Simmer down
The conflict between the feuding neighbors China and the Philippines will likely intensify but only in terms of a bitter exchange of words, which will strain diplomatic relations.
Text size
Share
Daily TribuneThe conflict between the feuding neighbors China and the Philippines will likely intensify but only in terms of a bitter exchange of words, which will strain diplomatic relations.
Share
On several occasions, US President Joe Biden and his security officials indicated that the superpower's commitment to come to the aid of the Philippines in case of a blown-out conflict is "ironclad," something that is provided for under the Mutual Defense Treaty.
The question now is the resolve of the US government in putting into effect the oft-repeated pledge.
With the US presidential elections coming, the political atmosphere will lean toward preventing any major conflict, particularly as the public sentiment is for an American leader who will prioritize the domestic economy.
The conflict between the feuding neighbors China and the Philippines will likely intensify but only in terms of a bitter exchange of words, which will strain diplomatic relations.
China remains insistent on its 10-dash line claim covering practically the entire South China Sea, including the West Philippine Sea, while the Philippines holds firmly to the rights and entitlements provided under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, which was the basis for the 2016 arbitral tribunal award.
After the Permanent Court of Arbitration's crucial decision invalidated China's historical claim, the United States increased its Freedom of Navigation Operations, or FONOPS, in the disputed seas.
According to political analysts, the prevailing sentiment in Washington is for the US to pull back from being so frontal in the maritime conflict, whether rhetorically or materially, in terms of its presence in the Asian theater.
The demand now is for the US government to apply "substantial leverage over Manila" to be more restrained in some of its actions.
Lyle Goldstein, Director of Asia Engagement at the think tank Defense Priorities, said the mood in the White House is not to encourage the Philippines to fight with China.
"They are likely to lose that fight," Goldstein said.
"We do have a treaty with the Philippines… but that treaty should be read very narrowly. It should be read as we defend the main islands of the Philippines — if they are threatened acutely, we will be there," goes the US government's view as expounded by Goldstein.
"And if it means that we need to put some defensive forces in those areas to reassure the Philippines, I'm okay with that. But my view is that we should not even consider going to war over rocks and reefs or different interpretations of the law of the sea. That would be extremely foolish and reckless, and it would be very hard to explain to the American taxpayers," he said.
Aside from weighing the public backlash, political pundits said several factors, chief of which is getting the approval of Congress for any major military action, come into play in the so-called ironclad defense commitment.
The treaty has so many ambiguities that allow the US headroom regarding its commitment to come to the Philippines' defense.
Beijing has exploited the loopholes to advance its WPS ambitions. In a meeting between Presidents Ferdinand Marcos Jr. and Joe Biden, both indicated their intention to resolve the unclear provisions in the treaty.
Felix Chang, a senior fellow at another Washington-based think tank Foreign Policy Research Institute, said, "Washington must weigh the precedent-setting implications of each case for its security commitments not only to the Philippines but also to other American allies. Even so, the United States has seemed remarkably unperturbed by the ambiguity in the treaty's details. As to why, it has probably been because Washington saw some advantage in the ambiguity."
A basic question now being routed among US security officials is: How would the United States respond if a government-controlled but nominally non-military entity such as China's coast guard or maritime militia were to take aggressive action against Philippine forces?
The treaty, nonetheless, has placed the US at the forefront of the friction since the Philippines cannot face even the China Coast Guard in the event of a flare-up.
Détente must be the way forward that will favor all the protagonists in the conflict.
