The Armed Forces of the Philippines conduct an island seizure simulation on November 6, 2024, near the waters of Nanyao Island, South China Sea. Photo: VCG

Editor's Note: 

The escalation of recent tensions between China and the Philippines raises concerns among neighboring countries in the South China Sea. How will the Philippines' provocations, instigated and supported by the US, affect the situation in the South China Sea? Why does ASEAN hope that the situation will be contained?

In the "ASEAN Perspective on the South China Sea" series, we collect wisdom and insights from former diplomats and scholars from ASEAN member countries. Rommel C. Banlaoi (Banlaoi), president of the Philippine Society for International Security Studies, told Global Times (GT) reporters Yu Jincui, Qian Jiayin and Xing Xiaojing on the sidelines of the 5th Symposium on Global Maritime Cooperation and Ocean Governance, recently held in Sanya, Hainan Province, that the Philippines has become an "outlier state" when it comes to the ASEAN position, as the ASEAN way is balancing China and the US, the two major powers, while seeking a peaceful settlement of disputes, avoiding conflict and promoting amity among nations.

GT: Recently, during a visit to the Philippines, the US defense secretary said the US would defend its treaty ally if Filipino forces come under an armed attack in the increasingly volatile South China Sea. Some commentators believe this is merely an empty promise from the US to the Philippines. Do you believe that the US will stay committed to the Philippines regarding the South China Sea issue? 

Banlaoi: That's the official position of the US. However, if you put that position to the test, it will have to undergo procedures in the US, because military action by the US to defend the Philippines is not automatic. Under the Mutual Defense Treaty, it has to go through a political process in the US. Whether the US Congress will approve military action of the US is subject to the constitutional processes of the US.

This also applies to the Philippines, as the Philippine Congress must also approve any US military action to defend the country. Therefore, it's more of a public relations statement. When it comes to the actual implementation of that commitment, there are political processes involved.

GT: The US plans to deploy the "Typhon" medium-range missile system "indefinitely" in the Philippines. The Philippine Department of National Defense also confirmed that it was seriously considering purchasing Typhon missile systems from the US. What does this mean for the security of the Philippines? Is this weapon system a "security guarantee" or a "security liability" for the Philippines?

Banlaoi: The expectation of the Ferdinand Marcos Jr government is that the deployment of the Typhon missile will provide security for the Philippines. But, in my opinion, it creates more insecurities for the Philippines because the deployment of such a US missile on the Philippine territory will act as a magnet of attack by adversaries of the US.

Therefore, I oppose the deployment of this kind of US medium-range missile system. If the Philippine government decides to procure its own missile system, where will it get the money from? Ultimately, I believe this is more about public relations and propaganda. Once operational, it could lead to even more problems.

GT: The Philippine President Marcos passed two maritime laws recently to assert claims over the South China Sea, which sparked protests from both China and Malaysia. The Philippines continues to take various measures to escalate tensions in the South China Sea. Are these actions controversial within the Philippines?

Banlaoi: They are very controversial. They've generated reactions from parties directly involved in the conflict in the South China Sea, such as Malaysia, and we heard the loudest reaction from China.

The intention of the Philippine government in passing the two laws is to strengthen its national position and assertiveness in pursuing its maritime claims and jurisdiction in the area. But, as I said, such unilateral actions cannot contribute to peaceful settlements without due regard to other parties.

GT: Exacerbating tensions in the South China Sea clearly contradicts the principles of ASEAN. The Philippines has been continuously hyping up the South China Sea issue on various ASEAN occasions. Is there an intention to influence ASEAN's stance on this matter?

Banlaoi: His government [The Marcos government] is implementing what I call excessive pro-Americanism in its foreign policy. And ASEAN is not comfortable with that kind of excessive pro-Americanism. The ASEAN way is balancing the relationship between the two major powers, China and the US, and the Philippines is no longer balancing. The Philippines is favoring the US against China. That is against the principle of ASEAN for friendship, peace, and neutrality in the region. So, in that regard, the Philippines has become an outlier state when it comes to the ASEAN position, as the ASEAN way is balancing China and the US, the two major powers, while seeking a peaceful settlement of disputes, avoiding conflict and promoting amity among nations.

GT: In your view, where is the potential for improvement in China-Philippines relations? If you were to advise the current Philippine government, what kind of relationship with China do you think would be beneficial for the Philippines' interests?

Banlaoi: It's very difficult to give advice to the current government due to its very hostile and unfriendly attitude toward China. We cannot settle disputes with China with that kind of mind-set. If you truly want to peacefully resolve your disputes not only with China but also with other parties in the South China Sea, you must foster a friendly environment. You have to seek friendship.

For example, because of their friendly relationship, Vietnam and the Philippines have been able to manage their differences. We also maintain a friendly, even brotherly, relationship with Malaysia, which allows us to manage our territorial disputes over Sabah. However, we do not have that kind of friendly attitude toward China under the current government.

During the Rodrigo Duterte administration, there was a more amicable approach, which helped to calm the overall situation in the South China Sea and facilitated various forms of cooperation. Unfortunately, his term was short, and he was succeeded by the current president, whose attitude is very hostile toward China. If you cannot promote cooperation, you cannot peacefully settle disputes with China under such an attitude and mind-set.

GT: Your views are very different from the current policies adopted by the Marcos government. Do you feel any pressure within your country?

Banlaoi: I feel a lot of pressure and am being described negatively by many public officials. Some people even call me a traitor for being friendly toward China, but those are just words because I believe in what I am advocating. For me, territorial disputes with China can only be peacefully settled in the context of a friendly relationship. Without friendship and understanding, it is very difficult to resolve these disputes. Therefore, we must develop friendship and foster common understanding; this will pave the way for a peaceful settlement.

GT: Have your views garnered attention and generated discussion in the Philippines?

Banlaoi: Yes, they have generated a lot of discussion. Those who are hostile toward China often criticize and attack me. 

However, those who are friendly to China tend to remain silent and agree with me. That's the problem. The anti-China sentiment in the Philippines is very loud, while pro-China voices are much quieter. That's why I'm encouraging those who are friendly to China to speak up and make their voices heard. If they do not raise their voices for friendship and understanding, people like me will continue to be ostracized and criticized, if not demonized.