Senate vs. China

HOW do you think China will respond to the Senate resolution strongly condemning its continued harassment of our Coast Guard and fishermen in the West Philippine Sea by their Coast Guard and militia vessels?

Senate Resolution 718, principally authored by Senate President Juan Miguel Zubiri and Sen. Risa Hontiveros, urges the Philippine government to take appropriate action in “asserting and securing the Philippines’ sovereign rights over its exclusive economic zone and continental shelf.”

The resolution is the end-result of consultations by senators with officials of the Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) led by Secretary Enrique Manalo and the Armed Forces of the Philippines headed by Chief of Staff Romeo Brawner .

Earlier, the two senators filed Resolution 659 urging the DFA to sponsor a resolution before the United Nations General Assembly, calling on China to stop its harassment of Philippine vessels in the WPS.

Resolution 718 slams China’s continued incursions in the WPS as illegal, as it violates the 2016 landmark ruling of the Permanent Court of Arbitration.

The lawmakers agreed there is “no legal basis for China to claim historic rights to resources within the sea areas falling within the nine-dash line” and that Beijing’s claims ran contrary to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.

“Rather than comply with the decision, the Chinese government has instead chosen to ramp up its harassment of Philippine vessels, including those of the country’s fisherfolk, navy, and coast guard, thus undermining peace and stability in the region,” the resolution read.

“In clear violation of the Arbitral Award, China has built artificial islands in various parts of the WPS – fortified with airstrips, military installations, hardware, and equipment-and has militarized at least three of those artificial islands, arming them with anti-ship and antiaircraft missile systems, laser and jamming

We hope to see more positive collaboration beyond words DOT equipment and fighter jets,” it added.

The resolution also noted that in the past two months, the Philippine Coast Guard and military noted the “increased presence of Chinese vessels and maritime militia swarming the Recto Bank and Scarborough Shoal or Bajo de Masinloc.”

“If we have not manifested our position, then it is as if China had succeeded in muzzling the Philippine Senate, ” the senators said.

What, then, should the Philippine government do to address China’s incursions in the WPS aside from holding dialogues with the Chinese government?

Will Beijing take kindly to all these Philippine initiatives? We don’t think so

One, bring international attention to China’s harassment of Filipino fishermen in the Philippine EEZ and its continued violation of the Hague Ruling and the UNCLOS.

Two, use international fora to rally multilateral support for the enforcement of the Hague Ruling and raise awareness on the real situation in the West Philippine Sea.

Three, engage like-minded countries in various international organizations, meetings, and other fora to urge China to respect the Hague Ruling and the UNCLOS.

Four, file a Resolution before the United Nations General Assembly calling for the cessation of all activities that harass Philippine vessels and violate the Philippines’ established rights in the West Philippine Sea.

And five, pursue other diplomatic modes as the Department of Foreign Affairs may deem appropriate and tourism in the Philippines?

After Frasco’s fiasco was exposed, Frasco announced the DOT will no longer use the videogram.

However, it appears the DOT is inclined to retain the “Love the Philippines” slogan.

Frasco also said as a consequence of this anomaly, the DOT cancelled its P49-million contract with DDB Philippines.

She also claimed the DOT has not paid DDB Philippines anything for the campaign.

Whether Frasco’s claim of non-payment is true or not remains to be seen.

The US State Department wrote: “By impeding necessary provisions from reaching the Filipino service members stationed at Second Thomas Shoal, the PRC has also undertaken unwarranted interference in lawful Philippine maritime operations.”

The US also expressed Washington’s willingness to invoke its mutual defense commitments under Article IV of the 1951 US Philippines Mutual Defense Treaty in case of an “armed attack on Philippine public vessels, aircraft, and armed forces – including those of its Coast Guard in the South China Sea.”

It called on China “to abide by the arbitral ruling (in 2016 that invalidated China’s nine-dash line claim) as well as to respect the freedom of navigation – a right to which all states are entitled.” necessary.

We hope to see more positive collaboration beyond words.

In fact, the DFA is already expanding ties with Vietnam, including security cooperation.

Last week, Foreign Secretary Enrique Manalo went on an official visit to Vietnam for the 10th Philippine-Vietnam Joint Commission on Bilateral Cooperation where the two countries discussed areas of cooperation such as defense, maritime, economic and people-to-people ties.

In a speech delivered at the Diplomatic Academy of Vietnam on Aug. 1, Secretary Manalo said that while Manila and Hanoi had competing claims in the South China Sea, this underscored the need for the two countries to work together.

“Our geographies and status as major littoral and claimant states in the South China Sea make maritime cooperation a vital point of interaction between our two countries, as economic and security partners. As in centuries prior, this body of water connects our peoples, despite some differences,” Manalo said.

From Hanoi, Manalo also visited Vientiane for the 2nd PhilippinesLaos JCBC where the two sides explored ways to expand bilateral ties, including security cooperation.

The JCBC is the primary mechanism for the Philippines to discuss with both Vietnam and Laos possible strengthening of bilateral relations, as well as various regional and global issues.

Will Beijing take kindly to all these Philippine initiatives? We don’t think so.

Perhaps they will even slam these as an affront to their sovereignty.

But we should insist on our legitimate rights under international law, and resolutely resist their use of force to and outright bullying and intimidation to settle the territorial and maritime disputes in the South China Sea.

(Email: ernhil@yahoo.com) charges against the DOT officials who allowed the irregularity to happen. local and international.

If Frasco is unable to offer a satisfactory explanation as to why this embarrassing anomaly happened, she should resign her post immediately and spare President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. the trouble of dismissing her from the tourism portfolio.

Regarding the “Love the Philippines” slogan, if the DOT insists on using it, that will create a problem because according to Frasco, the DOT’s contract with DDB Philippines has been canceled.

Be that as it may, “Love the Philippines” seems forgettable enough.

It’s plain and bland, and isn’t catchy enough.

It indicates Frasco and her DOT personnel responsible for the DDB Philippines project failed to notice the fraudulent misrepresentation—foreign sites made to appear they are Philippine tourist destinations —before they allowed the dissemination thereof to the public. Didn’t they even watch it before they disseminated it?

That revelation also indicates Frasco and her DOT minions are unable to distinguish between local tourist destinations from tourist sites abroad! Officials of the DOT are not even familiar with our very own tourist destinations! How can they even begin to promote

Frasco has not substantiated her story with proof.

Perhaps she expects everyone to take her word for it, even if the incident involves P49-million in taxpayers’ money.

So far, Frasco seems mum about the matter.

The public demands an investigation.

Whether or not Frasco has actually ordered an investigation on this fiasco is unclear.

Frasco and her DOT officials should explain why they did not bother to review the DDB videogram before allowing the material to be disseminated to the public.

That failure, which seems to be attended by gross inexcusable negligence, may lead to the filing of anti-graft or administrative

For me, it sounds more like an exhortation for Filipinos to buy locally manufactured products instead of as a tourism promotional slogan.

Presidential Legal Counsel Juan Ponce Enrile also finds the “Love the Philippines” slogan unsatisfactory.

Enrile, a keen observer of events, is known to focus his public commentaries on legal issues. The slogan, which doesn’t involve law, must have been so objectionable to Enrile that he deviated from his usual legal discourses and this time openly expressed his reservations about the slogan.

Senator Nancy Binay also dislikes the slogan, which she called “unsalvageable.”