EFFECTIVE DETERRENCE V. APPEASEMENT ON CHINA’S HEGEMONY

By Philip M. Lustre Jr.

THE DISMISSAL by The Hague-based Permanent Court of Arbitration of China's claim of historic rights over the West Philippine Sea puts a stop on the initiatives of the Duterte administration to shift Philippine foreign policy from effective deterrence to appeasement on China's hegemony.

The dismissal ties the hands of Foreign Secretary Perfecto Yasay Jr., a greenhorn in foreign policy, to chart a more collaborative direction for Philippine foreign policy towards what could be regarded China's expansionist designs over the West Philippine Sea.

It would be extremely difficult for the administration to ignore the arbitration tribunal's decision and veer towards appeasing China without courting serious political repercussions in the domestic front and the international community.

China is bent to ignore the historic decision but not without becoming a pariah in the international community, a development, which does not favor its ongoing initiatives to become a global economic power.

The Philippine foreign policy towards China's hegemony over the West Philippine Sea has been largely characterized by effective deterrence, employing the multilateral approach, where the issue of China's claim of historic rights over the West Philippine Sea was brought to the arbitration tribunal for appropriate decision.

Then President Benigno Aquino III has pursued this policy amid threats and intimidation by Beijing, which has rejected the multilateral approach, preferring to settle the contentious issue through bilateral discussions between the two countries.

The new administration, unmindful of the current foreign policy initiatives and dismissive of the Aquino administration's inroads, has been seeking ways to transform the current foreign policy into appeasement in exchange for certain foreign assistance for infrastructure projects in the country.

Critics have described the Duterte administration's mindset as virtual mendicancy and a surrender of its moral high ground to what has been described as a rogue state, which is China. 

The key findings of the Permanent Court of Arbitration:

·          The so-called "nine-dash line" is invalid: "The Tribunal concluded that there was no legal basis for China's claim to historic rights to resources within the sea areas falling within the nine-dash line".

·          Reclaimed islands have no exclusive economic zone: "The Tribunal noted that the current presence of official personnel on many of the features is dependent on outside support and not reflective of the number of features ... (and) .... that none of the Spratly Islands is capable of generating extended maritime zones.

·          "The Tribunal found that it could - without delimiting a boundary - declare that certain sea areas are within the exclusive economic zone of the Philippines, because those areas are not overlapped by any possible entitlement of China."

·          China has behaved unlawfully "China had violated the Philippines' sovereign rights in its exclusive economic zone. The Tribunal further held that Chinese law-enforcement vessels had unlawfully created a serious risk of collision when they physically obstructed Philippine vessels."

·          Beijing has damaged the environment: China's large-scale land reclamation has "caused severe harm to the coral reef environment and violated its obligation to preserve and protect fragile ecosystems."

·          Island building should have stopped during the dispute process: The panel said it had no jurisdiction over military standoff and Second Thomas Shoal, where Chinese and Philippine military and law enforcement vessels are locked in confrontation.

·          However, "China's recent large-scale reclamation and construction of artificial islands was incompatible with the obligations on a state during the dispute resolution proceedings, insofar as China has ... destroyed evidence of the condition of the natural features of the South China Sea that formed part of the Parties' dispute. "

It could not be ascertained how and why President Rodrigo Duterte and Yasay have chosen to ignore the multilateral initiatives pursued by former President Benigno Aquino III and ex-Foreign Secretary Alberto del Rosario and openly advocated for appeasement without basic consideration of the pending arbitration case before the arbitration tribunal .

Even the domestic front has not appeared pleased for the unfolding foreign policy shift, as many sectors had expressed concern over Yasay's posturing.

Even Yasay did not even seem pleased with the dismissal decision, opting to assume a wait and see attitude.

Now, Yasay could not just ignore a multilateral decision written on stone. It would be absolutely foolhardy for him to still embrace the Giant Panda before the eyes of the discriminating international community.