- Beijing and Manila Clash Over Sovereignty and Maritime Rights in the South China Sea
In the South China Sea, China summoned the Philippines’ ambassador to voice its objections to two new Philippine laws that assert sovereignty over contested maritime areas. The summoning followed Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr.’s signing of the Maritime Zones Act and the Archipelagic Sea Lanes Act, legislation aimed at reinforcing the Philippines’ maritime claims and safeguarding its territorial integrity.
The laws are viewed by Beijing as encroachments on Chinese sovereignty, including territories claimed by China, specifically the Scarborough Shoal and parts of the Spratly Islands. The event marks yet another chapter in the turbulent history of South China Sea disputes, further complicated by regional politics and overlapping territorial claims.
The Maritime Zones Act and the Archipelagic Sea Lanes Act represent a concerted effort by the Philippines to solidify its maritime boundaries and reassert its claim over the waters and resources within its exclusive economic zone (EEZ). These laws aim to define the Philippines’ maritime entitlements and establish designated sea lanes and air routes, marking a significant push by the Marcos administration to address ongoing tensions in the South China Sea.
President Marcos articulated the purpose of the legislation as a commitment to international law and regional stability, declaring that the laws were a necessary step toward ensuring “our people, especially our fisher folk, should be able to pursue their livelihood free from uncertainty and harassment.” He added that the laws also empower the Philippines to harness mineral and energy resources within its seabed without undue interference.
Beijing’s foreign ministry reacted swiftly and sternly, calling the Philippine ambassador in for “solemn representations” against the newly enacted laws. Mao Ning, a spokesperson for China’s foreign ministry, stated that the legislation “illegally includes most of China’s Huangyan Island and Nansha Islands and related maritime areas in the Philippines’ maritime zones.” The Chinese names refer to the disputed Scarborough Shoal and parts of the Spratly Islands.
China has consistently rejected the Philippines’ claims in the South China Sea, a position that was further emboldened by Beijing’s refusal to recognize a 2016 ruling by The Hague-based Permanent Court of Arbitration, which dismissed China’s expansive maritime claims as lacking legal basis. The court ruled in favor of the Philippines, supporting its assertion of rights within its EEZ; however, Beijing has continued to reinforce its claims, often deploying coast guard and naval assets to patrol the contested waters.
The laws signed by President Marcos not only highlight Manila’s determination to protect its maritime rights but also underline the Philippines’ intent to maintain a rules-based approach to regional disputes, in alignment with international law. Senator Francis Tolentino, one of the authors of the laws, acknowledged that China is unlikely to recognize the legislation but emphasized the value of global support: “China will not recognize these, but the imprimatur that we’ll be getting from the international community would strengthen our position.”
The Philippine legislation sets up formalized maritime zones and asserts clear demarcations, a move that is seen as a direct challenge to Beijing’s longstanding claims. While the Philippines does not possess a navy or coast guard force that can match China’s, the country seeks to leverage international legal backing and alliances, particularly with the United States, which has consistently supported the 2016 ruling and Philippine sovereignty.
The South China Sea, a strategic waterway rich in resources and situated along critical shipping routes, has long been at the center of disputes involving China, the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei, and Taiwan. Beijing claims sovereignty over most of the sea, based on historical maps that show a “nine-dash line” encompassing nearly 90% of the waters. This claim, however, has been refuted by both the international community and by the Permanent Court of Arbitration in 2016.
For years, China has implemented various policies and actions to reinforce its claim, including building artificial islands equipped with military installations. Meanwhile, the Philippines and other Southeast Asian nations continue to assert their own rights, often in collaboration with each other and with external powers, such as the United States, that have strategic interests in the region. The Philippines’ 2016 legal victory was a historic moment, though the challenge of enforcing the ruling has remained.
The United States has remained a staunch supporter of the Philippines in its maritime claims, viewing China’s territorial expansion in the South China Sea as a destabilizing factor in the Indo-Pacific region. In response to China’s expansive claims, the U.S. has conducted regular “freedom of navigation” operations, deploying naval vessels to assert the principle that the South China Sea is international waters, open to all countries under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).
Washington has also pledged to uphold its mutual defense treaty with the Philippines, which could theoretically bring the United States into direct confrontation with China should there be an escalation. While the Philippines has expressed a desire to resolve disputes peacefully, President Marcos’s recent legislation signals a resolve to stand firm on maritime sovereignty, buoyed by the prospect of U.S. support.
China’s assertiveness in the South China Sea has been further reinforced by its domestic legislation. In 2021, China enacted a coast guard law that granted its maritime forces expanded authority to detain foreign vessels within the disputed waters. The law has been widely criticized for its potential to escalate conflicts with neighboring nations, as it effectively permits Chinese vessels to operate in areas that fall within other countries’ EEZs.
China’s coast guard, along with a network of Chinese fishing vessels, has been at the forefront of enforcing Beijing’s claims. These vessels, often seen patrolling or blocking access to disputed areas, have become a flashpoint for regional tensions. Incidents involving Chinese ships blocking Filipino fishing boats or preventing Philippine military resupply missions have been reported with increasing frequency.
The passage of the new maritime laws by the Philippines and the ensuing reaction from China underscore the enduring complexity of the South China Sea dispute. As Manila seeks greater alignment with international law and support from allies, it is likely to face further resistance from China, which has demonstrated its willingness to assert its claims unilaterally and forcefully.
Regional analysts suggest that the Philippines will likely prioritize diplomatic avenues to gain global support for its maritime rights, drawing on the legal foundation provided by the 2016 Hague ruling. Additionally, the presence of U.S. forces in the Philippines as part of enhanced military cooperation agreements may serve as a deterrent against any overt aggressive actions from China. However, this dynamic risks entangling the Philippines in broader U.S.-China strategic competition, a scenario that President Marcos’s administration will need to navigate cautiously.
The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), of which the Philippines is a member, has long struggled to present a united stance on the South China Sea due to the varying interests of its member states. Countries like Vietnam and Malaysia share similar concerns regarding China’s claims, but others, including Cambodia, have aligned more closely with Beijing’s stance.
Experts note that stronger unity within ASEAN could amplify the regional response to China’s actions, though achieving this cohesion has historically been challenging. The Philippines, however, may find allies within the bloc, such as Vietnam, which has also been on the receiving end of China’s aggressive maritime tactics.
Beyond geopolitics, the new Philippine laws represent an effort to protect the livelihoods of communities that rely on fishing in the contested waters. The South China Sea is a significant source of food and income for millions of people across the region, yet local fishers often face harassment from Chinese vessels when attempting to operate within their own EEZs. President Marcos has highlighted this point, emphasizing that the legislation is partly intended to reduce harassment and ensure stability for these communities.
However, enforcement remains a formidable challenge. China’s coast guard presence and frequent patrols mean that Philippine vessels, even within Philippine-claimed waters, risk confrontation or harassment. Enhancing the capabilities of the Philippine coast guard to effectively monitor and defend its maritime zones will be crucial for the legislation to make a tangible impact on local livelihoods.
