Shift in news coverage of West Philippine Sea needed

THERE ARE no signs to indicate that China will put a halt to its bullying tactics in the West Philippine Sea (WPS). They will keep up the gray zone tactics—tailing and shadowing Filipino vessels, using blinding lasers, and firing water cannons at vessels on supply missions to troops based on the carrying supplies to the grounded Philippine BRP Sierra Madre, which the Philippines maintains as its outpost in Ayungin Shoal. 

The Philippine media should keep reporting on these to inform the public about the conduct of China Coast Guard vessels that roam freely in Philippine waters. Public awareness about China’s determination to uphold its debunked nine-dash-line claim helps to consolidate consensus about the need to stand firm in our own territory. Filipinos must know about how Beijing views its neighbors with whom its shares sea boundaries. 

In stark contrast to the past policy, the Philippine Coast Guard (PCG) has pursued its transparency initiative in February 2023. During Duterte’s administration, the appeasement of Beijing prescribed restraint, if not silence about these episodes.  There were news accounts of these incidents but the PCG was not as vocal about the country’s hazardous encounters with Chinese vessels in the WPS. 

But coverage needs to shift focus so Filipinos can know about policies and actions that the government can pursue to uphold and protect Philippine sovereign rights. Otherwise, the national outlook will accept the status quo which puts in question our territorial claims, keeping us in a defensive position with no sign of improving the situation.

This is unacceptable as it weakens Philippine sovereignty in principle and in practice, apart from the collective commitment the country has made to international access to sea routes as provided by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). 

Expanding international ties

President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. himself in December 2023 identified the need for a “paradigm shift” in addressing the WPS situation, as traditional diplomatic channels have had little effect on China’s behavior. Analyzing feasible options could evolve more productive measures. But journalists have not asked him to talk about the options he might explore. 

As president, Marcos has strengthened PH-US relations, and activities have included the biggest Balikatan exercises yet. Talks with Japanese Prime Minister Fukio Kishida about a Reciprocal Access Agreement similar to the US’ Visiting Forces Agreement are also underway. 

Marcos, Kishida and US President Joe Biden also held their first ever trilateral summit on April 11. In a joint statement, they reiterated their respective states’ cooperation to support a “free and open Indo-Pacific” region, where the expanse of the South China Sea serves as the channel for one-third of the world’s global trade. 

Gathering allies, especially those who have similar interests in upholding the freedom of navigation and overflight, is a key step, but it is just one part of the formula. 

The strongest instrument for the Philippines is still the 2016 arbitration ruling that invalidated China’s claims to almost the entire South China Sea and upheld our sovereign rights to the 200-nautical mile exclusive economic zone (EEZs), which includes areas in which Chinese vessels have regularly engaged in “dangerous maneuvers.” 

The Marcos administration, again in contrast to its predecessor, recognizes the importance of the decision of the Permanent Court of Arbitration in the Hague to favor the claim of the Philippines. Former president Rodrigo Duterte dismissed it as a mere piece of paper, insisting he could not risk going to war with China. The fear of war which he stoked helped to shut down any further discussion of policy options that could strengthen the country’s position against Beijing’s combative thrusts against PCG vessels. 

Shift in reportage 

A review of the discourse that followed the ruling would be a timely shift for the media. The record will show the arguments of Retired Supreme Court Justice Antonio Carpio as he called tirelessly for ways of upholding the ruling without any risk of war. Media have failed to regularly recall these points to present an alternative to Duterte’s view which submitted to Beijing with little consultation with those who secured the ruling for the country. Neither have journalists referred to it and the terms of the decision as China has escalated its aggression against Philippine boats in Philippine waters. 

In 2023, Carpio described energy exploration in Recto Bank as a “litmus test” for Marcos. Most recently, on April 3, he reiterated on ANC’s Headstart the urgent need to begin process of gas exploration in the area, holding up the example of Malaysia and Indonesia who went on to do so within their EEZs, with the help of allies who sent patrols to accompany their ships. 

Back in November 2023, Carpio also called on the Philippine government to file a fresh case against China, this time to settle territorial disputes before the International Court of Justice (ICJ). In his book “The South China Sea Dispute: Philippine Sovereign Rights and Jurisdiction in the West Philippine Sea,” Carpio clarified that the Arbitral Tribunal at The Hague only ruled on the maritime entitlements—marine resources within the EEZ—as governed by UNCLOS. But territorial disputes cover conflicting claims of sovereignty over “continental land; islands, whether or not capable of human habitation or economic life of its own; or rocks above water at high tide” such as Scarborough Shoal or Bajo de Masinloc where heavily guarded Chinese vessels are able to prevent entry of Filipino fisherfolk. Carpio added that general principles of international law govern territorial disputes. 

Another retired magistrate, Artemio Panganiban, agreed that the country had already won our maritime rights prescribed by UNCLOS. He also recommended taking China to the ICJ. In a column in Philippine Daily Inquirer in June 2021, Panganiban wrote that filing a case in the ICJ can be done simultaneously with “other peaceful methods under the UN charter.”

Panganiban said in his column, “I always taught that poor and weak states like ours can vie with wealthy and powerful countries only by a reliance on the might of being right.” Holding a bully impervious to the rule of law accountable is no easy feat, but not impossible with political will and well-informed officials.

CMFR must add the great need as well for well-informed citizens and their support for officials who will fight for national sovereignty. On all platforms, but perhaps, more TV news for its dynamism and accessibility, journalists must prove their value as carriers of ideas. This involves their ability to push for the right ideas especially when engaging public officials.

Public opinion must be cut off from Duterte’s defeatist outlook which seemed more about pleasing Xi Jinping rather than fear of war. Media failed to check and interrogate Duterte’s flawed position. Journalists must now wean the public from this outlook, set aside false fears so Filipinos can all appreciate the alternative paths to be taken in defense of our national territory. Such determination will make a “strong and weak state” into a united and formidable defender of sovereignty. 

Sadly, journalists for all kinds of reasons lost so much time in shoring up the banks of information to counter Beijing’s domination of our seas. There is no reason now for passive coverage, waiting for the next incident to happen. Journalists must set aside false fears and set the news agenda. 

Media discourse must shift focus and broaden public understanding of what government can and must do if we are to recover our freedom to navigate our own seas, without fear of interference from foreign interlopers.