The recent resupply mission by the Philippines, which took place from December 3-14, 2024, vividly captures the simmering tensions in the South China Sea. Delivering essential supplies and holiday care packages to soldiers stationed aboard the BRP Sierra Madre at Second Thomas Shoal, the mission drew an immediate response from China. The Chinese coast guard denounced the operation, calling the Sierra Madre an “illegally grounded” vessel and claiming—rather provocatively—that the delivery was made “with China’s permission.” The Philippine embassy remained silent, a move that spoke volumes about the fragile nature of diplomacy in these waters. Just days earlier, on December 4, Chinese vessels fired water cannons and rammed a Filipino boat bringing supplies to fishermen near Scarborough Shoal. These events highlight that what may seem like routine logistical missions are, in reality, high-stakes flashpoints in an ongoing power struggle.

At the core of these resupply missions lies a tangle of sovereignty, international law, and strategic interests. For the Philippines, each mission is a determined assertion of its rights within its exclusive economic zone (EEZ). For China, these missions are direct challenges to its sweeping claims over nearly the entire South China Sea—a claim rejected by a 2016 international tribunal ruling. But beyond national pride and territorial lines, the South China Sea is a vital global waterway, carrying over $3 trillion in trade annually and rich in untapped resources. This strategic importance fuels the controversy, transforming simple acts of resupply into bold declarations of presence. The result? A volatile mix of diplomatic chess moves, nationalistic fervor, and the ever-present threat of escalation in one of the world’s most contested and watched regions.

Overview of the South China Sea Dispute

The South China Sea dispute is a multifaceted conflict involving overlapping territorial claims from several nations, including China, the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei, Taiwan, and Indonesia. This region holds significant geopolitical importance due to its strategic location, abundant natural resources, and vital shipping routes. Around 20% of global trade passes through the South China Sea, making it a crucial corridor for international commerce. Additionally, the region is believed to harbor vast reserves of natural resources, with estimates suggesting 11 billion barrels of untapped oil and 190 trillion cubic feet of natural gas.

China is the most assertive claimant, citing its controversial “New ten Dash Line” to justify its claim over nearly the entire South China Sea. The Philippines disputes China’s claims, particularly around the Spratly Islands and the Second Thomas Shoal. Vietnam maintains sovereignty over the Paracel and Spratly Islands, leading to occasional confrontations with China. Malaysia holds claims over parts of the Spratly Islands and has pursued joint development projects. Brunei’s claims cover a smaller area in the southern part of the sea, while Taiwan mirrors China’s expansive claims, further complicating the situation.

Recent developments have escalated tensions in the region. China’s militarization of the South China Sea, particularly through land reclamation and the construction of military installations in the Paracel and Spratly Islands, has been documented by satellite imagery. In response, the Philippines enacted the Philippine Maritime Zones (PMZ) Act and the Philippine Archipelagic Sea Lanes (PASL) Act, reinforcing its claims over disputed waters. Meanwhile, international symposiums have focused on peaceful dispute resolution and the need for global cooperation in managing maritime conflicts.

Importance of Resupply Missions

Resupply missions are critical operations involving the transportation of essential supplies such as food, water, ammunition, and equipment to military personnel or civilians stationed in remote or contested areas. Their primary objective is to ensure the sustainability and operational readiness of these individuals by maintaining consistent logistical support. Without these missions, personnel in isolated locations would face significant challenges in maintaining their effectiveness, morale, and ability to operate efficiently.

In geopolitically contested regions, such as the South China Sea, resupply missions are more than just logistical efforts; they are strategic actions that help assert sovereignty and maintain a continuous presence. By regularly delivering supplies to outposts or installations, nations can visibly reinforce their commitment to territorial claims and deter potential adversaries from making incursions. These missions serve as a demonstration of resolve, showing a nation’s willingness to uphold its claims through consistent presence and support.

Recent developments highlight the importance of these missions, particularly for the Philippines. Despite ongoing tensions with China, the Philippines has maintained its resupply operations. On December 10, 2024, President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. reaffirmed the country’s commitment to supporting Filipino fishermen in contested waters. The Philippines continues to face challenges such as water cannon attacks and aggressive maneuvers by Chinese coastguard vessels, yet remains steadfast in its efforts to supply and protect its outposts and citizens in the region.

These resupply missions occur with notable frequency. For instance, from December 3 to 14, 2024, the Philippines conducted a significant operation delivering provisions to military personnel stationed at the Second Thomas Shoal. This location, part of the Philippines’ claimed West Philippine Sea, has been the site of numerous confrontations with Chinese forces. Despite such incidents, the Philippines has persisted in its missions. Similarly, efforts to support Filipino fishermen at Scarborough Shoal highlight the strategic necessity of these missions, even amid hostilities.

Expert opinions provide further insight into the geopolitical significance of resupply missions. President Marcos has made it clear that while the Philippines supports its territorial claims, it seeks to avoid unnecessary escalation. Conversely, Chinese Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Mao Ning has accused the Philippines of provocation, reflecting the underlying tensions between the two nations.

The United States is Preparing the Philippines for a Possible WAR with China

Historical Context

The South China Sea dispute is rooted in overlapping historical claims by several nations, each asserting their sovereignty based on historical usage, proximity, and international law. China claims almost the entire South China Sea, justifying its stance with historical maps that feature the “New ten-Dash Line Claims” as a boundary for its territory. The Philippines contests China’s claims by asserting rights to parts of the Spratly Islands and Scarborough Shoal, grounded in historical usage and geographic proximity. Similarly, Vietnam has long-standing claims over the Paracel and Spratly Islands, supported by historical records of Vietnamese presence and administration.

The territorial dispute has evolved significantly over time. Before the 20th century, the region saw sporadic claims and informal usage of the islands and waters by various countries. After World War II, interest in the region grew due to its strategic importance and the potential for abundant natural resources. By the 1970s, countries began actively occupying and fortifying islands in the South China Sea, setting the stage for increased tensions and confrontations that persist to this day.

The South China Sea dispute has witnessed several key incidents that have escalated tensions. One notable confrontation is the 2012 Scarborough Shoal standoff between the Philippines and China. This incident began with both nations’ vessels confronting each other over fishing rights, ultimately resulting in the Philippines withdrawing under Chinese pressure, effectively allowing China to assert control over the shoal. Another significant event is the 1974 Paracel Islands conflict, where China engaged in a naval battle with Vietnam, ultimately seizing control of the Paracel Islands.

More recently, the Second Thomas Shoal incident in 2024 highlighted the ongoing struggle for control. During this event, Philippine supply boats faced water cannon attacks from Chinese coastguard vessels while attempting to resupply personnel stationed on a grounded warship. This confrontation signified China’s increasing assertiveness and the Philippines’ determination to maintain its presence in the contested area.

These incidents have far-reaching implications for regional stability. China’s increased militarization—manifested in the construction of military bases and airstrips on reclaimed islands—has raised concerns among neighboring countries and global powers. The United States and its allies have responded with Freedom of Navigation Operations (FONOPs) to challenge China’s expansive claims and assert international maritime rights. The dispute also impacts vital shipping lanes, affecting global trade and access to natural resources. 

Naval Base Camilo Osias is a Key to Strengthen the Philippines’ Defense Against China

Legal and Diplomatic Framework 

The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), adopted in 1982, serves as a comprehensive legal framework for the governance of the world’s oceans and their resources. It establishes clear guidelines for maritime zones, navigation rights, and the sustainable exploitation of marine resources. In recent years, there has been a push to develop a legally binding instrument under UNCLOS aimed at the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction. These efforts reflect the ongoing need to adapt international ocean governance to contemporary environmental and geopolitical challenges.

UNCLOS has also been the foundation for significant legal arbitration, particularly in the South China Sea dispute. A landmark case was the South China Sea Arbitration (Philippines v. China), decided on July 12, 2016. The tribunal ruled that China’s claims to historic rights within the “nine-dash line” were not legally valid under UNCLOS. This ruling remains a critical point of reference in ongoing territorial disputes. However, enforcement remains problematic, as China rejected the ruling and continues to assert its expansive claims, highlighting the limitations of international legal decisions in the face of geopolitical realities.

Bilateral and multilateral agreements have emerged as essential tools in managing disputes in the South China Sea. For instance, ASEAN and China have been negotiating a binding Code of Conduct (COC) aimed at ensuring peace and stability in the region. Although progress has been slow, recent agreements, such as those reached in July 2023, aim to accelerate negotiations.

International diplomacy continues to play a crucial role in addressing tensions in the South China Sea. Countries such as the United States, Japan, and Australia have taken active roles in supporting freedom of navigation and overflight to challenge unilateral claims and ensure open access to critical shipping routes. These diplomatic efforts focus on maintaining regional stability, promoting peaceful dispute resolution. By engaging in joint exercises, diplomatic dialogues, and strategic partnerships, these nations help mitigate the risk of conflict and balance regional power dynamics.

Some believe that UNCLOS provides a solid legal foundation but lacks robust enforcement mechanisms, limiting its ability to influence powerful nations that refuse to comply. Others emphasize that ongoing diplomatic engagement and multilateral cooperation are essential for achieving long-term solutions and sustainable resource management. The combination of legal frameworks, diplomacy, and regional cooperation remains the most viable approach to addressing the complexities of maritime disputes in the South China Sea.

 Strategic and Military Implications

China has dramatically increased its military presence in the South China Sea through extensive island-building and the deployment of military assets. This militarization includes constructing ports, airstrips, radar systems, and fortifying outposts with advanced weaponry such as fighter jets and cruise missiles. The Paracel and Spratly Islands have become focal points for these developments, as China has reclaimed land to expand its territorial reach and establish strategically significant military bases.

Other claimant nations, including Vietnam, the Philippines, Malaysia, and Taiwan, have responded to China’s assertive behavior with a combination of diplomatic protests, international appeals, and increased defense cooperation with external partners. Vietnam, in particular, has been vocal in objecting to China’s militarization and has threatened to take legal action to protect its claims. The Philippines has sought support from allies like the United States while maintaining its commitment to resupply missions and defending its territorial waters. Malaysia and Taiwan have also taken steps to assert their rights, although often through less confrontational means, balancing the need for security with the desire to avoid escalation.

Experts hold differing views on the implications of China’s militarization and the international responses. Some believe that China’s activities pose a grave threat to regional stability and the established norms of international maritime law. They argue that unchecked militarization could embolden China to enforce its claims aggressively. Conversely, other analysts emphasize the importance of diplomacy and multilateral cooperation in managing disputes.

How the US Military Revive Naval Base in Subic Bay to Defend the Philippines from Chinese Invasion?

Controversies Surrounding Resupply Missions

The South China Sea remains a region of intense geopolitical competition due to overlapping territorial claims among nations such as China, the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei, Taiwan, and Indonesia. These conflicting claims frequently lead to confrontations, particularly during resupply missions to outposts in disputed areas. Resupply missions, which involve delivering essential supplies to troops or civilians, are seen as vital for maintaining a country’s presence and asserting sovereignty. However, these missions are often met with hostility from other claimant nations. For instance, the Philippines’ attempts to resupply its forces stationed at the Second Thomas Shoal have provoked aggressive responses from Chinese coastguard vessels, including water cannon attacks and dangerous maneuvering. China perceives these missions as direct challenges to its sovereignty, responding with diplomatic protests and displays of military strength to reinforce its claims.

The legal dimensions of these disputes further complicate matters. The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) serves as the primary framework for resolving maritime claims, but interpretations of international law vary among the disputing countries. The 2016 Hague tribunal ruling, which invalidated China’s expansive “nine-dash line” claims, remains a critical yet contentious point. While the Philippines and other nations have called for the enforcement of this ruling, China has outright rejected it. The absence of a binding enforcement mechanism exacerbates these issues, as China continues to fortify islands and obstruct resupply missions in defiance of international law. These instances of non-compliance highlight the challenges in maintaining legal order in such a contested region, where diplomatic resolutions are often overshadowed by power dynamics and strategic interests.

Media coverage significantly influences public understanding of these disputes, often framing events in ways that serve national narratives. Western media frequently emphasize the broader US-China rivalry, casting the situation as a binary struggle for dominance. Public sentiment in the countries involved is shaped by these media narratives and fueled by nationalistic fervor. In China, national pride and government propaganda strengthen support for aggressive measures to defend territorial claims. In the Philippines, there is widespread public endorsement of resupply missions as necessary acts of sovereignty and defense, particularly given the economic reliance on fishing in contested waters. This dynamic makes it difficult for governments to de-escalate tensions without appearing weak to their domestic audiences.

Case Studies 

Scarborough Shoal, or Bajo de Masinloc, has been a longstanding point of contention between the Philippines and China, with both countries asserting sovereignty over the area. The dispute became particularly intense in 2012 when China took control of the shoal, preventing Filipino fishermen from accessing the traditionally rich fishing grounds. This event marked a turning point, heightening tensions between the two nations. The situation further escalated in 2024, when Chinese coast guard vessels fired water cannons and sideswiped a Philippine patrol boat during a routine patrol. This aggressive action led to a strong diplomatic backlash, with the Philippines condemning China’s actions, while the United States expressed its support for the Philippines, reaffirming its commitment to uphold international law and the freedom of navigation in the region. The continued standoff over Scarborough Shoal has strained relations between the two countries, despite their economic ties, as the Philippines continues to assert its rights under international law, while China maintains its territorial claims.

Similarly, Second Thomas Shoal, also known as Ayungin Shoal, has witnessed numerous confrontations between the Philippines and China. The Philippines has maintained a military presence at the shoal since 1999, when the BRP Sierra Madre, a naval vessel, was deliberately grounded to serve as a military outpost. The shoal lies within the Philippines’ exclusive economic zone (EEZ), as defined by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), giving the Philippines the right to conduct resupply missions to support its stationed troops. However, China disputes this claim and has regularly sought to block such missions. Tensions have flared in recent months, with Chinese coast guard vessels resorting to tactics such as firing water cannons and ramming Philippine resupply boats. A particularly alarming incident occurred on June 17, 2024, when Chinese personnel boarded Philippine vessels, damaging communication and navigational equipment. This aggressive approach has drawn international attention, with calls from the global community, including the United States, urging China to adhere to international law and to resolve disputes peacefully.

Future Prospects and Solutions

One of the potential solutions for managing disputes in resource-rich areas like the South China Sea is the implementation of joint development agreements (JDAs). These agreements allow countries with competing territorial claims to share resources and profits without directly settling the issue of sovereignty. This approach has been discussed in the context of the South China Sea, particularly between the Philippines and China. However, progress has been slow due to disagreements over the legal and operational frameworks that would govern such arrangements.

In addition to joint development, establishing mechanisms for conflict resolution and de-escalation is crucial for maintaining peace in the region. Such mechanisms could include hotlines for direct communication between military forces, which would reduce the risk of miscommunication and accidental escalation. Regular diplomatic dialogues and third-party mediation are also important in facilitating peaceful resolutions. Existing frameworks like the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) and the Code for Unplanned Encounters at Sea (CUES) are examples of mechanisms designed to manage military encounters and prevent confrontations.

The role of the international community is also vital in addressing the South China Sea dispute. Major powers, such as the United States, Japan, and Australia, have been actively involved by conducting Freedom of Navigation Operations (FONOPs) to challenge excessive territorial claims and to uphold international maritime law. These countries also offer diplomatic support to smaller claimant states, helping to balance power dynamics in the region. International organizations, such as the United Nations and the International Maritime Organization (IMO), contribute by promoting adherence to international law and facilitating dialogue among the parties. Their involvement is crucial in ensuring that disputes are managed peacefully and in accordance with established legal frameworks.

Looking ahead, a long-term, peaceful resolution to the South China Sea dispute will require sustained diplomatic efforts, a commitment to international law, and mutual compromise. However, achieving a comprehensive and lasting solution will necessitate continued engagement from all parties involved, as well as a willingness to find common ground despite deeply rooted differences.

How The Philippines’ NEW STANDARD MAP Counter China’s 10-Dash Line Claim?