Panatag: Face-saver for Beijing, Manila

THERE ARE several isles, reefs and other features of the surrounding sea being disputed by the Philippines and China, but Panatag (Scarborough) shoal off Zambales appears to be a good starting point of attempts to normalize relations between the neighbors.

Focus should be on Panatag not only because of its strategic location, but also because of humanitarian concerns over China’s barring since 2012 of Filipinos from this their traditional fishing ground. The ban has sent displaced fisher-families looking for other means of making a living.

If Beijing is looking for a face-saving reason to get off its high horse and sit for direct dialogue with Manila searching for a mutually acceptable resolution of the neighbors’ quarrel, this is it – Panatag to Filipinos and Huangyan Dao to the Chinese.

In his last public mention of Panatag, tough-talking President Rodrigo Duterte humbled himself begging China to let Filipinos back to the rich and safe fishing ground that is just 120 nautical miles west of Zambales and 630 nm east of Hainan, the nearest major Chinese land mass.

Beijing could not have missed Mr. Duterte’s not invoking the ruling of the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague that favored the Philippines’ submissions and struck down China’s “nine-dash line” basis for claiming much of the surrounding maritime area.

The arbitral tribunal was set up under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. Having signed and ratified UNCLOS together with most of the civilized world, both China and the Philippines are bound by it.

Last July 19, we suggested in Postscript: “The best option for President Duterte is to talk to his Chinese counterpart or emissaries. A new ambassador plenipotentiary must be assigned to Beijing posthaste, followed by an exchange of top-level official visits.

“One breakthrough that should be quietly aimed for is to persuade China to stop driving away Filipinos from Panatag, which for generations has been their traditional fishing ground.

“This could be the dramatic face-saving scenario that China has been looking for. Whatever modus vivendi that may arise from it could serve as model for similar situations elsewhere.

“Neighborly negotiations bear fruit faster. With just six years in his hands, Mr. Duterte cannot just watch time ticking away while waiting for supposed allies to use their good offices or muster economic pressure on China to mend its expansionist ways.

“The Philippines has a Mutual Defense Treaty with the United States. The Cold War-vintage contract, however, has no ironclad guarantee that the US will retaliate instantly except if China launches an armed attack on either of the two allies’ territory or armed forces.

“The MDT cannot be stretched to cover what the arbitral tribunal struck down in its July 12 ruling as illegal Chinese occupation or building (by reclamation) of artificial islands on reefs and rocks in the West Philippine Sea.

“China’s reclaiming Panatag or driving away Filipinos is not an ‘armed attack’ so the MDT does not come into play – unless if the Chinese fire live bullets in the process.” (See: http://tinyurl.com/z6k4f3h)

• Why Pinoy fishers must share Panatag

PRESIDENT Duterte did not invoke the favorable PCA ruling. Foreign Secretary Perfecto Yasay also has made it known that the Philippines does not intend to press in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations discussion of the maritime dispute with China.

Will such stepping backwards by the Philippines inspire forward steps of goodwill by China?

In recent summits of the 10-nation ASEAN, China’s allies Laos and Cambodia foiled attempts of some members, notably the Philippines, to insert in the closing communiqué a mention of the territorial tiff.

In our July 19 Postscript, we noted: “Although Panatag is well within the 200-nm Philippine Exclusive Economic Zone, The Hague ruled that nobody owns it exclusively and should be shared by those traditionally fishing there.

“China’s allowing back Filipinos would be seen as honoring the arbitral tribunal’s ruling without officially citing it, and a neighborly gesture that the watching world could appreciate.

“The fishery resources of Panatag are enough for everybody, so the Chinese need not worry. The lagoon inside the chain of reefs and rocks, btw, has an area of 150 square kilometers (58 sq. miles). In bad weather, fishermen can seek shelter inside it.

“Without discussing sovereignty issues, China and the Philippines can invite Vietnam to join the Panatag talks and proceed together to lay down guidelines for fishing and sharing, as well as for conservation, mutual assistance and protocol.”

In The Hague, the Philippines did not raise any issue of sovereignty or possession over Panatag. It merely sought sanction over China’s shooing away Filipino fishermen.

The arbitral court picked up that submission, saying in its award that Panatag was just several rocks protruding at high tide that cannot support human habitation and therefore does not merit sovereign entitlements.

The tribunal ruled that Panatag should be open to everybody who traditionally fish there. But since then President Noynoy Aquino, on advice of the United States, ordered Philippine sea craft and fishermen pulled out in 2012, China has since occupied and controlled Panatag.

As arbitration expert Mario E. Valderrama said: “The Philippine premise in occupying the islands it administers is that there are no claimants (in legal terms, terra nullius, or land without an owner). Thus, when the Philippines withdrew from Panatag, China simply took over.

“… There was a time when Philippine forces occupying an island left to attend a fiesta on another island. When they returned, Vietnamese forces were already there. The Philippines lost the island.”

* * *

ADVISORY: To access Postscript archives, go to www.manilamail.com (if necessary, copy/paste the url on your browser’s address bar). Follow us on Twitter as @FDPascual. Email feedback to [email protected]