shairee Malhotra on India’s role in G20. Shairee Malhotra serves as a Coordinator of the T20 India Taskforce on Reformed Multilateralism for India’s G20 presidency.Ada Dyndo
The Social Credit System currently being rolled out in China may pose significant organisational and legal challenges for both foreign and Polish entities operating in China. We invite you to read our report, prepared in cooperation between the Boym Institute and Kochanski & Partners.Patrycja Pendrakowska
Book review of "North Korea’s Cities", written by Rainer Dormels and published byJimoondang Publishing Company in 2014.Nicolas Levi
Book review of "Unveiling the North Korean economy", written by Kim Byung-yeon and published by Cambridge University Press in 2016.B. Tauris in 2017.Nicolas Levi
India’s current position towards the Russian invasion on Ukraine may damage its reputation as a major force of peace in the world
On May 24 Dr. Nicolas Levi gave a lecture on Balcerowicz's plan in the context of North Korea. The speech took place as part of the seminar "Analyzing the Possibility of Reform and its Impact on Human Rights in North Korea". The seminar took place on May 24 at the prestigious Yonsei University in Seoul, South Korea.
The Boym Institute, working with other think tanks, organizes panel discussions on topics related to the European Union's Indo-Pacific strategy
The debate was the consequence of positive reactions to the open letter that the Boym Institute published in the summer of 2020. Many of its readers pointed out the necessity of broad consultations regarding the principles of the new multidimensional policy in order to reflect the diversity of perspectives, interests and conditions.
We would like to cordially invites all to the new series "Voices from Asia" that is devoted to the Asian perspectives on the conflict in Ukraine. In this series, we publish analysis by experts based in Asia or working on Asian affairs who present their positions on this matter.
Nowadays all the CA states continue transitioning into the human-centered model of governance where the comprehensive needs of societies must be satisfied, nevertheless, the achievements are to a greater extent ambiguous.
Her research focuses on political economy, migration studies, and international trade. Ailuna, we are more than happy to welcome you to the team!
The Chinese Influence Campaign can allegedly play a dangerous role at certain Central European universities, as stated in the article ‘Countering China’s Influence Campaigns at European Universities’, (...) However, the text does ignore Poland, the country with the largest number of universities and students in the region. And we argue, the situation is much more complex.Patrycja Pendrakowska
Interview with Ada Dyndo, President of WICCI's India-EU Business Council and Principal Consultant of European Business and Technology CentreAda Dyndo
The course will be taught via interactive workshops, employing the Adam Institute’s signature “Betzavta – the Adam Institute’s Facilitation Method“, taught by its creator, Dr. Uki Maroshek-Klarman. The award-winning “Betzavta” method is rooted in an empirical approach to civic education, interpersonal communication and conflict resolution.
The situation of Taiwan and Ukraine is often compared. The logic is simple: a democracy is threatened by a repressive, authoritarian regime making territorial claims and denying it the right to exist.Paweł Behrendt
We want the Boym Institute to become a valuable platform of exchanging views, making valuable acquaintances and, above all, deepening knowledge. Therefore, we undertake the organization of many events: debates, lectures, and conferences.