India’s evolving stance on the South China Sea
The mention of the South China Sea dispute in the joint communiqué issued by Russia, India, and China after their 14th annual trilateral meeting in Moscow this past week is an interesting development, indicating the evolving stance of all parties on the issue. This is the first time that the South China Sea dispute has been mentioned in an RIC statement, and it's easy to see why: later this year, the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague will be hearing a case on China's territorial dispute with the Philippines in the Spratly Islands, and many believe that there is a strong possibility that the decision may not go in favour of the Asian giant. Beijing does not even recognise the legitimacy of the PCA and continues to insist that all such disputes must be resolved bilaterally.
However, after the PCA ruled that it had jurisdiction over the case, and other major powers in the region and outside also publicly supported this stand, Beijing is now clearly seeking to strengthen its position before the hearings. Towards this end, it is seeking to make its stand more palatable to the international community by officially committing itself to maintain international law, while, at the same time, sticking with its bilateral-only position. It is in this context that one must view the RIC joint statement which on the one hand commits Russia, India and China to uphold the “principles of international law” by respecting the UN Convention on the law of Sea, the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea, and the Guidelines for the implementation of the DOC, while at the same time also states that “disputes should be addressed through negotiations and agreements between the parties concerned”. This is a carbon copy of unilateral statements made by Chinese Government on the South China Sea issue. That Russia has toed the Chinese line is not surprising, given that only days before the meeting Russian Foreign Minister Sergei lavrov had publicly supported a bilateral resolution of disputes as opposed to the internationalisation of disputes.
India's position though is little more complicated. In general, India, especially under Prime Minister Narendra Modi, has repeatedly highlighted the sanctity of international laws in such cases. It has also mostly sided with the Philippines and Vietnam in their territorial disputes against China. Hence, by now agreeing to sign a statement that legitimises the bilateral approach strikes a somewhat discordant note. This is moreso the case when one compares the RIC statement with the joint statement issued only days earlier by Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar and his US counterpart Ashton Carter. That statement expresses support for “a rules-based order and regional security architecture” and emphasises a commitment to “working together and with other nations to ensure the security and stability that have been beneficial to the Asia-Pacific for decades”. This statement clearly favours an international mechanism over a bilateral one.