When Malaysia hosts next year’s Asean Summit, things will get heated. Fireworks are expected on the centrality issue since, this early, friction has been building regarding how the Association of Southeast Asian Nations can confront China’s maritime aggressiveness.

Malaysia has made known its position that the bloc must take the path of diplomacy and “cooperation” regarding the South China Sea disputes.

Malaysia’s Foreign Minister Datuk Seri Mohamad Hasan insists there is a convergence between China’s claim to practically the entire South China Sea based on its historical rights and upholding maritime rights based on international law.

“We also adhere to international law, just as China does. However, what is essential is that we always utilize diplomatic channels and do not shut the door to discussions,” Mohamad said in defining the Malaysian position.

The carefully worded response apparently concerns President Ferdinand Marcos Jr.’s position to hold China accountable for its growing mischief in the disputed areas.

Mohamad urged Asean not to “take steps that would hinder communication and instead sit down together to negotiate.”

The position, of course, is shared by China which has stated its unwavering position that only countries involved in the territorial spats should sit down and negotiate for solutions.

China has laid out a path, however, which leads to a destination that is loaded in its favor, making discussions useless.

In negotiating for a binding Code of Conduct (CoC), China has imposed the conditions that its historical claim is respected and that third-party rules do not apply, including the 2016 Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) ruling.

In July 2016, following the claim filed by the Philippines, the PCA in The Hague ruled that China had no legal basis for its territorial claims. China, however, did not participate in the arbitration process and subsequently rejected the landmark award.

Beijing wanted the discussions held exclusively between Asean and China.

Thus, a clear conflict exists with the Malaysian position of kowtowing to China.

Mohamad asserts that Malaysia is in a strong position as it has long registered its maritime boundary map in accordance with the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).

“International law clearly defines maritime limits, including baselines, forward lines, and exclusive economic zones extending over 300 kilometers,” he stated.

Malaysia, nonetheless, based its position on the argument that “any crisis in this region would have severe repercussions on global trade.”

President Marcos touched a raw nerve when he called on all parties concerned during the Vientiane summit to reaffirm their commitment to universal multilateralism.

Moreover, he warned of the rules-based international order being under attack.

“Across the globe, states have acted against the principles of international law and, at times, against plain human decency,” Marcos said.

In what seemed to be an indirect reference to the paralysis afflicting Asean when confronted by China, the President said, “A multilateral organization should not merely exist; it should proactively uphold and protect the international rule of law against contemporary challenges.”

Marcos on Friday reiterated the need to address the South China Sea issue to manage the differences and reduce tensions following the recent incidents between China and the Philippines.

Moreover, citing the recent skirmishes involving the Chinese government and militia vessels and the Philippine Coast Guard and Filipino fishermen, he said, “These kinds of behavior cannot be ignored, and demand of us concerted and serious efforts to truly manage our disputes in the South China Sea.”

For all its worth, the Asean Summit did result in exposing the telltale deficiencies that made it fail as a true community that protects the interests of its members.