Ren'ai Jiao is part of China's Nansha Islands, and China's sovereignty over Ren'ai Jiao is based on China's claim to Nansha Islands as a whole. The Philippines illegally stayed at Ren'ai Jiao under the pretext of "** failure" and tried to build permanent facilities in an attempt to illegally occupy Ren'ai Jiao, which is a violation of China's sovereignty.
On November 10, 2023, two small Philippine transport vessels and three coast guard vessels trespassed into the waters near Ren'ai Jiao in China's Nansha Islands.
China has taken necessary measures against the Philippines' illegal transportation and replenishment, which is to safeguard China's sovereignty, not to pursue geopolitical interests, not to counter the cooperation of the Philippine-US alliance, and not to take advantage of changes in the international situation to "expand" in the South China Sea, as some commentators have speculated.
While resolutely protecting its sovereignty and maritime rights and interests, China also advocates resolving disputes through direct negotiations, avoiding the escalation of confrontation at sea, and promoting temporary arrangements such as resource sharing and development. China's policy in the South China Sea is stable and continuous, based on China's interests in the South China Sea and a clear understanding of the South China Sea issue, and will not change because of the intentions of the United States and the West or international interference, nor will it be shaken by the situation at sea between China and the Philippines.
It can be seen from the recent statements made by China's Ministry of National Defense, the China Coast Guard, and the Southern Theater that the Chinese authorities are objectively and rationally stating the facts and truth, and warning the Philippines.
In contrast, the Philippines not only carries out provocations and abuses at sea, but also hypes it before, during, and after the event, and the high-level officials of different departments such as the Philippine Coast Guard, the ** Security Council, and the Ministry of Defense also often make emotional and inflammatory remarks, and even threaten to sue China again before international tribunals and arbitration institutions, expel Chinese ambassadors, unite other countries to conduct maritime patrols, and conduct security reviews of Chinese investments. It could further undermine political trust between the two sides and confuse the Philippines' China policy and South China Sea policy.
On November 23, 2023, the Philippines and the United States conducted a three-day joint naval and air patrol in the South China Sea.
In response to the situation at Ren'ai Jiao, some political forces in the Philippines have either hyped up the situation for their own interests, or have been instigated by the United States and other countries outside the region to stir up the situation, and this political ecology has exacerbated the capriciousness of Marcos Jr.'s policy in the South China Sea. If there is one department that can benefit from tension at sea, the Philippine Coast Guard is certainly one of them.
By constantly exaggerating maritime conflicts, the Philippine Coast Guard can gain more funding, influence, voice and visibility, and may even have more opportunities for promotion. The Philippine Coast Guard has often said on different occasions that it will "more often use more effective means than diplomacy to force China to respond." On the surface, there are some legitimate "reasons" for this kind of blatant provocation and creating incidents, but in fact there are also many ulterior "benefits", which are well known in the political ecology of the Philippines.
Beginning in January of this year, the Philippines and the United States held discussions on the roles of the two sides in alliance obligations and maritime incidents. In return, Biden asked Marcos Jr. to turn the Philippines' obligations to the United States under the U.S.-Philippines Mutual Defense Treaty into a list, and Marcos Jr. also wants the U.S. to be more explicit about the circumstances and conditions under which the treaty will be triggered in the South China Sea, and where the United States can provide military and intelligence support to the Philippines. Clearly, the Philippines also wants to test the extent to which the United States will truly fulfill its security commitments to the Philippines through the restocking of Second Thomas Shoal.
Many Filipinos rally in front of the military headquarters in Quezon, a suburb of Manila, Feb. 2, 2023, as the United States demanded that the Philippines open more military bases.
The U.S.-Philippines Mutual Defense Treaty was signed during the Cold War, and the Ren'ai Jiao issue is a bilateral issue between China and the Philippines and has nothing to do with the United States. The U.S. has repeatedly used the U.S.-Philippines Mutual Defense Treaty to threaten China and support the Philippines' illegitimate claims, which has inspired the Philippines to take risks at Second Thomas Shoal and has had undesirable consequences.
The Philippines and the United States have long-term and in-depth military and security cooperation, and nationalist sentiment in the Philippines is also very high, and the "China threat theory" still has a large market in the Philippines. Under such circumstances, it is difficult to hear the objective and rational voice of the Philippines on the South China Sea issue, and some reasonable people have even been labeled as betraying the national interests of the Philippines and have been attacked in the country.
The Philippines argues that the South China Sea arbitration award gives its claim to the so-called international law basis of the Second Thomas Shoal claim. The South China Sea arbitration is a legal challenge to China by the Philippines, instigated and supported by the United States and premised on its illegal occupation of Nansha islands and reefs, with the aim of consolidating its illegal gains and curtailing China's sovereignty and maritime rights and interests. The arbitral tribunal in this case violated the provisions of international judicial and arbitral institutions.
The arbitral tribunal in this case violated some basic principles that international judicial and arbitral institutions should abide by, exceeded its own jurisdiction, and rendered an award with confusing logic and full of loopholes. Far from resolving the dispute, the ruling complicates it and reduces the political space for the parties to negotiate a settlement. If the Philippines insists on the illusion that the adjudication is international law and the compass, believing that China will accept an unjust and unreasonable solution, then the South China Sea dispute will fall into a "dead end" that cannot be resolved.
Now, China-Philippines relations are facing serious challenges, and the fundamental reason is that the Philippines has changed its previous China policy and South China Sea policy, and has broken its commitments. The Philippines should draw lessons from the situation in the South China Sea and the changes in China-Philippines relations over the past decade or so, and look at the issue from a historical perspective.