Strategy for disaster risk reduction Disaster risk reduction (DRR) systems are now in place in Bangladesh, Myanmar
reduction (DRR) systems are now in place in Bangladesh, Myanmar and the
Climate change –induced weather disasters have quadrupled during the last few years. The
2011 horrifying earthquake and tsunami in Japan is one such weather disaster. The 2013
typhoon Yolanda accompanied by the terrifying storm surge in the Philippines is another.
Tropical storms, extended drought, harder monsoon rains, devastating floods, unexpected
landslides and earthquakes are more common now in densely populated Asia where people
are the most endangered when natural calamities strike. The annual cyclones in Bangladesh,
the uncommon cyclone occurrence in Myanmar in 2008 as well as the destruction brought by
typhoons Ondoy, Sendong, and Pablo in the Philippines drew attention to these countries’
efforts at reducing disaster risks in managed ways.
Emergency
food stocks (and replenishment), utensils for immediate use like cooking stoves, water supply,
provision of sanitary facilities and others.
Experience with disaster emergency management gave way to the principle of “build back
better” which means that damaged structures are not simply replaced but improved to make
them more resilient and intact for the onslaught of another natural calamity. Like in other
areas of environmental management, the institutional arrangement to cope with natural
Global level
At the international level, the UN has an International Strategy for Disaster Reduction which
aims to guide and coordinate the efforts of a wide range of partners to achieve substantive
reduction in disaster losses and build resilient nations and communities as an essential
condition for sustainable development. The United Nations International Strategy for
Disaster Reduction (UNISDR) is the secretariat of the ISDR system and comprises numerous
organizations, states, NGOs, financial institutions, technical bodies and civil society which
work together and share information to reduce disaster risks.
It also serves as the focal point for the implementation of the Hyogo Framework for Action, a
ten-year plan of action adopted in 2005 by 168 governments to protect lives and livelihoods
against disasters.
With the prominence of the field of environmental law during the last four decades, the
enactment of a legislation on disaster risk reduction and management is encouraged. One
such is the 2010 Philippine Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Act (R.A. 10121). An
action plan and guidelines to define the respective roles and responsibilities of government
1
Philippines with the support of international organizations like the Red Cross and the Save
the Children and their respective governments. DRR refers to all activities by local
communities, families, governments and NGOs that help reduce in advance the effects of
natural disasters. The objective is to cover all risks including the effects of climate change.
Disaster risk reduction system
The main feature of a disaster risk reduction system is a disaster plan and prevention
program in endangered towns and villages. It incorporates standardized warning signals,
different flags for use before and during disasters, identification of emergency shelters,
evacuation procedures,
disasters involve not just one government agency like the Department of Social Welfare and
Development but many other environment-related agencies such as those on local
governments, health, education, agriculture, police, public works, etc. The Philippines’
National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council (NDRRMC) follows that direction
through effective inter-agency linkages and coordination with regional and local
governments for disaster remediation operations.
agencies, schools, NGOs and other groups is in place. The challenge is to translate into
effective local community action to save lives and reduce disaster risks and economic losses.
Above all, a safety culture in times of disasters and emergencies should be established so
that people in danger areas will be well informed and motivated to consciously integrate the
risks in their day-to-day living.
Indeed, the success of any disaster plan and prevention program depends on the cooperation
of the local people exposed to danger. Nobody is more familiar with the immediate
environment than the local inhabitants themselves who are also best situated to overcome
the risks that accompany weather disasters aided by disaster emergency awareness and
preparedness strategies and techniques.
Asean: Better, faster disaster reliefs? BY THE MANILA TIMES ON FEBRUARY 6, 2015
DURING the past three decades, the frequency of natural disasters has increased globally but
the worst increase has been in the Asia-Pacific region. Be that as it may, advances in the
science of disaster risk management point out that there are no true natural disasters. Many
natural hazards are accelerated by human activity and no matter how “natural” the hazard, it
is human exposure, vulnerability, resilience and preparedness that define whether a given
event results merely in a rainy day or natural catastrophe. In short, human behavior can be
regulated unlike the weather.
Studies of experiences about regulatory frameworks for reducing disaster risks, responding
to disasters and recovering from them are still in their infancy. Yet states are increasingly
turning to legal instruments at the national, regional and international levels to fight
disasters. Are those legal instruments in place meeting their potential to increase
cooperation on disaster risk management and humanitarian response ?
The Asean Agreement on Disaster Management and Emergency Response (ADMER) signed
and ratified by all ten member states is one such legal instrument. Agreed on as an aftermath
of the 2004 Great Tsunami which hit, among others, the coastal zones of Indonesia and
Thailand resulting in much loss of life and property, ADMER was already in effect (29
December 2009) when one of the strongest typhoons ever recorded, Typhoon Yolanda
(Haiyan), hit the Visayas in the Philippines.
Some of the militaries of the Southeast Asian countries were forced to respond to the
calamity but their voluntary efforts highlighted military operational shortcomings in the
region. In many ways, the response was mainly on a national basis. Some transport aircraft
and ships were sent but there was not enough multinational cooperation. Analysts trace the
situation to the lack of trust and confidence between many governments for which reason
bilateral and trilateral arrangements may be more effective.
Aware of the need for greater cooperation in humanitarian assistance and disaster relief,
Thailand and Korea sponsored a Southeast Asian Regional Forum Disaster Relief Exercise in
Thailand while Brunei Darussalam and Singapore co-hosted in 2013 a combined military
medicine/humanitarian assistance and disaster relief exercise with all ten Asean members
involved. Additional region-wide exercises were held in Thailand in 2014. Singapore, on the
other hand, offered to the Armed Forces of the Philippines its newly launched Changi
Regional Humanitarian Assistance and Disaster Relief Co-ordination Center to organize multi-
national military intervention in response to Typhoon Ruby (Hagupit) which made landfall in
Eastern Samar on 6 December 2014 but was downgraded into a tropical storm soon after its
landfall.
Take note that while defense of sovereignty is the primary responsibility of the military, the
requirement to respond to floods, earthquakes, tsunamis, volcanic eruptions, etc. is likely to
remain a secondary priority but one, nonetheless, which is likely to increasingly influence the
modernization drive of the Asean countries’ military over the next decades.
2
In that connection, Singapore procured large multipurpose amphibious ships in 2014. Similar
efforts at modernization are being exerted by Indonesia, the Philippines, Myanmar and
Vietnam even if, admittedly, security in the increasing territorial disputes is the prime mover
for the heightened emphasis on the militaries’ capacity and capability in the region.
To fulfill the military requirements related to humanitarian search/rescue and relief
operations, procurement targets of Asean countries like multi-role helicopters and transport
aircrafts would not require new designs to fulfill the militaries’ secondary role. What is
necessary is inter-operability of joint and multi-national missions with greater command-and-
control capabilities among Asean’s military considering the vastness of the region.
In the light of scientific information that natural disasters are projected to intensify in the
Asia-Pacific region in the future, the Asean Agreement on Disaster Management and
Emergency Response mentioned above could serve the Asean countries well if utilized
effectively and cohesively. As an agreement on disaster preparedness, emergency response
and rehabilitation, it is about expedited customs and immigration clearance; faster
movement of relief goods, tools and personnel (included are provision of food, water
sanitation facilities and temporary shelters); setting up of an Asean disaster relief fund;
better utilization of civilian and military personnel as well as stronger simulation exercises to
test emergency response.
Actually, an Asean Co-ordinating Centre for Humanitarian Assistance on Disaster
Management (AHA) is functioning in Jakarta to facilitate cross border movement of relief
efforts and coordination among member countries in joint emergency response.
An ADMER evaluation report in 2013 noted that many civil society organizations are
increasingly involved in advocacy work around disaster management laws in countries such
as Cambodia, Laos, Indonesia, Thailand and the Philippines.
However, there is a need to complement legal instruments with strong research which could
help boost our understanding of the complexities underlying risk and disaster relief at all
levels.
Environmental refugees: Quickly spreading BY AMADO S. TOLENTINO, JR. ON JUNE 15,
2015
Refugees are people who seek asylum for fear of political, racial or religious persecution or
people who leave their homes because of war or civil strife. This traditional notion of
refugees, however, leave out the new, growing and quickly spreading phenomenon of
environmental refugees triggered by natural calamities like earthquakes, tsunamis, volcanic
eruptions, landslides resulting to forced displacement of people. (When people seek refuge
within their own countries as environmental refugees, they are commonly referred to as
internally displaced persons).
Recent scientific studies show that rising seas will supplant encroaching desserts and other
forms of land degradation as the major threat to habitability of many places this century. The
evacuation of 1,400 residents of Papua New Guinea’s Carteret Islands (the world’s first
climate change refugees according to the UN) due to rising sea levels offers a sobering vision
of the future for coastal populations.
Global warming brought about by excessive fossil fuel use is reported to result to thermal
expansion of the oceans and melting of the icecaps. A one meter increase in sea level will
displace millions of people in the delta regions of the Nile and Ganges rivers, further
compounding land scarcity in Egypt and Bangladesh. To think that world population is
projected to increase by 90 million annually all of them in need of food, water and shelter. In
fact, as the root causes of the on-going Southeast Asian migrant crisis unravel, it would not
be surprising if it turns out in the UNHCR backed Bangkok Special Meeting on Irregular
Migration in the Indian Ocean of concerned countries and other probes being carried out
that some of those ‘boat people’ are in reality environmental refugees from Bangladesh and
Myanmar aiming for Thailand, Malaysia and Indonesia.
The combined effects of warmer climates and higher seas will make typhoons more frequent
and more destructive further damaging the habitability of coastal areas. Extensive river
diversions will markedly lessen the amount of freshwater discharged into coastal areas while
higher sea levels will increase saltwater intrusion thus reducing mangrove forest cover and
disrupting major fisheries within fragile ecosystems. Endangered places that may cease to
exist include, among others, Tuvalu, Kiribati and the Marshall Islands in the Pacific, Maldives
in the Indian Ocean as well as the touristic string of emerald islands and islets in the
Caribbean prompting the formation of an association of small island states working towards
solutions to their plight to counter sea level rise before the United Nations.
Poverty and inadequate development policies along with rapid population growth are the
roots of environmental degradation in the developing world. Present environmental refugees
may already be the biggest single group of displaced persons. By the middle of this century,
people forced to leave their homes and places of livelihood because of flooding,
desertification, toxic pollution, sea level rise or other environmental disruptions may even
constitute the largest in number among those displaced by all other means.
3
Improvement in general environmental practices particularly agricultural methods, including
soil conservation, which maintains the capability of ecosystems to support life known in
environmental science as ‘carrying capacity’ will help prevent migration of people. Above all,
rapid population growth must be managed particularly in places most vulnerable to
ecological disasters.
Sovereignty vis-a-vis environmental security BY AMADO S. TOLENTINO, JR. ON JUNE 23,
2013
The benefit of a changing approach to the concept of sovereignty over natural resources
extends to environmental or ecological security as it relates to facilitating conflict resolution
to prevent or resolve armed conflict or hostilities or threats therefrom between and among
States.
In this, the due regard principle in customary law comes to the fore. Nature is civilian in
character but it is easy to transform civilian to military objective. An example is the reported
pollution of the Danube River during the Kosovo war resulting from alleged bombing of
industrial facilities.
From time to time, military conflicts over water rights was a national security issue between
India and Pakistan over the Indus; Ethiopia and Egypt over the Nile; Turkey and Syria over the
Euphrates; Botswana and Namibia over Okavango; Israel and Palestine over the Jordan River.
Water in those areas cross political boundaries with the concomitant boundary issue. The
situation, however, creates a natural interdependence between the States in sharing the
water resource drawing people to work together on the water resource availability aspect
even when countries were officially at war.
In reality, environmental security problems are solved not only within the confines of
national boundaries. Often, they involve transborder areas, e.g. transboundary deep or
shallow underground aquifers, international rivers, other shared watercourses. Actually,
governance of groundwater remains weak, perhaps partly because of reliance on the old
concept of sovereignty.
There are no standards for developing boundaries for groundwater systems rendering
effective governance problematic. Governance models are moving towards public-private
partnership for environmental management and utilization and groundwater as part of the
global commons. And, when the environmental harm or interference occurs within national
boundaries, they give rise to internally displaced persons as what happened to victims of
water conflicts or of natural disasters like earthquakes, tsunamis and floods. Ultimately, their
displacement bring them across national boundaries as environmental refugees.
Ecological security must be recognized as an inseparable component of the concept of
sovereignty to attain international security. States must recognize their joint responsibility
for the protection of the transnational environment. Opportunities for the shift of political
attention and natural resources from the military domain to the environmental domain
should be pursued, i.e. strengthening confidence through cooperation in environmental and
other non-military areas.
The issue of environmental security occurs whenever sovereignty issue pose a threat like
potential disputes over exploitation of natural resources. Case in point is the rich in marine
and mineral resources but object of overlapping ownership claims of the Spratly islands in
the West Philippine Sea among the Philippines, Vietnam, China, Malaysia, Brunei Darussalam
and Taiwan where more arguments favor cooperation to preserve/conserve the ecological
wealth of the area than tackling head-on the territorial sovereignty issue. Apart from the
long-standing suggestion for an Asean Area of Cooperation in the Spratlys, there are
possibilities for the provision of internationally protected area status in the area through
multilateral cooperative options available.
Indeed, the notion of ecogeographical regimes is a useful one in demarcating areas within
which natural resources can be taken to be relatively homogenous and, consequently, the
concept of sovereignty duly re-adjusted. The International Commission for the Protection of
the Rhine, the two international commissions for the environmental protection and
sustainable utilization of the Baltic Sea, and the comparable mechanism for cooperation
among most of the littoral states are examples of this. In short, there is a continuing need for
international and inter-regional cooperation that must be able to transcend the rights of
sovereignty now vested in States. The principle of shared responsibility for the protection of
the environment must be fully accepted.
It is also a fact that politico-military and environmental security are linked in terms of
opportunity costs. Political attention and material resources spent in the military sector could
be used to strengthen environmental security. A revised concept of sovereignty is an
opportunity to shift attention and resources from the military sector to the environment
sector. It could further elaboration of confidence and security building measures in both the
military and civilian sectors by the adoption of less offensive military postures in defense of
the environment. Hopefully, after the most recent posturings, the demilitarized zone (DMZ)
between North and South Korea would still be headed towards this direction via the proposal
4
to make the area an international peace and nature park for, among others, the preservation
of biodiversity found therein.
Environmental security should be equitable for all States, cultures and generations.
Environmental conscience, search for common gains, and multilateral cooperation should
replace attitudes and policies of confrontation with the insurance of recognition of the
concept of sovereignty over natural resources. The removal of confrontation between States
is an important precondition for the removal of confrontation between humankind and the
natural environment considering the fundamental necessity of securing the long-term
availability of natural resources.
The pursuit of environmental security could become a major agent of change in international
affairs, promoting an international order more compatible with human needs. Common
sovereignty over natural resources should be recognized and given priority in the resolution
of conflicts and hostilities among States.
Asean environmental security concerns BY AMADO S. TOLENTINO, JR.On OCTOBER 3,
2015
The effects of extreme weather events caused by climate change are now felt all over the
world – warmer temperature causing desertification and inadequate food supply; low lying
areas inundated by rising seas; drought sparked conflicts over water supply as downriver
inhabitants safeguard their share. As a further consequence, food producing areas become
uninhabitable leading to disease, mass migration and conflict. Worst of all, the scarcity of oil
and mineral resources raises tensions between powers that import those commodities. All
these could undermine a country’s capacity to carry out its key function of providing security
to its people.
The security implications of the earth’s environmental degradation are forcing governments
and militaries to review their long-term defense strategies. Defense planning is increasingly
being shaped by climate and resource considerations.
Asean countries have experienced super typhoons and super droughts; storm surges and
tsunamis which destroyed coastal infrastructures and properties including flooding of roads,
airports, military camps and destroyed hospitals and health centers which brought about
displaced people and population migration. (Earthquakes and volcanic eruptions are not
influenced by the weather). The latest occurrence was the horrendous floods brought about
by a heavy monsoon season in Myanmar which deluged 12 out of the country’s 14 regions.
Rice growing areas were very much affected as flood water drains through the vast
Irrawaddy river delta. The army helped the residents cope with the situation as the
government embraced foreign assistance.
Security implications of severe climate change in the Asean countries include, but is not
limited to, (a) huge movements of people from uninhabitable areas; (b) conflicts over basic
resources like water and food exacerbating water scarcity and increase in food costs and
food shortage; (c) greater incidence of malnutrition, risks of infectious disease outbreaks,
and even death from rising temperatures; (d) energy production and transportation
disruptions of varying lengths and magnitudes; (e) increased demand for disaster and
humanitarian reliefs and limited environment for military operations, e.g. military
installations near coastlines threatened by heavy rains in stormy situations and coastal
erosion; (f) intensified heat waves presenting challenges to outdoor training and personnel
efficiency.
Environmental disasters could even be taken advantage of for terrorism. Indeed, the impacts
of global warming are becoming ever more evident and humankind must rise to the
challenge.
In the light of security concerns brought about by global warming, what is the role of Asean
militaries in a resource-stressed environment due to climate disruption? Take note that
energy supply and other imported resources by Asean countries are overly dependent on
sealanes, the Strait of Malacca in particular, between Malaysia, Indonesia and Singapore.
That alone is enough to have Asean countries re-examine and re-think their maritime
priorities to have resource protection a core function of its navies.
The greater need, however, is for strengthening the Asean military capabilities in anticipation
of impending climate wars. This means more soldiers with different training and weapons
defense and security systems designed to operate effectively across the full range of
foreseeable future environments altered by a warmer climate – resource war (oil and
minerals), water wars (diminished water for agriculture and water supply shortage for
domestic use) and migratory wars.
With climate change, the demand for rapid military deployments in response and recovery
efforts in disastrous environmental circumstances is likely to increase too and this is a good
time for Asean to plan out to protect its future security, i.e. improving infrastructures
including military installations located in or near coastlines taking into account advances in
engineering design, techniques and technologies. After all, it is better to work with nature
rather than against it.
5
Definitely, strategies like Asean military to military cooperation and enhanced collaboration
that boost capability and effectiveness will play an increasingly significant role in helping its
most vulnerable members prepare as best they can for a changed warmer world. Whatever
the result will be, humankind must adapt to global warming.
Asean: Changed security environment BY AMADO S. TOLENTINO, JR.ON DECEMBER 18,
2015
NEW thinking about defense and security environment during the last few years pervades
countries around the world. This was brought about by, to mention a few, the emergence of
a terrorist quasi-state in the Middle East; home-grown terrorist attacks prompting
governments to be on extreme alert; mass immigration to Europe; the proliferation of
advanced defense technologies; internal displacement of people due to armed conflicts; the
phenomenon of environmental refugees including climate migrants as a consequence of
natural disasters; popularity of cyber warfare, which gave way to various levels of internal
uncertainty and a new perception about security concerns.
In the Asean region, tension prevails as rivals jostle over territories in the West Philippine
Sea which has enormous geo-strategic and economic significance. This climate of conflict has
security implications which forced governments to re-think their long-term defense
strategies. In fact, some analysts opined that defense planning is increasingly being shaped
by climate and resource considerations too. Take note that majority of the Asean countries
are vulnerable to extreme climate disturbances due to global warming and disaster relief had
come to be accepted as the military’s secondary role.
The changed defense and security environment in the Asean countries has led to
‘procurement drives’to ensure stability. Singapore highlights its island defense capabilities
centered on automation and mobility enhancements. The Singapore Armed Forces recently
acquired protected mobility vehicles which enhances ballistic protection for troops and
incorporates a host of safety measures. Earlier, the country significantly boosted its sea
power by commissioning six new frigates.
The Philippines, as part of its long awaited military modernization program, recently
received new aircrafts including jet fighters and helicopters from South Korea. Medium lift
transport and surveillance aircrafts were also acquired from Spain while heavy landing craft
vessels will be acquired from Australia. Meanwhile, as Vietnam’s economy improves
tremendously, reforms to further professionalize the Vietnam People’s Army are under way.
Its procurements include, among others, fighter aircrafts, submarines, coastal radar system,
maritime patrol helicopters and fast patrol vessels for the Vietnam Coast Guard.
Brunei Darrusalam’s off-shore patrol vessels from Germany considerably enhanced its naval
operational capabilities. To improve training, its Navy is building a center of excellence for
seamanship warfare, weapons handling, firefighting and damage control, communications
and engineering training.
Indonesia, on the other hand, identified its need for a complementary submarine fleet that
can fill in the gaps of their new ocean-going submarines. Note that Indonesia maintains a
submarine base in Sulawesi Island.
Malaysia, which established its own Malaysian Maritime. Enforcement Agency in 2005, took
delivery of its first Scorpene submarines in 2009 while Thailand, the first to possess
Southeast Asia’s aircraft carrier has been exploring submarine procurement.
The rapid expansion of Myanmar’s Navy backed up by an ambitious program of indigenous
shipbuilding is well noted in the region. Myanmar’s military or Tatmadaw, however, was
drawn into its largest and costliest military campaign against insurgents in the Kokang region
of northeaster Shan State. The Kokang campaign marked the first time the Tatmadaw
undertook combined arms operations involving mechanized infantry, artillery, armor and air
power under combat conditions.
Those acquisitions of military hardware were made prior to Washington’s announcement of
a US $250 million plan to bolster naval capabilities of the Philippines, Indonesia, Malaysia,
Vietnam and Japan and before Singapore agreed to the first deployment in the city state of a
US P8Poseidon spy plane, the most advance surveillance aircraft of the US, and long before
the arrival in Subic Bay of USS Tucson, a high endurance submarine with advanced stealth
capabilities.
A rising China turning closer to Russia with US as Pacific hegemon are obviously contributory
to the changed defense and security environment in the countries of Southeast Asia.
Be that as it may, the most pressing priority for Asean countries in the changed security
environment is to improve their intelligence-gathering capabilities. Procurement of
munitions alone would not suffice to meet the countries’ security needs. There ought to
have improvement in the region’s intelligence sharing and coordinating capabilities. More
than any other time, the new era of “intel-centric” warfare using innovative information,
communications and computer technologies demands the ability to assess, analyze and
decisively act in an emerging situation of critical importance. In short, military equipment and
weapons advantage should be backed by an effective intelligence capability.
6
Asean: Defense evolves in uncertainties BY AMADO S. TOLENTINO, JR. On JULY 22,
2016
MEDIA campaigns by the global defense industry accelerated during the last few years.
Military defense technology exhibition/exposition with seminars, conferences and free
demonstrations of the latest in arms capability increased in number and frequency. Among
Asean countries, Singapore and Indonesia are known to have hosted such events.
Defense procurement drives. Easily noticeable are the Asean countries’ almost simultaneous
procurement drives to ensure maritime security. Under the military upgrade and
modernization program of former President Aquino, the Philippines acquired patrol frigates,
fast transport and support vessels, helicopters and fighter jets. BRP Tarlac, launched in early
2016, is the first of two landing platform dock style vessels for the Philippine Navy. Indonesia
is constructing a submarine base on Sulawesi Island and plans to buy Russian-made diesel
electric submarines as well as an amphibious jet-powered aircraft with particular ability in
firefighting and coastal search and rescue.
Singapore, which has the region’s only submarine rescue capacity, boosted its sea power
with the delivery of Independence, the lead ship of its Navy’s Littoral Mission Vessel program,
an effort aimed at developing the country’s latest and most advanced surface warfare
platforms. Malaysia received its first Scorpene submarines while Thailand, the first to possess
Southeast Asia’s aircraft carrier, purchased a Saab Grippen fighter aircraft capable of tactical
data links.
The arrival in Brunei Darussalam of German-made offshore patrol vessels considerably
enhanced its Navy’s operational capabilities. Vietnam’s procurements include fighter
aircrafts, submarines, coastal radar system, maritime patrol helicopters, and fast patrol
vessels for the Vietnam Coast Guard.
Sea drills. With the acquisition of modern military weapons and equipment, naval exercises
between and among Asean countries significantly increased, too. These are exercises
designed to improve professionalism, develop exchange experiences and draw lessons from
fellow navies. The activities evolved out of the Indonesia-Singapore, Malaysia-Singapore, and
Malaysia-Thailand bilateral naval exercise agreements. In addition, some Asean countries
maintain defense engagement activities with the US (US-Philippines “Balikatan”), Australia
and New Zealand. Of late, “Balikatan” (Shoulder-to-Shoulder) was not only about maritime
security but humanitarian assistance and disaster response as well.
 To those military exercises should be mentioned the fact that China, with claims to most of
the South China Sea, does routine sea drills in the area with the most recent one described as
featuring air control operations with live missiles. China and Malaysia had a joined military
exercise in the same way that the US also had its naval engagement activity in Vietnam.
Japan is into joint military exercises with the US and the Philippines.
China vis-à-vis Asean. As tension mounts in the region, reports say China uses fishing fleets
with armed escorts to bolster its maritime claims and even trains Chinese fishermen militarily
for readiness in case of checks and intercepts by coast guards and navies of claimant
countries in the disputed South China Sea
To deter China and to reassure its allies, the US undertook last month drills in the Philippine
waters “close to the disputed waters,” making use of its awesome USS John Stennis and USS
Ronald Reagan. While at sea, the strike gap conducted maritime surveillance, defensive or
combat training, long-range strikes, coordinated maneuvers, and other exercises. The US
Navy explained, “As a Pacific nation and Pacific leader, the US has a national interest in
maintaining security … peaceful resolution of disputes … adherence to freedom of navigation
and over-flight throughout the shared domains.”
Interestingly, the China Shipbuilding Corp. proposed the construction of an “Underwater
Great Wall” consisting of a network of ship and sub-surface sensors that could significantly
erode the undersea warfare advantage held by the US. Specific components of the
surveillance system will include underwater security equipment as well as marine oil and gas
exploration devices.
Asean’s united front toward China?. So far, as a regional bloc, Asean has not presented a
united front toward China on the South China Sea issue. While the Philippines and Vietnam
have come into direct confrontation with China, the Mekong River riparian countries Laos
and Cambodia prefer to side with China. Indonesia and Singapore have been a bit outspoken
compared to Malaysia, Thailand and Brunei Darussalam, which chose cautiously to take the
middle stand. This situation enabled China to expand its sway over much of the South China
Sea despite overlapping claims. Add to that the “Asean way” of non-interference into their
respective internal affairs.
The expectation was Asean would make a clear joint statement after the promulgation of the
Permanent Court of Arbitration’s decision in the case brought by the Philippines against
China. None is in the offing. Perhaps, it will not make a joint statement at all as it seems the
arbitration decision even further raised regional tensions undermining the Asean objective of
regional integration.
7
Asean’s changed security environment
There is now a new perception about security concerns in the Asean due to the proliferation
of advanced defense technologies, recent terrorist attacks around the world, the
phenomenon of environmental refugees as a consequence of natural disasters, to mention a
few. In connection therewith, the security implications of overlapping claims over parts of
the South China Sea have forced Asean governments to rethink their long-term defense
strategies.
Be that as it may, defense planning these days is increasingly being shaped by climate and
resource considerations. Take note that majority of Asean countries are vulnerable to
extreme climate disturbances due to global warming and disaster relief, which had come to
be accepted as the military’s secondary role.
The most pressing priority for Asean countries in the changed security environment is to
improve their intelligence-gathering capabilities. Procurement of munitions alone would not
suffice. There ought to have improvement in the region’s intelligence sharing and
coordinating capabilities. The era of computer technologies demands the ability to assess,
analyze and decisively act in an emerging situation of critical importance. In short, military
equipment and weapons should be backed up by an effective intelligence capability.
Asean environmental security concerns. Apart from security concerns as mentioned above,
the effects of extreme weather events caused by climate change are more evident in Asean
countries. Security implications of severe climate change in the region include but not limited
to: (1) huge movements of people from areas of natural disasters and internal armed fights;
(2) conflicts over basic resources like water and food, exacerbating water scarcity and
increasing food costs and food shortage; (3) greater incidence of malnutrition, risks of
infectious diseases outbreaks; (4) increased demand for disaster and humanitarian relief; and
(5) intensified heat waves presenting challenges to the military’s outdoor training and
personnel efficiency.
In the light of security concerns brought about by global warming, what is the role of Asean
militaries in a resource stressed environment due to climate disruption? For one, energy
supply and other imported resources by Asean countries are overly dependent on sea lanes,
specifically the Strait of Malacca straddling Malaysia, Singapore and Indonesia. That alone is
enough to have Asean countries reexamine their maritime priorities to have resource
protection a core function of their navies.
With climate change, the demand for rapid and coordinated military deployment in response Asean’s defense should shape or reshape itself to meet the challenges in and opportunities
and recovery efforts in disastrous environmental circumstances is likely to increase, and this for humanitarian assistance vis-à-vis the region’s new security and environmental concerns.
is a good time for Asean to plan out and protect its future security, i.e., improving After all, Asean is also about convergence in cooperation and conflict as well as disastrous
infrastructures, including military installations located in or near coastlines—taking into weather events.
account advances in engineering design techniques and technologies. Indeed, it is better to
work with nature rather than against it. Maritime convulsions in the ‘Asean’ seas BY AMADO S. TOLENTINO, JR. ON MAY 25,
2015
‘Asean Agreement on Disaster Management and Emergency Response’. Despite
procurement drives and sea drills, Asean countries are hopeful the increased tensions “The sea belongs to nobody -but interests clash over its uses.”
resulting from the arbitral decision could be successfully managed to avoid actual armed
AT no other time in history do some Asean countries face several maritime challenges than
conflict. Emerging lately from Asean leaderships are possibilities for dialogue push, reduction
during this second decade of the 21st century. All because of the uses of the South China
of threats and even the practicality of joint management for equitable utilization of the
(West Philippine) Sea and its resources – major shipping routes, important fishing grounds
resources found in the disputed parts of South China Sea, i.e., minerals, fisheries, etc.
and abundant oil and gas reserves. But over and above those maritime pursuits is the
Supreme Court Justice Antonio Carpio suggests declaration of the disputed waters as an
question of territorial (land, water and air space) ownership as developed in law.
international marine park and protected area.
“The South China Sea is a marginal sea that is part of the Pacific Ocean, encompassing an
The year 2009 saw the enactment of the Asean Agreement on Disaster Management and
area from Singapore and Malacca Straits to the Strait of Taiwan of around 3,500,000 square
Emergency Response (AADMER), with the objective to “… provide effective mechanisms to
kilometers.” Center of dispute is the Spratly Islands area. China’s unilaterally declared “nine-
achieve substantial reduction of disaster losses in lives and in the social, economic and
dash line” ownership of 90% of the South China (West Philippine) Sea overlaps with the
environmental assets … and to respond to disaster emergencies through concerted national
competing claims of some Asean countries – Brunei Darussalam, Malaysia, the Philippines
efforts and intensified regional and international cooperation.” Pursuant thereto, an Asean
and Vietnam. Non-Asean claimant is Taiwan. Similarly claimed by China is Natuna Islands at
Coordinating Center for Humanitarian Assistance (AHA) on disaster management was set up
the southern tip of the South China (West Philippine) Sea which is within Indonesia’s
in Jakarta to assist Asean member states in preparing for and responding to disasters.
exclusive economic zone (EEZ) and sits on Indonesia’s maritime borders with Brunei
The vulnerability of Asean countries to natural disasters has been extensively discussed in Darussalam, Malaysia and Vietnam. Likewise, China’s recent announcement of a fishing ban
various forums and documented scientifically. In fact, Asean countries already experienced to all fishing activities in Hoang Sa (Paracel) archipelago was strongly objected to by Vietnam.
horrendous floods brought about by heavy monsoon season, super typhoons, storm surges Vietnam says it has sufficient legal and historical foundations testifying to its sovereignty
and tsunamis, which resulted in loss of lives and damaged infrastructures and properties; and, over Hoang Sa and the sovereign rights and jurisdiction over its waters, EEZ and continental
although not influenced by climate change, earthquakes and volcanic eruptions, which gave shelf in line with the UN Law of the Sea.
way to internally displaced people.
Scarborough Shoal which is well within the Philippine EEZ is contested too. (Japan is into a
Defense preparations by Asean countries on account of the South China Sea issue will not be bitter territorial dispute with China over the Senkaku/Diaoyu islands in the East China Sea).
put to naught, considering the worldwide acceptance of the military’s secondary role—
At the recently concluded Summit of Heads of States held in Malaysia, Asean leaders
humanitarian assistance and disaster relief. There is much room in AADMER’s identified
expressed their concern at China’s massive reclamation in the Spratlys which “has eroded
priorities like environmental emergencies, early warning and monitoring and climate change
trust and confidence and may undermine, peace, security and stability in the South China
adaptation. Specifically, the Asean military would be most useful in enhancing disaster
Sea.” Asean foreign ministers were instructed to urgently address the matter constructively
preparedness for effective response and to “Build Back Better” in recovery, rehabilitation
via frameworks “such as Asean-China relations.”
and reconstruction.

8
The Asean Chairman’s statement also (ii) reasserted “the importance of freedom of
navigation in and over-flight in the South China (West Philippine) Sea; (ii) called for the full
implementation of the Declaration of the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea;” and (iii)
demanded that the parties concerned should resolve their differences in accordance with
international law including the Law of the Sea treaty.
The rising tension in the disputed waters prompted the US to warn against militarization of
the territorial disputes. Lately, satellite imagery showed the extensive reclamation activities
for a land mass that could support an airstrip, apron, harbor, etc. which China defined as
being within its “sovereign” territory. The US navy sent a littoral combat ship on its first
patrol and used a P8-A Poseidon, the most advanced surveillance aircraft in the US arsenal,
over the contested area.
Prior to this development, the US had its 6th Naval Engagement Activity in Vietnam. Likewise,
the Philippines and US militaries recently held its largest “Balikatan” exercises in years with
nearly 12,000 troops participating (double the number that participated in 2014).
Coincidentally, IHS Jane’s Defence Weekly,a leading provider of defense and security insight
and information, noted that the rest of the Asean countries are modernizing their respective
navies as part of a wider Southeast Asian trend towards greater maritime capabilities.
Singapore has the most potent military in Southeast Asia. Myanmar, on the other hand,
embarked on an ambitious program of indigenous shipbuilding backed up by naval exercises
on its own.
The territorial sovereignty issue in the South China (West Philippine) Sea had become an
external sovereignty or regional security issue with environmental security threats revolving
around exploitation of natural resources alongside strategic ones, i.e. potential military uses
of the islands.
In all these maritime rivalries, ecological security ought to be recognized as an inseparable
component of the concept of sovereignty to attain regional security. Contending states must
recognize their joint responsibility for the protection of the transnational environment.
For the rich in marine and mineral resources but object of overlapping ownership claims
Spratly islands group, some arguments favor cooperation to preserve/conserve the
ecological wealth of the area rather than tackling head-on the sovereignty issue. In this
regard, serious thought should be given to the long-standing suggestion for an ASEAN Area of
Cooperation in the Spratlys as well as the possibilities for the designation of an
internationally protected area status, i.e. Marine Peace Park, through multilateral
9
cooperative options available. These could further elaboration of confidence and security
building measures in both the military and civilian sectors by the adoption of less offensive
military postures in defense of the environment.
The removal of confrontation between states is an important precondition for the removal of
confrontation between humankind and the natural environment considering the
fundamental necessity of securing the long-term availability of natural resources.
The pursuit of environmental security could become a major agent of change in international
affairs, promoting an international order more compatible with human needs. Common
sovereignty over natural resources should be recognized and given priority in the resolution
of conflicts and hostilities among States.
Asean: Waves of naval expectations BY AMADO S. TOLENTINO, JR. ON MAY 9, 2014
The geography of Asean as a regional grouping of nations is noticeably maritime. For
archipelagos i.e., Indonesia and the Philippines, the sea is an integral component of their
respective national profile. Brunei Darussalam, Malaysia, Thailand, Singapore and Vietnam
depend to a great extent on the sea for their trade interests. Even the less maritime-based
Myanmar and Cambodia and landlocked Lao PDR rely on the sea for national income.
Naturally, many issues confronting the Asean have a maritime dimension. Among these are
piracy, smuggling, human trafficking, illegal fishing and territorial security. These issues
brought to fore the unequal levels of naval capabilities in the region. Singapore has the most
sophisticated navy especially at maritime surveillance and modern war-fighting capability.
The other countries are only capable of operating within their own coastlines.
Naval cooperation, however, is present under bilateral and sub-regional arrangements. It
consists of coordinated patrols and combined exercises like the Malacca Strait Patrols among
Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore to counter piracy and armed robbery at sea. There are
also combined multi-national exercises to improve professionalism, develop exchange
experiences and draw lessons from fellow navies. Examples are the Indonesia-Singapore,
Malaysia-Singapore and Malaysia-Thailand bilateral naval exercises. In addition, some Asean
countries maintain defence engagement activities/exercises with the US, UK, Australia and
New Zealand. The on-going annual joint Philippines-US military maneuvers called Balikatan
2014 is not only about maritime security but humanitarian assistance and disaster response
as well possibly on account of the experience last year of Asean member countries coming to
the rescue and relief of Typhoon Yolanda victims in the Philippines later than expected.
Be that as it may, IHS Jane’s Defence International, a leading provider of defence and security Asean sea region Sea of constraint or sea of environmental cooperation BY AMADO S.
insight and information, mentioned in one of its reports the Asean resolve to take greater TOLENTINO, JR. ON MARCH 11, 2017
responsibility for their own maritime security. This is evidenced by, among others, the
Philippine Navy’s modernization plan which includes acquisition of two new anti-submarine IN 1974, the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) spearheaded a Regional Seas
helicopters, two frigates and four patrol frigates along with a number of patrol craft and fast Program. It is an effort to involve countries bordering the seas to meet the challenges of
transport and support vessels. Also included are multi-purpose attack crafts with missile environmental degradation in the sea, coastal area and inland, and to link sustainable marine
launch capabilities to patrol its territorial waters. Myanmar has acquired eight Chinese resource management with development. To that end, an action plan and legal framework
frigates under its development of naval industrial capabilities program in conjunction with are expected to be built up.
China . Vietnam is acquiring submarines from Russia. The first boat Hanoi was already
For Southeast Asia, the regional seas identified for the purpose of the program was the “East
handed to the People’s Army of Vietnam Navy and a second one Ho Chi Minh City is on track
Asian Seas,” referring to the Asean seas in the South China Sea. |
for delivery.
UNEP’s role is not only as a funding agency but to coordinate activities, ensuring an
Singapore has much significantly improved capabilities through deliveries of Swedish and
integrated approach and taking care that the interdisciplinary character of environmental
German-made submarines and patrol vessels. It also announced a 2014 defense budget of
problems is not neglected. At the same time, environmental law (national legislation and
$9.93 billion, a 3.2 percent increase over spending in 2013. (It should also be mentioned that
bilateral, regional and global agreements) was thought of to provide a firm commitment
Singapore has the region’s only submarine rescue capacity).
from States to maintain the environmental quality of the shared seas. Efforts to achieve this
In Brunei Darussalam, the arrival of German-made off-shore patrol vessels considerably may include the promotion of harmonization of national legislations, the encouragement of
enhanced the navy’s operational capabilities. To improve training, the navy is building a the adoption of regional agreements to foster cooperation as well as in the implementation
centre of excellence, due to become operational in 2015, for seamanship warfare, weapons of existing international agreements.
handling, firefighting and damage control, communications and engineering training.
Sadly, while numerous inter-governmental meetings resulted in the adoption by the Asean
Indonesia, on the other hand, is constructing a submarine base in Sulawesi Island and plans
member countries at the time (Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand) of
to procure up to 12 boats to augment its submarine force. It also announced it would
an Action Plan for the Protection and Development of the Marine Environment and Coastal
purchase submarines from South Korea. Submarines, after all, are the most cost effective
Areas of the East Asian Seas Region, it became evident by 1990 that the adoption of a legal
way of denying maritime territory to a hostile armada. In fact, not every navy requires an
framework (draft Convention for the Protection and Development of the Marine and Coastal
ocean-going submarine. Asean waters are mostly archipelagic and shallow. Littoral patrol
Areas of the East Asian Seas Region) would not materialize due to, among others, overlaps of
submarines will do to conduct intelligence gathering, act as a deterrent against maritime
competing claims of some Asian countries in the Spratly islands area of the South China Sea.
incursions and bolster confidence.
After 25 years, the situation has worsened, brought about by China’s assertion of ownership
However, a lot still has to be done. Among these are a review of each state’s responsiveness
of almost all of the resource-rich waters of the South China Sea despite rival claims from
to defend itself against any and all threats to national security; effective capability pooling;
Asian countries. Time and again, China has reiterated its “indisputable sovereignty” claim
development of an Asean defence industrial complex; and collaborative defence research
over the Spratly islands and its adjacent waters. It is even of the view that freedom of
and development. In all this, there is a strong imperative for more efficiency, more
navigation and overflight for military aircraft does not apply to the South China Sea because
coordination and more cooperation among the Asean navies to create the assurance about
of its claimed ownership of the area.
the region’s self-defence readiness.
The US does not recognize China’s claim. Its military aircraft have repeatedly flown over, and
FROM THE PHILIPPINE AMBASSADORS’ FOUNDATION INC. (PAFI)
its ships repeatedly sailed in, the South China Sea, passing through islets where China has
built runways and set up military outposts. Clearly, the US is out to assert its right to

10
navigation in the South China Sea through which thousands of commercial vessels pass
carrying some $5 trillion worth of goods a year. The US aircraft carrier USS Carl Vinson, with
its supporting ships and planes, has moved into the area. Sovereignty and freedom of
navigation are about to clash in the South China Sea.
Actually, the South China Sea serves as a constraint on naval and maritime cooperation in
Southeast Asia. Differences over threat perceptions relative to China have been at the root of
increasing Asean disunity on security issues. Enmity between Cambodia and the Philippines
at the 2012 Asean Ministerial Meeting in Phnom Penh was emblematic of a deeper emerging
divide between continental and maritime states comprising Asean.
In this regard, Cambodia is generally oriented towards China, with Vietnam being the major
exception. The situation limits Asean solidarity with respect to territorial claimants in the
South China Sea.
terms will improve on those of the Declaration or if it will restrain the rival claimants’
activities in the region. Nor is it clear how the desired legally binding Code will be enforced.
Be that as it may, for the Spratly island group, rich in marine and mineral resources but the
object of overlapping ownership claims, there is the argument in favor of cooperation to
preserve/conserve the ecological wealth of the area. In this connection, it is time that serious
thought be given to the longstanding recommendation for an Asean Area of Cooperation in
the Spratlys as well as the possibilities for the designation of an internationally protected
area status, i.e. International Marine Peace Park, through multilateral options available.
These could further the elaboration of confidence- and security-building measures in both
the military and civilian sectors by the adoption of less offensive military postures in defense
of the environment.

Clearly, the four Asean claimants to the disputed island territory in the South China Sea
(Brunei Darussalam, Malaysia, the Philippines, Vietnam, which are all claimants with China
and Taiwan) are also divided among themselves such that none has recognized the
sovereignty claims of the others in the region. Add to that the aggravating territorial dispute
over Sabah between Malaysia and the Philippines which spilled into a violent incursion in
2013.

The situation described above further limits the opportunity for Asean claimants to agree on
common positions vis-à-vis the South China Sea.

Be that as it may, the South China Sea also has some unifying potential within Asean. For one,
the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea stipulates that littoral states around semi-enclosed
seas should cooperate on natural resource conservation and environmental protection. In
this, the Gulf of Thailand littoral states have been successful in setting aside boundary
disputes to pursue joint development. Cambodia and Thailand manifested sincere
cooperation despite tensions over their disputed land territory near the Preah Vihar temple
complex (ultimately decided by the International Court of Justice in favor of Cambodia).
Likewise, Vietnam and Malaysia’s joint submission of their extended continental shelf claim
to the relevant UN committee in 2009, demonstrate oneness between Asean claimants.

Asean’s effectiveness as a vehicle for cooperation will eventually be tested by the progress in
concluding a legally binding Code of Conduct with China over the South China Sea. The 2002
Asean Declaration on a Code of Conduct with China was non-binding and ultimately failed to
reduce tensions over the disputed sea. At this point, it is not clear if the Code of Conduct’s

11