GPS on Philippine foreign policy

It will be the second year since July 12, 2016 when the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) handed down its ruling in favor of the Philippines in our dispute with Beijing on the overlapping maritime claims in the South China Sea. The PCA ruled there was no legal basis for China’s “nine-dash line” claim of historic rights to resources within the disputed areas in South China Sea.

From evaluation of the petition initiated by our government, the PCA disclosed in an 11-page official statement having found certain areas of the dispute within the exclusive economic zone (EEZ) of the Philippines and that China had violated the sovereign rights of the country’s EEZ by the following acts: (a) Interfering with Philippine fishing and petroleum exploration, (b) constructing artificial islands and (c) failing to prevent Chinese fishermen from fishing in the zone.

“The Tribunal also held that fishermen from the Philippines (like those from China) had traditional fishing rights at Scarborough Shoal and that China had interfered with these rights in restricting access,” the PCA statement cited. Based at The Hague, Netherlands, the PCA concluded its process despite Beijing’s declaration it won’t participate in it.

The PCA ruling on the South China Sea came in while then President Rodrigo Duterte was barely two weeks into office at Malacanang Palace. It was the administration of former president Benigno Simeon Aquino III that pursued to the hilt the resolution of our country’s claims on the disputed Spratlys in South China Sea which our government renamed as the West Philippine Sea.

The latest incidents in Scarborough Shoal – which we call Bajo de Masiloc in Zambales – renewed debate on the ramifications of President Duterte’s decision to put at the backburner the PCA ruling for the meantime while rekindling Manila-Beijing ties. Thus, the once icy relations of the Philippines and China eventually thawed. For the past two years, this has resulted to robust exchanges of state visits of President Duterte going to China several times already. In reciprocity, top Chinese leaders President Xi Jinping and Premier Li Keqiang visited Manila one after the other.

We took a second look at the West Philippine Sea (WPS) issues in our weekly Kapihan sa Manila Bay news forum last Wednesday. It was timely topic following incidents involving Chinese Coast Guard patrols partaking from fish catches of our hapless Filipino fishermen in Scarborough Shoal.

We invited to our Kapihan sa Manila Bay former ambassador Alberto Encomienda, ex-Environment Undersecretary Arthur Valdez, and industrialist George Siy, president of Integrated Development Studies Institute (IDSI).

Encomienda is our foremost mind in Maritime and Ocean Affairs, having spent over a decade of his diplomatic career on legal studies of our Philippine claims at SCS. Prior to his retirement from the diplomatic service in 2009, he served as ambassador to Greece, Malaysia, and Singapore. He received his advance degrees on Ocean Law and Policy from London and Columbia University. He is also currently the executive director of Balik-Balangay.

Valdez is better known for leading the recent successful Balangay voyage that crossed the SCS, recreating the story of the Sultan of Sulu voyage to China in 1417. It was after returning from the Balangay voyage last month that he decided to speak about the need to resolve the WPS issue with China and the other claimant countries on the basis of common benefits and welfare of their respective peoples.

An industrialist and known as owner of Marie France/Svenson, the not so well-known fact about Siy is his being an international trade practitioner/negotiator for Philippine interests vis-a-vis ASEAN, Japan, US, China. He is the founder of the think tank IDSI that conducts extensive research on geopolitical developments and promotes a more practical approach to foreign policy.

They shared the alternative narrative on the WPS based on wide-ranging research and pragmatic, constructive perspectives/approaches on Philippine foreign policy. Encomienda called for “ocean governance” among claimant countries to avoid such incidents that are taking place in Scarborough Shoal. He explained such “ocean governance” would be based on the common and joint use of the resources that abound at the SCS.

Encomienda agreed with the navigational term used by Valdez in referring to global positioning system (GPS) to help guide our country’s foreign policy on how to best steer and sail through the rough waters in South China Sea.

GPS is a satellite-based navigation system that works in any weather conditions, anywhere in the world, 24 hours a day, with no subscription fees or setup charges.

Lest they may be misunderstood anew of their perceived leaning on the WPS debate, the reference to GPS is in no way support to the US position vis a vis Beijing. The two superpowers have been at odds also on the rights of passage of international ships and respect of the freedom of navigation in the South China Sea.

As a former diplomat and law expert on the matter, Encomienda believes President Duterte acknowledges where the Philippines is in the total scheme of things. While our country has long-standing military alliance with the US, he cited the Philippines likewise maintains strong friendly relations with China and the rest of its neighboring countries like Japan, South Korea, Australia, its fellow ASEAN member states that include the four other claimants in the South China Sea.

As the latest buzzwords being dished out by President Duterte on how he handles the South China issue, “It’s all geopolitics.”

As the chief foreign policy architect of the country, the President must try to make a balanced view of things. It is a balancing act from the legal standpoint of the PCA ruling and the realities of geopolitics that transcend borders.

So in that context, the reference to the GPS was an analogy to charting of foreign policy directions that would place the Philippines in the best position.