China’s original offer of $100,000 from the
Government matched by the Chinese Red Cross was greeted with disbelief by the
international community alongside donations from Australia ($30 million), the US
($20 million plus extensive civilian and military support), Japan ($10
million), United Kingdom ($70 million) and so on.
China later revised its contribution upwards to
$1.75 million, mostly in tents and blankets, but still below totals from Taiwan
($4 million), Indonesia ($2 million), India (15 tonnes of medical supplies)
and, perhaps most tellingly, the Swedish furniture chain of Ikea ($2.7
million).
So what is the reason for this poor treatment of
the Philippines from the world’s second largest economy that has, in the past,
been generous with similar appeals around the world? The answer appears to lie
in the dispute between the two countries over a series of tiny islets in the
South China Sea.
Beijing’s claim to various islands and atolls in
the area has been well documented. It has also had disagreements with Vietnam
and Indonesia, but it is the Philippines which has been most willing to
challenge China’s claims over a formation known as the Scarborough shoal about
160 kilometres off the Philippines coast.
While Manila cannot hope to face down its giant
neighbour militarily, it has taken its case to arbitration at the United
Nations – and there it has a good chance of winning.
China bases its “indisputable rights” in the area
to the fact that it has been fishing there since the fifth century AD, but as
one maritime legal authority pointed out to me “the world has changed somewhat
since the days of the Roman Empire and claims based on a practice 1600 years
ago have to withstand 21st century geopolitical realities”.
Leaving all that aside, it has been universally
recognised in the past that when disaster strikes, political considerations are
put aside in the face of the need to bring relief to human suffering. The fact
that in this case China appears not to have accepted this is an indictment of
those who wield power in Beijing.
No comments:
Post a Comment