进入9月以后，南海战略大博弈将围绕中国的双轨思路进入新的剧烈波动期，突出的表现是国家领导人之间的互动。

习近平主席于9月访美期间，或将与奥巴马总统磋商南海问题。年底，习主席或将赴菲律宾参加2015年APEC非正式领导人会议，将直面APEC的东道主、南海争端声索方之一的阿基诺三世。年底，李克强总理将赴马来西亚参加东亚领导人系列会议，这是他去年在缅甸首都内比都提出南海双轨思路之后，既要面对南海主权声索国和东盟整体，又要处理那些实际介入南海问题的美、日、印、俄、澳等国领导人的所谓“关切”。

以上情境假设的核心是中国提出的解决南海问题的基本主张，即双轨思路。它是指有关争议由直接当事国通过友好协商谈判寻求和平解决，而南海的和平与稳定则由中国与东盟国家共同维护。也就是说，中国解决南海问题将坚持两个轨道，一个轨道是中国分别与东盟相关声索国进行一对一谈判，另一个轨道是中国与东盟整体共同维护南海的和平与稳定，是1与10的谈判与合作。其实，沿着两个轨道解决南海问题至少已经持续十几年了。早在2002年，中国就与东盟签订了南海各方行为宣言（DOC），这是中国与东盟整体维护南海和平稳定的共同之举。经过十几年的新发展，尤其是近年来南海问题的不断升温，中国政府逐步形成并完善以双轨思路为基本主张的南海政策主张组合。中共十八大以来，双轨思路的形成完善可谓一年一步走。

第一步是2013年，在中国周边外交总体框架下，形成处理南海问题的主要思路。王毅任外长后，于5月1日首访泰国，提出了中国对东盟政策的“三个坚持”，即中国新一届政府将坚持把加强与东盟睦邻友好合作作为周边外交的优先方向，坚持不断巩固深化与东盟的战略伙伴关系，坚持通过友好协商和互利合作妥善处理与东盟国家间的分歧和问题。具体到南海问题，6月30日，王毅在中国-东盟（10+1）外长会上强调，中国同少数国家围绕南沙岛礁的争议不是中国同东盟之间的问题，中方一贯主张通过对话和直接谈判寻找解决之道；个别声索国的倒行逆施不可能得逞；中国愿与东盟国家共同努力，排除来自各方面的干扰，切实维护好南海地区的和平稳定。2013年9月，李克强总理在广西南宁的中国-东盟博览会上提出中国东盟关系从“黄金十年”升级为“钻石十年”的口号。10月，中国在印尼首次提出21世纪海上丝绸之路、建设中国东盟命运共同体的倡议。 双轨思路虽然未正式出现，但相关要素已经具备。而且，未来将产生的双轨思路，应该是在中国周边战略大框架、中国对东盟整体战略中框架下的一项具体政策主张。

第二步是2014年，双轨思路正式成为中国政府解决南海问题的政策主张。8月9日王毅外长在中国-东盟外长会上正式提出双轨思路。9月7日王毅在悉尼提出南海问题“四个尊重”，即尊重历史事实、尊重国际法规、尊重当事国之间的直接对话协商、尊重中国与东盟共同维护南海和平稳定的努力。2014年底，李克强总理在中国东盟领导人会上正式提出双轨思路，标志着该思路成为我国处理南海问题的国策。王毅解释说，中国政府倡导双轨思路的原因，一方面是由直接当事国通过协商谈判解决争议是最为有效和可行的方式，符合国际法和国际惯例，也是DOC中最重要的规定之一；另一方面，南海的和平稳定涉及到包括中国和东盟各国在内所有南海沿岸国的切身利益，我们双方有责任也有义务共同加以维护。

第三步是2015年，中国政府进一步完善和补充双轨思路。8月5日，王毅在中国-东盟外长会上重申双轨思路，之后称之为中国与东盟处理南海问题机制的第一步。在此前后，王毅在不同场合阐述了与双轨思路相关的“五个坚持”和“三点倡议”。8月3日，王毅在访问新加坡期间公开表示，中方在南海问题上将奉行“五个坚持”，即坚持维护南海的和平稳定，坚持通过谈判协商和平解决争议，坚持通过规则机制管控分歧，坚持维护南海的航行和飞越自由，坚持通过合作实现互利共赢。8月5日，王毅在马来西亚吉隆坡出席中国－东盟外长会时提出维护南海和平稳定“三点倡议”：第一，南海地区国家承诺全面有效完整落实南海各方行为宣言，加快“南海行为准则”磋商，积极探讨海上风险管控预防性措施。第二，域外国家承诺支持地区国家上述努力，不采取导致地区局势紧张和复杂化的行动。第三，各国承诺依据国际法行使和维护在南海享有的航行和飞越自由。其中，“海上风险管控预防性措施”、“域外国家”、“南海航行和飞越自由”等，均是根据现实情况和事态发展，对双轨思路作的必要补充完善。

双轨思路是南海战略大博弈的产物。最近几年，南海这盘棋越下越大，越来越复杂。从博弈对手看，域外观棋的“高参”变成了下棋的“高手”，奥巴马、G7领导人均公开指责中国岛礁建设是改变现状，加剧紧张局势。

南海战略大博弈的结构发生变化，形成清晰的三层结构：第一层是中国与相关国家的主权争端，第二层是中国与东盟整体的关系，第三层是中国与其大国围绕南海问题的博弈。前两层的基本态势未变，第三层快速发展，中美、中日关系中的南海因素凸显，尤以中美的南海博弈为重中之重，甚至有可能发展为影响南海问题走向的主导因素。

在此背景下，双轨思路将南海问题锁定在前两个层次，有助于分清责任，维护中国和东盟国家解决南海问题的主导权，将其他大国排除在进程之外，坚决不给其浑水摸鱼的机会，防止事态进一步复杂化。从目前双轨思路实施的情况看，中国与东盟整体谈判东海行为准则有所进展，但中国与东盟声索国启动双边谈判十分艰难，而且中美对抗升级。目前中美在南海问题上的困境，是中国不允许美国介入，但美国就要介入，这对双方都是羞辱，而且会加剧东盟的分化。美国战略界认为，中国通过双轨思路将美国排除在南海争端之外，推动“一带一路”和亚投行建设，均造成中美在亚太战略较量的升级，是地区秩序塑造问题，是一盘更大的棋。

由此来看，双轨思路解决南海战略大博弈结构的前两层问题，但管不了中美问题，中国政府应该还有其他配套、协同的政策，来解决美国对南海的介入问题。双轨思路虽然将美国排除在外，但并不意味着中美之间缺乏沟通南海问题的渠道。今年6月举行的中美战略经济对话就包含海上问题的磋商，相信9月习奥会晤也会磋商南海问题，这有利于双方摸清底线，达成谅解，缓解对抗，构建中美新型大国关系。

南海大博弈，需要大规矩。将双轨思路与中美新型大国关系有机对接，“不冲突、不对抗”、“底线兼容”、“舒适度”等，都是针对南海战略博弈的大智慧。

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.