CHINA’s decision to downgrade its representation at the recent Asean Defense Ministers’ Meeting-Plus (ADMM-Plus) hosted by the Philippines should not be viewed merely as a diplomatic slight. More importantly, it should serve as a reminder of how much work remains to be done in rebuilding trust and confidence between Manila and Beijing.
By sending a defense attaché instead of its defense minister, China signaled its dissatisfaction with the current state of bilateral relations. Strategic distrust has grown in recent years as tensions in the West Philippine Sea have intensified. Maritime incidents, competing narratives and geopolitical rivalries have increasingly shaped perceptions on both sides. As a result, defense engagement, which should serve as a stabilizing force during difficult periods, has become one of the relationship’s weakest links.
This is unfortunate because defense dialogue is most valuable when political relations are strained. Military-to-military communication helps prevent misunderstanding, reduces the risk of miscalculation, and creates mechanisms for managing crises before they escalate. When such channels weaken, uncertainty grows and even routine encounters can become sources of tension.
The ADMM-Plus episode should therefore encourage both countries to focus on practical cooperation. Neither the Philippines nor China benefits from a continued deterioration in defense relations. Both have a shared interest in maintaining regional peace, preventing incidents at sea, and promoting stability in Southeast Asia.
The first step forward is to resume regular dialogue. Communication should not depend on the state of political relations or the occurrence of crises. It should be constant, predictable and professional. Senior defense officials, military commanders and operational personnel must continue talking even when disagreements persist.
Second, both countries should strengthen crisis-management mechanisms. Existing communication channels and hotlines need to be more effective and responsive. In an increasingly complex maritime environment, rapid and reliable communication can prevent incidents from escalating and create opportunities for de-escalation when tensions arise.
Third, Manila and Beijing should broaden cooperation in non-traditional security areas where common interests are easier to identify. Humanitarian assistance and disaster response, maritime search and rescue, environmental protection, public health cooperation, anti-piracy efforts and counterterrorism offer practical opportunities for collaboration. Such initiatives may not resolve longstanding disputes, but they can help rebuild confidence and foster a culture of cooperation.
Fourth, both sides should reaffirm their commitment to managing differences peacefully. The Philippines and China hold divergent positions on key maritime issues, and these differences are unlikely to disappear soon. However, history demonstrates that countries do not need to resolve every disagreement before pursuing constructive engagement. What matters is the willingness to prevent disputes from overwhelming the broader relationship.
The challenge for Manila is to continue strengthening its security partnerships while maintaining productive channels of communication with Beijing. The challenge for China is to demonstrate that it remains committed to dialogue and confidence-building despite persistent disagreements.
Ultimately, geography dictates that the Philippines and China will remain neighbors. They share important economic interests, regional responsibilities and a common stake in preserving peace and prosperity in Asia. Neither country can afford a relationship defined solely by confrontation and mistrust.
The ADMM-Plus controversy should therefore be treated as an opportunity for reflection. It highlights the importance of restoring defense diplomacy as a stabilizing pillar of bilateral relations. At a time when geopolitical competition is reshaping the regional landscape, Manila and Beijing must resist the temptation to allow differences to dominate their interactions. Managing disputes responsibly while expanding areas of cooperation remains the most realistic and productive path forward.
The future of Philippines-China relations will not be determined by a single meeting or diplomatic gesture. It will be shaped by the willingness of both sides to keep communication open, build mutual confidence, and seek common ground despite their differences. That is precisely why the recent ADMM-Plus episode should be seen not as a setback but as a wake-up call and an opportunity to strengthen defense diplomacy in pursuit of regional peace and stability.
Rommel C. Banlaoi, PhD, is director of the Philippines-China Studies Center at Diliman College, president of the Philippine Society for International Security Studies and former president of the Philippine Association for Chinese Studies.