Skip to content
U.S. officials accuse China and Russia of blocking East Asia Summit joint statement
A U.S. official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, shared insights with Reuters regarding the recent East Asia Summit held in Vientiane, Laos. Following this summit, a joint statement crafted by 18 Southeast Asian nations faced opposition from China and Russia.
The official elaborated that the pushback from these two nations was primarily due to disagreements over language concerning contentious issues in the South China Sea. The statement is said to have been developed unanimously by the 10 member states of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and was submitted on the evening of October 10 for consideration at the summit.
“The final draft was presented, and it was essentially an ultimatum: either it’s fully accepted or discarded,” the official noted.
Support was voiced by the United States, Japan, Australia, South Korea, and India; however, the official stated, “Russia and China indicated that they could not, and would not, endorse the declaration.”
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov commented during a press conference in Vientiane on October 11, explaining that the failure to pass the final version of the declaration stemmed from the attempts by the U.S., Japan, South Korea, Australia, and New Zealand to turn it into a purely political statement.
The Chinese embassy in Washington did not immediately respond to requests for comment from Reuters.
The U.S. official pointed out several points of contention, with a critical issue being how the declaration referenced the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), marking a more assertive stance than the previous 2023 East Asia Summit statement.
Reuters previously reported that China claims sovereignty over nearly the entire South China Sea and has been increasing pressure on other claimant countries, especially the Philippines among several ASEAN nations.
ASEAN has engaged in years of negotiations with Beijing regarding a Code of Conduct for strategic waterways. Some member states insist that this code should be grounded in UNCLOS.
