Recently, the Guoguan Think Tank and the Pacific Forum of the United States jointly released a research report titled "Competition and Risk Management - Different Positions of China and the U.S. on the South China Sea Issue." As a participant in this academic cooperation, the author found many logical paradoxes and practical challenges in the U.S. South China Sea policy during the in-depth research process. These issues not only affect the peace and stability of the South China Sea region but also increase the complexity of managing Sino-U.S. relations.

The United States initially took a legal stance of non-participation and non-bias on South China Sea island sovereignty disputes. However, in practice, it has tilted toward Southeast Asian countries through measures such as "freedom of navigation," "joint military exercises," "military base reinforcements," "arms sales," and "legal interpretations." But this ambiguity shifted significantly after former U.S. Secretary of State Pompeo's South China Sea policy statement in 2020.

On July 13, 2020, former U.S. Secretary of State Pompeo issued a so-called "Position on U.S. Maritime Claims in the South China Sea," arbitrarily discussing China's South China Sea sovereignty.

Pompeo explicitly supported the ruling of the 2016 South China Sea arbitration case, negating China's sovereignty and legitimate rights and interests in the South China Sea. This shift actually gave the U.S. more reasons to intervene in the South China Sea situation, which conflicts with the spirit of the United Nations Charter that external powers should remain neutral and not interfere in regional disputes. Such a policy change pushed controversies that could have been resolved bilaterally into internationalization and complexity, objectively increasing uncertainty in the South China Sea situation.

Paradox One: "Freedom of Navigation" vs. "Unbridled Freedom"

The U.S. "freedom of navigation operations" also have logical deviations.

The report shows that since 2017, the U.S. has carried out nearly 50 "freedom of navigation operations" in the South China Sea (about 28-30 times during Trump's first term and 16 times during Biden's term), far exceeding its response frequency to similar maritime claims by other countries. More noteworthy is the U.S. broadened interpretation of the "freedom of navigation" concept, including military reconnaissance and intelligence gathering activities, which clearly deviates from the original intent of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.

On August 19, 2023, the USS Johnson destroyer harassed our normal military drills near China's Xisha Islands. (Source: Ministry of National Defense)

According to relevant provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, coastal states enjoy sovereign rights within their territorial seas, and foreign warships conducting innocent passage should abide by the relevant laws and regulations of the coastal state. China's Law on the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone clearly stipulates this. The frequent close-range activities of U.S. warships and aircraft indeed raise legal issues.

According to data previously published by the South China Sea Strategic Perspective Program, U.S. reconnaissance aircraft made nearly 1,000 sorties to the South China Sea for close-range reconnaissance in 2023 and 2024. Such high-frequency military activities are difficult to explain under normal "freedom of navigation" and instead represent an American-style "unbridled freedom."

Paradox Two: "Outsider" vs. "Arbitrator"

The U.S. selective interpretation of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea further exposes the inherent contradictions in its policies.

Although the U.S. has not ratified the convention, it often cites its provisions to judge other countries' maritime policies. According to the principle of "treaty relativity" established in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, treaties generally only bind the contracting parties. The U.S., as a non-contracting party, has obvious problems with the legal basis for citing treaty provisions.

In contrast, China, as a faithful contracting party to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, strictly handles maritime affairs according to the convention. China's claims and practices in the South China Sea fully comply with the basic principles of international law. Spokespersons for the Foreign Ministry have repeatedly stated that they hope the U.S. can "act consistently," and if it considers the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea important, it should consider ratifying the convention and assuming corresponding international obligations.

Paradox Three: "Risk Management" vs. "Crisis Creation"

Under the guise of "capacity building," the U.S. military deployment around the South China Sea has drawn attention from all sides.

The U.S. has added multiple new military bases in the Philippines, deploying advanced weapons systems such as the "Titan" missile system. These measures clearly go beyond the scope of general maritime law enforcement capacity building. The Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea clearly requires all parties to "exercise restraint, avoid actions that complicate or escalate disputes, and affect peace and stability," and whether the U.S. approach aligns with this spirit deserves serious reflection.

On April 7, 2024, the U.S., Japan, Australia, and the Philippines conducted joint military exercises in the South China Sea.

Although China and the U.S. have established several maritime risk management mechanisms, including the Agreement on the Code of Safe Conduct in Maritime Military Encounters and the Code for Air-to-Air Encounters, the actual effectiveness of these mechanisms still needs improvement. China has always attached great importance to the construction and operation of these mechanisms, actively participating in related dialogues, demonstrating its sincerity in managing differences and maintaining stability.

However, effective risk management requires joint efforts from both sides, especially the need for the U.S. to stop provocative behaviors in the South China Sea and create a good atmosphere for the normal operation of the mechanism. As the spokesperson for the Ministry of National Defense pointed out, "The fundamental way to solve maritime and air safety problems is for the U.S. to stop reconnaissance missions against China."

Sino-U.S. Relations in the South China Sea: Seeking Consensus Amid Disagreements

China's position on the South China Sea issue is clear and consistent. China has indisputable sovereignty over the islands in the South China Sea, which has ample historical and legal grounds.

China strictly handles South China Sea affairs in accordance with international law, including the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. It actively participates in the implementation of the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea and promotes consultations on the Code of Conduct in the South China Sea, fully demonstrating its high regard for regional peace and stability.

China's navy and coast guard maintain professionalism and restraint when handling maritime incidents, strictly implementing tasks according to relevant laws and regulations, showcasing the demeanor of a responsible major country. China always advocates resolving differences through dialogue and consultation, actively promoting practical maritime cooperation with ASEAN countries, and is committed to maintaining peace and stability in the South China Sea, reflecting the greatest goodwill and constructive attitude of China.

From June 10 to 11, 2025, the Senior Officials' Meetings of the ASEAN Plus Three (10+3), East Asia Summit, and ASEAN Regional Forum were held in Penang, Malaysia.

Maintaining peace and stability in the South China Sea serves the common interests of all parties involved, including China and the U.S. As a non-regional power, the U.S. should respect the efforts of regional countries to maintain peace in the South China Sea. Looking ahead, all parties should handle the South China Sea issue with a more rational and constructive attitude, seeking effective ways to manage differences and promote cooperation while upholding their core concerns. All parties can explore practical cooperation in areas such as maritime search and rescue, environmental protection, and fisheries management, further improving and effectively implementing existing multilateral mechanisms, and continuing to strengthen the construction of maritime risk management mechanisms.

This joint study by Chinese and U.S. scholars on the South China Sea issue provides a valuable platform for enhancing mutual understanding. Such academic exchanges deserve further deepening. Scholars from both countries have come to realize more profoundly that seeking consensus amid differences and managing risks in competition is not only a responsibility of major powers but also a requirement of the times. We believe that as long as all parties make joint efforts, abandon Cold War thinking and zero-sum game concepts, the South China Sea can become a sea of peace, friendship, and cooperation.

(Author: Yi Wu-shuang, researcher at the Ocean Research Center of the Guoguan Think Tank, postdoctoral instructor at Tsinghua University's Schwarzman College)

Original Source: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7516529270664839706/

Disclaimer: The article represents the author's personal views. Please express your attitude by clicking the "Top" or "Downvote" button below.