ASEAN, China struggle over South China Sea code amid escalating tensions
The South China Sea remains one of Asia's most contentious regions, with China claiming roughly ninety percent of these strategically vital waters through its nine-dash line, while multiple Southeast Asian countries assert rival claims. In 2026, tensions have intensified with frequent confrontations between Chinese coast guard and maritime militia vessels against Philippine and Vietnamese boats, including ramming incidents and water cannon attacks. The area carries about 24 percent of global maritime trade worth 7.4 trillion dollars annually and holds vast oil and gas reserves. ASEAN, which took the Philippine chair in 2026, has attempted to negotiate a legally binding Code of Conduct with China since the early 2000s, but talks have stalled over disagreements about enforcement mechanisms and military activities. The Philippines pushes for binding agreements under international law, while China resists measures it views as threatening its interests. Underlying these disputes are unresolved questions about maritime boundaries, exclusive economic zones, and whether China's historic rights claims have legal standing under international law. A 2016 arbitration tribunal ruled against China's extensive claims, but Beijing has rejected this ruling as null and void.
Key facts
- China claims approximately 90 percent of the South China Sea using the nine-dash line, rejected by a 2016 international tribunal ruling that favored the Philippines
- The South China Sea carries roughly 24 percent of global maritime trade, worth about 7.4 trillion dollars annually, plus an estimated 11 billion barrels of untapped oil and 190 trillion cubic feet of natural gas
- In July 2026, China and the Philippines clashed three times in a single week at Scarborough Shoal and Second Thomas Shoal, prompting joint U.S.-Philippines-Japan maritime drills
- China's People's Armed Forces Maritime Militia maintained a record daily average of 241 vessels in the South China Sea in 2025, according to the Center for Strategic and International Studies
- ASEAN has been negotiating a Code of Conduct with China since 2002, with fundamental disagreements remaining over whether it will be legally binding and enforceable
How different outlets framed it
Left-leaning coverage: Left-leaning outlets frame China's actions as illegal imperial expansion and aggression. They emphasize China's rejection of the 2016 international tribunal ruling, describe its claims as baseless despite historical revisionism, highlight its weaponization of civilian maritime militias to evade accountability, and stress that Beijing's militarization of artificial islands threatens regional stability and freedom of navigation for all nations.
Right-leaning coverage: Right-leaning perspectives emphasize U.S. strategic interests and alliance-building. They stress the importance of freedom of navigation operations to challenge Chinese claims, highlight Japan and U.S. military support for the Philippines and Vietnam, frame Chinese behavior as destabilizing opportunism that tests Western resolve, and argue that robust defense partnerships are necessary to counter Beijing's assertive expansion in this critical economic and strategic waterway.
Limits of this briefing
Sources focus heavily on incidents involving the Philippines and U.S. perspectives; perspectives from Cambodia, Laos, and other ASEAN members that maintain closer ties to China are underrepresented. The analysis reflects reporting available as of September 2026 and may not capture all diplomatic channels or confidential negotiations.
Sources
- Council on Foreign Relations: Territorial Disputes in the South China Sea Centre
- Indo-Pacific Defense Forum: Beijing drives maritime militia aggression in South China Sea Right
- East Asia Forum: Drifting through dispute in the South China Sea Centre
- CGTN (China Global Television Network): Explainer: Why China's claims on South China Sea are legitimate Left
- Chatham House: With the Philippines as ASEAN chair, a South China Sea agreement is unlikely to be concluded in 2026 Centre