South China Sea: doubts surface over Philippines’ deal with Beijing on shoal missions

The two sides reached an apparent agreement, but insiders and analysts suggest tensions could yet flare again despite the talks

Reading Time:4 minutes

The Philippines’ BRP Sierra Madre seen grounded on the contested Second Thomas Shoal in the South China Sea. Photo: Reuters

Published: 8:00am, 25 Jul 2024Updated: 11:06am, 25 Jul 2024

The Philippines and China appear at odds once again over Manila’s resupply missions to a disputed South China Sea outpost, with conflicting statements from both sides casting doubt on the viability of any apparent agreement.

Analysts say Beijing seems to be framing the arrangement in a way that suggests the Philippines has conceded to its demands – a characterisation vehemently denied by Philippine officials.

These divergent comments have only heightened the uncertainty surrounding the latest development in the long-standing maritime dispute.

On Sunday, the Philippine foreign ministry announced that the two countries had “reached an understanding” on a “provisional arrangement” for the resupply and rotation of the Philippine garrison aboard the BRP Sierra Madre – a navy ship deliberately grounded on the contested Second Thomas Shoal in 1999 to serve as a military outpost.

However, the terse three-paragraph statement provided few details, save that the arrangement was reached following discussions between the two on July 2 in Manila during their 9th Bilateral Consultation Mechanism on the South China.

Marines fold a Philippine national flag on the BRP Sierra Madre, a transport ship deliberately grounded on the disputed Second Thomas Shoal. Photo: Reuters

On Monday, China’s foreign ministry issued a statement saying the two sides had “agreed to jointly manage differences in maritime issues”. Beijing asserted that the Philippines was “violating China’s sovereignty” by maintaining the grounded naval ship on the disputed shoal, and said it would be “willing to allow” resupply efforts if Manila provided advance notice and allowed Chinese monitoring and “on-site verification”.