SOUTH CHINA SEA: A GEOPOLITICAL CHESSBOARD

It was a playing-with-fire moment.

Like a knight checking a threat in its defensive position, secured only by a marooned dilapidated navy ship looking like an isolated useless pawn, the Philippine Coast Guard vessel, ill-equipped with its guard down, moved toward the Ayungin shoal.

All of a sudden, moving like a piece of rook, the Chinese coast guard ship deployed an intimidating block, maneuvering unsafely, almost ramming the Philippine vessel.

Thrown off balance, our Pinoy skipper, in no time at all, reversed his vessel’s direction, then, in an instant, shut off its engine, and in the nick of time, averted a disastrous collision.

The stakes were high. A miscalculation could have sparked a conflict that would engulf the whole region and beyond. This was not a game. Or was it?

CHESS: WAR OVER THE BOARD

I have always been fascinated by chess. Dubbed the king of games, it is the game of kings and queens, of strategy and tactics, of mind and will. A metaphor for life, for war, for geopolitics, it teaches us how to think, how to plan, and how to act. As Bobby Fischer, the 11^th World Chess Champion, once said, “Chess is war over the board. The object is to crush the opponent’s mind.”

That is why the news caught my eye about the new men’s World Chess Champion, Ding Liren from China. It pumped me up to write this article about another chess game that is unfolding before our eyes – the South China Sea (SCS) conflict – an ongoing complex dispute involving multiple players such as China, Taiwan, the U.S., and the Philippines.

Imagine a chessboard with a map of the SCS on it. The board is divided into squares, each representing a different feature of the region – islands, reefs, rocks, shoals, and waters. On one side, the white pieces represent the U.S. and its allies; on the other side, the black pieces, China and its supporters. The game has begun, and both sides are vying for control of the center of the board – the SCS.

Did you know that the SCS is home to at least 3,365 species of fish, about 571 species of reef coral, and 30 percent of the world’s coral reefs? Did you know that it produces 12% of the world’s fish catch (though accounts for only 2.5% of the planet’s ocean surface area), and serves as a fishing ground to half of the world’s 3.2 million registered fishing boats that operate there?

Did you know that it holds an estimated 11 billion barrels of oil and 190 trillion cubic feet of natural gas (in proven and probable reserves with much more potentially undiscovered), and carries about one-third of the world’s maritime trade?

No wonder it is one of the most contested regions in the world.

OPENING GAMBITS

China’s gambit has been to build artificial islands and militarize them to assert its sovereignty and expand its sphere of influence in the region. Since 2013, China has reclaimed over 3,200 acres of land on seven features in the Spratly islands and three features in the Paracel Islands. It has also constructed airstrips, radar stations, missile systems, and other military facilities on such islands. China claims that these activities are for defensive purposes and that it has indisputable sovereignty over most of the South China Sea based on its historical rights and its nine-dash line.

The U.S.’s gambit has been to conduct freedom of navigation operations and overflight missions to challenge China’s territorial claims and uphold international law. Since 2015, the U.S. Navy has sailed within 12 nautical miles of several features claimed by China in both the Spratly Islands and the Paracel Islands. It has also flown military aircraft over these features or near them. The U.S. asserts that these activities are for peaceful purposes and that it does not take sides in territorial disputes but supports a rules-based order by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.

Both sides have faced costs and benefits from their respective moves. China’s island-building and militarization have enhanced its presence and power projection in the region but have also provoked a backlash from other claimants. U.S. freedom of navigation and overflight missions have demonstrated its resolve and leadership in the region but have also risked escalation and confrontation with China.

MIDDLE GAME TACTICS

China’s main tactic has been using its economic clout to coerce its neighbors into accepting its claims or staying silent. (Rewind: “I’ll tell you, sob, [the Hague-based UN-backed tribunal ruling] is just a piece of paper. I’ll throw that in the waste basket.” – PRRD) China, for example, imposed sanctions on Philippine products, cut off water supplies to Vietnam, and threatened to boycott Australian exports. It increased its military presence and activities in the region, such as conducting drills, deploying aircraft carriers, and firing missiles.

The U.S.’s main tactic has been forming alliances and partnerships with like-minded countries in the region and beyond, such as Japan, India, Australia, Vietnam, and the Philippines, to counterbalance China’s growing influence. It conducted joint military exercises and operations with such countries, such as Exercise Malabar, Rim of the Pacific Exercise, and Balikatan, to foster a free and open Indo-Pacific.

Both sides have also employed other tactics to gain an edge or to test their opponent’s resolve. China, for example, has deployed its coast guard and maritime militia to harass and intimidate other claimants’ fishing vessels and oil exploration activities (Headline: “Philippine Coast Guard says Chinese ship aimed laser at one of its vessels” -- CNN) On the other hand, the U.S. has deployed its aircraft carriers and bombers to conduct patrols and exercises in the region.

Like poison pawns in chess, these tactics are designed to lure the opponent into making a mistake or provoking a confrontation. However, they also carry the risk of miscalculation that could lead to an unintended conflict.

END GAME: CHECKMATE, STALEMATE, OR PERPETUAL CHECK?

China’s endgame is to establish its de facto control and dominance over most of the SCS and to deter or exclude any external interference. China hopes to achieve this by consolidating its presence and capabilities on its artificial islands, coercing or co-opting its neighbors into accepting its claims or interests, and undermining or isolating the U.S. role and sphere of influence in the region.

The U.S.’s endgame is to preserve its access and presence in the SCS and to support a peaceful and lawful resolution of disputes. The U.S. hopes to achieve this by maintaining its military presence and operations in the region, strengthening its alliances and partnerships with regional countries, and encouraging dialogue and cooperation among claimants based on international law and norms.

The checkmate could happen if either side makes a miscalculation or provocation that leads to war. Case in point: if China invades Taiwan considered by the U.S. as a vital ally. Such a scenario would have catastrophic consequences for both sides and the world.

The stalemate could happen if both sides manage in avoiding direct conflict and maintain a balance of power in the region. That is, China respects the ruling of the Hague-based UN-backed tribunal invalidating its claim in 2016. On the other hand, the U.S. recognizes China’s legitimate interests and engages in dialogue and cooperation on regional issues. Such a scenario would require mutual trust and compromise from both sides.

The perpetual check could happen if both sides keep on making moves and countermoves on the SCS chessboard without resolving -- the most likely scenario in the foreseeable future. Both sides have strong incentives to avoid war but also strong reasons to maintain their positions and interests. Both sides have invested too much in this conflict to instantly back down or easily give up.

BEYOND CHESS

As I reflect on the geopolitical chess game, I can’t help but think of the chess player, Ding Liren, a young poet and philosopher as well, who says, “Chess reflects the deepest part of my soul.” Beyond doubt, he’s a piece of welcome news in the region amid the SCS brewing tension. He reminds me of Rosa Parks, the ordinary woman who sparked the civil rights movement in America by refusing to give up her seat on a bus. She showed that one person can make a difference by standing up for what is right.

I wonder if Ding Liren someday does the same for his country and his people. I wonder if he and his breed someday become a catalyst for a peaceful and democratic transition in China. I wonder if he someday becomes the knight in shining armor that will checkmate the dragon.

Biologist and anthropologist Thomas Huxley said, “The chessboard is the world, the pieces are the phenomena of the Universe, the rules of the game are what we call the laws of Nature, and the player on the other side is hidden from us.”

Not until the Player on the other side of the Board says, “Game Over” does Ding Liren checkmate the dragon. This Irish saying strikes a chord: ”When the Chess game is over, the Pawn and the King go back to the same box.” The Bible’s Ecclesiastes 3:20, as if waving a red flag, is an apt passage for drawing this Sunday article to a close: "Everything's smoke. We all end up in the same place -- we all came from dust; we all end up as dust."

Have a blessed Sunday!

Content of this article put together in collaboration with Microsoft Bing AI-powered copilot

Head cartoon courtesy of South China Morning Post

Video clips courtesy of YouTube