Chinese buildup amid COVID-19: Little protest from government and media

THE PHILIPPINE government did not seem to be aware that China had constructed two research facilities in Kagitingan and Zamora Reefs in the West Philippine Sea, and had established two administrative districts.The first one is in the Spratly Islands, which include the Kalayaan Island Group and are declared Philippine territory. The second is in the Paracel Islands, which are off the coast of Vietnam and included in its territorial claims. China announced the two developments on March 20 and April 18, respectively, during the enhanced community quarantine period.

These disturbing developments were not revealed by any official of the Duterte government, although the Chinese media had been trumpeting these recent gains. There is a Philippine Embassy in Beijing whose reports on these matters should have been subject of official concern. But the public heard nothing about the development. And the country’s media seemed oblivious to what was going on.

Meanwhile, journalists reported China’s“do-gooding:” the medical aid and support to help the Philippine government deal with the rising cases of COVID-19, its donations of test kits and of  personal protective equipment (PPE). News followed China’s visiting team of medical experts, being shown around by government officials. On two separate occasions, President Rodrigo Duterte, faithful to his commitment to China’s leader, publicly expressed his gratefulness to Chinese President Xi Jinping for the aid.

But on March 23, Inquirer.net, Rappler, Philstar.com, and the online sites of ABS-CBN and CNN Philippines carried news about the research facilities based on Chinese media’s announcement. Later, on April 20, the online accounts again picked up on the establishment of administrative districts, still referring to China’s reports.

News organizations did not move the discussion forward. Perhaps, reporters were waiting for government’s lead which at the time was silent on the issue.

CMFR reviewed the coverage of three Manila-based broadsheets (Philippine Daily Inquirer, Manila Bulletin, The Philippine Star), four primetime news programs (ABS-CBN 2’s TV Patrol, GMA-7’s 24 Oras, CNN Philippines’ News Night and TV5’s One News Now) and selected online news sites from March 20 to April 30.

Little interest from the media

Following up on the news break, reports of Inquirer.net and Rappler interviewed experts who have been keeping track of China’s growing presence in Philippine waters.

The articles were based on interviews with retired Justice Antonio Carpio, former Foreign Affairs Secretary Albert del Rosario, and maritime experts Prof. Jay Batongbacal, Singapore-based Prof. Collin Koh and Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative’s Gregory Poling, who all agreed that Beijing continues to assert its presence, attempting to hold absolute control over the entire South China Sea. Carpio, Batongbacal and Del Rosario all said that the Philippine government should protest these aggressions.

But none of the reports asked any government official what they had to say about what constitute fresh attacks on Philippine sovereignty.

TV Patrol reported the experts’ insights on April 22.  The rest of the media ignored the information until an official spoke on social media.

Tweeting DFA secretary

DFA Secretary Teddy Boy Locsin, Jr.’s tweets on April 22 captured media’s attention. Locsin tweeted that he filed two diplomatic protests with the Chinese Embassy in Manila: one for the establishment of the administrative districts, and the other for an incident involving the pointing of a radar gun by a Chinese ship towards the Philippine Navy.

Reports on print, in broadcast and online merely repeated what tweeted, including his point that these were “strictly confidential; and that no one else in the government was competent to comment on the matter.

Unfortunately, insisting on the confidentiality of these diplomatic protests diminished the impact not only of the official protest. Tweeting these actions also lessened the seriousness of the challenge that the build-up posed to Philippine national sovereignty. It made it look like it mattered much to the government and its officials.

The media could have stressed the views given by the experts previously quoted in the media, giving the issue the attention it deserved, probing more into the position of the government, business and civil society. But journalists did not venture further from the narrow path taken by the DFA and had no further questions, choosing as well not to say anything about the usual difficulty of getting the tweeting secretary to respond to media queries.

Notably more than a month since announcement of the research facilities in March, the Star, Philstar.com,Inquirer.net, and the online sites of ABS-CBN and Bulletin picked up the delayed statement on April 23 made by Presidential Spokesperson Harry Roque. He backed up DFA’s protests and said the Palace hopes China would exercise restraint. Characteristically restrained and careful not to offend China with the appropriate expression of outrage, the Palace was faithful to its established policy of a submissive acceptance of whatever China does.  This context was missing in the coverage. 

Absent official statements from the DFA, reports continued to draw information from Locsin’s Twitter account for information.  No one questioned the DFA secretary about the need to let the public know about the government’s official position. Reports merely repeated the tweets without the factual context of government policy on China. 

The song that flubbed

On April 24, the Chinese Embassy released a music video celebrating Chinese-Filipino cooperation during the pandemic. The campaign to win hearts and minds failed, as it irked the public who slammed the feature as blatant propaganda.

What did the government have to say about this?

The Star and ABS-CBN online reported Locsin’s tweet to “leave the Chinese Embassy alone.” These reports also referred to the secretary’s praise of China’s support, adding that this aid should be viewed separately from the maritime issues between the two countries, a remark that should have been shown up as a failure to uphold sovereignty issues.

Is it policy to keep silent about China’s build up on Philippine waters so as to receive China’s aid? Neither the Star nor ABS-CBN could work this into the story.

When Locsin tweeted, “China’s anti-COVID assistance has been impeccable and cannot be accused of being covert. Covid/covert. Get the play on words?” – no  news account pointed out that whether it was covert or overt, Locsin could not deny the reality of China’s actions and that the foreign secretary is charged to keep these incursions checked if only with persistent diplomatic force.

Cheer!

CMFR cheers the Inquirer’s April 30 editorial “Discordant note” provides a sharp criticism of the government’s conciliatory stance, arguing that unless the Philippines changes its treatment of China, “it may well go down in history as the administration that sold the country for a song.” At the expense of Philippine sovereignty, the government continues to treat China with kid gloves. This is no longer news, but media refusing to call these official actions out for what they are is a great disservice to the public.