Since when did a country's lawful action in its own territory merit reproach?
Key figures, some unrelated to South China Sea disputes, have expressed opinions accusing China of impairing navigational freedom, speculating that China's island construction is for military purposes and, most outrageously, comparing China to Nazi Germany.
While addressing a seminar in the Republic of Korea, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Daniel Russel said China's behavior raises the question:"What kind of a power does China seek to become?"
It is ironic to see the question coming from an American official. History has proved in the past several decades that China and other claimants to Nansha Islands successfully maintained peace and stability in the region, which carries more than half of the world's trade.
Russel failed to mention that the Obama administration's strategic "pivot" to Asia also heightened tension in the region. The latest crisis was caused by a U.S. reconnaissance plane flying over China's Nansha Islands.
China's position on the South China Sea has not and will not change. As vice foreign minister Liu Zhenmin noted, China is a staunch proponent of peace and stability in the South China Sea, and is committed to resolving disputes through negotiation with directly concerned countries.
Even some American maritime experts concede that China's island-building activities do not violate maritime law. These islands are mainly for civilian purposes, situated hundreds of miles from the continent. Their military function is defensive in nature, targeting no other parties.
Instead, construction on these islands will enable China to better fulfill its duties and obligations in maritime search and rescue efforts, disaster prevention, scientific research, navigation safety and providing fishing services.
As for the new construction of two lighthouses on Huayang and Chigua reefs in the Nansha Islands, aside from helping passing ships navigate in the waters more safely, we can't think of any other military purpose they have. Let alone the groundless accusations about China intimidating or "invading" other nations.
On the contrary, it is the role of Uncle Sam that needs to be re-examined. Though promising not to choose sides in the disputes, the United States has continued to make irresponsible remarks about China's legal actions while adopting double standards, being "selectively mute" about construction activities carried out by others.
China will continue to advocate addressing the disputes through a "dual-track" approach. Disputes in the South China Sea should be resolved bilaterally between China and countries directly concerned, rather than with the interference of external parties, and peace and stability in the region should be maintained by China and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations.
U.S. intervention does no good in solving the disputes. It will only create more chaos and instability.
