Pag-asa island/source of photo http://jibrael.blogspot.com |
By Chester B Cabalza
Blogger's Notes:
Commentary of an Academic (Copyright @ 2013 by Chester B Cabalza. All Rights Reserved).
Conceptual and geographical configurations
Blogger's Notes:
Commentary of an Academic (Copyright @ 2013 by Chester B Cabalza. All Rights Reserved).
Conceptual and geographical configurations
The Republic of the Philippines is not
claiming entirely the South China Sea (SCS). The recently concocted geographical
features of the West Philippine Sea (WPS) is stipulated in President Benigno Aquino's Administrative Order No 29, promulgated last September 5, 2012.
The WPS does not explicitly configure and
cover all of the contested SCS.
To level off our understanding about the
geographical and maritime contours of WPS and SCS, the prestigious UP Asian
Center courtesy of Dr Aileen S.P. Baviera and Atty
Jay Batongbacal provided us a primer on the West Philippine Sea: The
Territorial and Maritime Jurisdiction Disputes from a Filipino Perspective
(read related primer at
In the said primer, WPS refers to the part of
the SCS that is closest, and of vital interest, to the Philippines. Administrative
Order No. 29, Section 1, provides that the “maritime areas on the western side
of the Philippine archipelago are hereby named as the West Philippine Sea.” It
includes “the Luzon Sea, as well as the waters around, within and adjacent to
the Kalayaan Island Group (KIG), and Bajo de Masinloc also known as Scarborough
Shoal” (2013:1 General Introduction).
Meanwhile, Baviera and Batongbacal illustrate
SCS as the much broader expanse of water, often described as a semi enclosed
sea, bounded by China/Taiwan in the north, by the Philippines in the east, and
by Vietnam, Malaysia, Singapore, Indonesia, and Brunei in the west and south.
Scattered over the South China Sea are various geographic features, the most
prominent of which are known internationally as the Spratlys, the Paracels,
Macclesfield Bank and Pratas Island. There are overlapping claims by various
countries to these features and to the waters and resources surrounding them,
including parts of the West Philippine Sea (Ibid).
Prof Rommel Banlaoi’s post on facebook last
June 14, 2013 describes SCS referring to the body of water encompassing the
Malacca Strait and Taiwan Strait covering an area of 3,500 square kilometers.
China claims almost 80 percent of this water while Vietnam almost 60 percent.
The WPS only refers to the part of the SCS within the Kalayaan Island Group
(KIG) and the Bajo de Masinloc (Panatag, Scarborough) Shoal. The WPS does not
cover the whole SCS. WPS is not a substitute name for the SCS. WPS represents a
portion of the SCS that the Philippines claims as part of its maritime
territory.
Retrospective statements
Earlier in an interview with Asia Times
Online last September 15, 2012, I said that China’s baselines are all expressed
in its coastal geography through a U-shaped line in the South China Sea and in
several offshore places. This exceeds those allowed by the United Nations
Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and international law. On the other
hand, the Philippines being an archipelagic country, is entitled to enclose
large bodies of water within the baselines and assert sovereignty over it (read
related article at http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Southeast_Asia/NI15Ae02.html).
In a phone interview with Philippine Daily
Inquirer, I clearly stated in the article published on December 2, 2012 that
China’s most recent muscle flexing to lay claim to the disputed territories in
the South China Sea is, therefore, a “wake-up” call for the Philippines. I said
this in the context that our reawakening [from the escalating maritime disputes
in SCS] always starts with a conflict. This made us look at our defense
policies anew (read related story at http://globalnation.inquirer.net/58487/row-with-china-a-reawakening-for-ph-defense).
Because of (my) profound and personal views
in trying to expound details on our country’s Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) and freedom of navigation or to enlighten
some closed-minded policy-makers on the state of our external defense; surprisingly, netizens
in the borderless cyberspace continued circulating news feeds online. But oftentimes (mis)interpreted or (mis)translated my statements in various
languages including Mandarin Chinese, Vietnamese, and even Spanish.
I have had also monitored think thanks
virtually collating news articles in their respective news bulletin each time I
google my name. Some patriotic advocacy groups on facebook even invited me in their
accounts to call the attention of defense leaders to help modernize our
country’s armed forces.
But being an academic, I need to be objective
and non-partisan. I also had shared some of my thoughts on timely issues with
China and Taiwan live via DZUP early this year. Flabbergasted when top
opinion-maker, Inquirer’s Conrado de Quiros, favorably cited me last year in
his column (see related column at http://opinion.inquirer.net/42123/crisis).
Repercussions
The porous maritime borders of the
Philippines certainly has affected us why we lost or losing some of our
important territories from our adversary and neighboring claimant-countries in
SCS.
As Chinese naval power flexes its muscle, we
certainly had lost Mischief Reef in 1995, Scarborough Shoal in 2011, Ayungin Reef in 2013, and perhaps the entire WPS in the future from China’s rising
military power.
With the arbitration process on the side,
Chinese authorities reject it and commence in calling the Philippines a bully.
How come a small country like ours, asking for military support from political
allies, is being questioned suspiciously and done a reverse psychology by his
big brother?
I remember saying the same message in one
interview, although, my statements were published in two separate stories that:
Firstly, [The conflict with China] greatly
impacts on us because the Philippines’ strategy has been to use international
legal instruments because that’s the most we can do. We cannot contain the
maritime strength of China because we lack the capability. A diplomatic protest
is the most we can do (read related article published last November 30, 2012 at
http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/315873/gazmin-calls-for-formal-protest-of-chinese-naval-patrol-of-disputed-territories).
Secondly, the Philippines has long been
confronted in the West Philippine Sea but has had limited capabilities to
address this security issue. Moreover, the country has been focusing on an
internal armed conflict for decades that external defense, such as the
tug-of-war over territories in these waters, has been a secondary preoccupation
for the government (read related article published on December 2, 2012 at http://globalnation.inquirer.net/58487/row-with-china-a-reawakening-for-ph-defense).
Our problem with national sovereignty and
territorial integrity boils down to various causes and effects. Apparently, there
are conflicting international laws and historical claims among claimants. The
Philippines suffers lack of maritime patrol due to lack of manpower, patrol
assets, technology, surveillance system, and the mother of all issues – budget.
There are also overlapping EEZ provided by UNCLOS.
Definitely, there are many countries that
have interests in the SCS as one of the major sea lines of communications
(SLOCS) in the world. It will also result to incursion by claimant countries given
the absence of an agreed code of conduct. As an effect, there will be confusing
occupations and use of force which is very apparent now that will definitely challenge
sovereignty and reduce territories of a country. Consequently, loss of economic
activity to local fisher folks or to the national economy of a country as a
whole may result.
Furthermore, as tension escalates, it may
further call for increased patriotism from each claimant-country. As political
bickering rises, perhaps what we all fear to happen in the future may happen
unless stakeholders clearly manage and responsibly resolve the territorial
problem.
Geographically speaking, WPS does not cover entirely the SCS. Don’t invade the West Philippine Sea!
1 comment:
China will never listen to the Philippines, ASEAN, or the US. I wonder why a great power like China is misbehaving just to become a superpower! I bet they will become a real headache in the region...
Post a Comment