The Nature of Dispute
The South China Sea dispute is one of the most complex maritime disputes, which is indeed one of the longest maritime disputes which is not nearing mutually agreed resolution. Usually maritime disputes take place due to the pursuit of living resources, offshore nonliving resources, uncertain sovereignty, over uninhabited islands or rocks or varying interpretation of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Seas (UNCLOS). Since different states adopt different interpretations of how to draw boundary lines at sea, it has led to enlargement of their maritime jurisdiction, maritime dispute of overlapping claims and maritime contestation over marine and natural resources.
The South China Sea dispute comprises all the above mentioned elements of maritime dispute. The complexity of the same is exacerbated due to the presence of multiple claimants and their pursuance of varied maritime strategies. There have been skirmishes between these claimant states with China over allocation of area for energy exploration, building of artificial islands for military purposes and increase in surveillance and patrolling. As maritime dispute is fuelled by an action-reaction process, these claimant states have been pursuing unilateral maritime policies as well as addressing their demands at multilateral level through the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN).
Present Bottlenecks
In the year 2002, the ASEAN and China had signed a Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea. It is considered to be a watershed moment as it brought forth the possibility of conflict management. However over two decades a lot has changed. Defining the geographical scope of the Code of Conduct remains one of the major bottlenecks. There are disagreements among the claimant states and China over the scope of the same. Along with it, China also seeks a non-binding Code of Conduct, whereas the ASEAN wants a code that is legally binding. Yet another bottleneck is the varying perception of freedom of navigation over the South China Sea among these parties. Although, according to their latest commitment- the ASEAN and China are supposed to finalise the Code of Conduct by 2026. Intensified military activities in the South China Sea have resulted in degradation of trust and have also pushed states to build their naval capabilities. The continuing inconclusiveness of this maritime dispute and the shifts in areas of contested water, will continue to undermine peaceful dispute settlement.
The year 2024 has witnessed growing intensity of China-Philippines dispute in the South China Sea regarding the ownership of territorial features such as the Second Thomas, Scarborough Shoal, and Sabina Shoal, and the resources around them. China’s perceived legitimacy is based on its interpretation of historical rights over the South China Sea and its varied interpretation of the UNCLOS and freedom of navigation. Second, China is wary about the presence of the external actors in the region especially the U.S. Third is the involvement of the Philippines in the Permanent Court of Arbitration in the South China Sea in 2016.
In the year 2023, the Philippines and U.S. had renewed their Mutual Defence Treaty. China continues to remain wary about the growing affinity between the Philippines and the U.S. With the coming of the Trump administration 2.0 and the imposition of fresh tariffs on China, Beijing will keenly watch the relation between the Philippines and the U.S. under Trump 2.0. Beijing will want to test the commitment between both the states. Fourth, in November 2024 the Philippines had passed the Philippine Maritime Zone Act and the Philippines Archipelagic Sea Lanes Act. To which, China quickly responded by establishing territorial lines around the disputed Scarborough Shoal. Hence, there is an intention among these states to respond by adopting counter-policies which can also fuel maritime tension in the longer run.
In addition, another concern is that not every feature of the South China Sea is habitable and does not qualify for resolution under the UNCLOS. On 4th November 2024, the Philippines and China nearly sparked a standoff at Sabina Shoal in the Spratly Islands. Although Sabina Shoal falls under the Philippines’ jurisdiction of Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), it is a low-tide elevation and does not qualify for territorial dispute. Given the vagueness of the area of dispute and its resolution, this will continue to trigger the existing maritime dispute in 2025 and well after that.
Another issue which will shape the South China Sea dispute in the coming times is the building of artificial islands and runways on the features of the same. Vietnam has begun laying down a runway on Barque Canada Reef, western end of the Pearson Reef and Ladd Reef of the Spratly Islands. Such capabilities can significantly address Vietnam’s airspace control, surveillance and deterrence. In the coming time, whether Vietnam will use these runways for defence purpose, will definitely invite responses from China. Furthermore, since 2012 China has continued to fill up individual rocks, reefs, and atolls into artificial islands and to build infrastructure on them. In addition, China has also continued to use “gray zone” strategy both in the South China and East China Sea which involved employment of coast guard, naval forces and maritime militia. It is a strategy which China uses to assert its sovereign jurisdiction over the disputed waters and features of the South China Sea. It is usually identified as an irking tool which does not swings into full escalation. Nevertheless, this strategy have catalysed a competitive environment. The Chinese Coast Guards will continue to harass the fishing vessels, disrupt the oil exploration projects and use threatening tactics.
What can we expect in 2025?
There are less chances that these claimant states will render to the demands of China based on its “nine-dash line”, which was declared illegal according to the Permanent Court of Arbitration Ruling of 2016. What can we expect in 2025 is that the maritime dispute over the South China Sea will continue, although the intensity might differ. Given the strategic significance of the maritime area which is laden by immense natural resources and vital straits, these states will continue to pursue their respective interests. Whether their pursuance of interests are going to flare up the maritime dispute or not, will be interesting to watch in the coming months. Moreover, another aspect is the commitment of ASEAN and China to conclude the Code of Conduct by 2026. This year Malaysia will be taking up the chairmanship of ASEAN in 2025. Apart from the looming Myanmar crisis, the South China Sea issue will continue to dominate the list of issues in the ASEAN region. The role which Malaysia will play in the coming months of 2025, will lay the path for negotiation between ASEAN and China over the Code of Conduct. However, due to the absence of a consolidated conflict management strategy over the South China Sea dispute, the claimants will continue to ramp up their activities in the region. Hence, peace in the South China Sea region will continue to act like a mirage.
