About Senators Kiko Pangilinan’s and Rodante Marcoleta’s heated debate over the legitimacy of the West Philippine Sea.
MARCOLETA FLUNKS ELEMENTARY CARTOGRAPHY
Marlen V. Ronquillo… The West Philippine Sea is for real. Philippine laws have codified a specific area called by that name, and maps have been drawn to reflect. In 2012, then-president Benigno Aquino III issued Administrative Order 29 that demarcated the West Philippine Sea as “the Luzon Sea, as well as the waters around, within and adjacent to the Kalayaan Island Group and Bajo de Masinloc, also known as the Scarborough Shoal.”
A law signed by President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. in November 2024 — Republic Act 12064, or the Philippine Maritime Zones Act — defined anew the portions covered by the West Philippine Sea. That law also asked the National Mapping and Resource Information Authority to prepare the corresponding map covered by that sea, then circulate that map in the country and beyond.
In her many warnings about China’s territorial ambitions in Southeast Asia, former United States secretary of state Hillary Clinton spoke about real threats faced by an area she called “the West Philippine Sea.”
The West Philippine Sea is a fact of nationhood, its existence amplified by the 2016 arbitral ruling that essentially said areas officially demarcated by the Philippine government under AO 29 and RA 12064 are, indeed, Philippine territory.
What accounts for Marcoleta’s refusal to recognize a basic fact of law, international ruling and cartography, the lay of the land in a nation of which he is a citizen and senator? That’s between Marcoleta and China. But to obviously take the side of China’s fictional nine-dash line over our historic and United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea-validated West Philippine Sea is beyond the pale. In nations and polities protective of their territories, a stand like Marcoleta’s will be grounds for a form of censure. In China, Marcoleta’s stand may fall under the category of treason and may end up like Lin Biao.
Some dear and basic lessons in geography and territory raise additional and troubling questions on why Marcoleta is seemingly on China’s side on the West Philippine Sea issue. With all the land, seas, and vast dominion in its possession, China’s territorial aggression looks like overkill.
China’s map occupies 9.6 million square kilometers — approximately the size of Europe. In terms of land area, it is the third largest in the world, after Russia and Canada, and much of Canada is uninhabitable tundra. The Philippines is a land-short country the size of the US state of Arizona. China, according to basic geographical data, shares boundaries with 14 other countries, and territorial disputes often arise, especially with India, due to boundary issues.
It cannot be that Marcoleta is cutting China some slack because it needs more territory, and the Philippines should play the role of a generous neighbor.
Speaking of basic generosity, has China been a generous and economically supportive neighbor, an economic superpower with zero predatory practices in economic dealings with the Philippines?
No. On the contrary — and this can be validated by the loan terms during the term of former president Rodrigo Duterte — China has imposed high interest rates on loans to the Philippine government, about 2 percent or more higher than those from, say, Japan and the European Union. Former Bayan Muna party-list representative Neri Colmenares has a compilation of China’s harsh loan terms, including provisions that allow China to seize national treasures, such as Rizal Park, in case of loan defaults.
China overall has been imposing onerous terms on foreign borrowers. After a loan default, one Latin American country found out that China demanded 80 percent of its total oil output.
So while we trade heavily with China — the only countries that do not trade with it are the imaginary trading posts Donald Trump slapped with tariffs in his April 2, 2025, “Liberation Day” tariff order — we should not forget one thing: trade is one thing, territorial aggression is another. Areas like Bajo de Masinloc — Masinloc is a town in Zambales — have been ours since time immemorial. And for Marcoleta’s information, China’s nine-dash line is a late 20th-century concoction.
Facts and cartography and history and empiricism all say there is a West Philippine Sea. Marcoleta’s West Philippine Sea distractions, at the very least, are on the wrong side of history.
“Standing firm vs. the new colonial narrative” by Jose Antonio Goitia
Under UNCLOS, maritime zones arise by operation of law from archipelagic baselines. We do not require separate coordinates to establish our Exclusive Economic Zone.
China’s so-called “nine-dash line,” by contrast, has no legal basis, no recognized coordinates, and no standing under international law. Treating it as credible is not an error—it is an inversion of truth.
Accountability Begins at Home
I find the remarks of Senator Rodante Marcoleta, Senator Robin Padilla, and several media figures do active harm to our Republic. By questioning settled maritime rights and amplifying narratives crafted by a foreign power, they compromise our legal position at a time when firmness is required.
https://manilastandard.net/opinion/columns/everyman/314701205/standing-firm-vs-the-new-colonial-narrative.html
“When our senators speak for China , the nation is in peril” by Jake Maderazo
At minimum, Marcoleta’s comments raise legitimate questions about whether a senator — sworn to uphold the Constitution and the nation’s sovereignty — has acted recklessly and irresponsibly. What duty does a senator have to be informed before discussing the surrender of territory? The answer is explicit: such matters are the highest state concerns, to be handled by the President, the Department of Foreign Affairs, and the consultative processes that involve Congress and the people. Unilateral public musings that mirror a foreign claimant’s position undermine the state’s negotiating posture, can be manipulated in public opinion and international fora, and thereby threaten national security.
… Social media reaction — from the coining of terms like “China-tors” to the “nine-hudas-line” smear aimed at senators purportedly soft on Beijing — reflects popular outrage. Such naming can be crude, driven by emotion and sometimes unfair. But it is also a corrective mechanism in a democracy. When institutions fail to act swiftly, the public resorts to naming and shaming as a way to demand accountability.
We should be cautious about ad hominem attacks but we should also not be cowed by the need for civility into silence when public servants say things that imperil national interest. If a senator’s statements consistently echo a foreign power’s narrative, the citizenry has a right to know whose interest that official is serving. Transparency is not persecution; it is the fuel of democratic accountability.
China’s playbook is not subtle: economic ties, infrastructure investments, political outreach and selective pressure on disputes are all tools of influence. If Beijing sees that internal divisions might open a path to a leadership more pliant to its interests, it will welcome that outcome.
And here is the paradox: the United States and other allies are increasing their military support to us precisely to deter aggressive action in contested waters. Our more assertive defense posture, backed by external partners, reduces the likelihood of kinetic escalation. But it also raises the stakes in the competition for political influence. If China perceives that military bolstering will make conventional options less attractive, it may redouble softer tactics — information operations, political influence campaigns, and attempts to reshape domestic politics through legal, economic and media channels. In short: when deterrence strengthens, destabilization becomes a preferred tool of leverage. We must always be alert on all interference.
It would be monstrous and complacent to dismiss this episode as a mere gaffe. The stakes are too high. Public servants who toy with the idea of surrendering our territory — even as a rhetorical device — breach a covenant with the people. They erode the trust that is essential to a functioning republic and give oxygen to foreign narratives that seek to minimize or erase our claims.
A democracy survives when its citizens and institutions demand integrity from their leaders. If senators are to remain guardians of the Constitution, they must be held to a higher standard: to speak with knowledge, to act with patriotism, and to never, ever offer the appearance of favoring a foreign power over their own country.
https://opinion.inquirer.net/189599/when-our-senators-speak-for-china-the-nation-is-in-peril
“Defending Beijing is betraying our nation” by Dindo Manhit
Over at the august halls of Congress, it is indeed a tragic thing when instead of being united in defending our country against China’s bullying, our politicians themselves disagree about the issue. We have seen many so-called public servants actually parrot China’s narrative. Some Philippine officials sound more like puppets mouthing talking points of the Chinese embassy, instead of championing the interest of their constituents. Many others attack advocates who defend the 2016 decision of the Permanent Court of Arbitration.
What a gross disservice to the nation. What a betrayal of the responsibility they swore to uphold.
For years now, China has been violating international law by continuing to encroach on the West Philippine Sea (WPS). This despite a 2016 arbitral ruling that clearly established its so-called nine-dash line had no basis, and that the area was part of the Philippine’s exclusive economic zone and sea territory.
China’s moves take on many forms. It has resorted to the use of water cannons, sideswiped vessels, harassed fisherfolk, and frontline military personnel, among others.
All these have not escaped Filipinos’ attention, thanks to our government’s transparency strategy when it comes to incidents in the WPS. As a result, nearly nine out of 10 Filipinos distrust China or view it as the greatest external threat to our country, according to recently conducted surveys by Pulse Asia and Octa Research.
Article continues after this advertisement
Unfortunately, the struggle does not only take place in the sea. More and more now, there have been discourses that promote the Chinese narrative, asserting China’s sovereignty, casting the Philippines as the aggressor and the one initiating provocative action. These discourses also allege that the responses of the Philippines are the doing of the United States.
The disinformation has become so prevalent, designed to make even Filipinos believe the spin. Worse, some become part of an army of trolls who push coordinated inauthentic behavior—for financial consideration.
Over at the august halls of Congress, it is indeed a tragic thing when instead of being united in defending our country against China’s bullying, our politicians themselves disagree about the issue. We have seen many so-called public servants actually parrot China’s narrative. Some Philippine officials sound more like puppets mouthing talking points of the Chinese embassy, instead of championing the interest of their constituents. Many others attack advocates who defend the 2016 decision of the Permanent Court of Arbitration.
by TaboolaSponsored Links
You May Like
South-east Asia seeks data centre investments – but must reckon with their thirst
The Business Times
What a gross disservice to the nation. What a betrayal of the responsibility they swore to uphold.
Article continues after this advertisement
A recent statement by the Chinese embassy, posted on its website, openly attacks Philippine officials and institutions defending our rights. Even the Armed Forces of the Philippines, which bears the brunt of maritime encounters, has been unfairly maligned. Such attacks are out of step with public sentiment: another nationwide survey shows the AFP enjoys 76 percent public trust, reflecting Filipinos’ recognition of its role in defending lives, livelihoods, and sovereignty.
… Indeed, defending China is a betrayal; staying silent is complicity. We now want to ask our leaders: why do they stand where they stand? Where is the public’s interest in their position? And how dare they receive their salaries from the hard-earned taxes of the people they have betrayed?
https://opinion.inquirer.net/189633/defending-beijing-is-betraying-our-nation
“Cartographic amnesia” by Melissa Loja, Romel Bagares
https://opinion.inquirer.net/190046/cartographic-amnesia