South China/West Philippine Sea

[camiar]

 

Hardly the point.

If, as you say, China is trying to woo us then why is it "we should not prod China into imposing their power over our weakness?" Seems contrary to think we have leverage and then to also cower because we cannot use that leverage until we develop muscle. Then it isn't really leverage, is it? As for biding our time, wasn't that the reason PNoy went to the UN, to stave off a threat while we were not able to deal with it militarily? I don't get the inconsistency and especially don't get this deep faith in Duterte's abilities.

As I've said on this thread many years ago, occupation almost always amounts to ownership. Other presidents gave up our islands, I get what Duterte is saying, he's been dealt a difficult hand. But to say he is doing well on this issue is quite the leap. All many of us see is a continuing weakness on his part. I had hoped, given all his bluster during the beginning, that he'd at least be as bold as he was with Canadian garbage.

 

 

It is already a given that China can use its military might very effectively against us, at the moment. Our military move against China will only prod China to act militarily, too, tit-for-tat, which can be quite overwhelming for us. The artificial islands in one clear point. We, and the great US of A, just stood by and watched them prove to us exactly what they can do to exploit our weakness and the US impotence in the issue.

 

Yes, we won the Arbitral ruling, but the job of executing the Arbitral Court's ruling falls on us, the Philippines. But we are too weak to do that. No other country would be willing to go to war with China just to enforce a ruling that will benefit only us. We are left on our own to claim and defend what is ours.

 

Forget the USA. They have become impotent. They can no longer fight for us.

 

I am in full support of our government's move to strengthen our external defense capability, precisely to counter China's expansive moves into our Exclusive Economic Zone, relying less on the USA, and more on our closer neighbors in Asia.

 

But that will still take several years.The only real and practical choice left to us at the moment is diplomacy and international political pressure.

[dungeonbaby]

Still doesn't address my point.

 

Appreciate what you're saying, Camiar. Agree with most of what you say on the WPS/SCS in general, not always the specifics, and if your memory is at least seven years long then you know I make more or less the same arguments. But...ah...nevermind. Can't expect you to defend the indefensible.

Edited October 23, 2019 by dungeonbaby

[Admiral Kunkka]

Di kaya ng Pinas ang China.

[lee sawyer]

President Duterte will terminate the VFA and, reportedly, the EDCA. Although President Trump nonchalantly said that terminating the VFA is fine, I am of the belief that our country and the US will negotiate another agreement.

[manishbombee]

Philippines’ Marcos to Pursue Bilateral Deal With Beijing Over South China Sea – The Diplomat

Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos, the current frontrunner for the Philippines presidency, said this week that if elected, he will set aside the historic 2016 arbitral ruling on the South China Sea and negotiate directly with Beijing on long-running maritime and territorial disputes.

The candidate laid out his position on the South China Sea in a series of media interviews this week, during which he said that asserting the arbitral case, which the Philippines brought against China in 2013, could not be pursued because Beijing had rejected it.

“That arbitration is no longer an arbitration if there’s only one party. So, it’s no longer available to us,” Marcos said in an interview with the popular entertainment host Boy Abunda on Tuesday, according to Rappler. With the option of war something that “must be dismissed outright,” Marcos said that “bilateral agreement is what we are left with.”

In a DZRH radio interview on Tuesday, Marcos, the son of the late dictator Ferdinand E. Marcos, repeated his claim that the case that the Philippines won against China was “not effective,” and that a bilateral agreement with Beijing is the “only practical option.” He added, “I think we can come to an agreement. As a matter of fact, people from the Chinese embassy are my friends, we have been talking about that.”

In a third interview with the ABS-CBN network, Marcos added that if elected president, he would dismiss any potential offer of help from the United States in negotiating with China, BenarNews reported. “The problem is between China and us.  If Americans come in, it is bound to fail,” he said.

 

The ruling by The Hague-based Arbitral Tribunal, which is constituted under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) found in favor of most of the Philippines’ claims. It invalidated Beijing’s expansive claim of “historic rights” to nearly the entire South China Sea and recognized Philippine sovereign rights in areas within its Exclusive Economic Zone, which over the past decade has seen repeated incursions by Chinese fishing boats, coast guard ships, and maritime militia vessels. Beijing, unsurprisingly, has refused to accept the ruling.

Needless to say, this approach bears a close family resemblance to that taken by President Rodrigo Duterte, who took office a month before the arbitral award was handed down but immediately set it aside in favor of cultivating Beijing for much-needed infrastructure financing. Last May, he described the ruling as a “piece of paper” that had done little to advance the Philippine national interest. “In real life, between nations, that paper is nothing,” he said, adding that calls for him to continue the legal fight was “a waste of time and at the same time disrupting the good relations of China and the Philippines.”

But critics of Duterte’s “pivot to China,” who fill a good part of the Philippines political and security establishment, have accused him of selling out national interests in the West Philippine Sea (as Manila refers to it) for very little in return. As Rappler editorialized this week, Marcos’ position against asking U.S. assistance “echoes Duterte’s defeatist policy.” The policy has also led to conniptions in Washington, where policymakers have blanched at the sight of their long-time treaty ally gliding into Beijing’s embrace.

Given the strong pro-U.S. baseline in Philippine political life, Marcos’ position also sets him apart from his four main presidential rivals – Vice President Leni Robredo, boxer-turned-senator Manny Pacquiao, Senator Panfilo Lacson, and Manila Mayor Isko Moreno – all of whom have taken hawkish positions on Chinese behavior in the South China Sea. Robredo has been the most outspoken, saying that, if elected president, she would “leverage” the win “to form a coalition of nations” supportive of the 2016 ruling. She said this coalition could block the “ongoing militarization of the West Philippine Sea.”

It might be too hard to read into comments made this week, especially since they were made a day after Marcos was assailed for ducking questions about the South China Sea, suggesting the policy was formulated on the fly. But after six years of concern about Duterte’s dalliance with Beijing, Marcos’ comments have no doubt given many in Manila and Washington another reason to pray that the son of the former dictator stumbles in his trek toward the presidential palace.

[JPBriones]

On 2/25/2022 at 3:23 PM, manishbombee said:

Philippines’ Marcos to Pursue Bilateral Deal With Beijing Over South China Sea – The Diplomat

Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos, the current frontrunner for the Philippines presidency, said this week that if elected, he will set aside the historic 2016 arbitral ruling on the South China Sea and negotiate directly with Beijing on long-running maritime and territorial disputes.

The candidate laid out his position on the South China Sea in a series of media interviews this week, during which he said that asserting the arbitral case, which the Philippines brought against China in 2013, could not be pursued because Beijing had rejected it.

“That arbitration is no longer an arbitration if there’s only one party. So, it’s no longer available to us,” Marcos said in an interview with the popular entertainment host Boy Abunda on Tuesday, according to Rappler. With the option of war something that “must be dismissed outright,” Marcos said that “bilateral agreement is what we are left with.”

In a DZRH radio interview on Tuesday, Marcos, the son of the late dictator Ferdinand E. Marcos, repeated his claim that the case that the Philippines won against China was “not effective,” and that a bilateral agreement with Beijing is the “only practical option.” He added, “I think we can come to an agreement. As a matter of fact, people from the Chinese embassy are my friends, we have been talking about that.”

In a third interview with the ABS-CBN network, Marcos added that if elected president, he would dismiss any potential offer of help from the United States in negotiating with China, BenarNews reported. “The problem is between China and us.  If Americans come in, it is bound to fail,” he said.

 

The ruling by The Hague-based Arbitral Tribunal, which is constituted under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) found in favor of most of the Philippines’ claims. It invalidated Beijing’s expansive claim of “historic rights” to nearly the entire South China Sea and recognized Philippine sovereign rights in areas within its Exclusive Economic Zone, which over the past decade has seen repeated incursions by Chinese fishing boats, coast guard ships, and maritime militia vessels. Beijing, unsurprisingly, has refused to accept the ruling.

Needless to say, this approach bears a close family resemblance to that taken by President Rodrigo Duterte, who took office a month before the arbitral award was handed down but immediately set it aside in favor of cultivating Beijing for much-needed infrastructure financing. Last May, he described the ruling as a “piece of paper” that had done little to advance the Philippine national interest. “In real life, between nations, that paper is nothing,” he said, adding that calls for him to continue the legal fight was “a waste of time and at the same time disrupting the good relations of China and the Philippines.”

But critics of Duterte’s “pivot to China,” who fill a good part of the Philippines political and security establishment, have accused him of selling out national interests in the West Philippine Sea (as Manila refers to it) for very little in return. As Rappler editorialized this week, Marcos’ position against asking U.S. assistance “echoes Duterte’s defeatist policy.” The policy has also led to conniptions in Washington, where policymakers have blanched at the sight of their long-time treaty ally gliding into Beijing’s embrace.

Given the strong pro-U.S. baseline in Philippine political life, Marcos’ position also sets him apart from his four main presidential rivals – Vice President Leni Robredo, boxer-turned-senator Manny Pacquiao, Senator Panfilo Lacson, and Manila Mayor Isko Moreno – all of whom have taken hawkish positions on Chinese behavior in the South China Sea. Robredo has been the most outspoken, saying that, if elected president, she would “leverage” the win “to form a coalition of nations” supportive of the 2016 ruling. She said this coalition could block the “ongoing militarization of the West Philippine Sea.”

It might be too hard to read into comments made this week, especially since they were made a day after Marcos was assailed for ducking questions about the South China Sea, suggesting the policy was formulated on the fly. But after six years of concern about Duterte’s dalliance with Beijing, Marcos’ comments have no doubt given many in Manila and Washington another reason to pray that the son of the former dictator stumbles in his trek toward the presidential palace.

 

Opinion ko lang po ito.

So nakakatakot pala kapag si Ferdinand Marcos Jr. ang manalo sa May 2022 Elections. Mababalewala ang The Hague Ruling na syang kaisa-isang sandata natin para maisulong ang mga karapatan natin sa WPS. At kapag nawalan ng bisa ang nabanggit na ruling maja-justify na ang 9-dash line at tuluyan nang makukuha ng China ang South China Sea.

 

 

[manishbombee]

On 3/1/2022 at 11:54 AM, JPBriones said:

 

 

negotiating and talking directly with china regarding our issues in the west philippine sea does not mean we are giving up the west philippine sea claim. setting aside the tribunal ruling does not mean we are invalidating it. we are just choosing not to use it against china at this time. china will just end up saying that they are not covered by the ruling as they are not a signatory to the UNCLOS (the US is also not a signatory to UNCLOS). 

somehow, you can compare it to the sabah claim of the philippines. the philippines and malaysia have decided to just put the issue on the side for the meantime to avoid souring the relationship of the two neighbors for peace's sake but it doesn't mean the philippines is giving up its claim to sabah.

at this time, it is better to just have bilateral talks with our neighbors than have a multi lateral forum wherein the us/west will be involved. the us has their own agenda in the wps and they might just end up messing up the whole thing by being there at the negotiating table. 

i think the government has done a pretty decent job in containing china. since 2016, no new structures has been built in the wps by china and no new fake islands were dredged. i feel that if the gov't approached it in a more aggressive way militarily, china would have been provoked to further expand and enlarge their presence in the wps. sure, their militia ships remain there but that has been the case since the 1990's and as long as they don't cause further trouble, i think its ok for now. the philippines in fact has been the one expanding its facilities by improving the naval and air structures in the pag-asa island which is good for us.

[FF]

2 hours ago, manishbombee said:

negotiating and talking directly with china regarding our issues in the west philippine sea does not mean we are giving up the west philippine sea claim. setting aside the tribunal ruling does not mean we are invalidating it. we are just choosing not to use it against china at this time. china will just end up saying that they are not covered by the ruling as they are not a signatory to the UNCLOS (the US is also not a signatory to UNCLOS). 

somehow, you can compare it to the sabah claim of the philippines. the philippines and malaysia have decided to just put the issue on the side for the meantime to avoid souring the relationship of the two neighbors for peace's sake but it doesn't mean the philippines is giving up its claim to sabah.

at this time, it is better to just have bilateral talks with our neighbors than have a multi lateral forum wherein the us/west will be involved. the us has their own agenda in the wps and they might just end up messing up the whole thing by being there at the negotiating table. 

i think the government has done a pretty decent job in containing china. since 2016, no new structures has been built in the wps by china and no new fake islands were dredged. i feel that if the gov't approached it in a more aggressive way militarily, china would have been provoked to further expand and enlarge their presence in the wps. sure, their militia ships remain there but that has been the case since the 1990's and as long as they don't cause further trouble, i think its ok for now. the philippines in fact has been the one expanding its facilities by improving the naval and air structures in the pag-asa island which is good for us.

leverage is the key to negotiation. and the hague ruling is the only leverage we have on our side. China does not respect us ipasok niyo sa ulo niyo yan. Go back to the news ... fishing boat binangga at iniwan ang mga pinoy fisherman na halos malunod. Ilang araw umistambay and fishing fleet nila kahgit na ilang protest ng DFA hindi umalis. As long as we do not stand up to our rights China will just keep on violating our rights.

[manishbombee]

11 hours ago, FF said:

leverage is the key to negotiation. and the hague ruling is the only leverage we have on our side. China does not respect us ipasok niyo sa ulo niyo yan. Go back to the news ... fishing boat binangga at iniwan ang mga pinoy fisherman na halos malunod. Ilang araw umistambay and fishing fleet nila kahgit na ilang protest ng DFA hindi umalis. As long as we do not stand up to our rights China will just keep on violating our rights.

I agree with you sir. Leverage is a key part in negotiations. However, the UNCLOS ruling is not the only leverage the Philippines has. In my opinion, this isnt even too much of a leverage because there is no one who will be there to impose the decision. Unlike local court rulings wherein court appointed sherrifs and the national police can enforce a certain ruling/decision, The Hague has no one to enforce this. I agree with the government's current approach of bilateral talks rather than doing the multilateral approach by involving the west/united states. Just like with the current Ukraine-Russia tension, they have decided to do bilateral talks (with belarus acting only as hosts) instead of having multiple countries get involved (especially NATO).

Yes, I am aware that the Chinese Coast Guard and their fishing miltias are still there and have had skirmishes with our fishermen. But if you go back to what I wrote, they have been there since the 90's. What I was saying was given the situation that we are in already, in my opinion, the current administration is doing a good job in containing the EXPANSION OF FACILITIES and BUILDING OF NEW ISLANDS. In other words, at the bare minimum, as long as the situation prior to 2016 remains relatively the same and we continue to engage china bilaterally, i feel is enough at the moment. 

In fairness to our Coast Guard and Navy, they have continued to build on their capabilities  and have kept their presence in the contested region by conducting patrols (i.e. escorting re-supply missions to the intentionally grounded brp sierra madre at the second thomas shoal). However despite the improvements in the capabilities, at this time, we cannot engage them tit for tat militarily. So its best to sit down with them and talk peacefully to hopefully resolve the matter going forward. 

[FF]

Why will China listen to us ? China will always do what it wants done. We are not containing the situation as you are saying its simply that China has already done what it wants ( i.e . build a military base ). What did we exactly do to CONTAIN the situation ? Can u enumerate anything that STOPPED the Chinese ?  e di nga pinapansin ung diplomatic protests natin ?

[manishbombee]

1 hour ago, FF said:

Why will China listen to us ? China will always do what it wants done. We are not containing the situation as you are saying its simply that China has already done what it wants ( i.e . build a military base ). What did we exactly do to CONTAIN the situation ? Can u enumerate anything that STOPPED the Chinese ?  e di nga pinapansin ung diplomatic protests natin ?

I understand where you are coming from and you have valid points that our diplomatic protests have sometimes fallen on deaf ears. However, I believe that the government's more pacifist approach to China in the recent years has cooled down the tensions. Here is a brief timeline on how events transpired in the past decade:

2012 - Scarborough Shoal Incident:

 2014- China starts building artificial islands

2013- Philippines files UN Arbitration Case

2013 - China declares Air Defense Identification Zone

2014 - China starts building and dredging the artificial islands building them on top of rocks

2016 (Feb) - China deploys missiles on Woody Island

2016-present - New philippine gov't warms ties with China. No new islands are dredged. URL: Philippines says China agrees on no new expansion in South China Sea | Reuters

Yes, Chinese (and Vietnamese) ships have always been present ever since, but relative to the activities before, China's aggression in the region has slowed down. Navy and Coast Guard personnel has also increased their patrols as their equipment has improved recently URL: Out in Force: Philippine South China Sea Patrols Are Way Up | Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative (csis.org)

As for the diplomatic protests, I see them as only standard response by the DFA to situations wherein Chinese ships have entered our territory. But by no means are they the main reason to solve the problem. I think back channeling and continued peaceful dialogue are the way to go forward.

 

[manishbombee]

More Filipino fishermen in Bajo de Masinloc as PH Coast Guard beefs up security | The Manila Times

THE Philippine Coast Guard (PCG) has confirmed the increasing presence of Filipino fishermen in the disputed Bajo de Masinloc (Scarborough Shoal), seen as a "significant milestone in promoting maritime security and maritime safety".

According to the PCG, it has monitored approximately 45 Filipino fishing boats conducting fishing activities in the waters off Bajo De Masinloc during intensified maritime operations from February 28 to March 5.

"Seeing more Filipino fishing boats in Bajo de Masinloc is proof of our intensified efforts to safeguard Filipino fishermen who consider fishing as their primary source of livelihood. Through our regular interaction, we assure them that the PCG will remain active and present in the area. Lagi naming binabanggit sa kanila na narito kami para pangalagaan ang kanilang kapakanan at itaguyod ang kanilang kaligtasan (We always tell them that we are here to look after their welfare and promote their safety)," said PCG Commandant Admiral Artemio Abu.

In 2021, the National Task Force for the West Philippine Sea reported several incidents when the PCG and the Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (BFAR) implemented rules-based and peaceful approaches against suspicious foreign vessels and "shadowing" China Coast Guard ships that were seen within the waters of Bajo de Masinloc, 124 nautical miles off Zambales.

Bajo de Masinloc is a disputed territory claimed by the Philippines, the People's Republic of China, and the Republic of China (Taiwan). The shoal's status is often discussed in conjunction with other territorial disputes in the West Philippine Sea such as those involving the Spratly Islands, and the 2012 Scarborough Shoal standoff. The Philippines considers the shoal part of Zambales province, until 2012, when China used warships against the Filipino fishing boats.

[alfred1967]

On 3/1/2022 at 11:54 AM, JPBriones said:

 

Opinion ko lang po ito.

So nakakatakot pala kapag si Ferdinand Marcos Jr. ang manalo sa May 2022 Elections. Mababalewala ang The Hague Ruling na syang kaisa-isang sandata natin para maisulong ang mga karapatan natin sa WPS. At kapag nawalan ng bisa ang nabanggit na ruling maja-justify na ang 9-dash line at tuluyan nang makukuha ng China ang South China Sea.

 

 

Matagal ng balewala yang ruling na yan dahil wala namang implementing body para masunod yan! Yang ruling na iyan din ang nagtulak kaya naging aggressive ang China sa WPS!

So I prefer ung suggestion ni BBM na Bilateral Talks para at least makinabang tayo sa mga islang iyan at matigil na ang pangbubully ng China! Kung makakakuha ng Fair Joint Exploration diyan ay magkakaroon ng silbi para sa atin yan at hindi puro salita lang tayo ng nationalismo at patriotismo na wala namang nangyayari kahit inokupahan na yang mga isla diyan!  Puwede naman nating maging kaibigan ang china at ang US ng hindi tayo nabubully at nalalamangan!!

[Kimiyow]

Mahirap din kasi bilateral

[alfred1967]

4 hours ago, Kimiyow said:

Mahirap din kasi bilateral

mas mahirap kung unilateral dahil single party lang gagawa ng aksiyon sa sarili niya ng hindi kumukunsulta sa ibang party na involve,  at least sa bilateral ay both China and Philippines should agree before any action can be taken..

kindly explain kung ano ang problema sa bilateral talks?