Marcos must send China’s troll ambassador packing

An “easy win.”

This is how Chinese Ambassador to the Philippines Jing Quan described China’s chances of defeating the Philippines militarily if it chose to use force, before insisting that Beijing prefers peace. Jing made the remark in response to a media interview in which he was asked to react to Philippine Defense Secretary Gilberto Teodoro’s description of China as a “regional troublemaker” amid escalating tensions in the West Philippine Sea.

Jing dismissed Teodoro’s characterization as “nonsense,” saying that we should feel fortunate to have China as a neighbor. “If we want to use force, we may easily win. But no, we will not choose force, and we love peace,” he bragged. The Chinese envoy then invoked conflicts elsewhere, adding: “In this region, we enjoy peace. Look at other regions: Ukraine, Gaza and even Venezuela.” The threat was hard to miss. The Philippines should think twice before standing up to China, lest it suffer a similar fate.

The backlash was swift and widespread. The Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) described Jing’s remark as a “thinly veiled threat,” while President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. said it “sounded like a threat” and was “undiplomatic.” The President announced that he would summon again the Chinese envoy to explain his remarks.

Teodoro was more unequivocal, calling Jing’s statement a clear threat, not “a slip of the tongue.” Philippine Coast Guard (PCG) Rear Admiral Jay Tarriela echoed this, pointing out that wrapping a threat in a “we love peace” disclaimer does not change its meaning. Correct! A threat does not become harmless just because it comes with a Hallmark-card sentiment at the end.

Sen. Risa Hontiveros, meanwhile, demanded that Beijing formally retract the ambassador’s statement and issue an apology. Should these demands go unanswered, she said, the Philippine government should declare Jing persona non grata.

And what about Vice President Sara Duterte? Nada. The few times she spoke about China, it was to defend her husband’s Cale88 corporation, which received P319 million from China. Sara asked whether it was wrong to do business with China, going so far as to call the Philippines a “troublemaker” of Southeast Asia, a term frequently used by Beijing to disparage our country. The “Eagle of Davao” has been exposed as the “Parrot of China.”

The Chinese embassy defended its ambassador, claiming that his remarks had been twisted to advance an anti-China narrative. According to the embassy, its peace-loving envoy, who supposedly had no intention of using force, was simply misunderstood. Oh, poor Jing. The Mahatma Gandhi of the Chinese embassy.

Yet in a social media post, the embassy promptly doubled down, challenging lawmakers calling for Jing to be declared persona non grata to “just do it or stop bluffing.” So much for its “we love peace” rhetoric. When challenged to explain, it responded by issuing another provocation.

Across government, civil society, fishing communities and frontliners, the reaction has been unmistakable. The envoy’s latest remarks have crossed a line. Since arriving in the Philippines last year, the controversial ambassador has earned a reputation more befitting an online troll than a career diplomat. But this latest episode is in a league of its own. An ambassador is expected to foster relations between countries, not boast about his country’s ability to defeat his host nation militarily.

As such, routine diplomatic protests, summonses and press releases may not suffice. Without meaningful consequences, they risk becoming empty rituals rather than effective instruments of diplomacy. The Philippine government must demonstrate that there are limits to what it will tolerate.

That is why the public is watching closely as Marcos Jr. prepares to summon Jing. The President faces a consequential diplomatic choice, one that will inevitably define his leadership.

Will the President emerge from the meeting declaring that Jing has sufficiently explained his remarks, that the misunderstanding has been settled and that both sides can move on? Or will he demand that Beijing recall its ambassador and appoint a better replacement?

If the President settles for an explanation without securing a retraction and apology, he risks deepening public doubts about his resolve to defend our country. After all, if an ambassador can threaten our country with military defeat and face no consequences, what exactly are our diplomatic red lines worth? And if the President cannot send a belligerent ambassador packing, how can he convince Filipinos that he will stand firm when the stakes are far higher?

By contrast, demanding Jing’s recall, or at the very least declaring him persona non grata, would send a clear message that the Philippines expects foreign envoys to respect its sovereignty. Sending Jing back to his mothership would not, by itself, guarantee a change in Beijing’s behavior in the West Philippine Sea. But it would constitute a concrete response proportionate to the gravity of its envoy’s offense. It would demonstrate that the President is no pushover and that the Philippines will not simply absorb every threat and provocation in the name of maintaining cordial relations.

This could also give Marcos a rare opportunity to rally Filipinos around the common cause of defending the country’s pride and honor. Such a display of resolve would offer a welcome contrast to his “Mahiya naman kayo” anti-corruption crusade, which has yielded mixed results and, in turn, drawn mixed public reactions.

The writing on the wall is clear. This is no time for business-as-usual diplomacy. Filipinos demand greater resolve and political will from their government. Diplomacy must not be reduced to an endless exercise in expressing concern while the other side brushes aside those concerns and carries on as before.

The troll Chinese ambassador must go. He may believe that defeating the Philippines militarily would be an “easy win.” Whether the Philippine government will allow his threat to become an easy diplomatic win for Beijing is another matter entirely.