By Minoli Gunarathna
The South China Sea has long been a simmering pot of territorial disputes, with multiple countries laying claim to various islands, reefs, and maritime features.
Recently, tensions have flared between the Philippines and China, with the Philippine Senate passing the Maritime Zones Bill. This aims to solidify the Philippines’ claims in the region based on the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and the 2016 Permanent Court of Arbitration ruling that invalidated China’s expansive claims.
This move comes amidst heightened tensions between the two nations, with China’s actions in the South China Sea challenging the territorial integrity of neighbouring states. The Philippines’ action seemingly underscores its commitment to upholding international law and defending its sovereign rights in the face of growing pressure from China. However, it also raises the potential for further escalation in an already volatile region, highlighting the urgent need for diplomatic efforts to resolve the disputes peacefully.
China’s Assertive Actions
China’s assertiveness in the South China Sea has manifested itself in various ways. One prominent aspect is its military build-up, characterised by the construction of artificial islands on disputed reefs and deployment of military personnel and equipment.
These strategic outposts serve to bolster China’s presence in the region, enabling it to project power and assert its territorial claims. Additionally, Chinese vessels have been accused of harassing fishing boats and coastguard ships from other claimant states, exemplified by the recent incident involving the Philippine Coast Guard vessel BRP Datu Sanday.
Such provocative actions exacerbate maritime disputes and increase the risk of maritime incidents. Furthermore, China’s resource exploration activities have sparked concerns regarding the depletion of fish stocks and potential environmental damage.
By exploiting marine resources without regard for the claims of other states or adherence to international law, China further destabilises the already volatile situation in the South China Sea. China’s insistence in the South China Sea extends beyond military actions and resource exploitation. It also involves diplomatic manoeuvres aimed at undermining efforts by other claimant states and international organizations to challenge its claims.
Beijing has consistently rejected the 2016 ruling by the Permanent Court of Arbitration that invalidated its territorial claims, opting instead for bilateral negotiations with individual claimants, a strategy that allows it to exert greater influence and leverage.
Moreover, its activities in the waters in focus not only bolster its military presence but also serve as symbols of its determination to assert dominance in the region. This insistent behaviour reflects China’s broader geopolitical ambitions and its willingness to challenge the existing order in pursuit of its strategic interests.
The Philippines Pushes Back
In response to China’s assertiveness in the South China Sea, the Philippines has taken several strategic measures to assert its own sovereignty and protect its interests in the region. Foremost among these actions is the passage of the Maritime Zones Bill, a legislative move that solidifies the Philippines’ maritime claims based on the principles outlined in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and international law.
By clearly defining its maritime zones, the Philippines aims to assert its rights and counter China’s expansive territorial claims. Additionally, the Philippines has sought to strengthen its alliances, particularly with the United States, through joint military exercises and seeking assurances of American support in case of conflict, thereby enhancing its defense capabilities and deterrence against potential aggression.
Furthermore, the Philippines has pursued legal avenues to challenge China’s claims, notably through the 2016 arbitration ruling that invalidated many of China’s assertions in the South China Sea. These multifaceted responses underscore the Philippines’ commitment to upholding international law and defending its sovereign rights amid escalating tensions in the region.
The Philippines’ response to China’s actions in the South China Sea is not limited to legislative and diplomatic measures alone. Beyond legal challenges and alliance-building efforts, the Philippines has also focused on strengthening its own military capabilities and maritime presence in the region. This includes modernising its armed forces, enhancing maritime surveillance capabilities, and conducting joint patrols with neighbouring countries.
The Philippines has actively engaged with other Southeast Asian nations through regional forums such as the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) to collectively address maritime disputes and promote a rules-based order in the South China Sea.
Additionally, the Philippines has sought to diversify its strategic partnerships, reaching out to countries like Japan, Australia, and India for security cooperation and assistance. This multifaceted approach reflects the Philippines’ determination to assert its sovereign rights and defend its territorial integrity against external encroachments, contributing to the complex dynamics of the South China Sea dispute.
Philippine’s Ground
All these have a bearing on the Philippines’ commitment to asserting its sovereign rights and jurisdiction over its Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) in both the West Philippine Sea and Benham Rise. The Bill highlights the importance of legislation that solidifies Manila’s control over these maritime areas. It emphasises that the measure aligns with international law, especially the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), providing a legal framework for the Philippines to forge alliances with other nations.
This rules-based approach is crucial for promoting stability and cooperation in the region, especially amid escalating tensions in the South China Sea. Philippines’ strategic objectives of safeguarding its maritime interests, enhancing its diplomatic leverage, and upholding the principles of international law in its maritime disputes with neighbouring states are significant with the recent passing of the legislation.
Regional Security Implications
The South China Sea dispute carries notable implications for security and military stability in South Asia. The escalation of tensions between China and claimant nations, such as the Philippines, raises concerns about the risk of military confrontation, which could disrupt regional stability. Such a scenario may draw in other countries with security interests in the South China Sea, adding complexity to the situation.
Given the South China Sea’s role as a critical global trade route, any disruption to maritime commerce could adversely affect economies in South Asia. Moreover, heightened militarization in the region, driven by perceived security threats, poses challenges to peaceful resolution efforts and contributes to regional tensions. Therefore, the South China Sea dispute presents a nuanced security challenge that requires careful consideration of various interests and perspectives to promote stability and mitigate potential risks.
South Asia’s Strategic Calculus
While South Asian nations are geographically distant from the direct dispute, they have a stake in the peaceful resolution of the South China Sea issue. South Asian countries possess significant diplomatic influence by emphasising the importance of finding mutually acceptable solutions to the conflict. Additionally, given the reliance of many South Asian nations on maritime trade routes passing through the South China Sea, they have a vested interest in supporting the principle of freedom of navigation in the region.
By advocating for the unimpeded passage of ships and adherence to international maritime laws, South Asian countries helps to uphold stability and security in the area, benefiting not only its own economies but also the global trade system.
Fostering regional cooperation between South Asian and Southeast Asian nations is vital for promoting collective security and stability in the broader Indo-Pacific region. Through collaborative efforts, these countries can address common security challenges and work towards a peaceful and prosperous future for all involved parties.
India’s growing interest in the China-Philippines maritime dispute is becoming apparent, although its approach remains somewhat subdued compared to other regional actors. While India is actively observing developments in the South China Sea, it appears content to adopt a supporting role rather than taking centre stage in the dispute.
As an extra-regional actor, India recognizes the sensitivities involved and has opted for a strategy that prioritises diplomacy and cautious engagement. By playing a “second fiddle” role, India aims to maintain cordial relations with both China and the Philippines while signalling its support for the principles of international law and freedom of navigation.
This approach allows India to contribute to regional stability without exacerbating tensions or risking direct confrontation. However, India’s quiet support of the Philippines underscores its strategic interests in the Indo-Pacific and its willingness to assert itself in maritime security matters, albeit in a manner that avoids provocation or escalation.
What the Future Holds
On the positive side, the legislation offers a clear legal framework bolstering the Philippines’ maritime claims under UNCLOS, enhancing its negotiation position vis-à-vis China and other claimants. By delineating its maritime zones, the Philippines may deter future Chinese actions within its claimed territory, mitigating instances of harassment or unauthorised resource exploration.
Such a move will also signal the Philippines’ commitment to upholding international law, rallying support from other nations with similar disputes in the South China Sea, thereby fostering a more unified stance against China’s expansive claims. Additionally, the clarified maritime boundaries could pave the way for responsible resource management and increased investment within the Philippines’ EEZ, bolstering economic opportunities.
However, the legislation also carries significant negative implications, including heightened tensions with China, which could lead to further escalations and confrontations. There is also the concern of increased miscalculations between Philippine and Chinese forces, potentially triggering inadvertent conflict. Moreover, enforcing these claims might prove challenging given China’s superior military capabilities in the region, while domestically, political disagreements over the legislation’s implementation could further complicate matters.
The uncertain implications revolve around international legal mechanisms and regional cooperation, which depend on China’s response, the stance of other Southeast Asian nations, and the broader international community’s willingness to uphold UNCLOS rulings and engage constructively in resolving the South China Sea dispute. In that regard, the Philippine’s new legislation signifies a critical juncture in the ongoing tensions, with far-reaching consequences contingent on various complex factors.
Minoli Gunarathna is a graduate from the Faculty of Law of the University of Colombo and a final year student at the Sri Lanka Law College.
Factum is an Asia Pacific-focused think tank on International Relations, Tech Cooperation, and Strategic Communications accessible via www.factum.lk.
The views expressed here are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the organization’s.
