At the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) summit, held in Laos, regional leaders voiced strong demands on two pressing issues: the need for a swift agreement on a code of conduct in the South China Sea and the immediate cessation of violence in Myanmar’s ongoing civil war. The summit, which wrapped up on Friday, brought together ASEAN’s 10 member states, alongside diplomatic representatives from global powers such as the United States, China, Russia, Japan, India, and South Korea.
The meeting took place against the backdrop of escalating tensions in the South China Sea—a critical trade route where sovereignty disputes have been simmering for years—and the deepening humanitarian and political crisis in Myanmar, which has been under military rule since a 2021 coup. These issues, intertwined with regional stability and international law, formed the cornerstone of ASEAN’s discussions, which sought to navigate the challenges facing Southeast Asia’s political and security landscape.
The South China Sea remains a flashpoint in regional and international diplomacy. Spanning a vital trade artery where $3 trillion worth of goods pass annually, the sea is contested by multiple nations, most notably China, which asserts near-total control over the area. This broad claim has brought Beijing into conflict with several ASEAN members, particularly the Philippines and, more recently, Vietnam.
During the summit, Southeast Asian leaders emphasized the urgency of finalizing a binding code of conduct for the South China Sea, one that adheres to international law. ASEAN leaders highlighted the importance of reducing tensions and fostering trust among the various claimants through “confidence-building measures.” These measures, they argued, would lower the risk of accidents, miscalculations, and unintended military confrontations in the disputed waters.
The ASEAN chairman’s statement called for continued positive momentum in negotiations, expressing hope for the “early conclusion of an effective and substantive” code of conduct. This code, which ASEAN and China first agreed to pursue in 2002, is seen as a framework to manage disputes, prevent conflicts, and ensure peaceful navigation. However, formal talks on the code only began in earnest in 2017, and progress has been slow.
One sticking point is China’s expansive territorial claim, represented by its so-called “nine-dash line” that encompasses almost the entire South China Sea. This claim has been repeatedly challenged by ASEAN members, particularly the Philippines, whose territorial waters overlap with the disputed region. The Philippines won a significant legal victory in 2016 when an international tribunal, operating under the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), ruled against China’s sweeping claims. Beijing, however, has rejected the tribunal’s ruling and continued to assert its dominance through militarization and construction of artificial islands in the contested waters.
The South China Sea issue gained added significance at this year’s summit, particularly as the United States, a strategic ally of the Philippines, has made clear its commitment to defend its treaty ally in the event of an attack. U.S. officials, present at the summit, reiterated the need for a rules-based order, including adherence to UNCLOS, but noted that both China and Russia opposed any reference to the convention during the meetings.
With tensions continuing to rise in the South China Sea, ASEAN leaders face the difficult task of balancing relations with China—Southeast Asia’s largest trading partner—and safeguarding their own territorial integrity. The long-overdue code of conduct, once completed, could mark a major step towards de-escalation, though the road to agreement remains fraught with diplomatic challenges.
Alongside the maritime disputes, the crisis in Myanmar loomed large over the summit. Since the military seized power in a 2021 coup, Myanmar has been engulfed in a brutal civil conflict, with the junta facing widespread armed resistance from ethnic militias and pro-democracy forces. The violence has plunged the country into chaos, exacerbating a humanitarian catastrophe that has left millions of people in dire need.
The ASEAN chairman’s statement underscored the urgency of addressing the crisis, calling for “an immediate cessation” of hostilities and the creation of an environment conducive to inclusive peace talks. The bloc reaffirmed its commitment to a peace process that is “Myanmar-owned and -led” but expressed deep concern over the continued violence and lack of progress in implementing a five-point peace plan, which was first proposed in 2021.
ASEAN’s peace plan, which called for an end to violence, dialogue among all parties, and the delivery of humanitarian aid, has made little headway. The Myanmar junta, which holds significant sway in the country’s political landscape, has shown little interest in meaningful negotiations, while resistance forces continue to gain ground in parts of the country.
The humanitarian impact of Myanmar’s conflict is staggering. The United Nations estimates that more than 18.6 million people—over one-third of Myanmar’s population—are in need of assistance. The violence has displaced hundreds of thousands of people, with many seeking refuge in neighboring countries. Access to humanitarian aid remains limited, with the junta restricting international assistance to areas under its control, further exacerbating the crisis.
Despite ASEAN’s calls for peace, the bloc has struggled to take decisive action on Myanmar, in part due to its principle of non-interference in member states’ internal affairs. However, growing frustration within ASEAN has led to a more vocal stance. During the summit, Thailand took the initiative to propose informal talks on the Myanmar situation, possibly involving other ASEAN members, in an attempt to break the deadlock. This development, though promising, reflects the difficulty in achieving a consensus on how to deal with Myanmar’s military rulers.
International actors, including the United States, have expressed support for ASEAN’s efforts to mediate the crisis, but also called for stronger measures, including sanctions against the Myanmar junta. However, such actions remain controversial within ASEAN, as member states like Cambodia and Laos have maintained closer ties to the military government.
The twin challenges of the South China Sea and Myanmar reflect the broader struggles ASEAN faces in navigating its role as a regional bloc. Formed in 1967 to promote economic and political cooperation, ASEAN has long been seen as a stabilizing force in Southeast Asia, mediating disputes and fostering dialogue. However, its consensus-based decision-making process often results in slow or diluted responses to crises, as member states hold divergent views on key issues.
In the case of the South China Sea, ASEAN members are divided between those that are directly affected by China’s territorial ambitions—like the Philippines and Vietnam—and others, such as Cambodia, that maintain close economic and political ties with Beijing. This division complicates the bloc’s efforts to present a united front on the maritime disputes, particularly when it comes to engaging with external powers like the United States, China, and Russia.
Similarly, the Myanmar crisis has exposed the limits of ASEAN’s influence. While the bloc has called for peace and offered mediation, it has struggled to exert meaningful pressure on the Myanmar junta, raising questions about its ability to resolve internal conflicts among its members. Critics argue that ASEAN’s principle of non-interference has hampered its ability to take stronger action, such as suspending Myanmar’s membership or imposing economic sanctions.
Despite these challenges, ASEAN remains a critical platform for regional diplomacy. The involvement of global powers like the U.S., China, Russia, and Japan in the summit underscores the importance of Southeast Asia in the broader geopolitical landscape. With the South China Sea representing a major point of contention between China and the U.S., and Myanmar’s crisis drawing international condemnation, ASEAN’s role in managing these conflicts is pivotal to maintaining regional stability.
As the ASEAN summit concluded, the path forward on both the South China Sea and Myanmar remains uncertain. While leaders expressed optimism about reaching a code of conduct for the South China Sea, the reality of competing interests and geopolitical tensions suggests that negotiations will continue to face significant hurdles. Similarly, while ASEAN’s calls for peace in Myanmar are laudable, the deep-rooted nature of the conflict and the intransigence of the military government make a swift resolution unlikely.
For ASEAN, the challenge is to maintain its relevance as a mediator in regional disputes while upholding the principles of international law and human rights. The bloc’s ability to navigate these complex issues will be critical in determining Southeast Asia’s future trajectory, as it seeks to balance the interests of its member states with the growing influence of external powers.
