Pearls and Irritations

President Bongbong Marcos played down the ramming of a Filipino Navy boat by a Chinese coastguard on 17 June. Calling it an accident, not amounting to an armed attack, when the photos showed otherwise. It was an embarrassing afterthought for a Head of State.

The incident at Second Thomas Shoal has clearly breached Article IV of the Mutual Defence Treaty (1951). The article states “that an armed attack is deemed to include an armed attack on the metropolitan territory of either of the Parties, or on the island territories under its jurisdiction in the Pacific or its armed forces, public vessels or aircraft in the Pacific (emphasis added).

Not admitting a spade is a spade was troublesome for President Marcos Jnr.

President Marcos has been canvassing for international support against China’s policy in the South China Sea. He has also been nudging President Joe Biden to invoke the “iron- clad” 1951 Mutual Defense Treaty (MDT) against China.

It must be frustrating for the President to be advised to downplay the collision.

As anticipated, the “incident” elicited only condemnation from the White House one day after, giving the impression that both parties (US and Philippines) were not keen to escalate the incident.

The cue was provided by the National Security Council spokesman John Kirby. Kirby informed journalists Monday, “This kind of behaviour [by China] is provocative, it’s reckless, it’s unnecessary, and it could lead to misunderstandings and miscalculations that could lead to something much bigger and much more violent.”

Kirby was silent on the Treaty.

Washington’s indecisiveness could undermine President Marcos’ popularity. The netizens expect him to stand up to the aggression. They expect the US to invoke the MDT as a quid pro quo for allowing Americans to use the military facilities in the Philippines to counter China.

From the US perspective, invoking the treaty could significantly escalate tensions in the region. The US might be cautious about escalating a localised maritime dispute into a broader conflict with China, especially given the vagueness of the Treaty, volatile domestic politics and the complex geopolitical dynamics in the South China Sea.

While the US policy of restraining action against China should be applauded, the Filipinos are questioning the value of the MDT.

Is the Treaty worth the paper written on it?

Grappling with more important strategic issues in the Middle East and Ukraine, opening a third front against a formidable China, 6000 miles away, will not be wise for the President Biden, Commander in Chief, who stumbled and looked disoriented during the recent Presidential debate with Donald Trump.

The US is in a ‘Damned if you do and damned if you don’t’ delicate situation regarding how to respond to China following the attack on a Filipino navy boat.

The Sunday incident was a deliberate act to test the US resolve and military preparedness.

The ramming of a Philippine Navy boat happened a day after China implemented a 2021 law that empowered its coastguard to detain foreigners for trespassing and committing other unspecified criminal activities in the disputed South China Sea, a core maritime domain.

While a possible conflict has been averted four days later when the Malacañang palace downplayed the collision, the attack on the boat was NO misunderstanding!

This is not the first time that Washington failed to come to the defence of the Philippines at sea. In 2010, for example, apart from growling, Washington did nothing when China occupied the Scarborough Shaol President Obama declared as the red line.

In hindsight, the incident at Second Thomas Shoal should not  have happened had both parties adhered to the standard operating procedures to prevent collisions at sea. Although the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea, (COLREGs) adopted by the International Maritime Organisation in 1972 do not apply to military vessels and are applicable only in high sea, the principles under COLREGs can be used to prevent such incidents.

China and Philippines are parties to COLREG.

China and the Philippine Navies could have resorted to the Code for Unplanned Encounters at Sea (CUES). This code of conduct was reached at the 2014 Western Pacific Naval Symposium “to reduce the chance of an incident at sea between the countries in the agreement, and — in the event that one occurs — to prevent it from escalating”.

Both China and Philippines Navies are among twenty- one signatories of CUES.

Incidentally, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) has been pushing for an identical code- of- conduct to prevent such incidents in the South China Sea after China occupied the Mischief Reef in 1995.

I have argued elsewhere that China will not sign a code-of-conduct that does not apply to US military operations in the South China Sea.

Beijing has been dragging its feet despite promises to the contrary.

Given American involvement in conflicts in the Middle East and Europe, it is unlikely that Washington will fight on another front. Despite President Biden’s promise of iron-clad support to President Marcos, the failure to invoke the 1951 MDT serves as a reminder to other US allies – Taiwan, Japan and Australia included – that defense treaties in modern times are sometimes not worth the papers they are written on.

Share and Enjoy !

SHARE TWEET SHARE COPY EMAIL PRINT