Soft power?

In China’s maritime territorial disputes with its neighbors, South Korea has largely stayed out of the fray.
Part of the reason is economic: South Korean companies have sizeable investments in China and bilateral trade is robust.

Another reason is historical: China is feuding with a country South Koreans are not enamored with – former colonizer Japan.

Yet another reason is the fact that security-wise, China generally stayed out of South Korea’s hair… until recently, when Beijing declared an Air Defense Identification Zone or ADIZ over the East China Sea.
The Chinese ADIZ covers its claimed exclusive economic zone, but overlaps with Japan’s ADIZ – extended 22 kilometers westward by Tokyo last June to cover the Senkaku/Diaoyu group of islands. The Chinese ADIZ also overlaps with Taiwan’s and covers South Korea’s resort island, Jeju, the scenic setting for many romantic Korean telenovelas.

The Koreans aren’t amused. Reliable sources have told me that Beijing’s declaration has soured relations between the two countries, and Seoul is rethinking its defense posture vis-à-vis China.

Japan, for its part, appears to be adopting two major strategies. One is to ramp up its defense spending, upgrading its military capability over five years. This includes the development of an amphibious force and the acquisition of Ospreys, those winged aircraft capable of vertical takeoff that were sent by the US Pacific Command to the Yolanda-devastated areas.

Even with an increase to an annual $12 billion, Japan’s defense spending will still be much lower than China’s. But the Japanese are still ahead in technology. And Beijing will lose out on the other Japanese strategy, which is the projection of soft power, or winning friends and influencing the region.

* * *

Judging from official pronouncements, Beijing is counting on history to present the Japanese military upgrade as a provocative move in the region.

But Japan is not laying claim to nearly the entire South China Sea, and flexing its muscles to stake the claim. Also, Japan circa World War II has been eclipsed by modern Japan, home of Sony and Toyota, video games and manga. Memories of an aggressive Japan have also been overshadowed by bombed-out Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

During one visit to Hiroshima, I was hosted for dinner at the home of a family of atomic bomb survivors. The father, a member of the Japanese Imperial Army, told me he was deployed during the war in the same Philippine province where my grandfather, as a member of the US armed forces, fought the Japanese. The father returned to Hiroshima and was there with his family when the bomb was dropped.

Any visitor to Hiroshima will find it hard to believe that Japanese wartime aggression can be revived.
More recently, the tsunami in northeastern Japan added to the country’s image of tragedy.

This year, Japan marks 40 years as a dialogue partner of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). Japan has combined its new national security strategy with a regional charm offensive – not a forte of the Chinese.

At the recent Japanese summit in Tokyo with ASEAN, which President Aquino attended, Japan committed $19.2 billion in aid to the region for the next five years.

A statement at the end of the summit announced enhanced cooperation between Japan and ASEAN “in ensuring freedom of overflight and civil aviation safety” as well as “freedom of navigation.”

“Together with ASEAN, I want to build the future of Asia where laws, rather than power, rule and people who worked hard will be rewarded – which would lead to a prosperous society with mutual respect,” Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe said.

The wording of the statement sounds a lot like the Philippines’ stand during other ASEAN gatherings. It calls for a rules-based, peaceful resolution of maritime territorial disputes, in accordance with international law.
Japan is providing patrol boats to the Philippines and Vietnam, which is also locked in a long-running territorial dispute with China.

More recently, Pinoys remember Japan for its prompt and substantial response in the areas destroyed by Super Typhoon Yolanda, the powerful earthquake in Cebu and Bohol, and the siege of Zamboanga City. Private Japanese companies have also pitched in.

Japan’s Defense Minister Itsunori Onodera visited Tacloban on Dec. 8, at the same time that Australian Foreign Minister Julie Bishop also visited.

I went with the Aussies on that day. From their tent hospital set up in Tacloban I could see the camp pitched by the Japanese forces. I don’t think any Pinoy expressed unease over the return of so many Japanese soldiers to Philippine soil.

Many members of the wartime Japanese Imperial Army were in fact Korean conscripts. But today Korea has a benign image in the Philippines, with its K-Pop, telenovelas and the presence of its manufacturing giants. The Koreans have also often expressed their appreciation for the Philippines’ deployment of a contingent to their country as a modest support force during the Korean War.

In an unprecedented gesture, the South Koreans are deploying over 500 soldiers overseas for the first time for purely post-disaster reconstruction work – in the Visayas. They will be posted here for a year.

* * *

Pinoy reaction might have been different if Chinese soldiers had been sent to the typhoon areas. Beijing probably considered the reaction as well, and finally decided to send instead medical professionals on a hospital ship.

Since the help arrived much later than those of other countries, however, the gesture looked mainly like a reaction to criticism (from non-Filipino commentators) of Beijing’s initial aid of $100,000 for emergency relief. A common comment was that Beijing failed its test of projecting soft power in the region.

I missed several chances in recent weeks to meet with Chinese Ambassador Ma Keqing, who will be leaving Manila this month. The soft-spoken envoy has had a rough time here. At the start of her stint she told me she was “not very popular” in the Philippines, and that every time she opened her mouth in public she tended to end up in deeper trouble.

From her statement at her farewell reception last week, which I also missed, it looks like she hasn’t changed her opinion of her posting in Manila.

Unless there’s a change in Beijing’s actions in the region, it’s unlikely that her successor will have an easier time.

And the Philippines, together with some other countries in the region, will inevitably move closer to friends such as Japan.



Dec 07 2013 

China is not the only Asian country that has declared an Air Defense Identification Zone, or ADIZ.

Japan declared its ADIZ way back in 1969, extending its boundaries several times, most recently in June this year to include contested islands. South Korea, Vietnam and Taiwan also have their ADIZ. Like common waters, the ADIZ of several countries can overlap.

Unlike other states, however, Beijing’s unilateral declaration of an ADIZ is ratcheting up tension in the region. This is because Beijing is claiming nearly all the waters around it as its own. If it could get away with it, Beijing would probably draw up a 20-dash line and claim all waters all the way to Palau for China’s shark’s fin and turtle soups.

If Beijing declares an ADIZ over the East China Sea, it may not be long before it declares an ADIZ in the airspace over its so-called nine-dash line in the South China Sea. We may soon see Chinese military jets flying over Palawan’s airspace, protecting Chinese fishing boats, oil explorers, and gatherers of scaly anteaters, birds’ nests and corals.

An airspace, in international terms, means the sky over land territory plus waters up to 22 kilometers from the coast. The ADIZ is supposedly a more defined, restricted airspace where a country monitors and identifies approaching aircraft.

Defining territorial airspace while up in the sky can of course be tricky. Miscalculations and accidents can lead to confrontation and escalate into armed conflict, especially between countries with a long history of rivalry.

*   *   *

This is the concern expressed by the United States in China’s unilateral declaration. But Chinese President Xi Jinping, meeting with US Vice President Joe Biden this week, reportedly stood firm. We can guess that Xi has his people’s support in this, since China’s ADIZ covers airspace claimed by Japan, South Korea and Taiwan – not exactly Beijing’s best friends. Xi will lose face if he backs down on this issue.
Closer to Earth, China has also finally deployed its first aircraft carrier – a refurbished one pre-owned by Ukraine.

Photos showed the Soviet-era Varyag, now renamed Liaoning, with no aircraft on board.

An American naval official reportedly described the Liaoning as a “museum.” US navy officials have also told me that it will take years before the Chinese can have the trained crew for a fully operational aircraft carrier.
But the Liaoning’s deployment was an expression of Chinese annoyance after the US flew two unarmed B-52 bombers over the Senkaku/Diaoyu island chain claimed by both Japan and China. The bombers were deployed after Beijing declared its ADIZ.

Chinese officials in Manila and Beijing have told me that they are fully aware of the limitations in their defense capability and are not competing with the world’s lone superpower. The Chinese, incidentally, consider the superpower concept a relic of the cold war.

They prefer to project “soft power,” the Chinese say. But even in this aspect they stumbled when it came to timely assistance for the areas devastated by Super Typhoon Yolanda. Because China’s initial aid commitment was a pittance compared to what much of the world sent ASAP, its deployment of a hospital ship, although much appreciated by the typhoon victims, was seen here largely as (in Pinoy slang) a “forced to good” gesture.

China insists it has no hegemonic ambitions in the region. But its ADIZ declaration fuels concerns about what US officials see as an “emerging pattern of behavior” for the Asian giant.

That behavior is prompting several countries in the region, the Philippines included, to strengthen security cooperation with the US and its other close allies Japan and South Korea.

A concern for Filipinos is that the Liaoning will show up one day soon off Zambales in the West Philippine Sea.

*   *   *

David Carden, America’s first resident ambassador to the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, wishes that US ties with the region could go beyond the China issue.

Carden was in Manila earlier this week for the ASEAN Youth Summit. Meeting with a small group of journalists, he expressed his government’s concern over China’s ADIZ declaration and reiterated support for Manila’s arbitration case filed with the United Nations.

But he also emphasized that China must be a partner in regional growth. He pointed out that China has been a partner of ASEAN in many aspects apart from trade, including education, connectivity and infrastructure development.

“We applaud China’s engagement in the region,” Carden said. “I think that there are clear opportunities that exist in our interactions with one another.”

He lamented that whenever people discuss the US pivot to Asia or rebalancing of forces, “they always talk about the military aspect.”

US interests in the region, Carden emphasized, go beyond security issues. “The most immediate focus is an ASEAN economic community by 2015,” he said as he prodded the Philippines to join the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP).

“It’s our hope and our expectation that our Filipino friends will see it in their best interest to be part of the TPP,” he said.

The TPP will be a platform not only for economic integration but also for empowering the Asia-Pacific to address four major challenges, Carden said: education, corruption, environmental issues and inequitable growth.

America, which Carden says bears “some of the responsibility” for the challenges, is also promoting the “four freedoms” – of expression and religion, and from fear and want.

Carden pointed out that everything is interconnected – environmental problems affect public health and food security, for example – and the world has gotten to the size “where we’re all neighbors now… we’re all in this together now.”

“It matters not only that you grow but also how you grow,” he said.

He could tell that to the Chinese, now the world’s second largest economy and still growing, but he’ll probably be told to mind his own business.

source:  Philippines Star Column of  Ana Marie Pamintuan

PH, Japan vow commitment to free airspace

President Aquino and Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe have reaffirmed their commitment to assuring the freedom of flight in international airspace amid China's establishment of an air defense identification zone (ADIZ).

"We reiterated our commitment to uphold the rule of law, promote the peaceful settlement of disputes, and to assure freedom of flight in international airspace," President Aquino said, however, stopping short of mentioning China, with whom the Philippines is locked in a territorial dispute with.

Aquino and Abe met ahead of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean)-Japan Commemorative Summit in Tokyo.

The leaders of the 10-nation bloc is meeting Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe in Tokyo this weekend to mark the 40th anniversary of ties.

Concerns over Beijing's ADIZ have been mounting since last month. It has been criticized by South Korea and Taiwan, while the United States and Japan have defied it by sending aircrafts right through the zone.

China earlier defended its ADIZ, saying it is merely exercising its right to defend itself.

Beijing also said, it might set up a similar air defense zone in the West Philippine Sea.

Aside from the Philippines, several other Asean countries are also involved in territorial disputes with China.

source:  Yahoo - ANC

U.S., Chinese warships narrowly avoid collision in South China Sea

WASHINGTON/SHANGHAI (Reuters) - A U.S. guided missile cruiser operating in international waters in the South China Sea was forced to take evasive action last week to avoid a collision with a Chinese warship maneuvering nearby, the U.S. Pacific Fleet said in a statement on Friday.

The incident came as the USS Cowpens was operating near China's only aircraft carrier, the Liaoning, and at a time of heightened tensions in the region following Beijing's declaration of an Air Defense Identification Zone farther north in the East China Sea, a U.S. defence official said.

Another Chinese warship maneuvered near the Cowpens in the incident on December 5, and the Cowpens was forced to take evasive action to avoid a collision, the Pacific Fleet said in its statement.

"Eventually, effective bridge-to-bridge communications occurred between the U.S. and Chinese crews, and both vessels maneuvered to ensure safe passage," said the defence official.

The near miss was the most significant U.S.-China maritime incident in the South China Sea since 2009, said security expert Carl Thayer at the Australian Defence Force Academy.

Heightened tensions over China's military assertiveness have raised concerns that an minor incident in disputed maritime waters, the South China Sea and East China Sea, could quickly escalate. Both Japan and China lay claim to islands in the East China Sea and have scrambled aircraft in recent months over the disputed seas and conducted naval patrols.

China and several ASEAN nations have competing territorial claims in the South China Sea.
The U.S. has raised the latest incident at a "high level" with the Chinese government, according to a State Department official quoted by the U.S. military's Stars and Stripes newspaper.

In Beijing, the Chinese foreign and defence ministries have yet to respond to questions about the incident, while China's often-nationalistic on-line platforms were filling with debate about the near-miss.

One poster demanded the Chinese navy follow-up by blazing an "independent sea lane" to Hawaii.
Beijing routinely objects to U.S. military surveillance operations within its exclusive economic zone, while Washington insists the United States and other countries have the right to conduct routine operations in what its says are international waters.

The U.S. Navy said the Cowpens was conducting regular freedom-of-navigation operations when the incident occurred.

China deployed the Liaoning to the South China Sea just days after announcing a new air defence zone which covers air space around a group of tiny islands in the East China Sea that are administered by Japan but claimed by Beijing as well.

Beijing declared the air zone late last month and demanded that aircraft flying through it provide flight plans and other information. The United States and its allies rejected the demand and have flown military aircraft into the zone.

The Chinese carrier, which has yet to be fully armed and is still being used as a training platform, was flanked by escort ships including two destroyers and two frigates.

Asked if the Chinese vessel was moving toward the Cowpens with aggressive intent, an official declined to speculate on the motivations of the Chinese crew.

"U.S. leaders have been clear about our commitment to develop a stable and continuous military-to-military relationship with China," the official said in the email.

"Whether it is a tactical at-sea encounter, or strategic dialogue, sustained and reliable communication mitigates the risk of mishaps, which is in the interest of both the U.S. and China," the official said in an email to Reuters.

Security expert Thayer said the incident was the most significant since five Chinese ships harassed a U.S. oceanographic research vessel, the USS Impeccable, in 2009, also in the South China Sea.
"There have been hints of other incidents that both sides have apparently kept quiet but not this time," he said.

"The U.S. is determined to stand by its rights in international waters and is clearly expecting China to act accordingly." (Additional reporting by Manuel Mogato in MANILA and Greg Torode in HONG KONG; Editing by Jim Loney, David Brunnstrom and Michael Perry.)

source:  Yahoo!

‘China’s planned ADIZ over West Phl Sea to trigger tension’

MANILA, Philippines - Visiting Japanese Defense Minister Itsunori Onodera said yesterday that China’s plan to establish an Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) over the West Philippine Sea would further trigger tension as Beijing’s unilateral action would be opposed by other nations in Southeast Asia.

Emerging from a bilateral meeting with Department of National Defense Secretary Voltaire Gazmin at Camp Aguinaldo, Onodera pointed out that an ADIZ over the South China Sea would cause alarm not only to the Japanese government but to the international community as well.

“I think the world shares the same understanding that the regional tension should not be raised by Beijing’s unilateral course of action,” Onodera said.

Japan and China are locked in a territorial row over a  chain of islands known as Senkakus to the Japanese and Daoiyu to the Chinese in the East China Sea.

Tension has been mounting in the region following China’s establishment of ADIZ over the area, a moved defied by the Tokyo government and the US military.

Beijing recently announced it is also establishing an ADIZ over the South China Sea to further boost its maritime claim in the hotly-contested region against other claimant countries including Brunei, Malaysia, Taiwan, Vietnam and the Philippines.

“The United States, South Korea, Taiwan and European Union and other countries are expressing strong concern over this. If the new ADIZ will be set in South China Sea or the West Philippine Sea, I think the government of Japan needs to express its concern similarly to what we have stand in East China Sea,” Onodera said.

Aside from several reefs that Beijing has converted into forward naval bases in the South China Sea, it has also established what  it calls Sansha City on the Woody Island in the Paracels to manage its supposed territorial waters in the East and South China Seas.

Several Chinese warships have been conducting regular patrols over the two areas. As China’s naval operations are continuously being challenged by Japan in the East China Sea, they have remained largely uncontested in the South China Sea and  West Philippine Sea.

China has been maintaining warships in Panganiban Reef and Subi Reef in Palawan. Only this year, China deployed two maritime surveillance vessels within the vicinity of Ayungin Shoal.

source;  Philippine Star

Selfie over the South China Sea

The Oxford University Press, the publisher of the Oxford dictionaries, has announced that “selfie” has been declared word of the year for 2013. The word, “smartphone” self-portrait posted online” saw a huge jump in usage in the past year to describe inordinate if not obsessive attention to oneself and his advocacies. Selfie could well apply to actions and statements of claimants to the land and sea area at the South China Sea.
For months, China has been engaged in selfies in the SCS, the most recent examples being the “Air Defense Identification Zone” in the East Sea and the “training mission” of their aircraft carrier Liaoning in the SCS, The twin moves follow previous Chinese “effectiveness” in the area such as the virtual occupation of Panatag Shoal, dispatch of Chinese fishing fleets accompanied by naval units, and creation of Chinese administrative units to “supervise” their territories. The biggest selfie is their nine-dash line. All these selfies do not build trust, escalate tensions, and curtail preventive diplomacy.

The Philippines has its own selfies. It hauled China to the Unclos Arbitral Tribunal. It has welcomed “increase national presence” of US troops to the Philippines and agreed to grant access to Philippine bases.

In doing its selfies on the WPS, the Philippines should engage in some sort of stock taking on recent developments—what we did which we should not have done and what we did not do and should have done. The Philippines in the Arbitral Panel is a positive step for the country. Our immediate concern in the Panel would be, (a) to convince the Panel that our submission is sufficient for them to assume jurisdiction.
(b) That our case does not fall within the reservations made by China to the disputes settlement mechanism and (c) that our memorials to be submitted by March next year should contain hard, specific data well grounded in fact and in law which will convince the Panel to award what we are praying for. Our memorials should contain a prayer for the Panel to grant the Philippines, “Provisional measures” or “preventive remedies” against on going tactics of China in the West Philippine Sea. The process in Panel will be protracted and China is likely to continue with their activities in the area.

Our petition should include measures against Chinese tactics of cabbage (surrounding a contested area step by step with naval presence and thus wrapped it like a cabbage).

A General of the People Liberation Army, which calls the shots in the SCS openly advocates this strategy. Another tactics called “Salami slicing” should also be prevented. This strategy involves a series of unfriendly acts, which can result in strategic change short of so called “small wars”. We should develop a framework strategy in case (a) we win in the Panel “how do we harness this victory to protect and promote our national interest” (b) in case we lose, what other options do we have.

Serendipity is not a policy option.

The Philippines together with Asean and other countries put great importance on a code of conduct in the South China Sea. China’s agreement to hold consultations on the subject is again a positive step. However, China’s position remains that any code could come only when the time is ripe. They still abhor the idea of “code.”

There are lessons to be learned from the first attempt to develop a code of conduct.
First, the Philippines should lead and avoid being only a fellow traveler in the negotiations. Second, the Philippines must have a draft, just like we had in 2002. The Philippines draft became an Asean draft, which we presented in a China-Asean meeting; China rejected the Draft but it opened the door for China to present their own views and engaged us in discussions. Third trust and confidence must accompany talks, which talks should go beyond regular Asean-China meetings. The SOM-senior officials- must develop a process of consultations to go forward.

US pivot to Asia
The Philippines considers and welcomes the US “pivot” to Asia as an aid of its position on the West Philippine Sea. The volume and tone of the debate on the issue should be lowered and efforts should the directed to how best to maximize the rotational presence and access to Philippine bases which we are about to grant. Despite protestations to the contrary, China perceives the pivot as directed against them.
The outcome in the Panel, in the talks on the code of conduct and the negotiations in the pivot are defining moments for Philippine foreign and diplomacy in the South China Sea.

There are several realities, which must be taken in to account as we negotiate these issues. First the security architecture of Asia will be determined to a significant extent by the strategic relations between the US and China. Second, territorial and maritime jurisdictions are generational issues, which will take time to resolve if ever at all. Trust must accompany relations between states and positions. Let us also keep in mind that China and the United States of yesterday are not the China and US of today.

We should take care that we do not raise unrealistic expectations of general support for principles of general international law, which are already enshrined in international instruments. They make us feel good but are not yet accomplishments of our objectives. Peaceful settlement of disputes, freedom of navigation etc. have been open quoted by both angels and demons alike.

The Philippine selfie in the SCS/WPS must be clear, creative, alert, agile.

source:  Manila Times Column of Amb. Lauro L. Baja

US forces operating 'normally' in China air zone

US military chiefs insist they will not change their operations despite a move by China to scramble fighter jets to monitor American and Japanese aircraft in Beijing's newly declared air defence zone.

China flew warplanes into its air defence identification zone (ADIZ) on Friday, Chinese state media said, nearly a week after it announced the zone, which covers islands at the centre of a dispute between Beijing and Tokyo, raising regional tensions.

The Xinhua report indicated that Japan and the United States are continuing to disregard China's demands that aircraft submit flight plans when traversing the area in the East China Sea or face unspecified "defensive emergency measures".

"We have flights routinely transiting international airspace throughout the Pacific, including the area China is including in their ADIZ," Pentagon spokesman Colonel Steve Warren said on Friday.
"These flights are consistent with long-standing and well-known US freedom of navigation policies that are applied in many areas of operation around the world. I can confirm that the US has and will continue to operate in the area as normal."

Chinese air force spokesman Shen Jinke earlier said several combat aircraft were scrambled to "verify the identities" of US and Japanese aircraft entering the air defence zone, according to Xinhua.
The Chinese planes, which included at least two fighter jets, identified two US surveillance aircraft and 10 Japanese aircraft including an F-15 warplane, Shen said.

The United States, South Korea, Japan and other countries have accused Beijing of increasing regional tensions with its new air defence zone.

Japan and South Korea both said Thursday they had disregarded the ADIZ, showing a united front after US B-52 bombers also entered the area.

Chinese media call for 'timely countermeasures'
But Beijing is facing considerable internal pressure to assert itself. China's state media called Friday for "timely countermeasures without hesitation" if Japan violates the zone.
Washington has security alliances with both Tokyo and Seoul, and analysts say that neither China nor Japan -- the world's second and third-biggest economies, and major trading partners of each other -- want to engage in armed conflict.

The Global Times newspaper, which generally takes a more nationalistic tone than China's government, said in an editorial Friday: "We should carry out timely countermeasures without hesitation against Japan when it challenges China's newly declared ADIZ."

The paper, which is close to the ruling Communist party, said: "We are willing to engage in a protracted confrontation with Japan."

But it shied away from threatening Washington, which sent giant Stratofortress bombers inside the zone, issuing an unmistakable message.

"If the US does not go too far, we will not target it in safeguarding our air defence zone," the paper said.
The Communist party seeks to bolster its public support by tapping into deep-seated resentment of Japan for its brutal invasion of the country in the 1930s.

Such passions are easily ignited, and posters on Chinese social media networks have urged Beijing to act.
China's rules covering the zone require aircraft to provide their flight plan, declare their nationality and maintain two-way radio communication -- or face unspecified "defensive emergency measures".

Both Japan and Washington have ADIZs of their own, and China accuses them of double standards, though China's zone includes a rock that is disputed between Beijing and Seoul, as well as islands controlled by Japan and claimed by China.

Japan denies that there is a dispute over the islands, and Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshihide Suga declined Friday to be drawn on reports that a Chinese envoy had suggested setting up a mechanism to prevent mid-air incidents.

"Our country's principle is that we will assert our position firmly in a stern but calm manner," Suga said. "And we keep the window of dialogue open."

The Yomiuri Shimbun reported that the United States and Japan planned to enhance military cooperation in the area, with Tokyo permanently stationing E-2C early-warning planes in Okinawa, and US Global Hawk unmanned drones expected to be operated from Japan soon.

The European Union added its voice to the criticism of the zone on Friday, with its top foreign affairs official Catherine Ashton saying it "contributes to raising tensions in the region".

At a regular briefing Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Qin Gang dismissed her remarks, saying: "Ms Ashton knows that within the EU, some countries have ADIZs, so I don't know if that means the situation in Europe is getting more tense."

US Vice President Joe Biden is visiting the region next week, and administration officials said that while in Beijing he will raise Washington's concerns about the ADIZ, and China's assertiveness towards its neighbours.

The Philippines has voiced concern that China may extend control of air space over disputed areas of the South China Sea, where the two nations have a separate territorial dispute.

source:  Yahoo News

PH arbitration case vs. China affects coastal and land-locked countries

The cataclysm wrought by the tsunami-like waves of Super Typhoon Haiyan has touched people from all over the world.  Nature’s fury has once again humanized mankind.  The warships of nations who fought in the decisive Battle of Leyte are now converging at this island, to cooperate and provide humanitarian relief.
In times of great human suffering, it is not timely to write about discord, but to reflect on goodwill and understanding.  In this context, I write about the arbitration requested by the Philippines for the peaceful resolution of its dispute with China in the West Philippine Sea.

The Philippines brought this request for arbitration in accordance with Chapter VI of the UN Charter entitled “Pacific Settlement of Disputes.”  Article 33, Paragraph 1 thereof provides: “The Parties to any dispute, the continuation of which is likely to endanger the maintenance of international peace and security, shall first of all, seek a solution by negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements, or other peaceful means of their own choice.”

The Philippines has chosen to bring this arbitration before the International Tribunal of the Law of the Sea (Itlos), in accordance with the provisions of Part XV of the UN Convention of the Law of the Sea (Unclos) entitled: “Settlement of Disputes” since the dispute has been the subject of good faith negotiations between the Philippines and China since 1995.

If the Philippines wins the case, China should be expected to comply with the arbitral decision of Itlos established under Unclos.  China has treaty obligations as a Party to Unclos and is not only a member of the United Nations but also a Permanent Member of the UN Security Council.  The Philippines does not stand alone on the issues before Itlos and expects international law to be respected.

The arbitration case raises issues affecting all the countries of the world, both coastal and land-locked.
According to the Philippines’ Notification for Arbitration, China claims “sovereignty” or “sovereign rights” over some 1.94 million square kilometers, or 70 percent of the West Philippine Sea’s waters and underlying seabed within its so-called nine dash line.

Unless China retreats from this position, China would be claiming “sovereignty” or “sovereign rights” over part of the high seas as well as part of the Area defined in Unclos as the seabed and ocean floor and subsoil thereof beyond the limits of national jurisdiction.

The Area and its resources, according to Articles 136, 137 and 140 of Unclos, are the common heritage of mankind and cannot be claimed or appropriated by any State but are vested in mankind as a whole, irrespective of the geographical location of States, whether coastal or land-locked, and taking into particular consideration the interests and needs of developing States.

China’s “nine dash line” also raises the issue of freedom of navigation in the high seas, which affects all maritime and trading nations, including the other Permanent Members of the UN Security Council.
Furthermore, the issues raised by the Philippines over its sovereign rights in its Exclusive Economic Zone and over the submerged features in its continental shelf are the same issues that Brunei, Malaysia and Vietnam have with China and, therefore, would have an impact on China’s relations with Asean.

All states expect international law to be respected, especially by those aspiring to be a leader of the international community.  There are great costs to those states that violate treaty obligations of a fundamental nature entered into by the great majority of States.

source:  Manila Times' Column of  Ambassador Jaime S. Bautista
jaime@jaimesbautista.com

The Chinese view on the Philippine arbitration on the West Philippine Sea

Participants to the recently concluded 4th biennial Conference of the Asian Society of International Law in New Delhi, India last November 15, 2017 heard for the first time the Chinese position on the Philippine arbitral claim on the West Philippines Sea dispute.

In the said conference, I delivered a paper entitled “What next after the Chinese Snub? Examining the UNCLOS dispute settlement procedure: Philippines vs. China”. My paper argued that the issues that the Philippines brought to the arbitral claims, to wit, the validity of China’s nine-dash lines, whether certain low-tide elevations where China has built installations pertain to the Philippines as part of its continental shelf; and whether the waters surrounding the territorial sea of Panatag form part of the Philippines EEZ are issues of interpretation of specific provisions of the UNCLOS and hence, were within the compulsory and binding dispute settlement procedure of the UNCLOS.

Further, while I acknowledged that China’s reservations on maritime delimitation and law enforcement activities in the exercise of sovereign rights were more challenging obstacles to hurdle, they were not insurmountable because the language of the Philippine claim does not call for a ruling involving any of the reservations made by China.

My paper assumed that the Tribunal’s jurisdiction over China as party to the proceedings was well settled. This is because China, as a party to the UNCLOS, has accepted the dispute settlement procedure of the Convention, together with all the provisions of the Convention which were all adopted on the basis of consensus.

The Chinese Judge to the International Court of Justice, Judge Xue Hanqin, was present in the conference. Judge Xue is the highest woman official in China prior to her election to the Court. Previously, she served as chief legal adviser and head of the treaties office of the Chinese Foreign Ministry and Ambassador to the Netherlands and Asean. She is said to have been groomed to be part of the Central Bureau of China’s People’s Party had she not opted to join the ICJ. While Judge Xue and I have been good friends, having served together in the Executive Council of the Asian Society of International Law for the past 6 years, I knew it would still be awkward to have her listening to my presentation.

But the most unusual thing happened after my 25-minute presentation. Judge Xue, explaining that since she was the only Chinese present in the conference because the Chinese delegates were denied visas by Indian authorities, took the floor for the next 20 minutes and for the first time expounded extensively on the Chinese position on the Philippine arbitral claim. This was unusual because magistrates, be it from domestic or international courts, will normally refuse to comment on an actual dispute, which could come to their court for adjudication. This certainly applies to the West Philippines Sea dispute.

Judge Xue raised four crucial points. Her first was that the Philippine claim involved territorial claims which is outside the purview of UNCLOS. She added though that “since the end of World War II, the international community, has acknowledged the existence of China’s nine-dash lines with no country ever questioning it until oil resources were discovered in the area.” Without expounding on the nature of the lines, she claimed that it is “not considered as a boundary line” and they “have not affected international navigation in the area.” She claimed that there was “”no international law applied in this regard to the region.”

Second, Judge Xue argued that 40 countries, including China, made declarations to the dispute settlement procedure of the UNCLOS. According to her, this means “these 40 states have not accepted the dispute settlement of the Convention as being compulsory”. She said that “when countries joined UNCLOS I, they are not deemed to have given up all their previous territorial claims.”

Third, she said that as China’s first Ambassador to Asean, she knows that the countries of Asean and China have agreed to a code of conduct relating to the South China Sea. Under this code, disputes must be resolved through negotiations and not through arbitration. She claimed that this obligation was “a substantive obligation binding on all claimant state.”

Fourth, Judge Xue explained that China opted out of the arbitration because “no country can fail to see the design” of the Philippine claim which she described as having “mixed up jurisdiction with the merits.”

She opined that the Philippines’ resort to arbitration complicated what she described as an “impressive process between Asean and China”. What the Philippine did “was to begin with the “complicated part of the South China Sea dispute” rather then with easier ones such as “disaster management.” This later pronouncement all but confirmed that the very limited humanitarian assistance extended to the Philippines by China in the aftermath of Yolanda was because of the Philippine resort to arbitration.

Judge Xue ended her intervention by exhorting the Philippines to consider joint use of the disputed waters, a matter that according to her has been successfully resorted to by China and Vietnam.

While Judge Xue’s intervention made our panel, without a doubt, the most memorable exchange in the conference, her declarations provided us with many answers that China has refused to give us.

We have Judge Xue to thank for this.

source:  Manila Times Column of  Atty. Harry Roque Jr.

Typhoon Yolanda: Cheapskate China Wins No Friends in Philippines

As hundreds of thousands of Filipinos struggled to find food, water, shelter and the bodies of loved ones in the wake of Typhoon Haiyan, China quickly dipped into its world-leading $3.7 trillion of currency reserves and came up with … all of $100,000.

That was Beijing’s first miserly offer of aid to the storm-tossed Philippines. By Thursday, an international outcry over China’s stinginess shamed it into upping its pledge to a modest $1.6 million worth of relief materials such as tents and blankets. But the damage was already done.

“It’s very hard to call for de-Americanization and then leave your wallet at home when there’s a human disaster the scale of the typhoon in the Philippines,” says Ian Bremmer, president of Eurasia Group in New York. “Yes, China is a poor country. Yes, they have troubled relations with the Philippines. But this sits badly with anyone thinking about China’s rise in the region.” If he were advising President Xi Jinping, Bremmer says, “I’d push for major humanitarian aid to the Philippines.”

Instead the bulk of that aid is coming from elsewhere: more than $28 million from Australia, $20 million from the U.S., $17 million from the European Union, $16 million from the U.K., $10 million from Japan, $5 million from South Korea, $4 million from the Vatican, $2 million from Indonesia, and huge amounts from official agencies -- the United Nations alone started a $300 million aid appeal.

China was clearly stung by the critical news coverage. South Korean figure skater Kim Yu-na herself gave $100,000 -- about enough to buy nine bottles of a 2006 Romanee-Conti. Even the new Chinese offer is rather paltry. New Zealand’s $167 billion economy is a rounding error compared with China’s $8.4 trillion one. Yet officials in Wellington have coughed up $1.7 million, even more than the People’s Republic.

Insulting Sum

Why the insultingly small sum for a geopolitically vital nation of 106 million people that by many measures is much poorer than China? Manila’s close ties with Washington have always worried China. But this is personal. Philippine President Benigno Aquino refuses to bow to China’s territorial claims in the South China Sea, and enraged Beijing by daring to challenge its maritime claims before a UN-endorsed tribunal. Aquino also demands that China treat the Philippines, one of Asia’s oldest democracies, as an equal, not a subordinate.

Nations hold grudges, of course. But China’s actions this week dramatically undercut what had been a very deliberate and strenuous -- and supposedly successful -- recent charm offensive. After President Barack Obama skipped out on a summit of Asia-Pacific leaders last month, Xi and Premier Li Keqiang gleefully toured Southeast Asian capitals, handing out investment deals to show how generous China could be with its neighbors, how eager it was for friendly relations.

The Philippines crisis offered an opportunity for China to show it had developed into a mature, cooperative nation and to win goodwill across the region. As a matter of fact, on Friday, Chinese and U.S. troops will even train together for the first time in Hawaii, as part of a drill in which the two nations cooperate in a humanitarian relief operation in a third country. Why not jump in and seek to cooperate in the enormous international rescue effort in the Philippines?

Instead, officials in Beijing find themselves evading awkward questions about their miserliness. Perhaps trying to save a smidgen of face, Beijing first upped its offering to $200,000 through the Red Cross. That was still less than half of the $450,000 the Philippines gave China after the 2008 Sichuan earthquake. Even now, China’s total offer is far less than the $4.88 million donated to Pakistan after an earthquake there two months ago.

China’s normally quiescent state-run media worried about the fallout. “China’s international image is of vital importance to its interests,” the usually gung-ho Global Times said in an editorial Tuesday. “If it snubs Manila this time, China will suffer great losses.”

Soft Power

One reason China’s efforts to develop its soft power have failed is the utilitarian way Beijing approaches the rest of the world. Instead of using culture, adept diplomacy and trashy movies to seduce other countries, China hands out cold, hard cash. All the investment poured into railways in Indonesia, tunnels in Brazil, power grids in Cambodia, hydroelectric projects in Laos, bridges in Vietnam, roads in Zambia, factories in Malaysia, airports in Myanmar, and mining rigs in Uzbekistan comes with a high cost. In return, China demands complete docility. That’s the message being sent to the Philippines now.

Arvind Subramanian, author of the 2011 book “Eclipse: Living in the Shadow of China’s Economic Dominance,” says China is going to be a “peculiar kind of superpower,” one whose attraction is more materialistic than heartfelt. “It won’t have the soft power the U.S. has -- people wanting to come, people wanting to live, people wanting to emulate it,” he told me in Hong Kong last week. “That soft power is lacking, but it will not impede China.”

I’m not so sure. If I were Aquino, I’d tell China to keep its money; maybe Xi could use it to hire a public-relations firm. As badly as the Philippines needs the help, so does China’s image.
(William Pesek is a Bloomberg View columnist.)

To contact the writer of this article: William Pesek in Tokyo at wpesek@bloomberg.net.
To contact the editor responsible for this article: Nisid Hajari at nhajari@bloomberg.net

source:  Bloomberg Column by William Pesek»

William Pesek is based in Tokyo and writes on economics, markets and politics throughout the Asia-Pacific region.

No sign of help for Philippines from China's hospital ship

HONG KONG (Reuters) - While the navies of the United States and its allies rushed to the aid of the typhoon-hit Philippines, a state-of-the-art Chinese hospital ship has stayed at home and in doing so has become a symbol of China's tepid response to the crisis.

The decision not to deploy the 14,000-tonne "Peace Ark", one of the newest and biggest hospital ships in the world, is one that contrasts with a recent charm offensive across Southeast Asia by China as it seeks to bolster ties and ease tension over the disputed South China Sea.

Even China's usually hawkish Global Times, a tabloid owned by the People's Daily state mouthpiece, on Friday called for the Ark to sail to the Philippines, where an international naval flotilla, headed by a U.S. aircraft carrier strike group, is delivering food, water and medicine.

Initially, China pledged $100,000 in aid to the Philippines after Typhoon Haiyan roared across central islands a week ago, and a further $100,000 through the Chinese Red Cross - figures dwarfed by multi-million dollar donations from countries and corporations around the world.

While tension between China and the Philippines has escalated recently over Manila's bid for a U.N. court ruling against Beijing's claim to much of the South China Sea, analysts and diplomats say its paltry response to the humanitarian crisis could undermine diplomatic gains.

The Chinese government has not ruled out more aid but foreign analysts are puzzled by the absence of the Peace Ark, a ship tailor-made for such emergencies.

"It is a self-inflicted wound to Chinese influence and prestige," said Rory Medcalf, a security analyst at Australia's Lowy Institute.

China's Defence Ministry did not respond to a request for comment about whether the ship would be sent to the Philippines.

Just last month, the Peace Ark returned to its Shanghai berth after an unprecedented four-month, eight-country deployment that saw it work with other navies and treat thousands of patients during goodwill stops.

"EFFECTIVE POSTURE"
As part of the voyage dubbed "Harmonious Mission 2013", the Ark - with 300 hospital beds, 8 operating theaters and more than 100 medical staff - joined a disaster relief exercise led by the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, which includes the Philippines.

Just this week in Hawaii, U.S and Chinese troops staged their first disaster relief exercise - another sign that China is increasingly keen to use its expanding military muscle for humanitarian, as well as security needs.
Over the past year, China has stepped up attempts to win over the region, despite the tension over the South China Sea, with a flurry of visits by President Xi Jinping and Premier Li Keqiang and economic deals, while re-enforcing a message of "comprehensive strategic partnership".

Medcalf said he was "astounded" that China's leaders had not used the Peace Ark to make a major gesture to the region during the Philippines' crisis.

Instead of a move that could have served their interests by neutralising the Philippines diplomatically and sending the message to the region that the United States was no longer needed, they had played into the hands of Washington which has announced a pivot, or re-balance, towards Asia.
"It is showing that the re-balance is still real and the presence of American forces in the region continues to be a very effective posture," Medcalf said.

Austin Strange, an analyst at the U.S. Naval War College's China Maritime Studies Institute, said China's weak response contrasted with what had been increasingly active anti-piracy and humanitarian assistance internationally, not just in Asia.

"China immediate response to (typhoon) Haiyan is arguably regrettable from a foreign policy standpoint," Strange said.

Amid domestic debate and foreign criticism, the government announced a further $1.64 million in aid on Thursday as Foreign Ministry officials played down online comments urging China to give the Philippines nothing. (Additional reporting by Megha Rajagopalan, Li Hui, Grace Li and Ben Blanchard; Editing by James Pomfret and Robert Birsel)


source:  Yahoo / Reuters

Japan aims to expand defense force to keep China, N Korea in check

Japan has traditionally focused on ensuring the quality of its defense forces, but will now seek more tangible, quantitative increases in personnel and equipment to counter the threats posed by China and North Korea.
     On Monday, a government panel on national security and military capabilities began full discussions on new national defense guidelines, which will be finalized by year-end.

     The existing document, drawn up in 2010, ended a policy of installing defense capabilities across the nation and instead placed an emphasis on mobility to counter the Chinese Navy, North Korea's ballistic missiles, and terrorism threats.

     Prime Minister Shinzo Abe decided in January to draft new defense guidelines; and defense-related expenditures are expected to grow for the second straight year in fiscal 2014.

     The Defense Ministry has identified five key areas for future Self-Defense Forces deployments: securing the seas and airspace around Japan, dealing with attacks on remote islands, defending against ballistic missile attacks, building cyberspace and space defense capabilities, and relief efforts following major disasters. The ministry says its requests for next fiscal year's budget include new early-warning aircraft, drones, the creation of amphibious units, and repairing Aegis ships that are part of the nation’s missile defense. It is also considering having the SDF deploy the MV-22 Osprey transport aircraft.

     The 2010 guidelines set the size of the Ground Self-Defense Force at 154,000. The ministry has proposed raising the number to 159,000, according to the head of the security and defense panel.

     The ministry is also eyeing capabilities to attack missile bases in North Korea. But that plan has met with resistance within the ruling coalition, and both the Foreign Ministry and the U.S. have expressed concerns that such a move could provoke China and South Korea.

source:  Nikkei Asian Review

HK and PH: Manila Hostage Crisis in 2010

Why Mayor Estrada Is Wrong on Hong Kong

Posted by Joe America on November 6, 2013

Subtitled: Filipinos Should Not Move to the Back of the Bus

As is often the case, kindly bear with me as I wander through some facts and acts, and examine things a bit, before arriving at a conclusion.

I’m sure most of you are aware of the background of the incident commonly known as the “Bus Massacre”. Eight Hong Kong tourists were killed on August 23, 2010, when an angry Filipino, holding the tourists hostage on a bus, opened fire on the hostages as Filipino police, trying to apprehend him, charged the bus.
The case has festered for three years because Hong Kong demands apology and remuneration from the Philippines while President Aquino holds to a “no apology” position. It is about as intricate as an issue comes. It reflects cross-cultural dynamics, national sovereignty, legal issues, and a lot of human emotions.

A Quick-Study of the Situation
Here is a wide-ranging list of some pertinent details that are in some way related:

• Hong Kong holds that the Philippine government was negligent in how officials handled the situation, resulting in unnecessary deaths. Hong Kong demands an official apology from the Philippine government, cash payments to families, punishment of officials in charge, and clear steps to assure a repeat will not occur.
• The Philippines (President Aquino) holds that the incident was the result of the hostage taker’s transgressions, and that Philippine officials responded the best that they could in a circumstance of considerable danger and unpredictability. The Philippines has expressed its regrets to the families of the slain tourists and offered financial remuneration to victims.
• Yesterday, November 5, 2013, Hong Kong’s Chief Executive issued a 30-day ultimatum to the Philippines, essentially “do as we tell you or face sanctions.”
• The bus scene was broadcast live by Philippine television stations. The hostage taker could see the approach of police from a television monitor on the bus.
• The Philippines conducted an immediate, comprehensive investigation and shared its report directly with China. The report was highly critical of the handling of matters by Philippine authorities. Indeed, Filipinos generally consider the matter “bungled” by government and police officials. The investigative report recommended charges against 15 people or organizations.
• China may have hardened Mr. Aquino’s stand by presenting a detailed list of instructions as to how the Philippines should deal with matters. Mr. Aquino considered the letter insulting. Hong Kong officials deny such a letter was sent.
• Manila Mayor Estrada, seeking to diffuse a situation which serves neither Hong Kong nor the Philippines well, has tried to deliver an official apology from the City of Manila to Hong Kong, along with a promise of payments to families. Hong Kong declined to receive the apology and angrily re-iterated its demands.
• Hong Kong is a part of China.
• China and the Philippines are in a territorial dispute near Philippine coasts. The Philippines has taken the matter to the United Nations arbiter for resolution, over China’s objection.
• China’s leaders refuse to visit the Philippines.
• Racially demeaning slurs fly both directions in social commentary.
• Hong Kong was accused by a human rights group in 2001 of racially discriminatory government acts toward foreign workers; Hong Kong defended itself by saying that proposals made by the organization would heighten racial discord.
• Mayor Estrada is a member of UNA, a major political party running against President Aquino’s LP candidates and candidates of other parties aligned with LP.

What Do We Take from This?
This is not as simple as Hong Kong would make it. “You messed up. Apologize, pay up and jail some people. Prove it won’t happen again.”
Some things are obvious:

• First and foremost, the matter was tragic for the Hong Kong families. No question.
• Second, there is no question as to who murdered, or caused the killing of, Hong Kong tourists. The hostage taker.
• Third, there is no question as to the poor handling of the matter by Philippine government officials and police.

The facts are clear, the investigations done, the matter understood.
To the extent that there are enduring issues, they pertain more to the relationship between Hong Kong – or China – and the Philippines than they do regarding the particulars of what happened.
The Philippine government is not without compassion, and has expressed its regrets to the families of those killed and injured. Certainly, no Philippine official WANTED this tragedy to occur. That innocence of motive, and the forthright self-examination undertaken by the Philippines, seems to have escaped the Chinese.
The incident remains hurtful as long as the matter is not laid to rest. The matter is laid to rest in the Philippines, officially, but not in Hong Kong, officially.
One can surmise that if the situation were reversed, Hong Kong officials would take essentially the same position as the Philippines has taken. It is the appropriate stance to take to protect sovereignty and legal rights. And, of course, if the situation were reversed, Filipinos would be outraged at Hong Kong’s refusal to apologize and there would be rallies in protest in the Philippines.
A neutral observer would argue that the matter should go to an international court for resolution, but no such steps have been taken. When the Philippines took China to the international arbiter over territorial rights, China objected angrily. One can imagine the same reaction if the Hong Kong matter were taken by the Philippines to an international arbiter for resolution. The Chinese do not respect such venues and are not willing to subjugate their national interests to other states or international courts.
Yet Hong Kong expects the Philippines to subjugate her national interests to Hong Kong.
As with the island territorial dispute, there is only one resolution that is acceptable to Hong Kong. The one that Hong Kong – that China – wants.
The Philippines could diffuse the anger by bowing to Hong Kong’s demands, but doing so would:

• suggest there was a willful negligence rather than incompetence,
• set a precedent of legal and financial obligation for future incidents that had tragic results,
• infringe on sovereign decisions of the Philippine state,
• risk encouraging Chinese adventurism (China seeing the Philippines as weak).

Clearly, diplomatic restraint is not a hallmark of Hong Kong’s approach. One cannot help but reflect back on Taiwan’s outsized outrage against the Philippines regarding the killing of a Taiwanese fisherman by Philippine Coast Guard troops. BEFORE the Philippines or Taiwan had investigated the incident.
Another Disturbing Time
This Chinese attitude of superior morality, superiority of act and perspective, reminds me of the United States in the 1960′s when many whites claimed superiority over other races, and government laws supported the view. When white racial stereotypes, bigotry and laws were challenged in the 1960′s, the white response in some parts of the country was anger. Much like the Chinese who relentlessly voice a loud disgust, disdain and condemnation of Philippine’s acts.
It was an ugly time in the U.S.
Blacks who did not behave were punished, sometimes in the courts, sometimes vigilante style. There was only one race that determined what was correct. It was white. Blacks were instructed to:

• Drink from the black drinking fountains.
• Visit the black bathrooms.
• Sit in the back of the bus.
• Stay out of our white schools.

Heroes emerged from the fracas, from the push-back by black Americans. Perhaps the two most notable were Martin Luther King and Rosa Parks (cover photo).
Rosa Parks changed the world the day that she decided she deserved to sit in the front of the bus, no matter what happened.
Is China Racist?
Clearly there is an ugliness to what is going on in the seas between China and her neighbors.
There is an edginess, a hostility to Chinese behavior that is disturbing. The Taiwan incident. The Hong Kong incident. The conflict over islands. China demands. Demands. Demands. Insults, condemns, expresses outrage and demands.
Disturbing.

Clearly, the Philippines is not behaving the way China wants.
Should the Philippines “behave”?

I have written elsewhere, and cited literature, that China’s history is steeped in disdain for the darker natives who inhabit lands across the seas. This is an aspect of her “Middle Earth” perspective, being the center of all that is right and important about the world.

Well, it is unnecessary here to make that kind of distasteful observation, of racism. I know too many Chinese in the United States who are educated and intelligent and not at all racist. And I know that the Chinese in the U.S. were sorely discriminated against in the 1800′s when the railroads were built substantially with Chinese sweat labor. So it cuts both ways.

So I won’t lift the heavy finger of racism here. The Chinese thuggery very likely emanates from its military cadre. They certainly issue the most racially tinged threats. And perhaps it is merely their authoritarian bent that needs to be brought into a better diplomatic line by Chinese leaders.

So perhaps it is enough to say that China – and Hong Kong – and Taiwan – display a similar striking disregard for the independence and sovereignty of neighbor states, and particularly of the Philippines.
Where is the diplomatic restraint that gives credit to the Philippines for wanting to right its wrongs, for wanting to punish those who acted illegally or rashly in the bus incident? Or credits the Philippines for being forthright and candid with her investigation. Where is the respect for the Philippines as a separate, independent, sovereign state?

The current mantra from Hong Kong is “an apology is not enough.” It is the tenor of an adult lecturing a child.

Such offensive demands.

Why Mayor Estrada Is Wrong
Mayor Estrada’s goals are honorable:

• Get this problem behind us.
• Build a harmonious commercial, tourism and OFW relationship with neighbor Hong Kong.
• Protect Filipino workers in Hong Kong.

There are pragmatic reasons why it is wrong:

• It establishes a precedence of guilt for future government acts that, through the acts of criminal or unstable minds, end up tragically.
• It risks encouraging Chinese adventurism by showing the Philippines as weak.
• It undermines the President’s firm stance which protects the sovereignty of the Philippines in its broader resistance against Chinese territorial expansion. (It is akin to VP Binay’s going outside the chain of command to try to strike a peace agreement in Zamboaga.)

I’m inclined not to read political manipulations into the Mayor’s acts. I believe he wants a cure, plain and simple.

But here’s my real objection.

Mayor Estrada would have the Philippines move to the back of the bus. As if we are to know our superiors, and respect their demands.

No.

It is up to China – and Hong Kong – and Taiwan – to respect Philippine good faith, good intent, and straight dealing. It is up to the Chinese to grant the Philippines the right to exist as a self-determined state of laws and good will.

The appropriate neutral ground for a dispute is an international arbiter. Resolution of the dispute cannot come from Hong Kong over the sovereign rights of the Philippine state to manage her own affairs.
President Aquino’s insistence on a firm, law-based approach is offensive to the Chinese. As was Rosa Park’s insistence that she be allowed to sit in the front of the bus, to whites.

Indeed, standing on principle presents risks. The Philippines risks the well-being of Filipino workers in Hong Kong, innocents caught up in the unrestrained emotions of the Chinese. In the mob reaction fueled by a Chinese press that is almost as obnoxious as her military leaders. And the Philippines risks another tear in the relationship between China and the Philippines.

But what does it say to Asia – indeed, to the world – if the Philippines moves to the back of the bus, as instructed by China?

As it was in 1963, so it is in 2013, exactly fifty years later. It is the principle that matters.
It is important that China learn that all states stand equal, one to the other. It would be even better if China could somehow comprehend that her leadership in Asia can best come by DEFENDING her neighbors’ sovereign rights and territorial claims, not attacking them.

Short of that kind of renewed insight, the Philippines must do what the Philippines must do. In a respectful world filled with independent and earnest sovereign states, the Philippines determines where she sits.
Not China.

source:  http://joeam.com/2013/11/06/why-mayor-estrada-is-wrong-on-hong-kong/comment-page-3/#comment-14747

Territorial disputes

All throughout history, rival empires have fought over boundaries to define ownership of certain territories and thereby acquire control of resources. But while the Philippines is engaged in a maritime dispute with China, we also have a territorial dispute within our own shores with Makati, Taguig and now Pateros engaged in a legal battle for Bonifacio Global City in Fort Bonifacio including Pitogo and the eight “embo” barangays (Cembo, Comembo, etc).

Pateros Mayor Jaime Medina cites historical records dating back to the 18th century placing Pateros under Pasig, until the issuance of a Spanish decree in 1770 giving Pateros independence with territories that include Barrio Mamancat where Fort Bonifacio and the “embo” barangays were located. Taguig on the other hand acquired dominion of the disputed areas through Executive Order No. 40 that gave the Bases Conversion Development Authority jurisdiction of 240 hectares of Fort Bonifacio which had Taguig as location. Meantime, Makati says Fort Bonifacio has always been under its jurisdiction since Spanish times, also citing legal basis such as Presidential Proclamations 2475 and 518 that transferred parts of Fort Bonifacio to Makati, as well as census data from 1948 to 1980 charting the said areas under Makati.

Cases were filed by the contending parties, with a Makati Regional Trial Court initially ruling for Taguig but was recently overturned by a Court of Appeals decision ordering Taguig to “immediately cease and desist from exercising jurisdiction… and return the same to Makati…”

Taguig is not ready to throw in the towel and neither is Pateros — with both saying the CA ruling is appealable and therefore not final.

Mayor Junjun Binay has given notice that the local government of Makati will have its presence felt soon with the deployment of personnel who would be implementing the laws of Makati. But Binay is willing to discuss revenue sharing with Taguig – understanding that the latter’s status as a city could be affected given the potential reduction not only in revenue but in land area. 

Some are saying it might be a good idea to put Metro Manila under a central authority to consolidate the efforts of all local units under a governor who will have the requisite political clout and power over legislative issues and other concerns like traffic, squatter relocation as well as disaster risk reduction programs. A case in point is the number coding scheme with some cities refusing to follow the MMDA’s window hours provision while others have no coding scheme at all, proponents say.

Opinion ( Article MRec ), pagematch: 1, sectionmatch: 1

In any case, this internal territorial dispute will most likely go on for a few more years but no doubt it will come to a definitive conclusion either by arbitration or through a final decision from the Supreme Court. In which case, all arguments should be resolved.

Unfortunately, it seems the same could not be said regarding our decades-long territorial dispute with China that continues to fester. Observers say both countries are raising the stakes, with the Philippines deciding to elevate the issue to an international tribunal, moving to enhance the country’s minimum credible defense posture as it welcomed the arrival of a second Hamilton class cutter and announced intentions to allow the increased rotational presence of US troops.

On the other hand, China is ratcheting up its claims by employing what experts describe as a  “salami-slicing” strategy using step-by-step “small actions” that are gradually giving them control in contested boundaries like what they did to the Aksai Chin plateau in the 1960s, the Paracels in 1974, the Johnson Reef in 1988, Mischief Reef in 1995 and the Scarborough Shoal last year.

While the Taguig-Makati-Pateros dispute will likely end with a Supreme Court ruling, this doesn’t seem likely with the territorial dispute involving China which refuses to submit to arbitration, claiming ownership through ancient historical data and the so-called map of the nine-dash line enclosing almost 80 percent of the whole South China Sea — something the Philippines seeks to nullify before the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea.

Ancient cartographic sketches are not exactly the most precise references for boundaries and the rendition of old maps have evolved all these years. In which case, the world as we know it today may not exactly be accurate as far as current geographical boundaries are concerned. It may well be that the real owners of all disputed territories — from Asia to Africa to Europe — are the descendants of dinosaurs who ruled the planet for ages.

Obviously, emotions are running high considering the stakes involved. But meantime, the Chinese and Filipinos can probably channel their repressed antagonism by fighting it out in a physical albeit less dangerous game like basketball, like what’s happening now with the FIBA Asia championship that Samahang Basketbol ng Pilipinas president Manny Pangilinan had worked so hard for to bring to the Philippines.

According to sources, the price tag for hosting the biggest basketball tournament in Asia is a hefty P70 million — but it’s a small price to pay to remind Filipinos that we can be a powerhouse in Asia as far as basketball is concerned, recalling the time when the Philippine team became FIBA Asia champion 27 years ago. MVP is bankrolling Gilas Pilipinas, and judging from the feverish response, it would seem that Filipinos are banking on the team to prove that the Philippines has a chance at beating China — if not in the military front then at least in a basketball court.

But levity aside, the court of law should be the final arbiter of territorial disputes whether local or international – something that civilized and self-respecting individuals and nations should learn to recognize and adhere to.

*      *      *

Email: babeseyeview@yahoo.com

source:
BABE’S EYE VIEW By Babe Romualdez (The Philippine Star)

Japan PM vows to help Philippines amid China row

Japan's Prime Minister Shinzo Abe pledged to strengthen the Philippines' maritime defence capabilities on Saturday, while reassuring neighbours about Tokyo's intentions amid growing territorial disputes with regional rival China.

"For Japan, the Philippines is a strategic partner with whom we share fundamental values and many strategic interests," Abe told a joint news conference with Philippine president Benigno Aquino after their meeting in Manila.

Speaking through an interpreter, Abe said his visit was intended "to strengthen the relations with the Philippines in all areas", including politics, security, and the economy.

As part of Japan's commitment, Abe said there would be "continued assistance to the capacity-building of the Philippine coastguard".

As an example of this, he cited 10 patrol boats that Japan is providing to the poorly-equipped Philippine coast guard.

The Filipino coastguard and navy have been at the forefront of tense encounters with navy and maritime surveillance vessels from China, which claims most of the South China Sea including areas close to the Filipino coast.

China seized the Scarborough Shoal, a South China Sea outcrop just 230 kilometres (140 miles) east of the main Philippine island of Luzon, last year after Manila backed down from a lengthy stand-off.

This year the Philippines has complained about the presence of Chinese navy vessels near Filipino-held Second Thomas Shoal in the Spratly islands.

Japan earlier this year announced it would make loans to the Philippines to purchase the 10 Japanese patrol vessels for its coastguard.

"The Prime Minister and I agreed to strengthen maritime cooperation which is a pillar of our strategic partnership," Aquino said Saturday.

Abe's visit came as tensions have also steadily risen between China and Japan over Japanese-controlled islands in the East China Sea.

He reiterated a call for a leaders' summit with China to discuss their territorial dispute, and assured the rest of Asia that his vision for a more robust Japanese armed forces would not threaten the region's peace and security.

Abe said Saturday his party's decisive victory in the upper house of the Japanese parliament would help him pursue his vision of Tokyo's role in the region, many parts of which were under brutal Japanese occupation in World War II.

"Against this backdrop I intend to further proceed with strategic diplomacy which will contribute to regional and global peace and security," he said.

Abe has pledged to loosen limits on the military in Japan's pacifist, post-war constitution and stand up to China over their East China Sea dispute.

He acknowledged at a separate news conference, after he appeared with Aquino, that a more assertive Japanese military was a sensitive issue in the region.

"I intend to explain politely so that the countries in the region will not have any misunderstanding," he said.
Abe said problems with China were "inevitable" being neighbours, but stressed that peaceful coexistence between the two regional powers was crucial for Asian peace and prosperity.

"It is important that we have frank and candid discussions. I have given instructions so that the foreign affairs authorities (can) proceed with dialogue without any conditions attached. Foreign ministers-level and leaders-level meetings should be promptly held."

As Abe and Aquino met at the presidential palace, about 80 protesters including elderly ladies who said they were former comfort women staged a rally nearby, holding signs demanding reparations from Japan.

source:  Yahoo! and AFP

Biden to address maritime disputes ‘head on’ in Asia Read more: http://globalnation.inquirer.net/81029/biden-to-address-maritime-disputes-head-on-in-asia#ixzz2Zfa8skXC Follow us: @inquirerdotnet on Twitter | inquirerdotnet on Facebook

WASHINGTON—US Vice President Joe Biden on Monday begins a week-long visit to India and Singapore where officials say he will tackle tensions over the disputed West Philippine Sea (South China Sea) “head on.”

The trip allows the White House to reassert its commitment to a strategic pivot to Asia, with Biden to discuss growing economic cooperation with the region as well as geo-political hot topics such as Afghanistan.
Notably it provides President Barack Obama’s number two a chance to confer with regional leaders on how to manage overlapping maritime claims in the West Philippine Sea — a flashpoint for the past decade.
China claims virtually all of the body of water, drawing accusations from rival claimants the Philippines and Vietnam, among others, that it is mounting a creeping takeover of disputed islets.

Biden and the Obama administration are “concerned about certain patterns of activity that have unfolded in these areas, and so I think you can expect that he will address this issue head-on while he is there,” a senior administration official said Friday.

While in Singapore, Biden will talk with leaders about Washington’s “very deep stake in making sure that these disputes are managed in a way that promotes freedom of navigation, promotes stability, promotes conflict resolution, avoids intimidation and coercion and aggression.”

Biden first travels to New Delhi, where he is scheduled to meet top leaders including Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and President Pranab Mukherjee.

On Wednesday Biden gives a policy speech at the Bombay Stock Exchange and holds a roundtable with business leaders, where he will press for stronger intellectual property protection and highlight growing trade between the world’s two largest democracies.

Bilateral trade has surged to nearly $100 billion per year, “but there is no reason it can’t be five times that much,” the administration official said.

Immigration reform currently under debate in the US Congress is of interest in India, where skilled graduates could stand to be the biggest beneficiaries of a planned overhaul that would triple the number of visas allotted to highly-skilled workers.

Biden’s trip follows Obama’s nomination of Nisha Desai Biswal as assistant secretary of state for South Asian affairs, the first time an Indian American would head the bureau which oversees US foreign policy with Afghanistan, India and Pakistan.

India is not party to the Trans-Pacific Partnership, the trade deal being negotiated by 12 nations and which Biden says he hopes will be completed this year.

But Singapore is a TPP participant, and Biden travels there Thursday. He is due to meet the city-state’s leadership as well as its founding founder Lee Kuan Yew.

 

source:  Philippine Daily Inquirer

Feeling the heat

The way the Chinese are ranting, they must be all riled up with recent adverse developments.
In their distorted perception, Chinese officials accused the Philippines of being “a troublemaker and unsettling the stability of the region.”

The Philippines incurred China’s ire by posing the most serious challenge to Beijing’s excessive claim over the entire South China Sea when Manila elevated to international arbitration its sovereignty over the West Philippine Sea in accordance with the United Nations Law of the Sea. UNCLOS gives nations with coast lines a 200-mile exclusive economic zone.

Beijing must be feeling the heat. It stepped up its propaganda attack after the panel of judges in the International Tribunal on the Law of the Sea announced it would start hearing Manila’s case without or without China’s participation.

Earlier, China received a rebuke when US President Barack Obama warned an official Chinese delegation against the use of coercion and intimidation in maritime disputes during two days of wide-ranging talks in Washington.

Much earlier, State Department officials and the Commanding Admiral of the US Naval Forces in the Pacific conveyed the same message. But this time, it was the US commander in chief himself talking.

Apart from US interest to keep navigational lanes in the South China Sea open, one can assume the Obama statement and the ITLOS action was driven by world opinion against China’s aggressive moves in the region.
While there is a school of thought who contend there is no such thing as a world opinion, China is mindful of what the international community says about it.

Chito Santaromana, who spent 30 years in China as an exile from the Marcos regime and later as Beijing bureau chief of the American Broadcasting Company TV network , said it is important to the Chinese not to lose face.

Despite their inscrutable countenance, the Chinese are affected by world opinion judging by their strong statements against the Philippines which makes them look like the villain.

China knows world opinion can sway the United Nations to action. Although the UN does not speak in one voice, and often dissonant, it is still able to carry out its mandate through its related agencies in acting against tyranny, aggression and crimes against humanity.

The world is watching how far China, a permanent member of the UN Security Council, can and will go in its calibrated aggression in maritime disputes with Japan and the Philippines remains to be seen.
China occupied Tibet but has taken its time with “renegade province” Taiwan. Beijing knows Taiwan is armed to the teeth and has full US backing, The Mainland leadership no longer threatens to launch an invasion across the Straits of Formosa.

Japan won’t be bullied on the Senkaku Island territorial row. Threatened by an aggressive China, Japan’s political leaders plan to amend its pacifist constitution so it can rearm.

Meanwhile, we have yet to hear our politicians speak out on the Chinese threat. Instead, they are more concern on the possible violation of the Constitution over giving our allies access to Subic naval base.
With billions in pork barrel funds lost to a scam syndicate, the President should really abolish the practice of allocating money to senators and congressmen’s pet projects.

Why not use the PDAF appropriation to beef up the military?

Incoming Senate President Franklin Drilon expressed the view it does not require legislation to abolish the graft-ridden pork barrel. It’s really President Aquino’s call.

Waging war with China is a no- brainer. But bolstering our self-defense capability and spending for the nation’s security should be paramount in our leaders’ agenda.

source:  Manila Standard today's Column of Alejandro Del Rosario

Toward a Philippine defense policy that works

Second of Three Parts
With President Benigno Aquino 3rd’s policy of allowing massive deployment of the American military and perhaps the Japanese as well, China will not only undertake adverse economic, diplomatic and security measures against the Philippines. As explained in the first part of this article, PNoy is provoking the People’s Liberation Army to build up PLA capabilities and firepower in the area.

Thus, the very policies intended to secure the Philippines and its claimed islands, waters and economic zones, will actually further endanger them and extend the threats to the entire archipelago as well as the economy and the nation’s global standing.

But guess what: increasing Chinese military, economic and international pressure on the Philippines is exactly what would serve Washington’s long-advocated initiative to create a “regional architecture” addressing international issues in Asia, and to increase its military presence in the region, including the planned shift to the region of 60 percent of American naval forces, while enhancing alliances and building new ones.

As the PLA expands in the South China Sea to match the U.S. Seventh Fleet and the Japanese Navy rotating in and near the Philippines with access to its bases, the Chinese deployment would underscore even more the aggressor role in which Beijing has been cast in recent years. And the more it uses its economic and geopolitical clout against helpless Manila, the more the bully label sticks.

That would only add greater impetus and justification for Washington’s so-called Pivot to Asia, including its push for military buildup, alliances and regional arrangements to counter the supposed threat of Chinese regional dominance. If Asian nations buy that geopolitical line, then Washington would be on its way to regaining its regional clout while trimming Beijing’s expanding influence.

What a scheme: Aquino lets Washington and Tokyo expand their military presence in and around the Philippines, which then provokes Beijing to punish Manila and build up its forces in the South China Sea—lending credence to the U.S. spiel that Asian nations must line up with it to contain Chinese aggression.
Will Asians fall for it? Not if they have a good grasp of history. Then they would recall that after the early 1991 Soviet collapse, the U.S. stopped wooing Asia after its global rivalry with the defunct U.S.S.R. ended. The September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks in America rekindled its interest and involvement in the region, but mainly to combat violent extremists. Only belatedly and with much prodding from Washington policy wonks did the U.S. scramble to regain clout in the region as it woke up to China’s rapid rise and the coming shift of the world’s economic and geopolitical center to Asia.

By comparison, since Deng Xiaoping’s reforms in the mid-seventies, China has proved a reliable and supportive friend to its neighbors, especially the Association of Southeast Asian Nations. It cut ties with communist rebels in Malaysia, the Philippines and Thailand, and backed Asean in opposing Vietnam’s 1978 invasion of Cambodia, even waging a brief punitive war against its fellow communist state.

During the 1997 Asian Financial Crisis, the West lectured and imposed crushing bailout conditions on the region, epitomized by then International Monetary Fund Managing Director Michel Camdessus looking down on then Indonesian President Suharto signing rescue loan terms. China, by contrast, quietly helped out by not devaluing its renminbi.

And in the past decade, it boosted trade and investment in Asean, outstripping most nations in new capital and commerce, especially after the U.S. financial crisis of 2007.

Those with even longer memories can look back on past centuries and see that unlike Western colonizers and their Japanese imitators, China never invaded and occupied faraway lands and peoples, even when it sent what was the world’s most powerful navy to Asia and Africa early in the 15th Century, with vessels several times the size of Christopher Columbus’s ships during his voyage to America decades later in 1492.

The United States, on the other hand, waged a brutal war to subjugate the Philippines, Asia’s first republic, in 1900, and fought five major conflicts in Asia since 1950—in Korea, Vietnam and Afghanistan, and two in Iraq. Plus even more interventions in the Western Hemisphere, from invasion in Cuba and Nicaragua to subversion in Guatemala and Chile.

Washington’s big-power ways continue today with its campaign pressuring governments to hand over cyber-surveillance whistleblower Edward Snowden.

All that makes it hard for most Asian nations to swallow the line that China is an aggressor against which the region should unite under American protection. Nor are they going to sacrifice burgeoning trade and investment ties with the region’s main economic growth engine by becoming its adversaries.
Rather, most of Asia will follow what has been Asean’s longstanding policy of being friends with all major powers, as envisioned in its 1971 Declaration promoting a Zone of Peace, Freedom and Neutrality (ZOPFAN) in Southeast Asia. Big nations will always be competing for influence and clout; little ones should generally avoid taking sides and getting caught in the crossfire.

That should be one key principle in addressing the Philippines’ security problems with China: Restore the warm but equidistant relations the country has had with America, China and Japan for at least the past decade. Two other tenets toward true national security: Downplay disputes and undertake confidence-boosting collaboration. And lastly, build up Philippine defense capabilities, rather than depending on other nations.

For space reasons, this article will need to extend to a third part on Friday outlining a roadmap toward regional harmony and Philippine national security. The way forward won’t be easy, but it can work.
(The first part of the article appeared on Monday. The last will be published on Friday.)

source:  Manila Times' Column of by Ricardo Saludo