IN the West Philippine Sea that encompasses our exclusive economic zone, vessels of the Philippine Coast Guard (PCG), Philippine Navy, and the Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources face an asymmetric conflict. They are confronting the ships of the China Coast Guard, People’s Liberation Army Navy, and Chinese Maritime Militia at a ratio of 10 to one. Our vessels are overwhelmed by China’s ships not only in sheer numbers but also in make, capabilities and sizes.
It’s not much different in Manila, the country’s seat of political power. A Philippine agency’s spokesman against the whole gamut of diplomatic and informational power and machinery of the Chinese Embassy in the Philippines. But the battle of narratives appears more skewed in Beijing’s favor, thanks to a few outspoken Filipino politicians, opinion writers, and trolls taking the cudgels for and parroting the position of a foreign power.
The media had a heyday in reporting the exchanges of barbs between the spokesmen of the Chinese embassy and the PCG over the latter’s showing of caricatures of President Xi Jinping and labeling him a bully in the West Philippine Sea. The former shot back, deeming the act “crossing political red lines” by “smearing” the Chinese leader.
Their spat led to the Philippine Senate nearly passing a resolution declaring the Chinese Embassy spokesman “persona non grata.” Unnerved, Chinese Embassy officials dared our government to have President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. be the one to ask them to leave, and if he does, they will immediately close shop.
We budged, saying “persona non grata” is an act of “last resort.” It could have ended there, until footage of heated discourses on the floors of both chambers of the 20th Congress circulated in both mainstream and social media.
China’s narrative or painful truth?
I share the same sentiment of being offended to hear learned Filipinos advancing the narratives of a country that attacks our sailors, Marines, coast guardians and law enforcers. We all feel the same disgust to see elected officials acting like advocates for a country that violates the rights of our fishermen to perform their livelihood in our EEZ. It is abhorrent to hear Sen. Rodante Marcoleta advocating surrendering our territory, legal claims, sovereign rights and maritime entitlements to salvage Philippine-China relations.
Marcoleta lectured his fellow legislators and tried to impress upon everybody watching the live coverage that the West Philippine Sea is nonexistent. And if it is, it is but our own creation and is not recognized internationally. It is not depicted on the world map, as a matter of fact. In that context, he was being more legalese than a Filipino.
Former president Rodrigo Duterte referred to the 2016 Arbitral Award that invalidated China’s nine-dash-line claim to nearly 90 percent of the entire South China Sea as a mere “scrap of paper” that should be “thrown to the waste basket.” Again, in the context of the ruling’s unenforceability, that is being legalese and, arguably, anti-Filipino. When he justified being warm and friendly, instead of adversarial, toward a powerful neighbor like China so that our fishermen can continue to fish rather than be driven away, he may be a pragmatist and, at the same time, a pessimist.
Still, I cannot understand the psychology. Why would learned Filipinos — and nationally elected officials, at that — would publicly articulate China’s narratives that undermine the legitimacy of our stand? Why would they weaken our position over an issue that other nations recognize? Why did they not discuss behind closed doors with fellow government officials on how to eliminate the gaps in our legal claims, instead of publicly exposing their perceived loopholes?
Key points worth reiterating
We need to establish important points, lest our countrymen be misled into believing.
Marcoleta says the West Philippine Sea is not recognized internationally. Well, not yet. But that does not mean we are precluded from doing so. As a matter of fact, giving a local name for that part of the South China Sea within our EEZ by virtue of Administrative Order 29 is a prerequisite. Naming it the West Philippine Sea by the Philippine government is an essential step. A condition precedent required by the International Hydrographic Organization Technical Resolution A 4.2.6 for the local name to be accepted in international charts.
Former Supreme Court associate justice Antonio Carpio has refuted Marcoleta’s claim that the West Philippine Sea has no coordinates. Carpio asserts that the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (Unclos) does not require coordinates because it is based on our 200-nautical-mile EEZ. And the extent of the West Philippine Sea is measured seaward from our established archipelagic baselines.
Marcoleta’s assertion that Pag-asa Island is not part of our territory since it is outside our EEZ is flawed, as records would show. The island, as well as the other islets and features in the area, is part of the Kalayaan Island Group, which was formally incorporated into our national territory by Presidential Decree 1569 in 1978.
We have established actual, continuous, and peaceful administration of that area, which Philippine Marine Corps personnel, once stationed there, call “Freedom Land.” We thus rely on the “Doctrine of Effective Occupation” recognized under international law as our legal basis.
And since Pag-asa is an island, it is entitled to maritime zones, including territorial sea and EEZ, provided for in the Unclos. It is unlike China’s artificial islands that were built by reclamation that, besides causing colossal damage to our marine environment, do not generate maritime zones.
For Marcoleta to argue that we should yield them to Beijing to save our relations with this aggressor is not only absurd but also a gross disservice to Filipinos. Why would a government official who swore to uphold the Constitution and protect the nation’s interests advance “arguments,” however flawed, that favor a foreign power? Is he not supposed to, at least as a Filipino, advocate national interests, find legal loopholes and help plug them, and identify strong arguments and leverage on them?
Whose national interest the likes of him serve?
atty.edarevalo@gmail.com
