From October 9 to 11, the 44th and 45th ASEAN Summits were held in Vientiane, Laos. Representatives from ASEAN member states, as well as China, Japan, South Korea, and several western countries, attended the meetings. The theme of the summit was “ASEAN: Enhancing Connectivity and Resilience,” with a focus on cooperation and development. However, Philippine President Marcos used the international platform to attempt opening a “second front” by launching a well-prepared accusation against China over the South China Sea issue.

Marcos stated that amid rising political tensions, China cannot separate economic cooperation from political security, and urged ASEAN to speed up negotiations with China on  the Code of Conduct in the South China Sea. As a party to the South China Sea disputes, it is normal for the Philippines to express concerns and push for a swift implementation of the Code of Conduct. In fact, as early as the ASEAN Summit held in May 2023 in Indonesia, countries including the Philippines and Singapore called for the expedited conclusion of the Code of Conduct. However, after over a year of provocations toward China regarding the South China Sea disputes, the Philippines took a particularly aggressive stance at this ASEAN Summit.

Marcos defended the Philippines’ position by portraying the country as a “model” of compliance with international law. He stated that the Philippines has always adhered to the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and has worked to manage tensions with China. At the same time, Marcos launched strong criticisms against China, accusing it of violating international law, and urged ASEAN members to address the “aggressive, coercive, and illegal” actions of external forces. At the meeting, Marcos also highlighted the incident that Chinese Coast Guard vessels used water cannons on Filipino ships, demanding that ASEAN expedite negotiations on the Code of Conduct to protect the Philippines from further “harassment.”

Despite carefully crafting an image of the Philippines as a “law-abiding” and “victimized” nation, Marcos found himself largely isolated, with little support. Leaders of other ASEAN countries who spoke after Marcos, including Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim, Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, and Vietnamese Prime Minister Pham Minh Chinh, did not respond to the Philippines’ grievances. Instead, they focused on regional unity and development, without mentioning the South China Sea issue.

Thai Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra emphasized the importance of strengthening ASEAN’s central role in promoting regional interests, calling for efforts to build a stronger and more united ASEAN community. She stressed that ASEAN must maintain a principled but non-aligned stance on issues affecting the region and its people. Regarding the South China Sea, she urged all parties to exercise restraint, avoid provocative actions, and creatively cooperate for a peaceful resolution to disputes.

Since 2023, the Philippines has continuously provoked China over the South China Sea issues, alternating between aggression and playing the victim, turning the issue into a regional flashpoint for potential conflict. One key reason for the Philippines’ inconsistent and provocative actions, which are disproportionate to its actual strength, is its reliance on external powers. The Philippines’ overconfidence in the U.S.-Philippines Mutual Defense Treaty and repeated security assurances from the U.S. have emboldened it to become the lone “instigator” in the South China Sea region.

Undoubtedly, the Philippines’ actions contradict ASEAN’s commitment to independence and peaceful resolution of the South China Sea disputes.

Firstly, the escalating tensions in the South China Sea since 2023 are a result of the Philippines’ reckless behavior, and neighboring countries are well aware of this. The Philippines’ attempts to play the victim and defame China on international platforms cannot change this reality. In this context, it is overly naive for the Philippines to expect regional countries to back its position.

Secondly, the South China Sea issue is between China and some ASEAN countries. Relying on external powers and bringing them into the region will only complicate the situation and undermine ASEAN’s role and centrality in resolving regional matters.

Finally, resolving the South China Sea disputes requires patience and political wisdom. Amid slow progress, it is possible to set aside conflicts temporarily and seek breakthroughs in bilateral relations in other areas.

Following this approach, China and ASEAN have made continuous breakthroughs in their relationship since the beginning of this century. Over the past 20 years, bilateral trade between China and ASEAN has grown at an average annual rate of 11%. China has remained ASEAN’s largest trading partner for 15 consecutive years, while ASEAN has been China’s largest trading partner for four consecutive years since 2020. The ASEAN-China Free Trade Area, established in 2002, announced the substantial conclusion of its 3.0 upgrade negotiations in early October this year. If one were to focus solely on the differences in bilateral relations, such remarkable achievements between China and ASEAN would not have been possible.

China supports the building of the ASEAN community, its central role in regional cooperation, and its greater involvement in international affairs. ASEAN can also play a more significant role in resolving regional disputes, including those in the South China Sea. However, the reality is that ASEAN faces considerable challenges in addressing regional security issues due to internal differences among member states and interference from external powers in Southeast Asia.

Looking ahead, the implementation of the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea and the maintenance of security in the South China Sea will require ASEAN’s participation and efforts. China and ASEAN share common interests in preserving regional peace and stability.

(Author: Dai Fan, Professor and Vice Dean at the School of International Relations, and Director of the Center for Philippine Studies, Jinan University)