Can rising powers redefine maritime law?

Are powers such as China trying to redefine maritime law that developed under Western control of the oceans?

Much maritime law rests on precedent rather than universally codified statute, so new behavior can reshape practice, while even the United States enforces rules without ratifying UNCLOS.

The discussion offers a rough teaching estimate that only a small portion of maritime law is formally codified, with custom and precedent carrying much of the system. It distinguishes writing down a rule from securing an international agreement on it. Competing modern precedents are presented as one way states could seek to change practice, while demands for exceptions make agreement difficult. The United States is cited as a state that has not ratified UNCLOS but supports many of its principles. Questions about a ship's flag and a coastal state's commitments lead to the qualification that particular disputes require specialist legal analysis.