Changing the mindset about the living space in the South China Sea.

Currently, the South China Sea issue is attracting considerable attention from both the academic community and the public. Some argue that the first step in South China Sea research is to clearly define the research objectives. So, in your opinion, what are our objectives in South China Sea research?

For some reason, for a very long time we have overemphasized the three characteristics of agriculture, farmers, and rural areas, forgetting that Vietnam is a maritime nation. Only recently, when the issue of sovereignty became very urgent and pressing, have we paid more attention to the sea and declared Vietnam a maritime nation. Clearly, we have over 3000 km of coastline, yet we are turning our backs on the sea. Regarding the mindset of venturing out into the open sea, frankly, the image of venturing out into the open sea makes me think a lot. From the image of bamboo boats, basket boats, or even the iron ships that the government has invested in and supported for people to build, they are all useless and will surely sink. Just look at our fishermen's boats at sea; Chinese ships, even at high speed, are already flooding our boats, not to mention the possibility of them colliding with us.

Therefore, our greatest goal when studying the South China Sea is to gain a comprehensive, systematic, and interdisciplinary understanding of the South China Sea, because it is not only related to sovereignty disputes but also to the issue of living space. From a geostrategic perspective, Vietnam can no longer look north or west; it can only go into space or out to sea. However, going into space is hampered by limited resources, and the deltas have already been exploited. Therefore, we must venture out to sea.

We must also abandon the mindset of exploiting resources without scientific knowledge and relying too heavily on natural resources, as this will lead to very serious consequences.

In order to achieve the research objectives mentioned above, what do you consider to be the most important factor?

First and foremost, we need unified top-down guidance along with a well-structured strategy. Currently, we have six or seven research centers and institutes focusing on the South China Sea, but only the South China Sea Research Support Fund and the South China Sea Research Institute (under the Diplomatic Academy of Vietnam) have the official support of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs – the voice of the State. All other efforts are merely proactive initiatives of research and teaching institutions. Therefore, it seems the State's stance is to leave this matter to the diplomatic sector. Or perhaps the State wants to concentrate research under one umbrella for easier management? In my opinion, ideally, there should be several research centers on the South China Sea, located in the North, Central, and South regions. And since it's a scientific issue, it should be under the Ministry of Science and Technology, not just focused on a single politically-oriented research center.

To date, there has been no clear message from the government regarding the widespread encouragement and support of researchers. For example, the Nafosted Foundation has not yet funded any research projects on the South China Sea. Even in training, universities have not yet encouraged graduate students to focus their research on this issue.

This situation could be due to a lack of policy direction, a lack of resources, or perhaps the belief that this topic is somewhat "exclusive" to the diplomatic sector. For example, organizing national-level conferences on the South China Sea is only entrusted to the Diplomatic Academy and the Vietnam Lawyers Association. When Hanoi National University organizes a conference on the South China Sea, it must obtain permission from all relevant ministries and ultimately from the Government Office. Furthermore, international scholars have also stated that the large scale of international conferences organized by the Diplomatic Academy and the Vietnam Lawyers Association makes it very difficult for them to engage in in-depth discussions.

So, in your opinion, what should be done to encourage academic freedom in research on the South China Sea?

We need to diversify and academicize the South China Sea issue. Now, international relations and foreign policy require the participation of many stakeholders, not just the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, but also academic institutions. However, in our country, we haven't encouraged independent academic organizations (think tanks), a model very common in the US, Australia, and other developed countries.

If we have diversified our foreign policy, then we must also diversify our dialogue on the South China Sea, and even the people must participate. We need to strengthen the capacity of the people, both in terms of technical knowledge of ships and boats, as well as legal knowledge, so that they can work with the government to protect sovereignty. Once the people understand the law better, sovereignty will be better protected. Border disputes and sovereignty disputes are resolved and maintained thanks to the people, not just the coast guard and other law enforcement forces. It is evident that our fishermen still lack knowledge and face legal issues with foreign countries when fishing at sea. For example, recently Thailand seized four of our fishing boats, and Indonesia has also repeatedly seized Vietnamese fishing boats because the fishermen do not understand which waters belong to us and which belong to them; they don't clearly distinguish between 12 nautical miles and 200 nautical miles.

Some argue that instead of focusing on fundamental research such as archaeology and history to prove historical sovereignty in the South China Sea, priority should be given to legal research aimed at participating in and "gaining an advantage" in discussions about disputes in the South China Sea. What are your thoughts on this viewpoint?

I think both approaches are very important. The first, pursued by legal scholars and international relations researchers, focuses on studying international law to determine issues of sovereignty and jurisdiction. The second, developed by historians and cultural scholars, attempts to find and prove sovereignty in history. Vietnam has probably approached this more often in the second way, that is, sovereignty in history and culture.

I maintain that these two approaches must be combined in research on the South China Sea to achieve an interdisciplinary approach. However, in the current context, when discussing sovereignty, the struggle through international law carries more weight, unless we have irrefutable historical evidence. As we can see from the recent PCA ruling, historical evidence did not have a decisive impact on the Permanent Court of Arbitration in making rulings on sovereignty over disputed areas. The Permanent Court of Arbitration requires that, in order to prove sovereignty over a sea or island, a country must have a history of peaceful occupation and continuous exploitation. Historical evidence stating that a country discovered a sea or island 2000 years ago but did not occupy it continuously is not considered sovereignty. For example, China argued that the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea came later, while they had sovereignty over those waters for thousands of years, but the Permanent Court of Arbitration also rejected these historical grounds.

According to him, what solutions do we need to quickly develop a team of researchers capable of meeting research objectives regarding the South China Sea?

It is true that we are severely lacking experts on the South China Sea. Therefore, it is urgent to organize effective training. This should be immediately incorporated into the curriculum with appropriate content in high school history textbooks. Following that, systematic, in-depth, and objective training should continue at the undergraduate and postgraduate levels. There should be a target to have a certain percentage of undergraduate, graduate, and doctoral students researching this issue. Furthermore, establishing centers and institutes at universities or relevant agencies (affiliated with specialized universities, regional universities, and those near the coast) is also essential. What the State can do is allocate budget resources from Project 911, or the Nafosted fund, or separate sources for South China Sea research, to support postgraduate students studying abroad, researchers participating in scientific conferences and seminars, short courses, postdoctoral studies, etc. In particular, it is necessary to attract foreign experts to work in research institutions and universities. A network connecting Vietnamese and international scholars in South China Sea research, especially interdisciplinary research related to the South China Sea, needs to be created.

Thank you, sir!

Source: http://tiasang.com.vn/Default.aspx?tabid=110&CategoryID=36&News=9933