Filipinos doubt US reliability as Marcos deescalates

The near-fatal showdown between Chinese and Philippine maritime forces in the South China Sea last week raised fears of unwanted escalation in the disputed waters.

A Filipino serviceman suffered physical injury after a large contingent of Chinese forces collided with and then forcibly boarded and disarmed personnel aboard a Philippine resupply mission en route to the hotly-contested Second Thomas Shoal.

Had Filipino naval troops resisted  China’s latest aggressive action, the situation certainly would have turned far more violent and potentially fatal, reminiscent of hand-to-hand combat between Chinese and Indian troops at the disputed borders in the Himalayas. 

Washington, which has a Mutual Defense Treaty (MDT) with the Philippines, was quick to condemn the latest incident. In a statement, the US State Department condemned what it called “escalatory and irresponsible” actions by Chinese forces and, crucially, reiterated its defense obligations to the Philippines in an event of armed attack on Philippine troops and public vessels in the South China Sea.

Philippine authorities publicly lashed out at China’s “coercive, aggressive and barbaric actions” – but were quick to de-escalate tensions by maintaining that the latest incident did not constitute an “armed attack” but instead was the product of a possible “misunderstanding or accident.”

“Well, you know this was probably a misunderstanding or an accident. We’re not yet ready to classify this as an armed attack,” said Executive Secretary Lucas Bersamin in a press conference hastily-organized last Friday. Bersamin, who leads the National Maritime Council (NMC), which coordinate interagency responses to crises in the South China Sea, was quick to shut down any speculation over the possible invocation of the MDT. 

The Filipino official also extended an olive branch to Beijing by reiterating its commitment to a diplomatic resolution of the dispute. “I think this is a matter that can easily be resolved very soon by us,” Bersamin said. “And if China wants to work with us, we can work with China.” The Philippine government’s muted response met with criticism and outrage across the country. 

Leading Philippine experts have argued that China’s latest action could have been a basis for invocation of the MDT. Surveys have found that up to 93 percent of Filipinos want their government to protect Philippine-claimed territories and wrest back control of those occupied by China.

Many in the Philippines began to doubt the determination of the Marcos administration to stand up to China, as well as to question America’s reliability as an ally.

In a speech before Philippine military personnel at the southwestern province of Palawan, which lies near the disputed Spratly islands, Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr sought to strike a balance by emphasizing that the Philippines has an uncompromising position as well as a commitment to diplomacy. 

“We are not in the business to instigate wars — our great ambition is to provide a peaceful and prosperous life for every Filipino. This is the drum beat, this is the principle that we live by and that we march by,” said Marcos during his speech at the “Talk to the Troops.”

“We refuse to play by the rules that force us to choose sides in a great power competition. No government that truly exists in the service of the people will invite danger or harm to lives and livelihood,” he added, underscoring preference for a non-aligned and independent foreign policy. Nevertheless, the Filipino president emphasized that his government will “stand firm” in protecting the country’s sovereign rights in the South China Sea.

The exact circumstances of the latest incident remain shrouded in mystery. From the standpoint of China, aggressive intervention was a legitimate response to the Philippines’ violation of a supposed prior agreement over the Second Thomas Shoal. Since the late-1990s, Manila has exercised de facto control over the disputed feature by stationing troops over a grounded warship, BRP Sierra Madre. But given the extremely poor conditions in the de facto Philippine base, China has hoped over the past decade to peacefully eject its rival from the area.

In 2013 People’s Liberation Army General Zhang Zhaozhong argued, “Without the supply for one or two weeks, the [Filipino] troopers stationed there will leave the islands on their own. Once they have left, they will never be able to come back.”

Over the succeeding years, China  not only expanded its reclamation activities in the disputed areas, birthing a whole host of massive artificial islands and military facilities, but it also began to tighten the noose around Philippine-occupied land features such as the Second Thomas Shoal.

Accordingly, China rapidly expanded the number of vessels, both warships and civilian, dispatched to the area in order to cut off Philippine resupply lines near the shoal. The Asian superpower upped the ante when it began suspecting that the Philippines had been transporting construction materials to fortify its de facto base in spite of an alleged “secret agreement” with former Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte to maintain the status quo. 

Latest reports suggest that the Philippines has already fortified the dilapidated BRP Sierra Madre, thus provoking outrage and aggressive countermeasures by China. Increasingly dangerous clashes between the Philippines and China, however, have raised concerns over America’s role.

Both the Trump and Biden administration have made it clear that MDT would apply only if there were an armed attack on Filipino troops and public vessels. But China’s deft reliance on “gray zone” tactics has undercut the utility of the Philippine-US alliance dramatically. Strategic planners in the Pentagon have clearly recognized this gap, which has been thoroughly exploited by China.

Last year, the Indo-Pacific Command (INDOPACOM) released an unclassified report in which its legal experts argued that the MDT should also apply to “illegal use of force [which]  is not limited by law to a kinetic armed attack (e.g. the use of munitions), but could also include non-kinetic attacks that result in death, injury, damage, or destruction of persons or objects.”

So far, however, the Biden administration has demurred from expanding the parameters of the MDT and, instead, insisted on a more general rhetoric of “ironclad commitment” that clearly doesn’t cover gray zone assaults on Philippine troops. As a result, critics are beginning to question the wisdom of the Marcos administration’s decision to expand military cooperation with Western allies without securing clear-cut commitments on the festering South China Sea disputes. 

So far, both the Marcos administration and the US have pressed for a diplomatic approach, despite the fact China has shown little appetite for compromise on its expansive claims across the disputed waters. Under growing domestic pressure, Manila likely will push for revision of the guidelines governing its mutual defense obligations with America.

But with the superpower facing competing priorities across the world, and the US presidential elections just over the horizon, it remains to be seen if Washington is willing to expand military commitment to its besieged Southeast Asian ally.