The Philippines and China are embroiled in a high-stakes territorial dispute in the South China Sea. Any incident related to their disagreement could potentially reshape the entire geopolitical landscape of the region.

Both countries have accused each other of provocative behavior. China stepped up its narrative by releasing a supposed phone conversation between a Chinese embassy official in Manila and Admiral Alberto Carlos, commander of the Philippine Navy’s Western Command.

The leaked two-minute recording discussed China’s proposed “new model” arrangement for Ayungin (Second Thomas) Shoal, a disputed territory in the South China Sea. The proposal, which was wiretapped or unlawfully recorded, suggested a potential shift in China’s approach to the dispute.

In the recording, the Admiral supposedly agreed that the Philippines would use fewer vessels in its resupply missions to the Second Thomas Shoal troops and notify Beijing about missions in advance.

Philippine defense and security officials decried the release of the wiretapped recording. They accused China of “repeated acts of engaging and disseminating disinformation, misinformation, and malinformation” to sow discord, division, and disunity.

National Security Adviser Eduardo Año and Defense Secretary Gilbert Teodoro, who denied knowledge of the “agreement,” urged the DFA not to let this pass unsanctioned without a severe penalty, even as they doubted the authenticity of the recording.

The situation remains highly volatile and could potentially disrupt our diplomatic relations with China, a development that would have significant and far-reaching consequences.

However, expelling foreign diplomats from the country is not without precedence.

In 2003, the Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) asked Baghdad to recall an Iraqi diplomat suspected of having ties to a Muslim terrorist group, the Abu Sayyaf, in the Philippines and taking part in an anti-American protest here, which the Iraqi diplomat vehemently denied.

A host country has the right to expel a foreign diplomat or declare any diplomatic staff member “persona non grata,” a term used in diplomacy to refer to an unwelcome person. This action can be taken without providing a reason, and the person to be expelled is typically handed a note withdrawing their accreditation.

The DFA is currently investigating a possible violation of the Anti-Wire Tapping Act, a Philippine law that prohibits the unauthorized interception of private communications. This investigation also involves a breach of diplomatic protocols and conventions, which are international agreements that govern the conduct of diplomats.

These potential violations have prompted a spokesperson from the Chinese foreign ministry in Beijing to ask the Philippines to refrain from provoking any further incidents and to allow Chinese diplomats to perform their duties without any hindrance.

The good Admiral at the center of the controversy could have addressed the issue publicly by either confirming or denying its occurrence instead of going on leave from his command. It would have been a proactive step in dispelling any doubts surrounding the controversy. It would have proved to his “mistahs” in Philippine Military Academy Makatao Class 1989, who supported him, that he was honorable.

If the conversation occurred in January of this year, it would also be essential to determine whether the recording was honest or had been tampered with and who recorded it.

Having covered the diplomatic community for many years as a DFA beat reporter, I know that any agreement on matters concerning the West Philippine Sea should be authorized by the President and coursed through the DFA, not through any admiral or general of the Armed Forces of the Philippines.

Although China claimed the leaked recording was an agreement, there was no such agreement. Is China resorting to coercive diplomacy?

Diplomats’ primary responsibility is to protect their country’s nationals in the host country while also working to strengthen the bilateral relationship between the two nations. Diplomatic and consular officers have immunity and inviolability in the course of their official acts.

Diplomats’ actions are governed by the United Nations Charter and international law, such as the 1961 Vienna Conventions on Diplomatic Relations and the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.

China’s “two-faced diplomacy,” a term used to describe a diplomatic approach that appears to be cooperative on the surface but is actually aggressive or manipulative, is unacceptable. It is treading on dangerous ground.

For feedback, text to 09451450681 or email at cynchdb@gmail.com