“The West Philippine Sea Newsletter Volume 2”
“Philippine reaction to Chinese arrest threats and fishing bans”
The past week in the West Philippine Sea did not experience any clashes, but there was still drama as the Philippines and China continued to make accusations against each other. China continues its imperious activities in the South China Sea as it declares a fishing ban in the entire region until September. The Philippines is lobbying international opinion over the Chinese threat to arrest all “foreigners” that violate its sovereignty over their dubious claims in the region. It is also worth noting that the Philippine strategy toward China is part of a strategic policy document that sets forth a road map of how to manage Chinese actions in the West Philippine Sea. This week's West Philippine Sea newsletter will review these points.
This week, China announced that it was imposing a four-month fishing ban in the South China Sea. This is a repeat ban that China has announced every year since 1999. China unilaterally declared the fishing ban without consulting any of the countries that have Exclusive Economic Zones in the South China Sea. International courts twice rejected China's flimsy historic claim to the entire maritime region in 2016, but China has ignored these rulings. The Chinese “People’s Daily” newspaper states that the ban is to promote sustainable fisheries and marine ecology, which is most likely true, but they do not have the international authority to make a sweeping decision in the entire South China Sea. This decision is based on a longstanding international law of the seas’ guidance.
The Chinese ban has occurred every year since 1999 and is a typical point of contention between the Philippines and Vietnam, both of whom typically ignore the Chinese claims but face increased harassment from the Chinese Coast Guard and the Maritime Militia in return. The Philippine Department of Foreign Affairs issued a statement to China, requesting them to "cease and desist from the conduct of illegal actions that violate the Philippines' sovereignty", and cited the 2016 binding international agreement that ruled against China's claims.
According to Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., the Philippines is not opposed to moratoriums to protect fisheries from overfishing, but China has no authority to create a moratorium in the West Philippine Sea and its Exclusive Economic Zone. China's decision violates Philippine sovereignty and the 2016 Arbitral Decision, which ruled in favor of the Philippines and against China's expansive claims. The purpose of bringing up the ruling is not to change the Chinese position, but it is part of the Philippines' ongoing campaign to highlight China's unreasonable and lawless position.
Another concern has arisen due to China's announcement that it is closing the South China Sea for fishing, with the Chinese Coast Guard enforcing the ban. In response to a Philippine NGO, Atin Ito, who slipped past a gathering cordon of the Chinese Navy, Coast Guard, and Maritime Militia at the Scarborough Shoal to supply Philippine fishermen, China issued a decree that it would enforce a 2021 trespassing law for the South China Sea. This law empowers the Chinese Coast Guard to apprehend any "foreigner" who is "trespassing" in the South China Sea, subjecting them to a 60-day jail sentence in China without a trial. The Chinese Foreign Ministry announced that this law will go into effect on June 15, 2024. So the ban on fishing and the announcement of arrests coincide with each other, increasing the potential for clashes.
When the Chinese closed the South China Sea to fishing, it was common for Philippine and Vietnamese fishermen to ignore the Chinese order to stop fishing. The Chinese harass the fishermen in the decree zone, but they do not arrest them. This year could be different, as the Chinese now need to make arrests or risk losing face, and Vietnam and the Philippines may need to withdraw their fishing boats to avoid a confrontation with China. The problem with this policy is that it would be viewed as an admission that China has the authority to set policy in the West Philippine Sea. Both sides appear to have more to lose by backing down from a confrontation.
President Marcos stated that the Philippines would not abandon a “square inch” of Philippine territory in the West Philippine Sea. The Philippine Navy stated that it would extend protection to Filipino fishermen. Commodore Ray Trinidad, a Navy spokesman, said that the navy would deploy additional vessels in the area to discourage the Chinese Coast Guard in the West Philippine Sea. Given that both sides have publicly stated their intent to enforce their positions, there is likely to be a push for an agreement or understanding. Alternatively, both sides may choose to enforce their decrees while purposefully avoiding contact. It is also likely that the Philippines will ensure they have international and national press members in the West Philippine Sea to catalog any action by the Chinese.
The government of President Marcos has adopted a comprehensive approach that includes the use of national and international media. The president aims to enable the Philippines to assert its sovereignty in the West Philippine Sea and establish it as a long-lasting national policy that will garner popular support beyond his term in office. Maintaining consistency is crucial, as the Chinese aim to take advantage of any discrepancies, similar to how they have complicated the current disputes by pressuring President Marcos to adhere to the "gentleman" agreements they established with President Duterte's previous administration.
President Marcos has two basic approaches to the issue to ensure that there will be continuity between the past, present, and future administrations. The first approach is to shift the focus from policy or economic arguments to people. The Philippines must maintain transparency to expose the actions of a hostile and expansionist China, which is attempting to deprive people of their traditional livelihoods and deny the Philippines its sovereignty. The concept involves presenting this issue as something that Philippine citizens can internalize and take personally, as they witness what China is doing to their nation. This approach will be more enduring and profound than arguing with its citizens about the inner workings of an arbitrary ruling from 2016, which China continues to ignore.
The second goal is to show the world that the Philippines is committed to supporting and contributing to the rules-based model of freedom of the seas, as well as the internationally recognized definition of territorial waters and Exclusive Economic Zones. This means that the Philippines is bringing together likeminded countries that, even if they do not oppose China, support an internationally recognized rule of sea freedom. This would also include traditional allies, such as the United States and Japan, as well as nontraditional allies, such as India and Vietnam. This approach also necessitates an improvement in its maritime defense capabilities so that it is an active partner with the allies that it gathers for its cause.
In the second approach, the Philippines also wants to communicate to China that its soul purpose is to promote international law in the West Philippine Sea, such as freedom of navigation and economic sovereignty over its Exclusive Economic Zone. The Philippines must demonstrate that it is not interested in Taiwan affairs; it will not increase the number of bases available for the United States to use in the Philippines; it will not seek reciprocal actions against China, which means it will not use water cannons against Chinese ships or resort to ramming; and finally, it wants to negotiate to resolve the dispute with China.
These points demonstrate that they do not want to antagonize China, but rather expect China to recognize its sovereign rights in the West Philippine Sea and not escalate the situation. China is likely to reject these, as it asserts that its sovereign rights over the South China Sea are non-negotiable, and the only aspect subject to negotiation is what it permits a country to do in its maritime waters. China also insists on excluding foreign elements from the South China Sea dispute, thereby requiring the Philippines to renounce its partnership arrangements with both traditional and non-traditional allies regarding the disputed waterway.
In their statements to China, the Philippines have already demonstrated a willingness to compromise and engage in negotiations, a contrast to China's steadfast refusal to make any concessions beyond imposing terms on the region's smaller powers. The disparity between the two approaches to resolving the issue highlights China's unreasonable power and unlawful actions, in stark contrast to the Philippines' unwavering commitment to pursuing a fair resolution. It is also prepared to publicize China's actions against civilians, turning them into a national pride issue that will sustain public support and elevate their sovereignty in the West Philippine Sea.
If you like my content, please consider becoming a Substack subscriber to Pegasus Research or support me through Patreon.
https://www.patreon.com/PegasusResearch
References:
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202405/1313182.shtml
https://www.orfonline.org/research/examining-manila-s-contemporary-west-philippine-sea-strategy