ASEAN and China fail to conclude disputed South China Sea code
ASEAN and China have reached a provisional agreement on about eighty percent of a long-awaited Code of Conduct for the South China Sea, but fell short of completing negotiations by the year-end deadline that the Philippines had pursued during its ASEAN chairmanship. The Code aims to manage maritime tensions and prevent conflicts in waters where multiple countries have overlapping territorial claims. China claims nearly the entire South China Sea based on its nine-dash line, despite a 2016 international tribunal ruling that rejected these claims as having no basis in international law. The disputed waters carry nearly a quarter of global maritime trade and are rich in fishing grounds and natural resources. Key remaining disagreements include whether the Code should be legally binding, its geographical scope, and how violations should be handled. Negotiations will continue next year when Singapore assumes the ASEAN leadership. Recent tensions between China and the Philippines have included maritime incidents involving water cannons and collisions between coast guard vessels.
Key facts
- ASEAN and China have agreed on approximately 80 percent of the Code of Conduct draft as of November 15, 2026
- Negotiations have been ongoing since 2002, spanning over two decades
- A 2016 international arbitration tribunal ruled China's nine-dash line claims have no basis in international law
- China's maritime claims overlap with the exclusive economic zones of Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, and Vietnam
- Nearly 25 percent of global maritime trade passes through the South China Sea
- Recent incidents in 2026 included Chinese Coast Guard water cannon attacks on Philippine vessels near Second Thomas Shoal and Scarborough Shoal
- Philippines had committed to concluding the Code negotiations by end of 2026 during its ASEAN chairmanship
- Singapore will take over ASEAN chairmanship in 2027 and continue Code of Conduct negotiations
How different outlets framed it
Left-leaning coverage: Left-leaning outlets emphasize China's aggressive militarization of the South China Sea through artificial island construction and military deployment, describing these actions as violating international law and the 2016 arbitral tribunal ruling. They highlight incidents of Chinese Coast Guard aggression against Philippine vessels, water cannoning incidents, and what they characterize as coercive gray-zone tactics designed to intimidate neighboring states while remaining below the threshold of warfare. They stress the importance of upholding freedom of navigation and international law-based dispute resolution.
Right-leaning coverage: Right-leaning outlets frame China's actions as part of a strategic expansion that threatens regional security and Western alliance commitments, particularly emphasizing the U.S. treaty obligation to defend the Philippines. They stress that China is deliberately prolonging negotiations to buy time for further military consolidation and island-building. They advocate for stronger alliance-building with countries like Australia and Japan to counter China's assertiveness, and view the defense cooperation deals being signed as necessary responses to Chinese aggression.
Limits of this briefing
Coverage varies significantly based on political perspective, with Western and allied nations emphasizing Chinese aggression while Chinese state media emphasizes defensive actions and Western interference. Internal ASEAN divisions on how to approach China complicate efforts to present a unified position. The dispute involves complex overlapping claims among multiple parties beyond just China and Southeast Asian nations.
Sources
- Al Jazeera: Pact on South China Sea code of conduct unlikely, as ASEAN leaders gather Centre
- East Asia Forum: Drifting through dispute in the South China Sea Centre
- Manila Times: South China Sea accord won't be done this year Left
- ABC News Australia: Major defence deal for Australia, Philippines amid clashes with China Left
- Global Times: A fishermen's shelter, refracted into a 'military threat' Right