10 years later, what did we gain?
Talking to a powerful neighbor is not necessarily a sign of weakness. Sometimes diplomacy is precisely what a country needs when military and economic realities impose limits.
Text size
Talking to a powerful neighbor is not necessarily a sign of weakness. Sometimes diplomacy is precisely what a country needs when military and economic realities impose limits.
We have marked 10 years since the landmark 2016 arbitration ruling on the South China Sea. That day, 12 July 2016, still brings a sense of pride. We were the smaller country that stood up to a much bigger power — and won the case on paper.
No matter how many anniversaries we celebrate, we will keep coming back to a simple question: What has that legal victory actually changed for ordinary Filipinos?
Imagine a farmer who finally gets the title to his land, only to find that he still cannot plow it because his neighbor keeps driving him away. The title may prove that the land is his — but what good is it if he cannot actually use it?
After 10 years, are our fishermen safer? Has the ruling stopped Chinese vessels from entering disputed waters? Has it given the Philippines greater control over its resources? Broadly, has this legal victory translated into something people can actually feel in their daily lives?
It’s complicated.
When the ruling came out, it was often described as UN-backed, as if the United Nations itself had endorsed the decision.
The Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA), an independent body and not a UN agency established under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), a UN-backed international treaty, administered the case. The ruling is legally binding on the parties and forms part of international maritime law.
This means the UN was not a party to the case and it had long clarified that point. In the rush to celebrate, that distinction was often lost.
More importantly, we celebrated the ruling without fully confronting the hardest question. How do we enforce a legal victory against a much more powerful country that refuses to recognize it?
Isn’t it like winning a lawsuit against a neighbor who controls the only road to your property — legally, it is a victory, but you still can’t get through the gate?
The tribunal’s scope also matters. The ruling, experts say, addressed specific maritime rights and claims under UNCLOS, but it did not decide who owns the disputed land features. That distinction is important because China’s broader claims involve territorial sovereignty, not simply maritime rights.
Billions of pesos were spent pursuing the case. That money ultimately came from taxpayers — from the VAT we pay on groceries, the fuel we buy, and the taxes collected from our work and businesses. What did we get for that investment, and what else could that money have funded?
Could it have strengthened the Coast Guard? Improved surveillance? Supported our fishermen? Built the capabilities we need to protect our waters?
Supporters of the ruling rightly emphasized that it gave the Philippines a stronger legal position. Legal strength and physical control, however, are not the same thing.
At sea, our fishermen still face harassment and our vessels still encounter Chinese ships. Broadcasting and publishing every confrontation may help document what is happening, but documentation alone will not stop it.
There is a difference between showing the world that we are being pushed around and having the capacity to prevent it from happening.
For years, we have treated the arbitration ruling as an important shield, but one that cannot provide deterrence. It has to be backed by capability, strategy, and the willingness to use diplomacy wisely.
This is where engagement with China matters, even amid continuing tensions. Talking to a powerful neighbor is not necessarily a sign of weakness. Sometimes, diplomacy is precisely what a country needs when military and economic realities impose limits.
The ruling remains important because it is part of our history and provides a legal foundation for defending our maritime rights. Although it is still a trophy sitting on a shelf.
For ordinary Filipinos, victory is not a legal document framed on a wall. It is a fisherman who can go to sea without fear, a supply vessel that can reach its destination, and a country confident enough to protect its resources and defend its interests.
Ten years later, perhaps it is time to stop asking whether we won on paper. It’s better to ask — what have we done with that victory, and when will Filipinos finally feel its benefits in the real world?
