The sovereignty dispute in the South China Sea has evolved into a multidimensional conflict where legal, military presence and alliance rivalries intertwine between China and the Philippines. While Beijing rejects Manila's expanding maritime claims as lacking historical and legal basis, it is also increasing its naval power on the ground.
China's Legal Rejection and Historical Arguments
According to Chinese media, Beijing holds the view that the Philippines' land borders were determined during the colonial period and fixed by subsequent international treaties. Citing a report by the China Institute for Marine Affairs affiliated with the Ministry of Natural Resources, Xinhua News Agency reports that Manila has, since the 1970s, expanded its maritime jurisdiction claims through constitutional amendments and domestic legislation, including parts of the Huangyan (Scarborough) and Nansha (Spratly) islands. China argues that these claims exceed international agreements and threaten regional stability.
The 2016 Arbitration Ruling and the Stances of the Parties
At the heart of the dispute lies the 2016 arbitration ruling. While the Philippines embraces the ruling as a legal reference, China firmly rejects it. According to Asia Times' analysis, the ruling was designed to clarify the application of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and, although it rejected the legal basis of China's 'nine-dash line' claim, it did not issue a final verdict on sovereignty. Chinese state newspaper Huan Qiu, on the other hand, claims that the ruling lacks legal legitimacy, is politicized, and complicates the dispute.
China's Response to Regional Alliances and Presence on the Ground
The conflict is expanding to include regional actors. Maritime border delimitation talks between Japan and the Philippines have drawn strong objections from Beijing. According to China Daily, Chinese Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Mao Ning stated that these negotiations violate international law and touch upon China's sovereign rights in waters east of Taiwan. Wuhan University academic Li Xiaolu described this step as an attempt that goes beyond geographic and legal reality.
China's response is not limited to the diplomatic sphere. According to China Daily, Chinese coast guard vessels are conducting patrols and scientific research activities in disputed waters that Beijing says are under its jurisdiction. The same newspaper reported that Chinese Defense Ministry Spokesperson Zhang Xiaogang stated that if provocative actions continue, his country will take resolute measures to protect its sovereign rights.
Philippines' Alliance Strategy and the Narrative Struggle
The Philippines, for its part, combines adherence to the legal framework with a strategy of strengthening security partnerships. Asia Times notes that Manila uses the 2016 arbitration ruling as a 'language of law' to garner international support, and that this ruling has become part of diplomatic discourse with partners like the U.S. and Japan. The Philippines is also trying to expand its ally base through bilateral defense cooperation agreements; Beijing sees this as an attempt to internationalize the dispute and bring external powers into the region.
According to Huan Qiu newspaper, this may further complicate the regional environment. The newspaper wrote that the Philippines is trying to reframe the dispute by presenting itself as the victim and leveraging concepts like 'freedom of navigation,' while China emphasizes historical facts and direct negotiation. Asia Times' analysis points out that law alone cannot resolve disputes but provides a framework to legitimize policies.
The China-Philippines dispute has evolved from a traditional border conflict into a multidimensional competition involving international law, field activities, alliance building, and narrative struggle. While Beijing focuses on refuting the legal legitimacy of Manila's claims, the Philippines seeks to establish the arbitration ruling as an international reference and strengthen its position with Western alliances.
