Let’s attempt to clear up the smoke on the China-Philippine conflict over territorial waters and atolls in the West Philippine Sea (South China Sea) by adding more conflicting arguments because it is, ironically, only when we juxtapose opposing sides of an issue that we see the truth.
No other side but our side. The conflict over territorial waters has been blown out of proportion, dragging the public to opposite extremes of the political divide by taking sides—America’s side or China’s side.
At the Pandesal Forum organized by Wilson Lee Flores and George Siy of the Institute of Development Studies Center (IDSC), former Ambassador Alberto Encomienda was quoted in a paper as saying, “We must take a side, and that is our side. Neither pro-America nor pro-China, but pro-Filipino.”
IDSC also quoted former Transportation Undersecretary Art Valdez as saying, “The sea is not meant to divide but to unite” China and the Philippines, which have been using the same waters in trade for many centuries, dating back to 1417 when the Sultan of Sulu visited China.
China’s Kra-tical dilemma? There are trillions of reasons that pushed China to encroach into our waters. About $7 trillion of global trade pass through these waters, the bulk of which belongs to China.
For 30 years now, China has been pushing for the building of the Kra Canal in southern Thailand that will cut down travel distance by 1,200 kilometers from South China Sea to the Indian Ocean. In fact, the Kra Canal project was envisioned a century ago along with the Suez Canal and Panama Canal, but was blocked by certain interest groups, forcing China to secure its trade routes by encroaching in our waters.
If the Kra Canal finally gets completed under China’s “Belt and Road” Initiative and as part of its “Maritime New Silk Road,” perhaps China will change its hegemonic expansionist tendencies. But now that the sleeping giant has awakened, an opposing tendency is China’s temptation to encroach on other territories as a natural consequence of its
growing imperial economic might. As we cannot fight and win militarily, diplomacy is our only recourse.
America’s conflicting agenda. Meanwhile, Janus-faced America has conflicting agenda. On one hand are the interests of the “military-industrial complex.” This means the “war industry” indirectly supports governments warring on its people and building their defense capabilities, while funding indirectly and remotely the opposite side—like rebellions, insurgencies, Islamic fundamentalism, terrorism, etc.
On the other hand is hot-tempered and impulsive President Donald J. Trump, notorious for his Islamophobic, misogynist and racist remarks, causing discomfort to the military-industrial establishment and its tentacles of influence in deep state, factions in Pentagon, Congress, academe and mainstream media as Trump wants to stop regime changes, calls the Cold War Nato obsolete, wants defense spending cuts and, above all, wants to do business with China and Russia.
He also hit the “color revolutions” backed by George Soros and similar groups, like the 2004 Orange revolution in Ukraine; 2003 Rose Revolution in Georgia; 2005 Tulip revolution in Kyrgyzstan, 2005 Cedar revolution in Lebanon, Yellow Umbrella Revolution in Hong Kong; Arab Spring in the Middle East, and the failed White Revolution in Russia.
Much “ado about nothing?” Meanwhile, the Permanent Court of Arbitration decision two years ago in our favor against China appears to be “a fluke” and a “monumental swindle” pulled by President Benigno S. Aquino III and Foreign Affairs Secretary Albert del Rosario by “verbally engineering the word arbitration to involve only one party,” which negates the essence of an arbitration of two parties mediated by a third party, said Ado Paglinawan.
Moreover, the ruling is not enforceable and is not backed by the United Nations, thus making it useless and inutile, he added.
Butch Valdez of the Citizens National Movement asserts, “why have they not raised issues about Itu Aba [occupied by Taiwan], an island within the Philippine 200 Exclusive Economic Zone, and not merely reefs that emerge and submerge depending on tides?” The same goes for Sabah. America should have helped the Philippines in the Sultanate of Sulu’s ownership claims.
Don’t worry, but be wary? Beyond national interests, “there is no other interest more primordial than world peace,” which is the interest of humanity, Valdez said.
We must not worry much if we allow people and our leaders to see the dynamics of these contradictions and see the truth through the metaphors and ironies of reality, and be tolerant and patient to engage in peaceful dialogs and not resort to the arrogance of power or the power of the gun.
E-mail: mikealunan@yahoo.com