Global maritime forum pushes practical cooperation amid geopolitical rivalry

A symposium in Sanya, China, focused on how ocean governance can still function as strategic competition intensifies and disputes stay unresolved. Speakers said practical cooperation on safety, fisheries, science and environmental protection may be more durable than broad political agreement.

Why it matters: - Ocean governance is under pressure from rivalry, unresolved maritime disputes and rising risks tied to climate change, biodiversity loss, maritime safety and fisheries. - The symposium’s core message was that cooperation still matters even when states cannot settle political conflicts first. - The debate has real-world stakes for how countries manage shared seas, prevent accidents and keep environmental and economic activity moving.

What happened: - The 7th Symposium on Global Maritime Cooperation and Ocean Governance took place in Sanya, China. - Discussions covered the South China Sea, the Arctic, the BBNJ Agreement, blue-economy partnerships, artificial intelligence and maritime security. - The forum framed itself as both a debate platform and a vehicle for practical, non-exclusive maritime cooperation.

The details: - George Yeo said maritime claims are often zero-sum and hard to compromise on, especially when domestic politics constrains governments. - Yeo argued for a “positive agenda” focused on areas with clearer shared interests, including maritime safety, environmental protection and fisheries. - Speakers on the South China Sea said unresolved disputes should not block cooperation on marine environmental protection, scientific research, fisheries management, search and rescue and other functional areas. - Pavel Devyatkin described the Arctic approach as “competitive coexistence,” with China and the United States able to remain strategic competitors while still cooperating where inaction carries clear costs. - The BBNJ Agreement was presented as an example of the shift from negotiation to implementation. - Reaching common rules was described as a major achievement, but putting them into practice requires reliable data, technical expertise and institutional capacity. - I Made Andi Arsana stressed that BBNJ implementation depends on geospatial information. - Arsana warned that unequal access to data, technology and expertise could limit developing countries’ ability to participate fully.

Between the lines: - The symposium reflected a broader strategic view: broad political trust may be too hard to build, but narrower technical cooperation can still survive. - That approach favors limited, practical arrangements over ambitious frameworks that depend on geopolitical harmony. - The argument also suggests ocean governance is becoming less about eliminating rivalry and more about managing it.

What's next: - The practical test now is implementation, not agreement alone. - Future progress will likely depend on whether states can build technical capacity, share data and keep cooperation going in contested waters. - The symposium’s model points toward issue-by-issue coordination on safety, science, fisheries and environmental protection even as larger disputes remain unresolved. - The likely outcome is an ocean order built around selective cooperation rather than comprehensive political settlement.