South China Sea: Manila's Growing ASEAN Isolation?

Mas Hadi Digital Media

You need 5 min read

·

Post on Nov 16, 2024

50 visitor like this post

Share

South China Sea: Manila's Growing ASEAN Isolation?

The South China Sea (SCS) remains a crucible of geopolitical tension, with competing territorial claims and overlapping maritime interests fueling a complex web of alliances and rivalries. While the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) has long sought to maintain regional stability and unity, the Philippines' increasingly assertive stance on SCS issues, particularly against China, raises questions about its growing isolation within the ASEAN bloc. This article will delve into the intricacies of this evolving situation, exploring the factors contributing to Manila's perceived isolation and the potential consequences for regional security and cooperation.

The Philippines' Assertive Stance

The Philippines, under President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., has adopted a more assertive approach to defending its sovereign rights in the SCS, despite earlier attempts at diplomacy and appeasement. This shift stems from several factors:

• The 2016 Arbitral Tribunal Ruling: The landmark ruling by the Permanent Court of Arbitration overwhelmingly favored the Philippines, invalidating China's expansive nine-dash line claim. This legal victory, however, has not translated into immediate practical gains, prompting Manila to pursue other avenues.

• Growing Chinese Assertiveness: China's continued construction of artificial islands, militarization of outposts, and aggressive actions in the SCS have eroded trust and patience amongst regional players, particularly the Philippines. Instances of harassment against Filipino fishermen and incursions into Philippine-claimed waters have galvanized public opinion and fueled a more hawkish approach.

• Strengthened US-Philippines Ties: The renewed alliance with the United States, manifested through increased military exercises, enhanced defense cooperation, and the expansion of US military presence in the Philippines, has emboldened Manila to push back against Chinese encroachment. This strategic partnership provides both military and diplomatic backing for the Philippines' assertive stance.

• Domestic Political Considerations: The SCS issue resonates deeply within the Filipino populace. Any perceived weakness or concession on the part of the government can be politically damaging. Maintaining a strong stance on the issue, even if it means risking some isolation within ASEAN, is often seen as a necessary political calculation.

ASEAN's Cautious Approach

ASEAN, characterized by its principle of non-interference in the internal affairs of member states, has historically adopted a cautious approach towards the SCS dispute. This reluctance to directly confront China stems from several factors:

• Economic Dependence on China: Many ASEAN members are heavily reliant on China for trade, investment, and tourism. A direct confrontation risks jeopardizing these crucial economic ties, prompting a preference for diplomatic engagement and de-escalation.

• Fear of Retaliation: China's economic and military clout casts a long shadow over the region. Openly criticizing or challenging China's claims can invite economic sanctions, political pressure, or even military threats.

• Internal Divisions: ASEAN is not a monolithic entity. Member states harbor differing levels of concern about the SCS issue, influenced by their own individual strategic interests and relationships with China. This internal divergence hampers the development of a unified ASEAN response.

• Emphasis on Consensus: ASEAN decision-making is predicated on consensus. This means that even one dissenting voice can stall or derail collective action. China's influence and the reluctance of some members to openly challenge it often stifle the formulation of strong, unified responses.

Manila's Perceived Isolation

The Philippines' more assertive approach, fueled by its strengthened alliance with the US and its commitment to defending its sovereign rights, has resulted in a perceived distancing from some ASEAN members who prioritize maintaining good relations with China. This perceived isolation is not necessarily complete estrangement but rather a shift in the dynamics of regional cooperation.

Factors contributing to perceived isolation:

• Limited Support for Joint ASEAN Actions: While some ASEAN members share concerns about China's actions, their reluctance to actively challenge China limits the potential for collective action. This leaves the Philippines feeling isolated in its calls for stronger regional responses to Chinese assertiveness.

• Differing Approaches to Dispute Resolution: Manila’s emphasis on international law and the 2016 arbitral ruling contrasts with some ASEAN members' preference for bilateral negotiations and quiet diplomacy. This divergence in approaches can create a sense of disconnect and limit coordinated efforts.

• Suspicion of US Influence: Some ASEAN members view the US-Philippines alliance with suspicion, fearing it could exacerbate tensions in the region and draw them into a great power rivalry. This perspective can lead to a reluctance to fully support the Philippines' stance.

• Economic Considerations trumping Security Concerns: For some ASEAN members, the economic benefits of maintaining strong ties with China outweigh the security risks posed by China’s assertive actions in the SCS. This pragmatic approach can leave the Philippines feeling isolated in its prioritization of security concerns.

Consequences and Future Outlook

The potential consequences of Manila's perceived isolation are multifaceted:

• Weakened ASEAN Unity: Continued divergence on the SCS issue can erode ASEAN's overall cohesion and effectiveness in addressing regional challenges.

• Increased Regional Instability: The lack of a united ASEAN response could embolden China to further assert its claims and undermine regional stability.

• Heightened Reliance on External Powers: The Philippines’ growing reliance on the US could draw greater great power involvement in the region, potentially escalating tensions.

• Diminished Regional Cooperation: Differences over the SCS issue could spill over into other areas of regional cooperation, hindering progress on issues such as trade, environmental protection, and disaster relief.

However, the situation is not entirely bleak. The Philippines continues to participate actively in ASEAN mechanisms, and there are avenues for bridging the gap:

• Strengthening ASEAN’s Code of Conduct (COC): A robust and effectively implemented COC could provide a framework for managing disputes and preventing escalation in the SCS.

• Enhancing Dialogue and Diplomacy: Continued diplomatic efforts to foster understanding and bridge differences among ASEAN members are crucial.

• Focusing on Shared Interests: Highlighting shared interests in areas such as economic cooperation and sustainable development can foster a more collaborative regional environment.

• Promoting Multilateralism: Strengthening regional and international mechanisms for resolving disputes peacefully is essential.

The South China Sea remains a complex and dynamic geopolitical landscape. While the Philippines' assertive stance might lead to a perceived isolation within ASEAN, it does not necessarily signal a complete fracture. The future will depend on the ability of ASEAN members to navigate their differing interests and find common ground on the SCS issue, while simultaneously addressing the legitimate concerns of all parties involved. Only through concerted diplomatic efforts and a commitment to multilateralism can the region hope to achieve lasting peace and stability.