The Obama administration may have been caught on its back foot by China’s rapid island building in the South China Sea over the last few years, but despite its lackluster policy response, its preference for multilateralism over containment may be achieving success. Fortunately for Washington, its allies and partners in the region have come together to confront Beijing’s deeper, more assertive expansion in the South China Sea. Washington’s hub-and-spokes security architecture in Asia now appears to be coalescing at the eleventh hour, as Pacific nations warily await a ruling from the International Tribunal on the Law of the Sea (ITLOS), widely expected to rule against Beijing’s claims.

近年来中国的“大自然的鬼斧神工”上演得火热，奥巴马政府有可能要栽跟斗了。不过撇开老奥那平淡无奇的回应政策不谈，他那对中国围堵策略上的多边政策倒是有可能达到其效果了。对美国来说幸运的是，其在南海地区的盟友和小伙伴们已经团结起来一起对抗中国在中国南海那更霸道、更具有侵略性的扩张活动了。美国在亚洲布置的“中心辐射型安全架构”现在看来是在最后关头才凝聚成型，而那些邻太平洋的国家警惕的等待着来自国际海洋法法庭的正义裁决，期待着这次裁决能够对抗中国的“自古以来”。

The region’s emerging security cooperation—primarily partnerships between middle powers such as the Philippines and Vietnam, but increasingly spearheaded by Japan’s reformist Abe administration—has materialized despite the lack of coherent strategy from Washington. To wit, smaller countries are coming together based on common self-interest, in the absence of coordinated U.S. leadership. This new Asian multilateralism may be more durable in the long run because it is not simply part and parcel of the U.S. rebalance, but rather an organic reaction deeply rooted in middle powers’ strategic interests.

南海地区现如今逐渐显露棱角的安保合作——（主要是菲律宾和越南这些中等体量的国家之间的合作，不过安倍晋三改良政府领导的日本逐渐在这个安保合作上担起了大旗）——在缺乏来自美国的政策配合支持的情况下已经实现了。这些机智体量较小的国家如今在没有美国进行领导协调的情况下，基于他们的共同利益而走到了一起。这个新的亚洲多边政策可能会坚挺很久，因为它不仅仅是美国亚太再平衡策略的一部分，它更是一个为中等体量国家战略利益发声的机构。

B Teoh ? a day ago
Despite numerous FON by US, China continues its island building. No sign reclamation and island development were affected by US's actions. China is definitely on the winning side.

虽然美国表演了无数次自由航行，中国仍然闷声不响造岛。没有任何迹象显示填岛工程和岛屿开发受到美国行动的影响。中国毫无疑问是赢家。

jonbigbootay ? 16 hours ago
The solution to this problem is simple: The U.S. in coordination with Vietnam, Philippines and the other claimants of the South China Sea, should pick a spot within the nine-dash line, but beyond 12 miles from any of China's occupied artificial islands, and start dredging up their own artificial island. And, if China interferes, then the USA should cancel all of the Chinese Treasury Bonds and Notes currently held by the China government (approx. $800 billion USD).

解决方案很简单：美国人和越南、菲律宾以及其他对南海有领土主张的国家合作，在九段线中找一个点，但是距离任何中国占领的人工岛12英里以外，然后开造他们自己的人工岛。如果中国胆敢干涉，那美国就赖掉所有中国政府现在持有的美国国债（大约8000亿美元）。

Result: instantaneous collapse of the Chinese economy.

后果：中国经济立刻崩溃。

Maybe World War III, too. But, hey, life's no fun without an occasional nuclear exchange.

也许还会爆发第三次世界大战。但是，嘿哥们，如果没有一场偶发的核战，生活将多么乏味啊。

Lichdar ? 20 hours ago
I'm glad they think its working. If it continues to work this well, I think everyone will be happy.

我很高兴他们认为这样可行。如果继续干得不错的话，我想每个人都会开心的。

Joseph Siew ? a day ago
The whole issue of SCS was blown out of proportion due to HRC's announcement of PIVOT TO ASIA. By stating that it would move 60% of the US troops to Asia, HRC is claiming that they would militarize Asia. Also, the announcement also emboldened the likes of Japan, Pinoy and Vietnam, making the situations worse. In order for Obama to leave the office with pride as the POTUS with a Nobel PEACE prize, the PTA initiative should be discarded. When the aggression is stopped, peace will be restored.

南海问题的关键在于希拉里宣布的重返亚洲计划把事态搞大了。若真要实施该计划，美国就须将60%的兵力部署到亚洲。那相当于对亚洲进行军事化。同时，公告还给日本、菲律宾和越南撑腰，使情况变得更糟。为了让奥巴马带着作为美国总统获得诺贝尔和平奖的骄傲离任，应该放弃重返亚洲的行动。停止好斗，和平就会再现。

中国从来没有主张九段线内所有海域的主权。中国只是主张跟这些岛礁相关的陆地、礁岩、岛屿和领海、大陆架和专属经济区的权力。
问题是好多记者都很懒，读者更懒，都不愿花时间去寻找真相。
老三 thesurvivor ? 8 hours ago
You were among those who have never bothered to find out the facts. Your "China only claim the land/ rock/island and the EEZ/Territorial sea/continental shelf associated with those island/rocks" means to me, China claims 12 nautical miles of the sea as her territory. Whenever the US does freedom-of-navigation operation in the Chinese claimed sea (12 nautical miles), it immediately becomes an issue. But you claimed it has never been an issue. Why?

你就属于那些从来都懒得费心去找出事实的人。你所谓的“中国只是主张跟这些岛礁相关的陆地、礁岩、岛屿和领海、大陆架和专属经济区的权力”对我来说意味着，中国主张12海里的领海。每当美国在中国声称的领海（12海里海域）自由航行时，立刻就有争议。但你声称这根本不是问题。为什么？

Let me repeat. The Americans do not accept your Chinese claim. To show their non-acceptance is to conduct freedom of navigation in your Chinese claimed area (12 nautical miles or 9-dash line). Is it an issue?

我来重复一遍。美国人不接受你们中国人的主张。为了表明不接受这一主张，他们就在你们中国人宣称的海域（12海里或者九段线）自由航行。这不是问题吗？

Also, I have given you the legal meaning of the term freedom of navigation. You simply did not try to understand it but blindly came up with blames on journalists and readers. You are here to defend and protect China's interests. If you lose by way of terminology, China also loses.

此外，我已经给了你航行自由这个术语的法律解释。你根本没有尝试去理解它，而是一味地指责记者和读者。我知道你是为了维护中国的利益。如果你在法理上输掉的话，中国其实在法理上也输了。