RECENT remarks by some Chinese academics claiming that Batanes “belongs to China through Taiwan” have understandably stirred unease among Filipinos. These assertions, though not official pronouncements of Beijing, are troubling because they attempt to cast doubt on Philippine sovereignty.
Yet they should be treated with perspective. They are speculative views, not binding policy. To overreact would only give undue weight to claims that lack legal and historical foundation.
Batanes is an inseparable part of our national territory. This is affirmed by the Philippine Constitution, recognized by international treaties such as the Treaty of Paris of 1898 and subsequent agreements, and lived daily by the Ivatan people who proudly identify as Filipino. Philippine sovereignty over Batanes is not a matter of debate; it is a matter of fact.
Historical and legal foundations
The Philippines’ sovereignty over Batanes is grounded in history and law. The Treaty of Paris of 1898, which ended the Spanish-American War, ceded the Philippine archipelago, including Batanes, from Spain to the United States. Subsequent agreements, such as the Treaty of Washington of 1900, clarified territorial boundaries to include islands not explicitly named in the Treaty of Paris. When the Philippines gained independence in 1946, Batanes was part of the territory recognized by the international community.
The 1987 Philippine Constitution further affirms that the national territory comprises the Philippine archipelago, including all islands and waters embraced therein. Batanes, as the northernmost province, is explicitly administered by the Philippine government. Its residents elect local officials, participate in national elections and live under Philippine law. These facts are indisputable.
Strategic context
Batanes lies at the northernmost edge of the Philippines, directly facing Taiwan across the Bashi Channel. This maritime corridor connects the South China Sea and the Western Pacific, making it strategically significant for regional powers concerned with freedom of navigation and Taiwan Strait security.
Because of this location, Batanes is not only a cultural and historical treasure but also a frontline of sovereignty. Our military presence in Mavulis Island, our governance structures, and the everyday lives of the Ivatan people all affirm that Batanes is firmly under Philippine jurisdiction.
Responding with clarity
The Philippines must respond with clarity, not alarm. Our government should categorically reject these claims and affirm that Batanes is Philippine territory beyond dispute. Sovereignty must be asserted in words and in deeds. Visible governance, community development and a credible security presence in Batanes reinforce authority on the ground.
Filipino scholars and policymakers should marshal rigorous research and present historical and legal evidence to counter false narratives. By answering with scholarship instead of hostility, we strengthen our position and show commitment to reasoned dialogue. This approach exposes unfounded claims without inflaming tensions.
At the same time, Batanes can be framed as a platform for cooperation, a hub for maritime safety, disaster response, and environmental protection. Promoting collaborative initiatives in these areas demonstrates that defending sovereignty does not preclude building constructive partnerships with China.
Sovereignty and friendship
The Philippines and China share centuries of cultural, economic and people-to-people ties, bonds that should not be eclipsed by speculative claims. Defending sovereignty does not mean rejecting friendship. Our position must be unequivocal: Philippine sovereignty over Batanes is nonnegotiable, yet respectful relations with China remain vital.
By combining resolve with openness, we show that national interest and regional cooperation can coexist. The Philippines can stand resolute against malicious views while sustaining respectful ties with a neighbor that is also a major power. This balance underscores that one can be pro-Filipino and China-friendly at the same time, unyielding in defense of territory, yet constructive in advancing regional peace.
Conclusion
The Batanes issue underscores that sovereignty must be defended not only through law and governance but also through scholarship and diplomacy. Malicious claims deserve decisive rejection, but without needless escalation.
The Philippines must assert its rights with confidence while sustaining dialogue with China in the spirit of mutual respect. This demonstrates that one can be pro-Filipino and China-friendly, unyielding in protecting territory, yet constructive in advancing regional peace.
By grounding our position in facts rather than fiction, the Philippines strengthens its credibility and contributes to stability in a region where narratives are constantly contested.
Rommel C. Banlaoi, PhD, is the director of the Philippines-China Studies Center at Diliman College and president of the Philippine Society for International Security Studies.
