TRENDING
Monday, 9 November 2026
----------------------
29 Jumada Al-Awwal 1448 AH
A new report from a Chinese think tank asserts Beijing's role in maintaining peace in the South China Sea. This analysis unpacks the strategic framing of the report against the backdrop of ongoing territorial disputes and power projection in the vital waterway.
A new publication, the "Global Maritime Security Report 2025-2026," was recently unveiled at the seventh Symposium on Global Maritime Cooperation and Ocean Governance in Sanya, Hainan Province, China. Compiled by the Huayang Center for Maritime Cooperation and Ocean Governance, a Chinese think tank, the report prominently features contributions from maritime experts across several nations. Its central assertion, highlighted by Wu Shicun, chairman of the Huayang Center, is that China is actively working to sustain peace and stability in the South China Sea. The report specifically points to China's ongoing consultations with the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) regarding a Code of Conduct in the region and its efforts to foster practical cooperation, while simultaneously rejecting the 2016 South China Sea Arbitral Award and noting challenges from "extra-regional powers" and "unilateral actions by some claimants."
This report, published by a state-affiliated entity and disseminated through state media, is a calculated exercise in narrative control, aiming to frame China's actions in the South China Sea as constructive and peace-promoting. At its core, the struggle in these waters is about control over vital sea lanes, rich natural resources, and strategic depth. Beijing's long-standing "nine-dash line" claim, which asserts historical rights over vast swathes of the sea, is a foundational element of its policy. The report's emphasis on "legal and administrative measures," such as the establishment of baselines and nature reserves, coupled with the rejection of the South China Sea Arbitral Award, underscores China's strategy to legitimize its expansive claims through domestic law and de facto presence, rather than international legal rulings it deems unfavorable.
The mention of "coast guard law enforcement, baselines and nature reserves, joint patrols and capacity building" is not merely descriptive; it outlines the toolkit of China's "grey zone" tactics. These are actions that fall short of overt military confrontation but are highly effective in asserting control, intimidating other claimants, and incrementally shifting the status quo. By deploying civilian-coded vessels like the maritime militia alongside coast guard ships, Beijing can project power without triggering a direct military response, thereby managing escalation while still achieving strategic objectives. This approach allows China to consolidate its presence around features it occupies, including the artificial islands it has constructed, which now serve as forward operating bases and surveillance outposts.
Economically, the South China Sea is a conduit for an estimated one-third of global maritime trade, worth trillions of dollars annually. Control or significant influence over these waters translates into immense economic leverage and security for China's own trade routes. Furthermore, the sea is believed to hold substantial untapped oil and natural gas reserves, as well as abundant fishing grounds, critical resources for China's continued growth and energy security. Strategically, the region provides a crucial buffer for China's southern coastline and offers a pathway for its expanding navy to project power into the wider Pacific and Indian Oceans, challenging the traditional maritime dominance of the United States and its allies.
The dynamic with ASEAN nations is also a key power play. While the report highlights "consultations on the Code of Conduct," these negotiations have been protracted for years. The slow pace benefits China, allowing it to continue its activities while presenting an image of diplomatic engagement. Beijing leverages its economic influence over individual ASEAN members, creating divisions and preventing a unified stance against its maritime claims. The "growing involvement of extra-regional powers" is a direct reference to the United States, Australia, and other nations conducting freedom of navigation operations and strengthening alliances in the region. These actions are perceived by China as attempts to contain its rise and challenge its regional hegemony, while these powers frame their presence as upholding international law and ensuring open access to global commons. For the Chinese Communist Party, the defense of what it considers sovereign territory is also a potent source of domestic legitimacy and national pride, reinforcing the imperative to maintain a strong stance in the South China Sea.
The abstract language of "maritime security" and "regional stability" in official reports often obscures the tangible, daily struggles faced by ordinary people caught in the geopolitical crosscurrents of the South China Sea. The most immediate human cost falls upon the fishing communities of Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia, Indonesia, and Brunei, whose livelihoods are directly threatened.
For generations, these communities have relied on the rich fishing grounds of the South China Sea. With China's expansive claims and the assertive patrolling of its coast guard and maritime militia, traditional fishing areas are increasingly inaccessible or dangerous. Incidents of harassment, seizure of catch, and even ramming of fishing vessels are regularly reported, forcing fishers to venture further, often into less productive or more perilous waters. This displacement not only reduces their income but also puts their lives at risk, eroding the economic stability of entire coastal villages and pushing families deeper into poverty.
The diminishing access to traditional fishing grounds has direct implications for food security in claimant nations. Fish is a primary source of protein for millions in Southeast Asia. Reduced catches translate to higher prices and scarcer resources for local populations. Furthermore, the constant pressure on these communities undermines the sense of national sovereignty and the ability of their governments to protect their citizens and resources, fostering resentment and a feeling of powerlessness against a larger, more powerful neighbor.
Beyond immediate economic impacts, the environmental costs are profound and long-lasting. China's extensive island-building and dredging activities have caused irreversible damage to vast coral reef ecosystems, which are crucial nurseries for marine life. These ecological scars impact biodiversity, disrupt natural habitats, and ultimately jeopardize the long-term sustainability of fish stocks for all nations in the region. The destruction of these natural resources represents a cost that future generations will bear, diminishing their natural heritage and economic potential.
The persistent tensions and the militarization of the South China Sea create an environment of chronic instability. This forces claimant nations to divert scarce resources towards defense spending, rather than investing in critical public services like healthcare, education, or infrastructure development. The constant low-level friction and the risk of miscalculation between naval and coast guard vessels of various nations create a climate of fear and uncertainty, hindering regional cooperation and diverting attention from pressing shared challenges like climate change and economic development. The human cost here is the opportunity lost – the potential for shared prosperity and regional integration sacrificed at the altar of territorial disputes.
The "Global Maritime Security Report 2025-2026" presents a carefully curated narrative, but like all official statements from powerful actors, it omits or downplays crucial elements that provide a fuller, more complex picture of the South China Sea reality.
The report champions China's role in sustaining "peace and stability." However, this definition of peace appears to be highly selective, equating it with the absence of overt military conflict while overlooking the daily realities of coercion and intimidation. For the Philippines, Vietnam, and other claimants, China's actions—such as the regular deployment of coast guard vessels to block resupply missions, the use of water cannons, or the establishment of de facto control over features like Scarborough Shoal—are anything but peaceful. This is a "peace" maintained through superior force and persistent pressure, where smaller nations are compelled to yield ground without a shot being fired. The report frames this as stability, but for those on the receiving end, it is a form of slow, strategic encroachment.
The report's characterization of the 2016 South China Sea Arbitral Award as "so-called" is a significant omission of its legal weight. The Permanent Court of Arbitration, established under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS)—a treaty China itself ratified—ruled unequivocally against the legal basis of China's "nine-dash line" claims and found that certain features claimed by China were not islands capable of generating exclusive economic zones. By dismissing this award, Beijing is not just rejecting a specific ruling; it is undermining the very principles of international law and dispute resolution that it selectively invokes when convenient. This sets a dangerous precedent, suggesting that powerful nations can disregard international legal obligations when they conflict with their national interests.
While the report acknowledges "coast guard law enforcement," it conspicuously downplays or entirely omits the role of China's vast maritime militia. This unofficial but state-controlled fleet, comprised of ostensibly civilian fishing vessels, operates as a crucial component of Beijing's grey zone strategy. These vessels are often involved in harassing foreign fishing boats, blocking access to disputed areas, and gathering intelligence, all while maintaining plausible deniability for Beijing. Their presence blurs the lines between civilian activity and state-sponsored coercion, making it difficult for other nations to respond without escalating to military confrontation.
The report mentions the establishment of "nature reserves" as part of China's efforts. This framing glosses over the massive environmental destruction caused by China's aggressive island-building campaign. The dredging and reclamation activities to construct artificial islands and military facilities have obliterated thousands of acres of pristine coral reefs, critical marine habitats, and biodiversity hotspots. This ecological devastation, which has long-term consequences for the entire marine ecosystem of the South China Sea, is a stark contradiction to any claim of environmental stewardship or peaceful development.
The report highlights "consultations on the Code of Conduct in the South China Sea" with ASEAN. What is left unsaid is the profound power imbalance in these negotiations. China, as a single, powerful entity, negotiates with a bloc of ten diverse ASEAN nations, many of whom have significant economic ties and dependencies on Beijing. This asymmetry allows China to dictate the pace and scope of discussions, often leading to non-binding agreements that lack robust enforcement mechanisms. The prolonged negotiations serve China's interest by maintaining the status quo, allowing it to continue consolidating its gains while appearing to engage diplomatically.
As the narrative battle for the South China Sea continues, several key indicators will reveal the true trajectory of power dynamics and their human impact.
First, observe the nature and pace of the China-ASEAN Code of Conduct (COC) negotiations. While the report emphasizes consultations, real progress would mean a binding, enforceable agreement with clear dispute resolution mechanisms. A continued slow pace, characterized by incremental steps without substantive commitments, will signal that Beijing prefers the existing ambiguity, which benefits its expansionist agenda. Any attempts by ASEana nations to push for a stronger, legally binding COC will be a critical test of regional resolve against China's influence.
Second, pay close attention to the frequency and intensity of China's "grey zone" activities. This includes monitoring the actions of its coast guard and maritime militia, particularly around flashpoints like Second Thomas Shoal and Scarborough Shoal, where Philippine vessels are regularly challenged. An increase in harassment, blockades, or water cannon incidents against fishing boats or resupply missions will indicate an escalation of pressure tactics, directly impacting the livelihoods and security of regional fishers.
Third, watch the responses and presence of "extra-regional powers," primarily the United States and its allies. Continued freedom of navigation operations, joint military exercises, and increased security cooperation with ASEAN nations signal a sustained commitment to upholding international law and balancing China's influence. Any significant reduction or increase in these activities will reflect shifts in the broader geopolitical competition and its direct implications for regional stability.
Finally, observe the patterns of resource exploitation. Any new initiatives by China or other claimants to explore or drill for oil and gas, or to assert exclusive fishing rights in disputed areas, could trigger fresh confrontations and further escalate tensions. The rhetoric of "peace and stability" must be measured against the tangible actions on the ground and at sea, as these will ultimately determine the future of the South China Sea and the lives of those who depend on it.
Source referenced: CGTN
This brief was synthesized by our Editorial Engine and reviewed by The Ground Narrative team.
