The ever-dynamic geopolitical situation in the Asia-Pacific region has been resulting in equally dynamic partnerships and alliances. Case in point: a critical side event to the “Sydney Declaration” that resulted from the ASEAN-Australia Special Summit recently is the establishment of a strategic partnership between Australia and Vietnam.
The pact is particularly wide-ranging, stipulating bilateral cooperation in areas like economics and trade, defense, law and justice, intelligence and security, education, science and technology, social affairs, culture, and even “people-to-people links.” It represents a progression in the two countries’ diplomatic relations, which was established 45 years ago in 1973, a sign that evolving geopolitical realities call for evolving relations.
It is not surprising, therefore, that a key feature of the partnership, especially in the context of the broader security issues hounding the Asia Pacific region, is its potential contribution as a stabilizing influence. There was no overt mention of China in the two countries’ joint statement, for instance, but the writing on the wall couldn’t be clearer.
It read: “We reaffirm our commitment to promoting security and safety, freedom of navigation and overflight, and the rule of law, including the observance and implementation of international legal obligations in good faith; and to the settlement of disputes by peaceful means, without resorting to the threat or use of force, in accordance with international law, including the UN Convention on the Law of the SEA and through the appropriate Asean-led mechanisms.”
The value of such an unambiguous support for the Code of Conduct and non-militarization cannot be overstated. It should also send a strong message against actions that run counter to building regional trust and confidence.
Vietnam, of course, is one of the countries challenging China’s historic claims to islands and island features in the disputed territory. Asean, with the Philippines as sitting chairman last year, was unable to finalize a binding Code of Conduct in the South China Sea, an area that the strategic partnership also categorically seeks to add its voice to.
“We reiterate the importance of the full and effective implementation of the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea and the early conclusion of an effective and binding Code of Conduct between Asean and China, consistent with international law.”
The Vietnam-Australia deal can serve as a good template of a strategic partnership that the Philippine government can use in enhancing similar bilateral agreements with Asean member-nations and beyond. Diplomatically, it shows how two nations with different political systems—Vietnam is communist—can build respect and cooperation based on shared interests.
For their part, both the Philippines and Vietnam, facing similarly daunting challenges in defending their maritime claims in the face of an emerging superpower, can benefit from more institutional efforts that support the rule of law in the region. For instance, the Vietnam-Australia strategic partnership’s stipulations on defense and security cooperation include the reaffirmation of “a commitment to closer defense, law and justice, intelligence and security cooperation, contributing to the peace, stability and development of the region.”
These include committing to an annual meeting of the two countries’ defense chiefs “to facilitate high-level dialogue on defense matters,” which can serve as a good venue to “explore further defense cooperation, including in education and training, maritime and aviation security, peace keeping training and support, counter-terrorism, war legacy issues, and other areas.”
Cooperation between Australian and Vietnamese police, maritime and border authorities is also covered, as are efforts to address threats like transnational crime, such as human trafficking, narcotics trafficking, money laundering, terrorism, and cybercrime.
In the economic front, the deepening of a bilateral trade and investment relationship is foremost in the agenda, in particular the establishment of a similar high-level meeting to identify opportunities to expand trade, identify potential areas for synergy, and build a mutually beneficial agriculture partnership, including joint research and technical assistance to boost Vietnam’s agriculture sector. Clearly, this is an area that the Philippines can also stand to benefit from.
But as a vital cog in the evolving geopolitical chess match that is the Asia Pacific region, the Vietnam-Australia strategic partnership is a force, ultimately, toward regional and international cooperation, as opposed to increasing protectionism and intimidation.
In fact, the two countries vowed to “work closely to preserve the open, inclusive and rules-based regional order, which underpins regional peace, security, stability and increasing prosperity. We share the goal of reinforcing and developing regional and international institutions to promote our common political, economic and security interests.”
Thus, given the obvious value of these possibilities, the presence of President Rodrigo Duterte—the only head of state who did not attend the summit—was sorely missed. There are clear lessons here for the Philippines. It only needs to listen and be open to them.