On May 22, after 20 years of negotiations, Indonesia and the Philippines signed a maritime border agreement delineating the boundaries of their overlapping exclusive economic zones in the Mindanao, Celebes and Philippine Seas. President Benigno Aquino III of the Philippines and the Indonesian president, Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, hailed the accord as a model for peacefully settling the increasingly tense maritime boundary disputes in the South China Sea. The spirit of compromise and cooperation in this agreement, however laboriously achieved, is very much needed to help settle the tangled web of conflicting territorial claims involving a seemingly endless list of Asian nations: the Philippines, Malaysia, Brunei, Taiwan, Vietnam and China. At issue is who controls what in the South China Sea, where large reserves of oil and gas are thought to be.

Tensions keep rising, and no quick resolution seems to be in sight. In the latest escalation, on May 1, China positioned an oil rig in waters claimed by both China and Vietnam. Chinese and Vietnamese fishing boats and warships have been jostling around the rig, leading to a Chinese vessel ramming and sinking a Vietnamese fishing boat this week. These territorial disputes in the South China Sea have strong economic motives, but they also reflect a deep-seated nationalism. As the Chinese vice foreign minister, Liu Zhenmin, put it, the sea is central to China's very existence as a global economic power. What is needed is an understanding that compromise and cooperation do not threaten national sovereignty. The quarreling states should return to the spirit of their 2002 Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea, a lofty but nonbinding agreement that included a commitment to international law, a pledge to resolve disputes peacefully and a promise not to occupy uninhabited islands. As long as states continue to make maximalist sovereignty claims, there will be no agreed upon maritime borders and only missed opportunities to manage the resources of the sea for the benefit of all. (NYTimes Editorial)

SLIDING TOWARD AUTOCRACY IN THAILAND

After taking power in a coup last week, Thailand's top army general said the military would establish a “genuine democracy” in the country. But in practice, the military is operating an increasingly authoritarian government intent on silencing all forms of dissent or disobedience. Since taking over, the army has detained more than 250 people, including politicians, journalists, academics and activists. Some have been released in recent days but only on the condition that they not speak to the public or criticize the military. Foreign news channels like CNN and the BBC have been ordered off the air and local networks have been heavily censored.

The generals have also given themselves the power to prosecute civilians in military courts without providing them with lawyers or the right to appeal, according to Human Rights Watch. On Thursday, the army banned all protests against the coup and sent more than 1,000 soldiers to seal a normally bustling intersection in the capital Bangkok. By taking these heavy-handed actions, the military risks escalating conflict and weakening the struggling Thai economy. That is the last thing the country needs given that it has just been through six months of public protests by anti- and pro-government groups that are divided by region and class. If Gen. Prayuth Chan-ocha, the army chief, wants to lead the country out of its political crisis, as he claims, he should provide a plan for a return to civilian rule, including setting a date for an election. (NYTimes Editorial)