For the country, two things are at stake in the West Philippine Sea (South China Sea) dispute: Sovereignty or territorial integrity, and the vast oil wealth beneath its waters. For other countries, such as the United States and Japan, it is maritime security and regional domination.
But for defeatists, even if the Philippines would win its case against China before the Arbitral Tribunal, China will no longer leave the seven reefs that it is reclaiming within the country’s territory, unless it is booted out by force, meaning militarily.
But, while the battle is still in the rhetoric stage, Beijing appears to be using a subliminal carrot-and-stick approach in dealing with Manila—with trade and investment being the carrot, and military buildup in the disputed areas as the stick.
Buying time
This is one way to buy time while China awaits the change in administration in 2016, hoping that President Aquino’s successor would be “friendly” to Beijing, observers say.
Party-list Rep. Jonathan de la Cruz of Abakada said he was told that the Chinese government is ready to renew its relations with the incoming administration. “I am told that the Chinese government is looking forward to a proper and responsible renewal of friendly relations with the next administration, [and] they will content themselves with the usual niceties with [President Aquino],” de la Cruz said, quoting his sources, who are senior Chinese officials visiting the country.
For now, however, President Aquino remains “resolute” in advocating a “principled foreign policy” on the issue. And Mr. Aquino is hoping the next administration will pursue this path with even greater vigor, especially with the support of three international blocs—the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean), the European Union and Group of Seven, including Japan and the US—for the country’s rules-based countercampaign against Chinese aggression in the West Philippine Sea.
Communications Secretary Herminio B. Coloma Jr. noted the latest positive developments in the maritime row in the ongoing Asean foreign ministers’ meeting in Kuala Lumpur. There, he said, “an emerging consensus” has formed behind the Philippines’s call for “a halt in reclamation, halt in construction and halt in aggressive actions that could further heighten tensions.”
Beyond Asean, Coloma added, “the European community, and the G7 countries, including the US and Japan, have expressed solidarity.”
According to Coloma, such salutary development vindicates Manila’s persistence in treading the peaceful, rules-based foreign policy in dealing with intractable issues that, if mishandled, could spark armed conflict in a zone deemed vital to global commerce. An estimated one-half of global shipborne trade passes through the sealanes involved in China’s row with its neighbors, the most vocal of which are the Philippines and Vietnam.
President Aquino, Coloma stressed on Wednesday, “is resolute in advocating continuity of principled foreign policy: a rule-based approach anchored upon international law and the primacy of attaining regional peace and stability.”
Such an approach “has gained broad-based support from Asean,” Coloma said, adding that it is, thus, “imperative that the next President and administration carry on with even greater determination so that the principle of ‘right is might’ will prevail.”
Military response
The reclamation and development into artificial islands of the Kagitingan Reef, Calderon Reef, Burgos Reef, Mabini Reef, McKeenan Reef, Panganiban Reef and Zamora Reef, or Subi Reef, is being coupled by the construction of ports, runways and up to six-story buildings for Chinese military use.
Despite the huge security challenge, the Armed Forces is waging its own “calibrated” response in pursuit of its mandate of defending the territory, and the answer was a combination of diplomatic efforts by way of the Executive department, and building its capabilities through the acquisition of assets and equipment.
The modernization of the military was being moved and even hastened despite the statement of Senior Associate Justice Antonio T. Carpio that, militarily, the country cannot challenge China, which is hell-bent on using its might in its territorial encroachments in the West Philippine Sea.
Carpio, who recently briefed employees of the Department of National Defense on the territorial issues in the disputed territory, said even diplomatic efforts “proved fruitless,” thus, leaving the country the only option of bringing Beijing to international arbitration, which China is not recognizing.
The magistrate said the country cannot even invoke the existing Mutual Defense Treaty with the US, which has been strongly vocal against China’s activities in the West Philippine Sea, but whose concerns and criticisms are being dismissed by Beijing, because the US does not take sides in territorial tiffs.
But the military said diplomatic efforts, the arbitration and its beefing up of its capabilities through the acquisition of assets and equipment are part of its inter-locking strategy in dealing with China’s occupation of the country’s territory and its advance in the West Philippine Sea.
The reclamation and occupation of the seven reefs, which are within the Philippines’s exclusive economic zones, even hastened the modernization of the military, which, upon its completion, should have equipped the Air Force with fighter jets, radars and attack helicopters, and the Navy with frigates and other vessels.
The Philippines is also probably using the diplomatic efforts and arbitration to buy its military the needed time to pursue its modest modernization, never to defeat China, but at least withstand Beijing’s first wave of attacks should it decide to use force in keeping up its “annexed” territory, or in encroaching deeper into the country’s territory.
China wants 86 percent
The military’s security trouble with China began after Beijing issued and pushed its nine-dash line map, which covered 85.7 percent of the entire West Philippine Sea, or an equivalent of 3 million square kilometers out of the 3.5-million-sq-m surface area of the West Philippine Sea.
China’s new delineation cut through Malampaya, the Philippines’s largest operating gas field that supplies 40 percent of the energy requirement of Luzon, in Palawan, and moved China’s boundary within less than a kilometer away from Batanes, Ilocos Norte and even Palawan, taking away at least 70 percent of the country’s territorial waters.
The map bestowed on China the maritime control over the West Philippine Sea, where half of the world’s oceangoing trade, valued at $5.3 trillion annually, passes through, raising concerns from other countries, including Japan and the US.
For one, seaborne trade to Japan passes through the West Philippine Sea, and if China will control the water, Japan-bound ships will have to go through the circuitous and unsecured Luzon Straight.
On the other hand, the US maintained that the West Philippine Sea is an international water, and it should remain that way so it will not restrict overflight and international navigation in the area.
While China is working double time to complete its reclamation and putting up structures, the military remained helpless in checking it. The only thing it can do is to continue undertaking its patrols, but which are even being subjected to harassments or “challenges” by Chinese paramilitary and military vessels.
The military’s hands were tied by the “status quo” ordered by President Aquino, which restricted soldiers from undertaking actions that could otherwise provoke China. The order even prohibited the military from rehabilitating its existing structures in the West Philippine Sea.
The status quo is clamped down until the international arbitration against China is decided.
Collective defense
Aside from building its capabilities and vainly waiting for the results of the arbitration, the military is also building up and strengthening its defense alliances with its allies.
The “collective defense” was a key factor in warding off China’s further belligerent behavior in the territory that it was disputing.
“The whole of Asean is a very strong voice if it can come together, much more if the whole of Asia,” said military spokesman Col. Restituto Padilla.
Manila signed last year the Expanded Defense Cooperation Agreement (Edca) with the US, which will allow American troops and their equipment to rotate in the country. It has been questioned, however, by various groups before the Supreme Court, where it currently pends for review.
Defense Secretary Voltaire Gazmin has said the Edca forms part of the defense strategy of the country, and its junking will “forever alter” the security landscape of the Philippines.
Two-faced policy
Nationalist People’s Coalition Rep. Sherwin Gatchalian of Valenzuela said China’s continuing reclamation activities in the contested West Philippine Sea show its two-faced policy in managing foreign relations with its neighbors.
Gatchalian maintained that the ongoing reclamation activities by China in the Philippines’s very own territory “threaten to disturb the status quo and the peace in the region,” saying that the next administration should strengthen its legal actions against the activities.
“They [Chinese] have been consistent in pushing for bilateral negotiations. But I think our country has already taken the legal track. We have advantage here. We just need to make sure that our legal tend is solid,” Gatchalian said.
Senior Deputy Minority Leader Rep. Neri Colmenares of Bayan Muna said the government should not abandon its tribunal cases as requested by China.
“China has demanded that we abandon our tribunal cases and limit ourselves to bilateral talks, which is unacceptable. The Aquino [administration] has publicly announced it is not willing to talk bilaterally with China. This is the reason China is pressing on with its land-grabbing activities with full force,” he said. “I also believe that we can have talks with China if only to protest its expansion, but without abandoning our tribunal case and other multilateral actions.”
Party-list Rep. Sherwin Tugna of Cibac said he believes that China will not negotiate based on a rule of law. “It will merely use brute force and might against smaller nations. Unless the international community acts against it and issues an embargo against China, it will continue occupying territories that it does not own.”
For Party-list Rep. Terry Ridon of Kabataan, the Philippine government should negotiate from a position of strength. “We should continue to strengthen our position without falling into the incorrect view that what is ultimately needed is US intervention into the West Philippine Sea question. With the extreme posturing of Mr. Aquino toward the US as the savior on the West Philippine Sea question, I have serious doubts whether talks can proceed toward any conclusion,” he said.
Party-list Rep. Francisco Ashley Acedillo of Magdalo said China now has structures in Gaven Reef, Fiery Cross or Kagitingan Reef, Chigua Reef, Johnson Reef, Cuarteron Reef or Calderon Reef, Zamora Reef or Subi Reef, and Mischief Reef or Panganiban Reef, all located in the West Philippine Sea.
“[These structures] will prove to you just how massive, how fast and how serious the Chinese are—not only in physically altering the landscape and seascape of the West Philippine Sea, but also changing the narrative of countries surrounding this body of water—including the Philippines,” Acedillo said.
He said that “given China’s propensity to plan out and execute [its] strategies in the long term, I don’t see them engaging the Aquino administration for any perceived short-term gain.”
The West Philippine Sea is one of the Earth’s most productive fishing zones in terms of its annual maritime catch, representing about 10 percent of the world’s total take. It contributes about half of the fish eaten in the Philippines, Vietnam and China, especially in poorer coastal areas.
Trade, investment partners
China’s standing as a top trading and investment partner of the Philippines, as well as of other Asean nations, makes it more difficult for Manila to just severe its ties with Beijing.
According to data from the National Statistics and Coordinating Board, in 2014 China is the country’s sixth top investment partner. In 2013 China’s approved investment in the country was at P1.2 billion, which ballooned to P11.4 billion in 2014. This was 6.1 percent of the P186-billion investment from overseas for that year.
In terms of trade, China was the third top export market of the Philippines in 2014, with shipments valued at $8 billion (mostly electronics). It also remains as the top import source, with merchandise imports valued at $9.5 billion in the same year (also mostly electronic products).
Overall China is the Philippines’s second-largest trading partner next to Japan in 2014.
Private- and public-sector officials say trade and investment relations are unaffected by the dispute at this time.
Dr. Francis K. Chua, president emeritus of the Philippine Chamber of Commerce and Industry, said a Chinese government-controlled steel-trading company is looking to set up shop in the Philippines.
Chua said business groups from China continue to visit despite the ongoing row over the West Philippine Sea.
“They said there is a difference between the political issue and business. So, as far as they are concerned, it’s business as usual. This is a government unit looking at investment opportunities here,” Chua said.
Trade Secretary Gregory L. Domingo also said trade relations with China are not affected by the developments in the territorial dispute.
AIIB
In June President Aquino expressed cautious words in joining a newly formed, China-led bank—the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB). “I think it behooves our sense of fiscal responsibility to look at how the governance structure of the AIIB will be, so that the economic help that is supposed to be afforded will not be subjected to vagaries of politics between our countries and the lead proponent.”
The AIIB is the embodiment of China’s aggressive campaign to exert economic influence on Asia, essentially by dangling much-needed capital for infrastructure development—an area which the Philippines is sorely lacking in.
Seen as a rival to the Asian Development Bank (ADB) and the US-led World Bank, China will be accounting for as much as 30 percent of the bank’s capitalization, pegged at an initial $50 billion. In the context of the region, the AIIB is intended to fill the dearth in infrastructure need in Asia, pegged by the ADB at $8 trillion between 2010 and 2020.
For the Philippines, the AIIB will mean another avenue to address its gaping infrastructure needs, especially since the AIIB is geared toward financing roads, dams and electricity grids, among other projects.
The Philippines, along with 21 other countries, signed the memorandum of understanding for the founding of the AIIB, albeit the signing was stressed by Philippine officials as a “nonbinding” commitment.
True enough, during the signing of the bank’s articles of incorporation later, the Philippines bowed out along with Thailand and Malaysia.
Finance Secretary Cesar V. Purisima said the country has until December to sign and is currently mulling over its options. The AIIB is being targeted to be operational by end-2015.
While China pledges that the AIIB will adhere to strict and transparent standards of a multilateral lending institution, the question of what kind of governance and decision-making procedure it will adopt (especially in fund allocation) is yet to be answered.
Some fear that the AIIB will give China a bigger hand in the decision-making on which projects will be built based on the advantage of its own industries; and choosing the recipient
countries to be prioritized for projects.
The senators’ take
Sen. Ferdinand R. Marcos Jr.: “I don’t think there will be further repercussions. The decision of the Philippines has been made very clear. And it is just a restatement of that position. We instigate action for assistance in the issue in the West Philippine Sea. Kung ano’ng maging reaction ng mga ibang bansa, hindi natin malalaman, pero sana nga sila ay magsalita at tulungan tayo sa mga problemang hinaharap natin dito.”
Sen. Sergio R. Osmeña III: “We have to do it [filing of case against China], we have to back up the President on foreign matters, huwag tayong mag-away-away; dapat maging buo ang ating position.”
Sen. JV Ejercito: “Definitely, it will affect the relationship [with China], but we have to fight for our sovereignty. So, in this issue, I support the President for fighting for our territorial integrity.”
Sen. Grace Poe: “Ang importante, matapos muna dito iyong ating arbitration case bago tayo gumawa ng mga hakbang na ganyan. Ipagpatuloy iyan at syempre merong ibang paraan din, at huwag natin kalilimutan iyong AFP modernization. Palakasin natin ang ating military, pero kailangan din nating isipin ang ibang aspects ng bilateral negotiations kung posible.”
Senate President Franklin M. Drilon: “Well, China certainly does not like it, but our foreign policy is basically to protect our national interest. I support the move of the government in filing the case.”
Sen. Loren Legarda: “I hope that they would accept jurisdiction of the case; that is the first step. And then, after that, of course, we would like to exhaust peaceful diplomatic means and the legal way to address the issue of the West Philippine Sea.”
Sen. Bam Aquino: “Well, syempre ayaw ng China iyan, but it is the best course for us, to raise it before the community of nations. At the end of the day, we’re not alone; we belong to a community of nations and the course of action of the Department of Foreign Affairs to raise it before the international tribunal and to get Asean to support our position, I think, is the best way to move forward.”
Image credits: AP/Bullit Marquez
1 comment
Fight fire with fire. They reclaim, we reclaim too.
Filing a case is good, if China is willing to recognize any ruling against it.
Buying warships and patrol boats and jets is good too. But are we seriously going to war? And even if we are dumb enough to get dragged into it by firing the first shot, will China actually want to risk a war with the U.S.and asean over some dubious claims China itself knows to be disputable at best?
China is wrong. No question here.
But how our governments have handled this whole mess has not been stellar either.
Let’s bring our Filipino brand of gulang to that area of the world, instead of always using that same brand of gulang on our own countrymen.