The New Philippine Baselines Law And The Spratlys Dispute
March 12th, 2009 by Ding G. Gagelonia
The government of the day has decided to push the envelope in its territorial dispute with China over the comparatively small region of the Spratlys off northwestern Palawan.
http://www.american.edu/TED/spratly.htm
President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo must have felt she was caught between the proverbial devil and the deep blue sea in terms of meeting a supposed May 13, 2009 deadline set in the United Nations Convention on the Law Of the Sea for nations to file claims defining their extended continental shelf, and of not ruffling Beijing’ feathers.
The rich mineral resources believed nesting under the Spratlys which some have estimated to be worth upwards of 20-billion dollars certainly factors into the dispute given how expanded continental shelves are reckoned compared to other parameters in the definition of a nation’s boundaries.
But China’s immediate protest of Mrs. Arroyo’s decision to sign the new Philippine Archipelagic Baselines Law cannot but raise renewed concerns.
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2009-03/11/content_7569668.htm
Executive Secretary Eduardo asserts the position of Manila quite boldly:
We are sending the message to the whole world that we are affirming our national sovereignty and protecting our national interest. This is the right thing to do. “Whatever problems we may have [on the contested territories], whatever action will have to be contested, will have to be done with the code of conduct agreed upon by the [Association of Southeast Asian Nations] and China.
Ermita is apparently referring to this key stipulation in the Code:
4. The Parties concerned undertake to resolve their territorial and jurisdictional disputes by peaceful means, without resorting to the threat or use of force, through friendly consultations and negotiations by sovereign states directly concerned, in accordance with universally recognized principles of international law, including the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea;
5. The Parties undertake to exercise self-restraint in the conduct of activities that would complicate or escalate disputes and affect peace and stability including, among others, refraining from action of inhabiting on the presently uninhabited islands, reefs, shoals, cays, and other features and to handle their differences in a constructive manner.
http://www.aseansec.org/13165.htm
Taking Malacanang’s position at face value, it may be that Mrs. Arroyo is convinced fully that she has done the right thing.
I will grant her that, given that she still has 4 months left in her term.
But as an ordinary Filipino I am asking myself what will happen if China, given its previous wrangles with other countries who also claim parts of South China Sea (notably Vietnam and Taiwan), takes military action against the Philippines?
http://www.american.edu/TED/spratly.htm
Will the Philippines be able to respond in kind to credibly assert its enactment of the new Baselines Law?
Postscript:
GMA also may have a new diplomatic card up her sleeve: the designation of a Permanent Ambassador to ASEAN.
Former sentor and ex-defense secretary Orly Mercado, apart from his legistave and executive department credentials, is a journalist.
Mercado began his career in the broadcasy industry with ABS-CBN, heading DZAQ Radyo Patrol which returned as DZMM in the post EDSA 1 era.
Mercado, who holds a doctorate degree, was until recently president of the long-sequestered Radio Philippines Network Channel 9.
His being posted in Jakarta will face its first test with the Spratlys dispute heating up.
Another interesting point with GMA’s signing into law of the Baselines Bill is its timing. she having just come from the annual ASEAN Summit.
It must be noted here that the Spratlys are also clamed wholly or in part by Malaysia, Thailand, Brunei, along with Vietnam and Taiwan.
Erratum: Thailand is not among the claimant countries.
March 12, 2009 at 12:07 pm
Hi Ding.
It is highly doubtful if China will indeed use military force against the Philippines. Tactically speaking, while China has a superb standing army and navy, the Philippines’ has an advantage with regards to proximity. China, if I’m not mistaken, has not yet purchased an aircraft carrier that will enable it to mibilize troops quickly to the KIG. Secondly, I doubt if China sees South China Sea in the context of 19th Century gunboat diplomacy. It has business interests in Philippines and ASEAN and I don’t think it can afford to piss off the bloc. Thidrly, the Seventh Fleet remains the biggest kid on the bloc. And the US is bound by treaty to defend RP. In fact, people at Heritage Foundation, as you have posted last week, are already asking Washington to back RP up.
But if the economic crisis get worse, China MIGHT turn crazy and go on a military adventure. This is because the Communist Party’s hold on power is rooted on economic stability and nationalism. If the crisis gets worse, the Party would look for ways to ignite nationalism to rally the people and prevent unrest. But again I think this is VERY unlikely.
Lastly, Ding, Thailand is not claiming the Spratlys.
March 12, 2009 at 12:25 pm
great news . the Philippines has finally made a one time smart decision. more power :)
March 12, 2009 at 12:26 pm
J, Thailand has a rerors on one of the islets.
March 12, 2009 at 12:29 pm
Malikmata. Yes not Thailand.
March 12, 2009 at 12:32 pm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spratly_Islands#Various_claims
March 12, 2009 at 2:37 pm
i agree that the law needed to be signed. About time really. Also we can see this as a plus with Mrs. Arroyo as she tries to covet Washington’s attention. A diplomatic row or an incursion by China in the region will require Washington’s attention. Maybe then Mrs. Arroyo will get her very much desired photo op with the Obamas.
March 12, 2009 at 2:48 pm
“Maybe then Mrs. Arroyo will get her very much desired photo op with the Obamas.”
Hala, magalit si Bencard :)
But seriously, coy, methinks that in fairness to Malacanang, I’d like to believe thay’ve thought about this hard.
Diplomacy is a serious game.
Manila should realize that its decision to push the envelop could either force a resolution of the competing claims earlier rather than later, or trigger a crisis it can ill afford at this time.
March 12, 2009 at 2:57 pm
ding,
in all honesty, me too. but i couldn’t help that notice the side-dish for her. hehe.
true. part of me wants a resolution swiftly too. we’ve got a huge opportunity to claim it anyway.
also if the philippines gets it, chances are anyway that the Chinese will win the contract to get resources off that area. and Mrs. Arroyo can also dangle that carrot over Washington.
March 12, 2009 at 3:10 pm
“Will the Philippines be able to respond in kind to credibly assert its enactment of the new Baselines Law?”
Answer: Not with the present capabilities of the AFP. What Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo can do to defend Inang Bayan is to Hu Jintao for a videoke session!
But China should be kwidaw with military action. The Province of Taiwan will be dragged into the conflict and this would be something that Obama would never want.
March 12, 2009 at 3:11 pm
Sorry that should read “to invite Hu Jintao for a videoke session”
March 12, 2009 at 3:19 pm
I think a diplomatic poker game is in progress.
March 12, 2009 at 3:20 pm
It’s easier for China to rekindle the sleeping ZTE Deal to spite the Arroyos for signing this Baseline Law than taking military action against the Philippines.
But since the bill is signed already, mag-putok na lang ang butse nila. I don’t think they’ll now provide GMA the favor to have a photo-op with Barack by attacking the Philippines, heheh.
March 12, 2009 at 9:37 pm
countries such as china who lends money to Philippines has no advantage in this case. solicitation and making bribes such as gift and providing loans at favorable terms to influence a country’s decision making can be illegal. the ball is on our side.
March 12, 2009 at 11:04 pm
I dont know where this claim will take us…
March 13, 2009 at 1:29 am
leytenian,
As a dear friend likes to say, in a classic situation where corruption is frowned upon, the bribe giver and bribe taker are both transgressing the law.
But it may seem in our crooked times, what is legal is what corrupt people get away with :)
MK,
This claim if sincerely pursued in a mutually agreed, equitable and within the frame of international law could be resoled to everyone’s mutual satisfaction.
But that an ideal scenario.
As in any negotiation, ang iba kapag di magkasundo nagsusuntukan na lang.
Ayaw natin humantong rito.
Si Manny Pacquiao di naman diplomat. :)
March 14, 2009 at 5:01 am
Why do people has to go to trouble on Spratleys just because of perceived not yet proven mineral resources?
We only have banca there as means of military superiority over Vietnam and China.
We have potential millions-of-barrels of oil in Tanon strait between Cebu and Negros and they had it stopped because they want to protect the habitat of the dolphins instead of the lives of the children and the Filipinos.
Duh!
March 14, 2009 at 5:16 am
Dude, I gotta go! Don’t take our exchanges personally. It was just one of those days!
Magandang Umaga!
March 27, 2009 at 11:36 am
Now that the UNCLOS III Compliant Law has been passed it is important that the Philippines establish baselines around the “regime of islands” so that territorial waters may be defined.
In reference the extension of the contenental shelf delimitations which must be filed by the May deadline, the Philippines may file its claim without complete scientific research. If another Nation State disagrees with the filing it would have the right to file a protest. In the event of a dispute the claimants would submit the claims to the UN for adjudication.
China will never agree to submit any dispute to third party adjudication such as the Internation Court of Justice because they would lose and lose big.
In 7 June 1933 China formed the “Land and Water Maps Inspection Committee” for the purpose of revising China’s maps and defining its maritime domain. The Committee arbitrarily drew Nine Dashes on their charts which included the South China Sea down to the 4th degree North Latitude. Once this was done the Chinese government did not comply with customary maritime law by disclosing the claims to the world. No mention of the Nine Dash lines was made until the 1970s when China realized it needed to start importing oil. The rest is current history. China has used its military might to intimidate the other four claimants and has actually engaged in gun battles with the Philippines and Vietnam.
The Nine Dash claim included the Malampaya and Camago natural gas and condensate fields.
China realized it could not engage in on-going gun battles with the other claimants or submit the issue to the UN so the strategy shifted to bilateral negotiations with the other claimants. Since Viethnam, Malaysia, Indonesia and the Philippines had/have no military to fight the Chinese, the PRC choose to buy compliance so they could have the resources they needed – so we have China negotiatng bilateral agreements and using money as the lever.
China has stated and will continue to state that it will not negotiate it claims to the formations in the Spartlys. The constant use of the term “indisputable claim” is intended to convince uninformed people that China has the rights to the formations in dispute.
China does not have an “indisputable claim.”
The Philippines must draft and pass a second bill in the form of an addition to the Baseline Bill that provides for Baselines around the “regime of islands” and define claims for the extension of the Contenental Shelf.
Yes the Chinese could attack the Philippines but lest we forget if a sympathetic world in Europe, Latin America and the United States stopped buying Chinese products, China would collapse economically in one month. Perhaps the Chinese will just continue buying its way into favorable treaty positions.