By Louis ‘Barok‘ C. Biraogo
As tensions simmer in the West Philippine Sea, the Philippines’ determination to bring China back to the negotiating table reflects a courageous commitment to diplomacy amidst daunting challenges. The Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) Secretary Enrique Manalo’s recent statements underscore the complexity of pursuing dialogue with a formidable neighbor while safeguarding national sovereignty.
The Primacy of Dialogue and Diplomacy
Secretary Manalo’s assertion that “the primacy of dialogue and diplomacy should prevail even in the face of these serious incidents” encapsulates a principled stance rooted in international law. The Philippines’ strategy leans heavily on the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and the landmark 2016 Arbitral Award, which invalidated China’s sweeping claims over the South China Sea. These legal frameworks provide a robust foundation for Manila’s position, reinforcing its rights over its Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) and continental shelf.
Bilateral Consultation Mechanism: A Hopeful Avenue
The Bilateral Consultation Mechanism (BCM) on the South China Sea represents a vital, albeit fraught, channel for dialogue. The working group’s recent preparations for a July meeting signify a renewed effort to engage China constructively. This mechanism, if leveraged effectively, could foster confidence-building measures and pave the way for more substantive discussions on resolving maritime disputes.
However, the road ahead is strewn with obstacles. China’s actions in the West Philippine Sea, particularly the harassment of Filipino resupply missions, starkly contradict the mutual understanding between Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. and Chinese President Xi Jinping to manage maritime differences peacefully. These incidents not only escalate tensions but also challenge the efficacy of diplomatic engagements.
Historical Precedents and International Experiences
Looking at historical precedents, the resolution of maritime disputes through diplomacy and legal recourse has been a mixed bag globally. For instance, the successful resolution of the maritime boundary dispute between Norway and Russia in the Barents Sea in 2010 demonstrates that sustained diplomacy, underpinned by mutual respect for international law, can yield positive outcomes. Conversely, the ongoing disputes in the East China Sea, where China and Japan remain at odds despite numerous dialogues, highlight the challenges of negotiating with a powerful and assertive state.
Possible Obstacles and Remedies
The primary obstacle to the success of the BCM is China’s apparent reluctance to adhere to international legal norms and its propensity to assert its claims through coercive means. This disconnect between dialogue and actions undermines trust and hampers progress. Additionally, the asymmetry of power between the two nations presents a formidable challenge for the Philippines.
To counter these obstacles, the Philippines could pursue several strategies:
1. Internationalizing the Issue: By garnering broader international support, the Philippines can apply diplomatic pressure on China to adhere to international law. This could involve more active engagement with ASEAN and aligning with other claimant states to present a united front.
2. Leveraging Legal Mechanisms: Continuous reference to the 2016 Arbitral Award and seeking further legal recourse through international bodies can reinforce the Philippines’ legal position and keep the dispute within a framework of law and order.
3. Enhancing Defense Capabilities: While diplomacy is the preferred route, bolstering defensive capabilities can serve as a deterrent against further coercive actions by China, thus supporting diplomatic efforts from a position of strength.
4. Engaging in Confidence-Building Measures: Small, incremental steps towards mutual trust, such as joint resource management or cooperative environmental initiatives, can help build a foundation for more comprehensive agreements.
Recommendations and a Call for Diplomacy
In the face of these tensions, it is imperative for the Philippines to remain steadfast in its commitment to diplomacy, while also preparing to defend its sovereign rights. The international community must support these efforts, emphasizing the importance of the rule of law in maintaining regional stability.
As the Philippines and China prepare for the upcoming BCM meeting, there is a glimmer of hope that reason and diplomacy will prevail. It is crucial that both nations engage in good faith, recognizing that long-term peace and prosperity hinge on their ability to resolve disputes amicably.
In conclusion, the path to resolving the West Philippine Sea dispute is fraught with challenges, but it is not insurmountable. By steadfastly adhering to international law, seeking broad international support, and engaging in confidence-building measures, the Philippines can navigate this turbulent sea towards a future of peace and cooperation.
- “Forthwith” to Farce: How the Senate is Killing Impeachment—And Why Enrile’s Right (Even If You Can’t Trust Him)
- “HINDI AKO NAG-RESIGN!”
- “I’m calling you from my new Globe SIM. Send load!”
- “Mahiya Naman Kayo!” Marcos’ Anti-Corruption Vow Faces a Flood of Doubt
- “Meow, I’m calling you from my new Globe SIM!”
- “PLUNDER IS OVERRATED”? TRY AGAIN — IT’S A CALCULATED KILL SHOT
- “Several Lifetimes,” Said Fajardo — Translation: “I’m Not Spending Even One More Day on This Circus”
- “Shimenet”: The Term That Broke the Internet and the Budget
KWEBA ni BAROK 
Leave a comment