IN a rare broadside against China, Foreign Affairs Secretary Teodoro L. Locsin Jr. on July 3 warned the communist state that the Philippines would exact the “severest response” if military exercises in the South China Sea were to “spill over” into the country’s territory.
Since taking over Malacañang, President Duterte has abandoned the landmark 2016 arbitral ruling which the Philippines won against China. The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (Unclos), also called the Law of the “Innocent Passage,” invalidated Beijing’s mythical nine-dash-line claim in the South China Sea, which Duterte set aside in favor of Chinese investments and friendlier ties. Such move, however, has become a thorn on the side of Filipino fishermen, as Chinese militia brazenly and arrogantly continue their aggression in the West Philippine Sea, while China carried on with building artificial islands to house military facilities in the disputed waters.
Locsin didn’t say what the Philippines is prepared to do in case such military exercises spilt over into Philippine territories, but he did raise the country’s legal victory handed over by the Unclos. Locsin in a taped message declared: “This is the problem with playing fast and loose with historical narratives and historical names: they open themselves to error; unless the real purpose is to excuse unchallenged mistakes that may over time harden into rights.”
China’s illegal incursion into territories claimed by several Southeast Asian countries is just one part of a puzzle which the world’s second- largest economy is piecing together to achieve, something that political analysts believe is its attempt at world dominance. That China is bent on establishing a beachhead to take away global leadership from the United States does not seem far-fetched.
China is omnipresent. Consider its efficient endeavors to polish processes of transforming economic control into economic bullying within and outside the Asia-Pacific region; its drive to be in full charge of crucial waterways off China’s coast; its ambition to create a string of bases and logistical provisions which extend beyond its boundaries; its naval shipbuilding program, seeking to deploy more sea vessels than the combined ships of the German, Indian, Spanish, and British navies, and its effort to rule high-tech industries that will establish distribution control of economic and military power.
But its most powerful weapon, according to cyber experts, is its ability to spy on its neighbors using cyberspace. The West is fully apprised of this, and is pushing back. The US Senate plans to delist from the US Securities Exchanges those Chinese companies which have not disclosed whether they are foreign state-backed, such as by the Chinese politburo. Also, the US Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is proceeding with the banning of these companies from operating in the US: China Telecom Americas, China Unicom Americas, Pacific Networks and ComNet. Both US government actions are predicated on concerns about these foreign companies being subjected to control, manipulation and exploitation by foreign governments. Based on past forays of China in other countries’ telecommunications industry, its goal appears to be total control—from infrastructure to data piracy, resources, and debt-trap financing.
Just recently, Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison revealed that his country was under a broad cyberattack from a “state-based actor.” He warned Australians of “specific risks” and further threats, saying that several sensitive institutions had been hit by the cyberattack. “This activity is targeting Australian organizations across a range of sectors, including all levels of government, industry, political organizations, education, health, essential service providers and operators of other critical infrastructure.”
Morrison pointed to a “sophisticated state-based cyber actor,” but declined to name the culprit, saying it could only come from one of a handful of states. Suspicions naturally pointed to Beijing, which has had several skirmishes with Canberra of late, as Australia spoke out against Communist Party interests. Australia also recently enraged China by calling for an investigation into the origins of the coronavirus pandemic. Australia also pushed back against what it describes as China’s economic “coercion,” covert influence campaigns, and the use of technology companies, such as Huawei, as a tool of intelligence gathering and geopolitical leverage.
The Australian incident has sparked national security concerns here, especially since suspicions from the attack have fallen on China. It also parallels the situation in the Philippines, which is embroiled in a long-running territorial conflict with China over portions of the South China Sea, and whose critical energy and telecommunications infrastructure may fall under Chinese control.
The Chinese government owns China Telecom (Chinatel), which owns 40 percent of third telco Dito Telecommunity. Chinese law mandates the companies it owns—like Chinatel—to provide intelligence to the government. Although Chinatel is a minority stakeholder in Dito, a consortium that also includes Davao-based businessman Dennis Uy’s Udenna Corporation and Chelsea Logistics, the Chinese company is building the telco’s communication infrastructure all over the Philippines, and will be involved in its daily operations.
In a recent forum, former Foreign Affairs Secretary Albert del Rosario called for preemptive actions from the Philippine government to foil China’s infiltration of the country’s key assets. “Other countries, such as Australia, Japan, US, and the European Union, have recently enacted measures to prevent China on taking over their strategic and vital industries like energy, technology and telecommunications,” he said.
Del Rosario also broached the idea of the Philippine government taking over Chinese state-owned assets in the country as remuneration for the damage China has caused to the country’s marine ecosystem. China’s artificial island-building and illegal fishing operations have significantly spoilt the country’s aquatic resources which the UP Marine Science Institute study valued at P33 billion yearly since 2014.
Because China has repeatedly refused to pay, del Rosario said, “It’s time for Filipinos to unite and demand what is due from China. Filipino authorities have the right to seize assets and properties owned by the Chinese state here in the Philippines to satisfy China’s debt to the Filipino people once China’s full monetary damages are determined.” Among these assets are the Chinese government’s interests in the National Grid of the Philippines and China Telecom, which is part of the third telco in the Philippines.
For comments and suggestions, e-mail me at mvala.v@gmail.com