Why China has to Climb Down on the Spratlys Issue

(The Chinese Government newspaper  Global Times recently contacted the author for an email interview on the Spratly-West Philippine Sea controversy.  After I submitted my answers, I received no acknowledgment or any further communication from the paper, possibly because the answers I gave were not to the newspaper’s liking.  Under the principle of never allowing a good interview to go to waste, I am reprinting it as my column here.)

How do you view the current South China Sea crisis? Will it further escalate?

Yes, I am afraid tensions will increase and could get out of hand, and the fault does not lie with the Philippines and other Southeast Asian countries.

For the South China Sea issue, China has been always advocating the principle of putting aside disputes and going in for joint development, in your opinion, is it a proper way to solve the South China Sea dispute?

Joint development without clear delineation of borders is a recipe for future conflicts.

The appropriate way to solve the issue is through multilateral negotiations involving all parties with claims to the area.  The UNCLOS (United Nations Convention on the

Law of the Sea) established the principle of countries having 200-nautical-mile-exclusive economic zones, and where these intersect and where there are disputed areas, multilateral negotiations are the only viable solution where there are several claimants. This is a very reasonable position.  Yet China refuses this solution, and instead tries to resolve matters unilaterally by making incursions into the 200-nautical-mile-EEZs (Exclusive Economic Zones) of other countries, or building structures in those areas, as in some parts of the Spratly Islands that are in the EEZ of the Philippines. For instance, Mischief Reef (Panganiban Reef), which China occupied over Philippine objections, is well within the 200 mile EEZs of the Philippines and over 1,000 miles from the Chinese coast. Moreover, China has formally staked a claim to the whole Sea, right down to the 24 nautical mile contiguous zones or 12-nautical mile-territorial limits of other countries in the area, completely disregarding the others’ EEZs and the fact that the waters and islands China is claiming are several hundred or even a thousand or more nautical miles beyond territorial border. This is Big Power behavior, and here China is unfortunately emulating the example of the European colonizers and the United States.

Some predict that a war in South China Sea is inevitable, do you agree?

No, I do not think so, although naval encounters, such as the tragic encounter in 1988 between China and Vietnam, where about 70 Vietnamese sailors died, are a possibility.  China must really climb down from its aggressive posture, otherwise, a chain of events may ensue that goes out of control.  Remember, World War I was an unintended war, one that nobody wanted, but once the mutual military mobilizations began, it was impossible to bring things under control.  Multilateral diplomacy for a comprehensive settlement of the West Philippine Sea issue is the best way to avoid such an unintended conflict

China has developed closer economic ties with many countries in Southeast Asia including the Philippines and maintained good relations with these countries, to what extent will the South China Sea dispute affect the relations between China and the Philippines?

These economic ties could sour if the Southeast Asian countries perceive that China is beginning to behave like an arrogant military hegemon.  Countries might become more worried that China’s military – or the threat of its use – might be employed to protect or push Chinese investments and other economic interests in their territories and begin to impose investment and trade restrictions on Chinese capital and trade inflows.  As China becomes more dependent on agricultural land in Southeast Asia to produce food for its population and on Southeast Asia’s resources to feed its industries, our countries will worry about signs of Chinese military hegemony.  People remember that Japan resorted to force to gain control of Southeast Asia’s land and resources 70 years ago.  They remember that Japanese traders, investors, and settlers started coming into the different countries of the region years before the Japanese military came.  Of course, China is not imperial Japan, but you can’t blame people in Southeast Asia if they get worried by signs of military hegemony exhibited by another Northeast Asian power.

How do you see the US’ role in the South China Sea dispute? And how will the US affect the dispute?

All countries that are signatories to UNCLOS are committed to protecting freedom of navigation in the world’s main waterways, such as the West Philippine Sea.  The Philippines must rely on ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations) as its key ally in resolving the West Philippine Sea issue with China. I do not agree with the Philippine and Vietnamese strategy to draw the US in as a first resort. Bringing in the US carries the danger of converting the crisis into a conflict between superpowers. However, I really can’t blame these governments for taking this course of action.  I blame China’s aggressive behavior. The best way to avoid the intervention of the US in the West Philippine Sea’s territorial disputes is for China to stop its aggressive behavior and come to the diplomatic table.  A diplomatic solution that avoids US military intervention is in the best interest of both China and the Philippines.

Will the South China Sea be a long-term headache for the involved countries and for the security of Asia-Pacific region? What is the breakthrough point to solve the problem?

Yes, it will be a long-term headache if we do not resolve the issue via multilateral diplomacy soon.  A demilitarized West Philippine Sea where borders are agreed upon, in the same way that the Gulf of Tonkin and Vietnam-China land borders were settled by Vietnam and China is the best guarantee of peace in the region.  If China could settle these borders peacefully with Vietnam, why can’t it do the same thing in multilateral discussions with the countries bordering the West Philippine Sea?

*INQUIRER.net columnist Walden Bello is a representative of Akbayan Party in the House of He authored House Bill 1350, which proposed renaming the South China Sea the West Philippines Sea, a proposal that was eventually accepted by the Philippine executive branch (Walden Bello. He can be reached at waldenbello@yahoo.com)

 

 

Continue reading

Philippines Charity PCSO not singling out Catholic Church Corruption- Audit Exposé

Malacañang Palace, Manila -  reiterated that no one was above the law but clarified it was not singling out the Catholic Church with the Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office’s exposé on bishops who allegedly received sport utility vehicles as donations from the agency.

Deputy presidential spokesperson Abigail Valte, however, said over radio dzRB that the bishops, despite being part of the religious sector, would not be immune from any criminal liabilities.

“Not only the Catholic Church, (but) for any religion, sect or denomination. The Constitution prohibits that (allotment of public funds to any religious sect or affiliation) because of the principle of separation of Church and state,” she said.

She cited Article 6 Section 29 (2) of the Constitution, which states that “No public money or property shall be appropriated, applied, paid, or employed, directly or indirectly, for the use, benefit, or support of any sect, church, denomination, sectarian institution, or system of religion, or of any priest, preacher, minister, or other religious teacher, or dignitary as such, except when such priest, preacher, minister, or dignitary is assigned to the armed forces, or to any penal institution, or government orphanage or leprosarium.”

Valte said no one would be above the law in terms of criminal liability.

“Certainly if it’s a criminal offense, nobody is above the law and nobody is immune from suit,” she said.

Valte said it would be up to PCSO chief Margie Juico to take the necessary steps as regards the filing of cases against those allegedly involved in the anomalies discovered during the previous administration.

She said the allegations were based on the Commission on Audit report in 2008 and 2009 “so it’s not personal.”

“The money should not have been disbursed because it’s violative of the constitutional prohibition,” Valte said.

“Apparently from the face of that document, there were no donations made to other denominations at least for 2009,” she said.

Discrediting the Church

The president of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines (CBCP), Tandag, Surigao del Sur Bishop Nereo Odchimar, said last Friday he was not discounting the possibility that the issue that some prelates accepted vehicles from PCSO was somehow linked to moves aimed at discrediting the Catholic Church.

“There may be some ploy to also discredit the Catholic Church. It’s a possibility,” he said.

Odchimar said the issue will be taken up during the plenary assembly scheduled next week.

He claimed not having any personal knowledge on the issue since the alleged requests for the delivery of vehicles were not coursed through the CBCP. The requests were reportedly directly made to the PCSO.

When asked if he would discuss the matter with Cotabato Archbishop and former CBCP president Orlando Quevedo and Butuan Bishop Juan de Dios Pueblos, who were reported to have received vehicle donations from the PCSO, Odchimar said, “If they would be around, we would also be asking their positions.”

He said the CBCP does not have any authority to summon its member bishops.

Nothing unusual

Quevedo said in a statement that the practice of asking for PCSO assistance for social action is not unusual and has been going on since the time of former President Corazon Aquino.

“It has been reported that Cardinal Sin himself, in defense of the PCSO assistance given to him for his projects for the poor, said he would even accept money from the devil in order to help the poor. I myself would not hesitate to ask for PCSO assistance for a very poor individual who needs a costly medical operation but cannot afford it,” said Quevedo.

Odchimar urged the PCSO to validate its report since the implicated Catholic Church officials have denied that the vehicle donations by the government-run gambling institution were for personal use and not for social action programs.

“They (PCSO) should be accurate because names are being destroyed. It would rather be irresponsible to be implicating names. They were just made suspects,” he said.

Former CBCP president Fernando Capalla, on the other hand, challenged the PCSO to identify other religious organizations that are receiving financial aid.

No follower

Meantime, Quevedo recalled that some 10 years ago, the bishops in a plenary assembly made a collective decision not to solicit or accept donations from legal and illegal gambling.

“Such a decision was not universally followed. The needs of the poor in the minds of many people in the Church, bishops included, simply transcended such a decision. After all, the bishops also knew that gambling is not immoral per se. It becomes immoral because of circumstances,” he said.

‘Sa pari’ SAFARI vehicles

The issue on SUVs given to priests has rekindled an old joke in remote areas of Mindanao that the 4x4 vehicles going to the hinterlands are called “sa pari (owned by priests),” tribal leaders recalled yesterday.

It was an apparent pun on the four-wheel drive vehicle Safari, manufactured by Nissan.

Locals said the use by priests of these vehicles is not new particularly in far-flung areas where they hold Masses.

Aside from SUVs, priests are also known to use motorcycles called “habal habal.”

 

Continue reading