THE smart man in the Cabinet is Foreign Secretary del Rosario; a man, not of rare intelligence but of intelligence rare in the Cabinet. He is forthright and forthcoming, never afraid to speak his mind, which he does softly but distinctly and firmly. That means his days are numbered in the government. Pygmies are uneasy with a giant.

Well, he just made his first mistake. But, as with the intelligent, even when wrong, del Rosario is right just the same.

A Chinese newspaper, a state organ as all the media are in China, published an editorial to the effect that countries disputing China’s inclusive claim to all territories in the South China Sea should mentally prepare themselves for “the sound of cannons,” if they will not accede to China’s demands.

Del Rosario objected, explaining that territorial disputes should be settled by international rules. Not artillery.

The Chinese actually agree with that.

They have, of late, joined multilateral institutions from which they once shied away for fear of rebuke or lecturing on their aggressive claims and poor human-rights record. They have seen the uses of joining, now that their economic strength and resilience will inspire the rebuke and lecturing to cease and respectful attention to take their place.

But the Chinese added that if the rules do not settle disputes to China’s satisfaction, then “some military action is necessary.” In short, the Chinese will talk so long as we listen and they will cannonade when we stop listening.

Del Rosario was wrong to call this “canonical” statement “grossly irresponsible.”

No, it is better than grossly irresponsible. It is very revealing.

It is hard enough to get totalitarian countries to say anything at all, what more get them to reveal their intentions. Any statement coming out of them is more than welcome.

Yet even when wrong, del Rosario is right.

While we welcome any chance to read China’s mind, especially with regard to our region, it is a diplomatic imperative to voice our objection to their declared intention to use force if they will not get their way. Otherwise our silence will be taken as consent.

We cannot consent to force as a mode of conflict resolution; we have no force to speak of. Our only force, if America permits, is the US 7th Fleet.

While it was ready to come to our rescue in the Spratlys, that was before Noynoy went to China and offered joint exploration and exploitation of our territories in the Spratly group of islets, which is to say joint exploration and exploitation even of Recto Avenue since he was emphatic that Recto Avenue is as much Philippine territory as the Recto Bank.

Opening the latter to joint exploration and exploitation opens the former to the same, presumably.

On the other hand, he may not have seen the necessary implication.

So, thank God, del Rosario is around to handle our foreign affairs. While he lasts, we are safe.

Meanwhile, we can take comfort in the certain knowledge that the writer, publisher, editors and staff of that Chinese newspaper already paid for the bullets and are on their way, even as you read this, to the football stadium to meet their maker, Karl Marx.

They violated the cardinal rule of Communist China, laid down by Deng Xiaoping just like George Washington’s last advice to his countrymen to avoid foreign entanglements.

In China’s case, Deng said in a telegraphic memo: avoid confrontation; build up comprehensive national power, economic and military, but discreetly; advance by increments.

And, it goes without saying, hide everything if you can.

And then wait.

Wait until the fruit rots on the branch and falls. Then pick it up. Countries with rotten leaderships are rotting.

Meanwhile, Noynoy struck a naval information-sharing agreement with Vietnam, which is on the Asian mainland and is situated flush against the underbelly of China.

It is not a soft underbelly by any means; several divisions of infantry, armor and rocket forces are stationed on the border. It bears remembering that China wiped out a Vietnamese garrison on a Spratly island, just like that. Just ash and sand.

Still, this approach to the Vietnam military was the right move, as we said in a piece where we predicted the annexation of the Philippines as a Chinese province and the extinction of the Filipino race as useless even for slave labor, given our mañana attitude.

But it was wrong to announce it after a military parade in outlandish costumes given in honor of the Vietnamese leader.

The rule is, speak softly but carry a big stick. The better rule is speak even softer or do not speak at all when you do not carry even a small stick or, at best, a flaccid Vienna sausage.

That open agreement of naval information, with particular regard to the Spratlys, is a provocation to China, the appropriate response to which I hope our government can make.

That response will not be credible unless we shall, before then, have agreed to a more or less permanent positioning, even sans bases, of US strategic forces in our territory. Forget the Constitution. The Constitution must yield to military necessity. Besides, that piece of nationalistic nonsense in the Charter has outlived its purely rhetorical usefulness.

Well, anyway, del Rosario will still be around to get us out of that mess. But expect a Chinese response next week. Perfect timing: it will be All Souls’ Day, Dia de los Muertos, the Day of the Dead—Ducks, in our case.

It will also be appropriately All Saints’ Day because, absent an unequivocal reaffirmation and reinvigoration of the Philippine-US Mutual Defense Treaty, we shall need the help of all the saints—and all the devils—to survive this latest gaff.