進入9月以後，南海戰略大博弈將圍繞中國的雙軌思路進入新的劇烈波動期，突出的表現是國家領導人之間的互動。

習近平主席於9月訪美期間，或將與奧巴馬總統磋商南海問題。年底，習主席或將赴菲律賓參加2015年APEC非正式領導人會議，將直面APEC的東道主、南海爭端聲索方之一的阿基諾三世。年底，李克強總理將赴馬來西亞參加東亞領導人系列會議，這是他去年在緬甸首都內比都提出南海雙軌思路之後，既要面對南海主權聲索國和東盟整體，又要處理那些實際介入南海問題的美、日、印、俄、澳等國領導人的所謂“關切”。

以上情境假設的核心是中國提出的解決南海問題的基本主張，即雙軌思路。它是指有關爭議由直接當事國通過友好協商談判尋求和平解決，而南海的和平與穩定則由中國與東盟國家共同維護。也就是說，中國解決南海問題將堅持兩個軌道，一個軌道是中國分別與東盟相關聲索國進行一對一談判，另一個軌道是中國與東盟整體共同維護南海的和平與穩定，是1與10的談判與合作。其實，沿着兩個軌道解決南海問題至少已經持續十幾年了。早在2002年，中國就與東盟簽訂了南海各方行為宣言（DOC），這是中國與東盟整體維護南海和平穩定的共同之舉。經過十幾年的新發展，尤其是近年來南海問題的不斷升溫，中國政府逐步形成並完善以雙軌思路為基本主張的南海政策主張組合。中共十八大以來，雙軌思路的形成完善可謂一年一步走。

第一步是2013年，在中國周邊外交總體框架下，形成處理南海問題的主要思路。王毅任外長後，於5月1日首訪泰國，提出了中國對東盟政策的“三個堅持”，即中國新一屆政府將堅持把加強與東盟睦鄰友好合作作為周邊外交的優先方向，堅持不斷鞏固深化與東盟的戰略夥伴關係，堅持通過友好協商和互利合作妥善處理與東盟國家間的分歧和問題。具體到南海問題，6月30日，王毅在中國-東盟（10+1）外長會上強調，中國同少數國家圍繞南沙島礁的爭議不是中國同東盟之間的問題，中方一貫主張通過對話和直接談判尋找解決之道；個別聲索國的倒行逆施不可能得逞；中國願與東盟國家共同努力，排除來自各方面的干擾，切實維護好南海地區的和平穩定。2013年9月，李克強總理在廣西南寧的中國-東盟博覽會上提出中國東盟關係從“黃金十年”升級為“鑽石十年”的口號。10月，中國在印尼首次提出21世紀海上絲綢之路、建設中國東盟命運共同體的倡議。 雙軌思路雖然未正式出現，但相關要素已經具備。而且，未來將產生的雙軌思路，應該是在中國周邊戰略大框架、中國對東盟整體戰略中框架下的一項具體政策主張。

第二步是2014年，雙軌思路正式成為中國政府解決南海問題的政策主張。8月9日王毅外長在中國-東盟外長會上正式提出雙軌思路。9月7日王毅在悉尼提出南海問題“四個尊重”，即尊重歷史事實、尊重國際法規、尊重當事國之間的直接對話協商、尊重中國與東盟共同維護南海和平穩定的努力。2014年底，李克強總理在中國東盟領導人會上正式提出雙軌思路，標誌着該思路成為我國處理南海問題的國策。王毅解釋說，中國政府倡導雙軌思路的原因，一方面是由直接當事國通過協商談判解決爭議是最為有效和可行的方式，符合國際法和國際慣例，也是DOC中最重要的規定之一；另一方面，南海的和平穩定涉及到包括中國和東盟各國在內所有南海沿岸國的切身利益，我們雙方有責任也有義務共同加以維護。

第三步是2015年，中國政府進一步完善和補充雙軌思路。8月5日，王毅在中國-東盟外長會上重申雙軌思路，之後稱之為中國與東盟處理南海問題機制的第一步。在此前後，王毅在不同場合闡述了與雙軌思路相關的“五個堅持”和“三點倡議”。8月3日，王毅在訪問新加坡期間公開表示，中方在南海問題上將奉行“五個堅持”，即堅持維護南海的和平穩定，堅持通過談判協商和平解決爭議，堅持通過規則機制管控分歧，堅持維護南海的航行和飛越自由，堅持通過合作實現互利共贏。8月5日，王毅在馬來西亞吉隆坡出席中國－東盟外長會時提出維護南海和平穩定“三點倡議”：第一，南海地區國家承諾全面有效完整落實南海各方行為宣言，加快“南海行為準則”磋商，積極探討海上風險管控預防性措施。第二，域外國家承諾支持地區國家上述努力，不採取導致地區局勢緊張和複雜化的行動。第三，各國承諾依據國際法行使和維護在南海享有的航行和飛越自由。其中，“海上風險管控預防性措施”、“域外國家”、“南海航行和飛越自由”等，均是根據現實情況和事態發展，對雙軌思路作的必要補充完善。

雙軌思路是南海戰略大博弈的產物。最近幾年，南海這盤棋越下越大，越來越複雜。從博弈對手看，域外觀棋的“高參”變成了下棋的“高手”，奧巴馬、G7領導人均公開指責中國島礁建設是改變現狀，加劇緊張局勢。

南海戰略大博弈的結構發生變化，形成清晰的三層結構：第一層是中國與相關國家的主權爭端，第二層是中國與東盟整體的關係，第三層是中國與其大國圍繞南海問題的博弈。前兩層的基本態勢未變，第三層快速發展，中美、中日關係中的南海因素凸顯，尤以中美的南海博弈為重中之重，甚至有可能發展為影響南海問題走向的主導因素。

在此背景下，雙軌思路將南海問題鎖定在前兩個層次，有助於分清責任，維護中國和東盟國家解決南海問題的主導權，將其他大國排除在進程之外，堅決不給其渾水摸魚的機會，防止事態進一步複雜化。從目前雙軌思路實施的情況看，中國與東盟整體談判東海行為準則有所進展，但中國與東盟聲索國啟動雙邊談判十分艱難，而且中美對抗升級。目前中美在南海問題上的困境，是中國不允許美國介入，但美國就要介入，這對雙方都是羞辱，而且會加劇東盟的分化。美國戰略界認為，中國通過雙軌思路將美國排除在南海爭端之外，推動“一帶一路”和亞投行建設，均造成中美在亞太戰略較量的升級，是地區秩序塑造問題，是一盤更大的棋。

由此來看，雙軌思路解決南海戰略大博弈結構的前兩層問題，但管不了中美問題，中國政府應該還有其他配套、協同的政策，來解決美國對南海的介入問題。雙軌思路雖然將美國排除在外，但並不意味着中美之間缺乏溝通南海問題的渠道。今年6月舉行的中美戰略經濟對話就包含海上問題的磋商，相信9月習奧會晤也會磋商南海問題，這有利於雙方摸清底線，達成諒解，緩解對抗，構建中美新型大國關係。

南海大博弈，需要大規矩。將雙軌思路與中美新型大國關係有機對接，“不衝突、不對抗”、“底線兼容”、“舒適度”等，都是針對南海戰略博弈的大智慧。

With a string of high-level interactions to come, the South China Sea disputes will attract more attention and become a point of strategic contest again in September.

During President Xi Jinping's visit to the United States later this month, President Obama is likely to raise this issue with him. In November, President Xi is expected to go to the Philippines for the APEC Economic Leaders' Meeting, whose host this year, President Benigno Aquino III, has made it a more prominent issue with China. In the same month, Premier Li Keqiang is scheduled to attend the East Asia Summit (EAS) in Malaysia, where he will face off with the leaders of other claimants, ASEAN countries and non-regional countries which have expressed an interest in the issue (including the US, Japan, India, Russia and Australia).

The upcoming high-level discussions will likely center around the “dual-track approach” advocated by Premier Li Keqiang at last year's EAS in Naypyidaw, Myanmar. Since then, it has emerged as a centerpiece of China's policy toward the South China Sea disputes. The approach suggests parallel work in two tracks. In one track, the directly concerned states will seek to settle the disputes through bilateral negotiations; in the other, China and ASEAN will work to maintain peace and stability in the South China Sea.This line of thinking has been in play for over a decade. By signing the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea (DOC) in 2002, China and ASEAN countries took a step forward in maintaining regional peace and stability. But in the meantime, the South China Sea disputes have bubbled up from time to time. Hence the greater clarity and more emphasis by Beijing on the “dual-track approach”, especially since the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China in late 2012.

In 2013, it emerged as China's preferred approach toward the South China Sea issue. This is best understood in the context of China's evolving policy toward the neighborhood.Wang Yi, soon after becoming foreign minister in early 2013, made Bangkok his first overseas destination on May 1. While in Thailand, he spelled out the new Chinese government's “three commitments” to ASEAN:

– to strengthen good-neighborly relations with ASEAN as a priority in China's neighborhood policy;

– to further consolidate and deepen China's strategic partnership with ASEAN; and

– to properly handle disputes and differences with ASEAN countries through friendly consultation and win-win cooperation.

Then on June 30, speaking at the ASEAN plus China foreign ministers' meeting, Wang zoned in on the South China Sea disputes and made the following key points:

– The disputes concerning some Nansha (“Spratly”) islands and reefs are between China and several southeast Asian countries, not between China and ASEAN as a grouping;

– China calls for resolving the disputes through dialogue and direct negotiation;

– Those few claimants which have acted unscrupulously will not get their way; and

– China would still like to work with ASEAN countries to remove various interferences and uphold peace and stability in the South China Sea.

In September, Premier Li attended the annual China-ASEAN Expo in Nanning, Guangxi, where he called for efforts to build on the “gold decade” of China-ASEAN relations and embrace a “diamond decade”.

The following month, President Xi formally called for building a “21st Century Maritime Silk Road” and “a community of shared destiny between China and ASEAN” when speaking to the Indonesian parliament.

In this overarching framework for China-ASEAN relations, while the term “dual-track approach” has not yet surfaced, the key elements can already be distilled.

In 2014, Beijing officially put forward the “dual-track approach” for resolving the South China Sea disputes.

On August 8, Foreign Minister Wang made direct reference to it at the ASEAN plus China foreign ministers' meeting.

On September 7, he called on non-regional countries to show “four respects” concerning the South China Sea issue:

– respect for historical facts;

– respect for international law;

– respect for direct dialogue and negotiation between the claimants; and

– respect for China-ASEAN efforts to uphold peace and stability in the South China Sea.

In late 2014, Premier Li mentioned the “dual-track approach” at the ASEAN plus China summit, sealing it as Beijing's official policy for handling the South China Sea issue.

Wang elaborated on the idea, explaining that direct negotiation between claimants is the most viable and effective way to resolve the disputes, adding that it is in line with international law and customary practice and one of the key provisions of the DOC. On the other hand, since peace and stability in the South China Sea affects the vital interests of China and ASEAN countries, the two sides have a shared responsibility to uphold it.

In 2015, Beijing amended and improved the “dual track approach”.

On August 5, Wang, again at the ASEAN plus China foreign ministers' meeting, reaffirmed China's support for the “dual-track approach”, saying it is the first step towards resolving the South China Sea issue. In the days before and after, Wang outlined China's “five commitments” and “three proposals”, which provided greater clarification on the “dual track approach”.

On August 3, Wang gave a press conference during his visit to Singapore, where he stated China's “five commitments”:

– to maintaining peace and stability in the South China Sea;

– to resolving the disputes peacefully through negotiation and consultation;

– to managing differences through rules and mechanisms;

– to upholding freedom of navigation and overflight in the South China Sea; and

– to achieving win-win results through cooperation.

On August 5, Wang put forward “three proposals” for maintaining peace and stability in the South China Sea at the ASEAN plus China foreign ministers' meeting:

– Countries surrounding the South China Sea commit to implement the DOC in a full and effective manner, speed up the consultation on a code of conduct (COC) in the South China Sea and explore preventive measures on managing maritime risks;

– Countries outside the region commit to support these efforts by regional countries and to refrain from taking actions that may heighten tension or complicate the regional situation; and

– All countries commit to exercise and uphold the freedom of navigation and overflight in the South China Sea that they enjoy under international law.

It must be noted that the language like “preventive measures on managing maritime risks”, “countries outside the region” and “freedom of navigation and overflight in the South China Sea” were all added in light of the evolving situation to make the “dual-track approach” more relevant.

A discussion of the “dual-track approach” must not miss the bigger picture or fail to see it as the product of a strategic contest. The South China Sea has become a complicated chessboard in recent years. The outside advisers, who had been monitoring the situation, have turned into players. President Obama and several other G7 leaders have openly criticized China's island build-out for changing the status quo and heightening tensions.

The dynamics in the South China Sea are shifting. Three layers are clearly discernible:

– the sovereignty disputes between China and relevant countries;

– the overall relations between China and ASEAN; and

– the strategic contest between China and other major powers.

While the first two layers are basically stable, the third layer is in constant flux. The South China Sea is a prominent issue in China-US and China-Japan relations. The China-US interaction, in particular, may come to be the dominant factor in the South China Sea disputes.

By focusing on the first two layers, the “dual track approach” places primary responsibility for resolving the South China Sea issue in the hands of China and ASEAN. Put another way, it denies the other major countries the opportunity to exploit and complicate the situation.

However, the reality on the ground is that while the COC consultation has made some progress, significant difficulties must be overcome before bilateral negotiations can materialize between China and other claimants. Moreover, there are growing risks of a China-US standoff in those troubled waters.

The United States wants to insert itself into the disputes over the objection of China. This is a lose-lose situation for both sides, not to mention the fault line it would create within ASEAN. Some American analysts suspect there is more to this than meets the eye. They see China's advocacy of the “dual-track approach” as trying to exclude the United States. Worse, they regard China's push for the “Silk Road Economic Belt”, the “21st Century Maritime Silk Road” and the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank as calculated moves to undermine US interests in the Asia-Pacific region.

At this point, it must be fairly clear that the “dual-track approach” will not help mitigate China-US tensions in the South China Sea. Beijing must devise other strategies to address the question of US involvement.

The truth is, although the United States is excluded from the “dual-track approach”, there is no lack of communication between the two sides on the South China Sea issue, which came up at the Strategic and Economic Dialogue in June and will most likely be on the agenda of the Xi-Obama meeting in September. These are welcome opportunities for the two sides to make clear their red lines, reach some accommodation and reduce the chance of showdown. Ultimately, it will contribute to the efforts to build a new model of major-country relationship between China and the United States.

Great wisdom is required in handling an issue as complicated and consequential as the South China Sea. For starters, the “dual-track approach” can be married with the new model of China-US relations. Hopefully on this basis, confrontation can be averted, vital interests can be protected and comfort levels can be accommodated. This would be good for everyone.