University of Asia & the Pacific

Pearl Drive, Ortigas Center, Pasig City

PHILIPPINE DIPLOMATIC APPROACHES TO THE SOUTHEAST ASIAN TERRITORIAL

DISPUTE

A Research Paper

Submitted as partial fulfillment for the course requirements in

Communication 3: Research Writing for 6YP

Submitted to:

Dr. Judy Tanael

Submitted by:

Joaquim Anton M. Bobis

26YP3

December 14, 2018

1
 Abstract

The Philippines is involved in a territorial dispute with China over territories in the West

Philippine Sea or South China Sea. China’s presence in Philippine waters have caused

unnecessary harm and danger to Filipino fishermen as well as environmental damage due to their

artificial island building. As a response, the Philippine tried to resolve it through diplomatic

approaches.

Although the Philippines utilized diplomacy, its approaches’ effectiveness in dispute

resolution are questionable. With the study revolving around the dispute between the Philippines

and China, it analyzed the documents, articles, and researches related to the conflict as well as

the diplomatic approaches used by the Philippines and other Southeast Asian nations with their

respective territorial disputes for comparison. Analyzing the results for a proposed diplomatic

approach for the Philippines, these were the findings. The Philippines utilized bilateral, two

involved parties, and multilateral, three or more involved parties, approaches in attempt to

resolve the dispute. However, both weren’t successful as it didn’t lead to conflict resolution.

Philippine bilateral economic approaches with China were more fruitful compared to its political

advances. If the Philippines were to try and resolve the dispute, it must choose a type of

approach, have a steady and consistent foreign policy, and find ways to prevent its occurrence.

The study could further elaborate on how Southeast Asian nations dealt with their

territorial disputes with China. It could also explore the power divide between the Philippines

and China in terms of military. Moreover, the Philippine foreign policy, it aims to solve the

dispute, should target the proper means to achieve it.

2
 Table of Contents

Contents Page Number

Title Page i

Abstract ii

I. RESEARCH PROBLEM AND REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE……………..5

Background of the Study…………………………………………………………....5

Statement of the Problem…………………………………………………………....7

Significance of the Study…………………………………………………………....8

Scope and Delimitations……………………………………………………………...9

Review of Related Literature………………………………………………………..10

Philippine-Chinese Relations………………………………………………..10

Benefits Gained by the Philippine Diplomatic Approach…………………...12

Philippine Diplomatic Approaches…………………………………………..14

Conceptual Framework……………………………………………………………....18

Definition of Terms………………………………………………………………......20

II. METHODOLGY………………………………………………………………………....21

Research Design…………………………………………………………………..….21

3
 Research Locale………………………………………………………………………21

Documents to be Used………………………………………………………………..22

Research Instruments…………………………………………………………………23

Data Collection Procedure……………………………………………………………24

Data Analysis…………………………………………………………………………24

III. PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF DATA......................................................…...25

IV. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMEDNATIONS……………………....38

Bibliography………………………………………………………………………………....46

Appendices…………………………………………………………………………………...48

Appendix A. Methodology Matrix…………………………………………………....48

Appendix B. Images…………………………………………………………………..49

Appendix C. Tables……………………………………………...…………………....50

4
 CHAPTER 1

RESEARCH PROBLEM AND REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

The chapter consists of the introduction and the review of related literature. The

introduction comprises of the background of the study, the statement of the problem, the

significance of the study, the scope and limitations, and the definition of terms. The review of

related literature includes the key concepts and the conceptual framework.

1.1 Background of the Study

The Republic of the Philippines is located in Southeast Asia. It is an archipelagic nation

with a multicultural identity. It has several international relations with different countries.

However, it is engaged in a territorial dispute with its neighbors against China. China has been

making reclamation efforts in the region for the past few years. It went as far as to trespass

Philippine waters and build artificial islands (Watkins, 2015). This has resulted into

environmental damage and the loss of territorial integrity. The country took a diplomatic stance

to the issue instead of engaging in armed confrontation like some of the other countries.

Raising the issue to the Hague, the Philippine contingent won the case against China. The

arbitrary court ruled that China’s island building activities were illegal and damaging to

Philippine sovereignty. The artificial constructions has caused irreparable environmental damage

and that China’s ‘nine-dash line’ was not legally applicable. China is in the Philippines’ own

backyard illegally. This has allowed for poaching, fishing, and residing of foreigners in local

waters (Santos, 2016). The Philippines’s territory has been trespassed and desecrated by the

construction of these synthetic lands. The latter has caused damage to the marine life in the area.

5
Moreover, that area is militarized. China claims that the artificial islands that they built were for

non-military purposes. However, these ‘islands’ are armed and equipped with weapons and

surveillance (Bodeen, 2018). Nevertheless, China continues its illegal efforts, despite the

international ruling. The ruling has no enforcer to impose punishments towards violators.

Originally having a stern stand against China’s illegal efforts under Aquino, the Duterte

administration has softened its position as the country cannot afford to go to war with this

regional powerhouse (Al Jazeera News, 2017). The change of administration from Aquino to

Duterte has shifted its foreign policy towards China.

Analysts say that there is untapped oil present in the South China Sea (Daiss, 2016).

Getting access to it would seriously boost a nation's’ economy. Aside from the potential prospect

of riches and fortune, it is a present source of marine goods from the sea life that could be caught

there (BBC News, 2018). This would be able to enrich marine food stocks of a country. Most

importantly, the area is a vital sea route to different places (Perlez, 2016). Controlling it would

be a huge boost to the nation that would be able to secure it. Nevertheless, the United Nations

Convention on the Law of the Sea or UNCLOS gives countries a certain boundary which is

designated as their territory. The case with Southeast Asia, however, is that there are a lot of

these overlapping. This makes the territorial dispute in the West Philippine Sea and the South

China Sea with China a pressing matter.

6
1.2 Statement of the Problem

The sovereignty of Philippine authority over its territory is at stake. It is embroiled in a

territorial dispute with one of the global powers in the 21st Century, China. Choosing the path of

diplomacy over aggression, the country is attempting to build peaceful relations with its Chinese

counterparts. Diplomacy for all its merits, however, may also have its downsides. That said, the

study would like to find out

1. How effective were the diplomatic approaches used by the Philippines in the Southeast Asian

territorial dispute with China in resolving the conflict?

It would also like to find out the following questions aside from the aforementioned main

research question:

1. How were Philippine international relations with China affected by Philippine diplomatic

approaches to the Southeast Asian territorial dispute?

2. What were the benefits gained by the Philippines in their diplomatic approach to the

dispute?

3. What are the diplomatic approaches used by the Philippines in relation to the Southeast

Asian territorial dispute with China?

7
1.3 Significance of the Study

One of the few things that define a country is its territory. It allows it to identify which

waters and islands belong to their jurisdiction. Moreover, this is where the people reside and live.

Their lives and livelihood are influenced by their location demarcated by a country’s territory.

The Philippines is no exception. It is still classified as an agricultural nation despite its issues

with the latter. However, its national defense isn’t as well-equipped as other nations in the region

alone. This makes national security with regards to territory an issue. Although the armed forces

are capable, their strength may not be enough as China has waltzed right in the nation’s waters

building artificial islands and damaging the environment in the process.

Instead of taking up arms against the invaders, the country has chosen peace over

aggression. While it does have an international ruling in their favor, by the Hague of all places, it

there is no enforcing body to implement the ruling. It is non-binding. The Philippines has

attempted to engage in talks with China on various platforms, bilaterally and multilaterally.

However, Filipinos are still being harassed in Philippine waters by Chinese vessels and are not

allowed to travel to particular areas. This affects the livelihood of those fishermen and the

national security of the country with the artificial islands weaponized and armed.

The study would like to review if diplomacy is as beneficial as it seems, whether or not

Philippine diplomacy has brought negative altercations. The matter of Philippine sovereignty,

territorial integrity, and national safety are all at stake. Analyzing the approach taken by the

government may help give a clear picture as to why it was the choice taken. Furthermore, it

8
would be able to point out the effects of choosing peace rather than aggression through

diplomacy and as to why it’s more applicable as opposed to war.

The study could benefit those that are engaged in an international dispute. While war may

be a logical choice, for all its patriotic undertones, it may just bring about the destruction of the

weaker party. It may also benefit those who are advocating for all out war with China as the

study could give them information of what the nation would be losing rather than just gaining. It

would not only initiate the Philippines’s allies to participate in war but it might also escalate the

regional disputes into a war on multiple fronts, which will not do any good at all.

1.4 Scope and Delimitations

The study would be focused on the Southeast Asian Territorial dispute with China that

the Philippines is involved in. Specifically, it would focus on its dispute over the West Philippine

Sea and/or South China Sea. It would seek to analyze the benefits gained by the Philippines in its

diplomatic approaches, the diplomatic measures taken by the Philippines to the issue, the

effectiveness of Philippine diplomatic approaches, and how Philippine-China relations were

affected by the diplomatic approaches. Moreover, it will analyze the benefits gained or lost by

the Philippines because of its diplomatic decisions. The latter would be studied in the scope of its

trade deals. The time period for analyzing the background and history of Philippine-China

relations would cover the 19th Century to the 21st Century (1800s-2000s).

9
 Research and materials would be limited to online books, journals, and other research.

The paper will not branch out to the territorial disputes of countries outside Southeast Asia other

than China with an exclusion given to the review of related literature. It will also not analyze the

diplomatic approaches taken by China towards the territorial dispute.

1.5 Review of Related Literature

The key concepts in the study are as follows: Philippine-Chinese relations benefits gained

by the Philippines form the diplomatic approaches, and Philippine diplomatic approaches.

1.5.1 Philippine-Chinese Relations

China has a significant contribution to tourism and trade. Engaging in armed conflict with

them would be most unwise. It isn’t to say that China is innocent, they still have violated

international law, but they are of help to the economy (Torres-Tupas, 2016).

Third Vice Premier Wang Yang visited the Philippines to initiate business deals and

proposals, which would benefit both countries. This includes a proposed railway system that

would interconnect the island of Mindanao. Economic businesses aside, he brought with him

relief goods for (then) earthquake stricken Surigao. There is also a possibility of flights straight

from Southern China to Manila or Cebu to be open soon (Philippine Daily Inquirer, 2017).

China and the Philippines have agreed on resource-sharing ventures and projects. Sec.

Cayetano stated that it would hopefully be a building block for a healthy relationship rather than

10
a block in the way of progress. The two countries would supposedly jointly explore oil and gas in

the region guided by a proper and legal framework (Heydarian, 2018).

The Philippines has raised the territorial dispute issue to the United Nations arbitration.

Although Beijing stated that the decision would damage relations between the two countries,

(then) President Aquino felt that they needed to do so. He went on to state that it was a matter of

“national territory and sovereignty,” a matter of commitment both to the nation and to

international law. There has also been a lack of a code of conduct in the region between ASEAN

nations and China for over a decade, much to the frustration of the president (The Guardian,

2014).

The Philippine government has taken a multilateral approach to the territorial dispute.

Having rejected China’s offer for bilateral talks, the nation has chosen to do this though the

ASEAN. The Code of Conduct in the South China Sea dictates how each nation should behave

in the region. However, China claims, citing the same document, that the Philippines should

settle it through negotiations with China directly. Despite this, China still has its doors open for

any bilateral talks that the Philippines would wish to engage in. Nevertheless, the ties between

the two countries remain strong in areas such as education, culture, and economic activities

(Calonzo, 2015).

Philippine-Chinese relations have taken a better outlook. Under the Aquino

administration, diplomatic relations between the two countries took a ‘sour patch.’ The

Philippines took the territorial dispute to the international court which dismayed the Chinese.

11
Under the Duterte administration, however, diplomatic relations improved as it hoped to achieve

beneficial deals for the country. Bilateral talks were more progressive and were not held back by

the territorial dispute. Reaffirming several matters such as marine cooperation, regional peace,

navigation freedom, commerce freedom, and oil exploration, the two countries have further

progressed their existing economic relations. China even went so far as to sign agreements and

extend help to a ‘destroyed’ Marawi (Gao, 2017).

A somewhat hostile attitude against each other was put up in relation to the territorial

dispute. Having gone through multilateral talks, it was unsuccessful in the fact that China refused

to cooperate in such an avenue. Shifting its policy, which also came in a shift in presidential

leadership, the Philippines engaged in bilateral talks with China which was more progressive

even if the government took a u-turn on proceedings. It wouldn’t be beneficial at all if the

Philippines lost to China (in war) or the Philippines lost China as the latter is a regional

powerhouse and provides a lot of aid to the economy. Moreover, despite challenges, the

economic side of the relationship wasn’t as troubled. It is worthy of note that despite the

turbulent relation, the two nations are still open to dialogue especially if it is economic in nature.

This doesn’t mean that China is off the hook as they are still violating international and

Philippine law with their artificial islands and blatant trespassing.

1.5.2 Benefits Gained by the Philippine Diplomatic Approach

The Philippines is in a dispute with China over territory. Neither side is willing to give in

but in a meeting, both presidents, instead of flaring hostilities, negotiated upon what would be

best for their nations. This resulted into a supposed joint exploration of possible oil in the region

12
with both sides getting a share albeit unequally. The Philippines, instead of fending off the

Chinese, built stronger ties and relations with them; the country even received firearms from

China. They are closer to the country as compared to the United States. However, if China goes

so far as to violate agreements and further territory, the president made it clear that the country

will engage in warfare (Nawal, 2018).

It is no secret that China doesn’t recognize the arbitral court’s ruling. Filing another case

in The Hague would not be a good idea because there is no guarantee that China would

acknowledge another ruling when they didn’t even respect the current ruling; the filing of a case

is simply too expensive regardless of the outcome. War isn’t a preferable option as the

Philippines will lose quite a lot. This leaves the country with diplomacy as the sensible course of

action (Malinao, 2018).

An absence of war or (negative) peace can bring a lot of benefits to a country. A country

can better allocate its budget for a non-war society. It could profit a lot more from the economy

and the economy itself could focus more on serving the consumer rather than the war. Life

would be ‘normal’ and people would be suffering less or not suffer at all; they’ll be able to build

the lives they want to build, if they have the capacity to do so. Illegal smuggling and shady

trading of goods and materials needed for war or others would cease, as there is no veil of

conflict to hide behind, at the very least it would lessen its occurrence. The government would be

able to better serve the people as it can freely create a suitable environment for growth, order,

and reform across a variety of aspects such as politically, socially, and economically among

others (Ferrer, 2013).

13
 Diplomacy would leave the country in a safer state without as many losses that it may

sustain in armed conflict. Aside from safety, it also builds international relations with other

countries specifically, China. It has led to benefits such as the acquisition of firearms and relative

regional peace for the time being. The arbitral lawsuit that the Philippines filed over two years

ago and the bilateral talks which have commenced between the two nations are indications of

diplomatic approaches. Nevertheless, should there be a violation, war may just be on the horizon.

However, if war does not occur at all then (negative) peace exists wherein there is an absence of

war. Governments function better, people live safer, economies are more efficient, environments

are more suitable, and life is ‘normal.’ There would still be struggle and other matters but being

in active conflict or war would change that situation altogether.

1.5.3 Philippine Diplomatic Approaches

The Philippines issued a file against China by virtue of the UNCLOS in 2013 after the

latter seized Philippine territory. This reef is known as Scarborough Shoal. The Filipino took it a

step further and brought the issue to an international tribunal to settle the matter as China proved

unwilling to cooperate. The Philippines won the case but China doesn’t recognize it whatsoever

(Perlez, 2016).

ASEAN and China settled down to work on a code of behavior in the South China Sea.

This was made to dictate a code of conduct in the region so as not to provoke dispute or conflict.

Philippine President Duterte, however, received criticism as he opted to withdraw the military

14
from the waters in one area of territory. Contrary to his predecessor, Benigno Aquino III, he took

a peaceful stand as opposed to a steadfast approach (Al Jazeera, 2017).

President Duterte’s administration has chosen to engage in bilateral talks with China over

the territorial dispute; he shifted from his original multilateral position (Peralta, 2018).

There are ongoing bilateral talks with China. Although both sides are criticized for

different reasons entirely, they are working together for a solution towards the problem.

Compared to Aquino’s, Duterte’s is a silent and respectful approach to talks (GMA News, 2018).

Diplomacy is essential to sustaining international relations. It is done to prevent war and

strengthen relations between nations. It is an avenue for the achievement of harmony and peace.

Without it international organizations would cease to exist and war will never end (Amacker,

2011).

Associations with other nations allow a country to contact them in times of need. Foreign

aid, requested by the Philippines to others, allows for more effective development efforts,

poverty alleviations, and disaster relief (Pamintuan, 2016).

It is not necessary for a country to like another country to engage in diplomatic

conversation. An absence of foreign relations may lead to a country losing its association with

another (Holmes, 2009).

15
 Multilateralism adheres to generalized organizing principles which would discount the

preferences that are made in bilateralism. What this does is that parties observe or oblige to

standards or rules that would ideally be followed by all that are involved. The policies and

regulations must apply to them. It would require that states observe international norms and

respect international institutions (Tago, 2017).

Bilateralism has a direct interaction between nations. This allows for the conclusion of

hostilities, monitoring of practices, procedures of dispute resolutions, and incentives of

compliance. The limited nature of such a set up makes the directness possible as it is between

only two parties or rather two nation states (Blum, 2008).

The two can interact in three ways. Firstly, bilateral agreements can utilize previously

designed multilateral agreements into their structure. Countries may adhere to multilateral

agreements and such agreements can be enforced and enhanced in their value through bilateral

agreements. This may result into giving the bilateral agreement a heavier tone or a more

legitimate setting. For example, Pakistan and India’s bilateral agreement (Blum, 2008).

Secondly, multilateral agreements may need clarifications through bilateral agreements.

Provisions of multilateral agreements may not be as expounded upon or be clear enough so

bilateral means may be used to clarify such things. UNCLOS is able to provide demarcating

maritime boundaries but to be able to define these specific areas they may need bilateralism

between two specific involved nations or multilateralism among specific involved nations (Blum,

2008).

16
 Thirdly, multilateral agreements can be used so that countries could adhere to multilateral

regimes. Under the 1994 United-States-Russia-Ukraine agreement, Ukraine had to transfer its

nuclear weapons to Russia. In turn, this would give Ukraine greater security assurances and

economic incentives (Blum, 2008).

Simply put, bilateralism involves two parties while multilateralism involves more than

two parties. However, in bilateralism, there is a more direct conversation with another party (or

nation-state). In multilateralism, there is a greater amount of factors that are involved as there is

an increased number of participants compared to bilateralism where there is a limited framework

to work with.

International relations are founded on diplomacy. It is a way of maintaining relations and

contact with another country. Associations between nations and international organizations are

coordinated through such a thing. Matters such as foreign aid and economic development are

discussed over these talks. Diplomacy or diplomatic approaches could be done through bilateral

or multilateral talks. That said, the Southeast Asian territorial dispute is not to be taken lightly.

China has violated international law, national sovereignty, environmental integrity, and territorial

authority. The Philippines has chosen a variety of approaches to the conflict, bilateral or

multilateral. The country tried to approach the international stage, such as through ASEAN

which China still did not recognize even though the Philippines was successful in its initiative in

the Arbitrary Tribunal. However, the country then shifted its policy to conducting bilateral talks

as change of leadership occurred.

17
 1.6 Conceptual Framework

Southeast Asian
territorial dispute

Philippines Philippine-Chinese China

relations

Diplomatic approaches of
the Philippines

Effectiveness of Benefits
approaches

Southeast Asian Economy

Conflict Resolution
nations

Trade deals between

Legal document or Halt or end of the Philippines and
agreement hostilities China

Proposed diplomatic
approach

18
 The Southeast Asian territorial dispute involves several nations including China and the

Philippines. The Philippines has utilized diplomatic approaches to resolve the issue. It has lead to

benefits gained by the Philippines through its international relations and the progress or regress

of Philippine-Chinese relations. The two countries’ relations have also affected its relations

particularly when it comes to the economy. However, the effectiveness of the diplomatic

approaches used by the Philippines will be analyzed as it is a solution to the territorial dispute

between the two nations. That said, the analysis would focus on how it benefits the Philippines as

well as how it actually solves the territorial dispute.

Both the Philippines and China are involved in a territorial dispute. The issue has affected

their relations. As such, the Philippines has attempted to resolve these through diplomatic

approaches. This has lead to benefits and questions regarding its effectiveness. The benefits of

these approaches will be measured economically. The specific aspect of it being the trade deals

that were conducted between the Philippines and China particularly the trade deals acquired by

the Philippines. The effectiveness of these approaches will be measured by actual conflict

resolution. More than just the Philippines and China, the approaches used by other Southeast

Asian nations who have territorial disputes will also be analyzed for a more comprehensive

analysis. The effectiveness would be specifically measured by virtue of an agreement and halt or

end of hostilities between nations. From all these variables, a proposed diplomatic approach will

be made for the Philippines.

19
1.7 Definition of Terms

1. Philippine diplomatic approach – It is, essentially, diplomacy. These are steps taken to

maintain or strengthen international relations. An avenue for the achievement of peace

and harmony, international organizations would cease to exist and war will never see its

end (Amacker, 2011). It will be defined as the steps taken by the Philippines in the spirit

of diplomacy to resolve particular issues, in this case, the Southeast Asian territorial

dispute with China.

2. Philippine-China relations – This would encompass the history of Philippine-China

relations as well as its challenges and achievements.

3. Southeast Asian territorial dispute – Though consisting of a list of nations, it primarily

focus on the dispute between the Philippines and China. China’s nine-dash line and

reclamation efforts in the South China Sea are key issues which both violate the United

Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (Sakamoto, 2018). That said, it will be defined

as the conflict between the Philippines and China in Southeast Asia.

20
 CHAPTER 2

METHODOLOGY

This chapter will consist of the methodology. It will be composed of the research design,

research locale, the documents to be used, research instruments, data collection procedure, and

data analysis.

2.1 Research Design

The research will be qualitative, as it will deal with texts and non-numerical information

taken from online sources. It will be a case study about the effectiveness of the Philippine

diplomatic approaches to the Southeast Asian territorial dispute. It will deal with the status of

Philippine-Chinese relations due to Philippine diplomatic approaches, the benefits gained by the

Philippines through diplomacy, and the diplomatic approached used by the Philippines. It will

analyze and compare three countries that have had territorial disputes in the past and how they

resolved it and what they used to solve it.

2.2 Research Locale

The research would be situated in the Southeast region of Asia, which includes the

Philippines and China. It would also include countries in Southeast Asia. The statements and

rulings of international organizations specifically that of the Hague ruling will also be

incorporated. Furthermore, researches or articles that specifically concern Southeast Asian

countries will be used.

21
2.3 Documents to be Used

The speech made by Department of Foreign Affairs Secretary Del Rosario was about the

importance of the arbitration case and the reason why the Philippines made such an attempt at

diplomacy. Del Rosario (2015) takes on the task of clarifying and explaining the said course of

action. Composed of crucial statements, the source is credible as it is from a government website.

Furthermore, it is taken from the speech of the foreign affairs secretary himself.

Nicole Jenne (2017) writes on the state of things in Southeast Asia. She tackles the

territorial disputes in the region and the attempts made by countries to resolve them. Working at

the Institute of Political Science in Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile as an assistant

professor, she herself possesses a PhD in Political Science/International Relations from the

European University Institute in Florence, Italy. Her credentials give weight to her words and

make the source credible.

The article written by Bob Shead (2017) is about the Philippine-Chinese relations with

regards to economics and politics. He discusses the political-economic effects and decisions

made in the relationship. Credible, he wrote it for the ASEAN Briefing which is published by the

Asia briefing which works with the Dezan Shira & Associates. The latter gives out legal, tax, and

operational advisory in Asia. The writer himself has twenty-five years worth of diplomatic

experience in Asia.

The Permanent Court of Arbitration (2016) tackles the territorial dispute with China and

the legality of both the Philippines’s and China’s claims in the region. The document is the

22
digital file of the arbitration ruling given to the Philippines. It tackles the territorial dispute with

China and the legality of the latter’s claims in the region. Giving the award (win) to the

Philippines, it is a reliable source as it comes from the Permanent Court of Arbitration which is

an international organization working as a court of justice.

Tuazon (2014) wrote a research paper on the ‘history’ of Philippine-Chinese relations.

He is a director for Policy Studies in the Center for People Empowerment in Governance,

Philippines. The paper is taken from a lecture at the Guangxi Academy of Social Sciences on

April 2014. It is credible as it is from an academic lecture done by an academe.

2.4 Research Instruments

The collection of information will be done through library and online research. Books,

articles, reports, and research papers will be used whether they are digital or print. Sources will

range from the 1900s to the 2010s (which includes the year 2018). They should answer the

research questions. That said, these sources must deal with the territorial dispute between the

Philippines and China, the diplomatic approaches used by the Philippines regarding the conflict,

& the benefits gained by the Philippines for doing so. Sources collected would also include the

approaches used by a minimum of three pairs of Southeast Asian countries to solve their

territorial disputes. Furthermore, all sources must be accessible to the researcher.

23
2.5 Data Collection Procedure

The researcher will first gather appropriate sources. Then, the sources will be classified to

answer the research questions. Using the sources and through thorough analysis, the researchers

will answer the research questions accordingly. The researcher will then create their own criteria

for a proposal for an effective resolution to the territorial dispute. The proposal will be based on

the sources used and synthesized for analysis.

2.6 Data Analysis

The researcher would primarily analyze and collect certain things from the data. These

things would be the methods used for attaining a resolution to territorial disputes by countries or

international organizations. Another factor to be collected upon would be the reasons and

decisions made by the Hague in the arbitral ruling on the dispute between China and the

Philippines. The history of Philippine-China relations will also be taken. Furthermore, the

benefits gained by diplomatic approaches will be derived from analyzing documents and

identifying its effectiveness. In doing all of the aforementioned tasks, a synthesis of information

will be done after each collected data per heading.

The effectiveness will be based on an actual conflict resolution wherein there is an end to

hostilities between nations as well as an agreement between nations regarding their territorial

dispute. After gathering these, the proposed diplomatic approach would be consisting of the type

of approach, the duration of the approach, and the prevention of conflict.

24
 CHAPTER 3

PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF DATA

This chapter contains the data analyses and research. It consists of the data presentation,

data analysis, and data interpretation.

3.1 Data Presentation

3.1.2 Department of Foreign Affairs Statement

The Southeast Asian territorial dispute with China has put the Philippines in an uneasy

position in the region. The archipelagic nation, the Philippines, has taken various attempts at

solving the territorial issue with China for several years either bilaterally or multilaterally.

Bilaterally, the Philippines attempted to do so in 1995 as China built artificial structures on

Mischief Reef. The latter was 126 nautical miles close to the Philippines while it was 600

nautical miles close to China’s Hainan Island, China’s closest point from there. Another meeting

happened in 1998 between the two nations’ foreign ministers/secretaries, which didn’t resolve

any issue. Multilaterally, the Philippines tried to choose ASEAN as a possible avenue for

resolution. However, China on those occasions of bilateral and multilateral talks with ASEAN

was cooperative and even invoked international law to be used and respected. Nevertheless,

neither bilateral nor multilateral talks proved fruitful results, as (again) it didn’t resolve any

territorial dispute. Moreover, in a turn of events, China became “progressively aggressive and

disconcerting” as it took steps to control the South China Sea (Del Rosario, 2015).

25
 The Philippines didn’t seek a ruling on sovereignty but a clarification of jurisdiction by

the Tribunal in the Hague. International law serves as an equalizer of sorts as it allows the weak

to stand against the strong on equal footing. More than clarification, the country (actually) sought

a binding decision as China was able to prevent the Philippines from conducting oil and gas

research in 2009 and fishing activities in 2012. Each occasion, they fell under the EEZ or

Exclusive Economic Zone of the Philippines. The Philippines, henceforth, seeks clarification in

the Tribunal on the following challenges: China’s historic rights gives them no entitlement to the

territory in the region, their nine-dash line (Figure 1) is irrelevant, their maritime feature bases

are not applicable, China has violated Philippine sovereignty under the Convention, and has

damaged the environment due to its maritime and military activities (Del Rosario, 2015).

3.1.3 Permanent Court of Arbitration Ruling

The Arbitral Tribunal undertaken by the Permanent Court of Arbitration dealt with the

South China Sea dispute between the Philippines and China. This was done with regards to the

legality of “maritime rights and entitlements, geographic features’ status, and the lawfulness of

China’s actions.” Based on the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of The Sea

(UNCLOS), the Tribunal’s ruling will not cover nor enforce matters of sovereignty over the area.

The Tribunal came to conclusions related to the cases the Philippines wanted to be clarified.

China’s historic claims are voided by the UNCLOS and are subsequently not applicable. This

would render the nine-dash line proposed by China void as well. Furthermore, several maritime

features in the region aren’t capable of producing their own exclusive economic zone as

established by the UNCLOS. Mischief Reef and Second Thomas Shoal fall within Philippine

boundaries. Moreover, China was considered to be trespassing in Philippine waters and have

26
created unnecessary risks to Philippine vessels and personnel in the area. China is also found

guilty of destroying maritime features, fishing, and illegally constructing artificial islands within

the Philippines’s exclusive economic zone (EEZ) (PCA, 2016).

3.1.4 Philippine-Chinese Relations

The Philippines and China have had a long-standing relationship. Originating from the

pre-Hispanic period, Chinese traders would arrive at the archipelago to trade with the different

tribes. When the Spanish did came, after having already established Chinese settlements in the

island group, the archipelago was put under the Spanish crown and eventually renamed the

Philippines. The Chinese, who the Spanish wanted to remove, were vital to the economy of the

colony as they built infrastructure, established trade, and made businesses. The Chinese-Filipino

would soon emerge from local interactions as the Chinese mestizos. The Americans came and

had the same situation with the Spanish. Eventually, as the Japanese invaded the lands,

indigenous Filipinos, ethnic Chinese, and Chinese mestizos fought bravely in the resistance. The

Korean War would be the next big conflict involving the two, however, it pitted them against the

Chinese and North Koreans. The Philippines would often be at odds with China due to their

alliances with the U.S. A. giving them different ideologies with their Asian neighbors.

Nevertheless, formal Chinese relations began in 1975, which were economic in nature (Tuazon,

2014).

It was in 1975 that Philippine-Taiwan relations ended as the former sought to form

international relations with China. President Ferdinand Marcos, who placed the Philippines

under Martial Law at that time “opened diplomatic relations with China.” The Philippines would

27
then have to adhere to the One-China policy, which meant they had to cut relations with Taiwan,

which was the exile government of China, “without cutting trade relations.” Although Taiwan

had stronger trade relations initially, China’s began to rise during 1990s. During the term of

President Gloria Arroyo, 2001-2010, China became the Philippines’s third largest trading

partner, ninth top foreign investor, and fourth biggest source of tourists. The Philippines focused

on development-oriented diplomacy in promoting economic growth and maintaining friendly,

cordial, and productive ties with many countries (Tuazon, 2014).

Several bilateral agreements were signed with China which amounted to a hundred from

1975-2010. These ranged from “political, defense, trade and investments, judicial cooperation,

infrastructure development, energy cooperation, air services, transnational crimes,

tourism/culture, sports, media exchange, science and technology, sister cities, military

consultations, and people-to-people exchanges. Included in these deals were the 1996

cooperative relationship based on good-neighborliness and mutual trust toward the 21st century;

a consensus on “shelving disputes and going in for joint development” on the South China Sea

issue; the 2000 “Joint Statement Between China and the Philippines on the Framework of

Bilateral Cooperation in the 21st Century”; and in 2005, the strategic and cooperative relations

for peace and development, which was reiterated in 2007. Bilateral trade rose to $36.37 billion in

2012 (Tuazon, 2014).

However, issues marred the relationship between the two: the Philippines had state visits

to Taiwan, overseas Filipino workers in China had salary issues, alleged drug trafficking

Filipinos in China were on the death row, Chinese were killed during shootout incidents in the

28
Philippines, and the Southeast Asian territorial dispute. Gloria Arroyo, the Philippine president at

that time, was involved in “alleged corruption cases in connection with infrastructure projects

funded by Chinese companies.” A change of leadership would eventually come as Benigno

Aquino III replaced the former and took the mantle of president (Tuazon, 2014).

President Aquino would encounter several challenges during his tenure as the nation’s

leader. Among them would be the territorial dispute with China which involves several countries

in ASEAN or the Association of Southeast Asian Nations. Furthermore, the archipelagic nation

increased its military modernization efforts and even strengthened international relations with the

U.S.A. and Japan, which China sees as rivals in the seas. Moreover, the Philippine raised the

issue to the International Tribunal on the Law of the Sea to resolve it. China disagreed with the

course of action the nation. They considered it offensive and “reiterated that sovereign claims

should be settles through negotiations.” The Expanded Defense Cooperation Agreement with the

United States of America in 2014 made the situation even more complex. Unsurprisingly,

Philippine-China relations took a hit as “investment and development cooperation” were affected

even though trade continues to occur (Tuazon, 2014).

The Philippines and China’s relations with each other has been marred by their territorial

dispute. All the while, the presidency of the Philippines has seen a change in leadership. Not

only did this shift the country’s stance toward the issue but as well as the relationship between

the two nations. President Aquino’s tenure as the nation’s leader had a ‘hostile’ treatment of

China while President Duterte, who took charge in 2016, was welcoming to China. He was more

29
open to economic dialogue and even went to China to secure economic deals for the Philippines.

However, this did not resolve the territorial dispute between the two nations (Shead, 2017).

In fact, Duterte himself stated that he, and the country, couldn’t stop China from

continuing its maritime operations in the West Philippine Sea: building artificial islands and

trespassing Philippine waters. Even with the 2015 Tribunal ruling, China still went on ahead with

its maritime activities and rejected the ruling altogether. Nevertheless, the two nations’ economic

relations are still going strong despite the political tensions. In 2016, President Duterte’s visit to

China resulted into acquisition of deals amounting to U.S. $24 billion. Department of Trade and

Industry Secretary Ramon Lopez said that it was inclusive of investment projects and credit

facilities. Furthermore, seventeen additional deals were made following the meeting. The known

deals/projects included a steel plant, a hydropower plant, a coastline project, and investments on

manufacturing facilities and infrastructure projects. Furthermore, tourism in the Philippines from

China rose to an estimated 680,000 in 2016 while, China hosted an estimated 1.2 million

Filipinos in 2016 (Figure 2) (Shead, 2017).

3.1.5 Southeast Asian Countries’ Resolution Attempts

Southeast Asia is a region that has had territorial disputes for a long time. Originating

from the time of the colonists, the nations, as they began to emerge, would soon find out that

their borders overlap with other states. In an attempt to resolve this, they employed various

means to achieve that end. Vietnam and Laos were able to solve “some” of their disputes through

bilateral talks by means of a treaty signing in 1977. In March 2016, the border was properly

30
demarcated and was considered complete. Other nations viewed the issue to be too conflictive

and risky for discussion (Jenne, 2017).

The Philippines and Malaysia were embroiled in Sabah on which country gets ownership

as they both lay a claim to the land. They, however, shelved the issue for the sake of ASEAN’s

survival, but this meant Sabah to remain a Malay state which the Philippines isn’t actively

pursuing. Not much of a resolution, it does, somewhat ease tensions in that area (Jenne, 2017).

Thailand and Cambodia’s border clashes lead to armed altercations. Cambodia appealed

to the United Nations between 2008 and 2011, but to no avail. In 2008, Cambodia went

unsupported by the ‘powers’ China and the United States and would withdraw its request. In

2011, the Security Council would eventually advise that the two nations (Thailand and

Cambodia) should settle it regionally or bilaterally. The Thailand-Cambodia situation would

eventually quiet down with ASEAN, a regional organization, or the United States and China, the

“great powers,” having done nothing to resolve the issue (Jenne, 2017).

Interestingly, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) was able to resolve disputes

between three pairs of nations. Indonesia and Malaysia’s were resolved over the islands Sipadan

and Ligitan in 2002. Malaysia and Singapore’s were resolved over three maritime features in

2008. Thailand and Cambodia’s through an interpretation of a previous ruling made by the ICJ

over the temple Preah Vihear in 2013. It is interesting to note that non-violent handling of

territorial disputes by ASEAN nations is due to the fact that they lack the capacity to engage in

external warfare except for Singapore (Jenne, 2017).

31
3.2 Data Analysis

To define the two terms (simply), bilateralism involves two parties while multilateralism

involves more than two parties. However, in bilateralism, there is a more direct conversation

with another party or nation-state (Tago, 2017). In multilateralism, there is a greater amount of

factors that are involved as there is an increased number of participants compared to bilateralism

where there is a limited framework to work with. The two can interact by incorporating or

involving previous multilateral agreements into a bilateral agreement or by clarifying multilateral

agreements by bilateral agreements (Blum, 2008).

The Philippines and China’s relationship has been grounded, primarily, in economics.

Although formal relations between the two began in 1975, bilateral economic trade eventually

blossomed into growth and development for the two nations. There were even one hundred

bilateral agreements that were made by both countries. In 2001-2010, China was third largest

trading partner, ninth top foreign investor, and fourth biggest source of tourists for the

Philippines (Tuazon, 2014). In 2016, deals were acquired and made by President Duterte in his

state visit to China, which amounted to U.S. $24 billion. This was inclusive of a hydropower

plant and infrastructure project investments among others. The tourism industry also saw a rise

to 680, 000 Chinese visitors to the Philippines (Shead, 2017). However, it seems that with each

presidential change, there is a shifting tone in diplomatic affairs with China.

Under President Ferdinand Marcos, the Philippines severed ties with Taiwan which was

the exile government of China. Severing ties with Taiwan allowed the Philippines to forge

relations with the People’s Republic of China, adhering to the One-China policy, while still

maintaining trade relations with Taiwan. Under President Gloria Arroyo, the Philippines and

32
China’s relations were marked by increased economic cooperation and development. In fact, the

Philippines development-oriented diplomacy was able to promote economic growth and maintain

friendly, cordial, and productive ties with several nations. Under President Aquino, however,

relations became somewhat hostile. Not only did the Philippine become embroiled in a territorial

dispute with China, they also raised the issue to the International Tribunal on the Law of the Sea.

China, however, viewed this as offensive and relations between the two nations took a hit as

investment and development cooperation dropped even though trade continues to occur (Tuazon,

2014). Contrary to his predecessor, President Rodrigo Duterte would be more open and

entertaining with China. Although he did secure economic deals beneficial to the country, the

territorial dispute was not resolved (Shead, 2017).

In an attempt to resolve the issue, the Philippines raised the territorial dispute to the

Permanent Court of Arbitration. Neither bilateral nor multilateral talks with China bore any

fruitful results, which prompted the Philippines to approach the Tribunal. The Philippines sought

a jurisdiction clarification rather than a sovereignty ruling from the Tribunal (Del Rosario, 2015).

The Permanent Court of Arbitration came to several conclusions regarding the matter. They

found China’s historical claims in the region to be superseded by the 1982 UNCLOS (United

Nations Convention on the Laws of the Sea), several maritime features to be incapable of

producing their own exclusive economic zone, China’s activities within Philippine waters were

trespassing and created risks toward Philippine personnel and vessels, and that China destroyed

the maritime environment through illegal fishing and artificial island construction within the

exclusive economic zone of the Philippines (PCA, 2016).

33
 The Philippines sought to strengthen its military strength or safety by entering into the

Expanded Defense Cooperation Agreement with the United States of America (Tuazon, 2014).

The country itself isn’t prepared for external warfare (Jenne, 2017). Nevertheless, the Philippines

isn’t the only nation in Southeast Asia who has undergone territorial disputes. Vietnam and Laos

were able to resolve their dispute bilaterally through the signing of a treaty. Boundary markers

were eventually finished in 2016. Cambodia and Thailand’s situation escalated into armed

conflict. Cambodia attempted to raise the issue to international bodies, the United Nations

Security Council and ASEAN, which subsequently weren't able to resolve the issue between the

two. Tensions eventually settled down and things went back to normal. The International Court

of Justice, however, was an international body which was able to resolve territorial disputes

between Cambodia and Thailand, Indonesia and Malaysia, and Malaysia and Singapore (Jenne,

2017).

3.3 Data Interpretation

Philippine-Chinese relations have economic foundations. Even though there was a

territorial dispute, both countries were able to continue trade relations with one another. The

changing of presidencies couldn’t stop economic ties with China. Although President Benigno

Aquino III had a ‘hostile’ attitude towards China, trade relations still commence despite a drop in

investment and cooperation activities. It would also be difficult to do so as China is one of the

largest countries in terms of economics. It would be a big loss for the Philippines to lose such

international relations. However, the fact of the matter is that China has violated international

law and trespassed Philippine sovereignty. Moreover, changes in the presidency have led to

shifting policies toward China. This may be a result of differing foreign policies under each

34
presidential administration. Not only that, but it may also be a product of differing situations

with China which would prompt the presidency of the Philippines to alter its foreign policy with

China (Tuazon, 2014).

The Tribunal ruling from the Permanent Court of Arbitration has rendered Chinese

activities and claims in the region to be illegal. They have violated international law and have

constructed artificial islands within Philippine seas (PCA, 2016). With President Rodrigo Duterte

admitting that Chinese activities in the region can’t be stopped, this implies that the Philippines’

armed forces are incapable of fending off, let alone, contesting with the Chinese (Shead, 2017).

Given that they can, it may provoke all-out armed conflict between the two, which may put the

Philippines at a disadvantage seeing as how their military strength is not as strong as China’s.

Defending Philippine waters, through naval forces, alone was not achieved. How much more if it

were a war between China and the Philippines which would involve an all-out and open armed

conflict?

International law isn’t necessarily useless but the Tribunal ruling isn’t exactly enforcing.

It isn’t enforcing as there is no body that seeks to enforce it, let alone the very nature of the

ruling was a request for clarification of jurisdiction. However, the Philippines went with the

decision to raise it to the Tribunal knowing and intending (full well) that they are seeking a

jurisdiction clarification from the organization. This doesn’t exactly solve the territorial dispute

as not only did it draw the ire of the Chinese government but it also wasn’t implemented at all.

The Tribunal ruling cannot be enforced as it was a mere statement or clarification of territorial

35
boundaries and the violations made by the appropriate parties, in this case, it was China.

Moreover, the Expanded Defense Cooperation Agreement with the United States may lead to the

Philippines gaining military strength, as it would be more secure through its alliances with a

powerful nation. This would effectively strengthen alliances with the United States, which is

treated by China as a rival in the region.

With the Philippines enhancing its military strength or safety by entering into the

Expanded Defense Cooperation Agreement with the United States of America (Tuazon, 2014), it

has put the nation in a more secure environment at that point in time. It is secure in the sense that

it has more support from its ally should external armed conflicts arise. This reinforces the fact

that the country itself isn’t prepared for external warfare (Jenne, 2017)

Other Southeast Asian nations have attempted to resolve their disputes through bilateral

and multilateral means. Bilaterally, Vietnam and Thailand were able to resolve this through the

singing of a treaty. This eventually, though probably not exactly directly, resulted into the

demarcation of boundaries by territorial markers. Multilaterally, the results vary. For Cambodia

and Thailand, utilizing a multilateral approach did not do anything. They tried resolving it

through ASEAN and the United Nations Security Council that did not give a resolution as

tensions between the two nations eventually settled down. For the three pairs of nations

(Cambodia and Thailand, Indonesia and Malaysia, and Malaysia and Singapore), the

International Court of Justice was able to resolve territorial disputes for them (Jenne, 2017).

36
 It can be said, from the data gathered, that bilateral talks are an effective way of resolving

disputes. However, for multilateral talks, the right and appropriate parties must be involved or

authoritative bodies must be facilitating. This would allow for a legitimate and proper resolution

and for actual legal proceedings to occur. Although the Philippines did try utilizing bilateral

talks in the past with China as well as multilateral talks using ASEAN, they nonetheless, didn’t

result into a resolution. ASEAN’s jurisdiction may not fall under this kind of issue and the

Permanent Court of Arbitration’s jurisdiction does fall under this kind of issue, however, both

aren’t able to produce a resolution to it.

37
 CHAPTER 4

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This chapter consists of the summary, which summarize all the data from the previous

chapter. This includes the conclusion, which will answer the research questions. The

recommendation is also included, as it will discuss how the paper can be improved upon.

4.1 Summary

Philippine-Chinese relations are economic in nature. The trade aspect of this relationship

is relatively unhampered by the territorial dispute between the two nations although cooperative

development did took a hit. Bilateral economic relations between the two have amounted to

$36.67 billion in 2012 (Tuazon, 2014). This is supported by the fact that China has helped the

Philippines by proposing and engaging in economic deals such as joint oil and gas exploration

(Heydarian, 2018) and the proposing of railway system construction (Phlippine Daily Inquirer,

2017). However, changes in the presidency has also lead to changes in foreign policy towards

China.

Though each administration tries to keep positive economic relations with China,

diplomatic issues arise with each government. Under the Aquino administration, the government

was ‘hostile’ towards China and even sought to strengthen its military strength or safety by

entering into the Expanded Defense Cooperation Agreement with the United States of America

(Tuazon, 2014). This would effectively strengthen alliances with the United States which is

treated by China as rival in the region. Under the Duterte administration, it was more welcoming

toward China and resulted into economic deals being secured by the president. Bilateral talks

38
with China resulted into reaffirming matters of marine cooperation, regional peace, navigational

freedom, commerce freedom, and oil exploration (Gao, 2017).

During the Aquino administration’s duration, decisions made during that period led not

only to the Philippines raising the issue to the Permanent Court of Arbitration as a result of failed

bilateral and multilateral talks with China but it has also lead to China having a negative outlook

on the country. Although China was found to have trespassed Philippine territory and destroyed

maritime environments and features in the West Philippine Sea, President Rodrigo Duterte has

(essentially) shelved the Tribunal ruling as he sought to secure positive relations with China.

This has lead to several economic deals for the Philippines. However, the territorial dispute itself

is not yet solved. China has disregarded the Hague ruling and war would bring a lot of loss to the

Philippines (Malinao, 2018) Regardless, diplomacy has led to an absence of war with China in

the Philippines. This has resulted into an economy concerned more on growth, people living

‘normally,’ and the government is free to create a suitable environment for development (Ferrer,

2013). Shown in how the Philippines was able to still maintain economic relations with China

and even establishing stronger ties with them (Naval, 2018).

Chinese ships and maritime artificial islands still are present in the region unhampered

and unchallenged. Regardless, other Southeast Asian nations have been able to resolve their

disputes either bilaterally or multilaterally. Bilaterally, it has led to a treaty signing between

Vietnam and Thailand effectively resolving the issue. Multilaterally, three pairs of nations were

able to resolve their disputes through the International Court of Justice (Jenne, 2017). Showing

that multilateral talks are effective when there is a legally binding decision from the proper

39
judiciary body, bilateral talks would be more effective. In fact, bilateral talks with China has

already resulted into economic deals, investment projects, and credit facilities (Shead, 2017).

4.2 Conclusion

The Philippines utilized bilateral and multilateral means to try and resolve the Southeast

Asian territorial dispute with China. On both occasions, it has failed to give a resolution.

Bilaterally, the Philippines and China weren’t able to come to a proper conclusion regarding its

territorial dispute. Multilaterally, through ASEAN, the two nations also were not able to come to

a conclusion. The Philippines then would try and bring the matter, multilaterally, to the

Permanent Court of Arbitration. Although the Philippines would then get the victory, the

Tribunal ruling itself would not be implemented, as it was just a mere clarification on

jurisdictions and boundaries. Oddly enough, economic bilateral talks with China would prove to

be productive as President Rodrigo Duterte was able to secure deals for the Philippines albeit

without resolving the territorial dispute. The Philippines also sought to strengthen its military

strength or safety by entering into the Expanded Defense Cooperation Agreement with the

United States of America.

Given that the Philippines engaged in bilateral economic conversations with China, it can

be said that they used economic approaches in their diplomacy. Diplomacy isn’t just merely the

prevention of war as it is also the maintenance or strengthening of international relations

(Amacker, 2016). That said, the Philippines was able to strengthen its international relations with

China through its economic ties it has with the country. Therefore, although the Philippines

wasn’t able to properly resolve the dispute, it was able to receive economic benefits from China.

40
This is shown in the credit facilities and, infrastructure and investment projects that President

Duterte was able to acquire in his 2016 visit to the country (Shead, 2017).

Nevertheless, the Philippines was able to gain and lose economic benefits due to its

diplomatic approaches. When the Philippines chose to enter into the Expanded Defense

Cooperation Agreement with the United States, investment and development cooperation from

China to the Philippines dropped (Tuazon, 2014). However, with Duterte replacing Aquino in

the presidency, a lighter and friendlier tone was given to China. The Philippines’ bilateral

economic approaches, serving as diplomatic approaches, to the situation led to the securing of

several deals for the Philippines ranging from infrastructure to manufacturing project

investments (Shead, 2017). Philippine-Chinese relations are economic in nature. That said, when

the Philippines sought to enhance its defenses through the Expanded Defense Cooperation

Agreement (EDCA) with the United States, it took a toll on investment and development. EDCA

would essentially strengthen its maritime alliance with the United States, which is treated by

China as a rival in the region. However, when the government transitioned into the Duterte

administration and a friendlier and more welcoming approach was taken to China, economic

deals were secured for the Philippines.

Philippine strategies and/or approaches to the Southeast Asian territorial dispute with

China, unfortunately, did not resolve anything. Although the Philippines was able to secure

economic deals through its bilateral economic discussions with China, it would ultimately serve

only the Philippines’s economy and distract attention from the territorial dispute. Chinese

maritime artificial features and patrol vessels are still present in the West Philippine Sea. They

41
are unhampered and unchallenged. Bilateral talks with China, multilateral talks with ASEAN,

and multilateral talks with the Permanent Court of Arbitration did nothing to resolve the dispute.

As it stands, Philippine-Chinese relations will continue to be grounded in economics but it will

still be facing the territorial dispute, which is left unsolved. This may be due to the fact that there

are a number of additional factors involved. Multilateralism involves additional parties so it

would follow that there are additional variables to consider when crafting an agreement (Blum,

2008).

If the Philippines would choose to resolve the dispute through a renewed foreign policy

or diplomatic strategy then, it may have to consider the following factors. Firstly, the type of

approach must be chosen. Bilateral talks are a direct avenue for resolving disputes with another

nation. Blum (2008) has stated that bilateral means are more direct and can focus on specific

issues between the two parties involved. However, the Philippines and China have failed to do so

in the realm of pure politics. It might make a difference if economic trade-offs come in to play as

it is proven the Philippine-Chinese bilateral relations are heavily economic in nature. That said, if

bilateral talks were to be chosen, economic add-ons might have to be included in the discussions

as incentives for each nation.

If multilateral talks are chosen by the Philippines then, it may have to choose the

appropriate involved party. Multilateral talks as stated by Tago (2017) has to include the

sentiments and concerns of additional involved parties. This would cover a brand new range of

variables compared to that of utilizing bilateral means. That said, ASEAN and the Permanent

Court of Arbitration were not able to give resolutions to the dispute. It may have to approach the

42
International Court of Justice as other ASEAN countries have tried to do which has resulted into

their disputes being resolved. Although it is multilateral, the venue itself is effective given the

progress and the resolution given by the International Court of Justice to the ASEAN countries

(Jenne, 2017).

Secondly, the duration must be determined once an approach is chosen, the Philippines

must ensure the consistency of its foreign policy. With each change in president, there comes a

change in policy (Tuazon, 2014). A consistent tone may not exactly help as the situation may call

for a change in approach. However, the sudden shift of stance on the territorial issue by the

government left the very topic unresolved. This would make the duration of the diplomatic

approach uncertain. That said, the key would be continuation and conviction in the foreign

policy. It must be ensured and enhanced as the years and presidents go by. This may lead to

protection of the nation’s territorial integrity and sustaining positive international relations. A

firm commitment to a particular approach, if correctly chosen, can lead to conflict resolution as

was shown in the case of other Southeast Asian nations (Jenne, 2017).

Thirdly, the Philippines must find ways to prevent such an issue from happening.

Southeast Asian countries aren’t prepared for external wars (Jenne, 2017). That said, it would

imply a gap in military strength between a defending nation and an opposing nation. The

Philippines must improve its armed forces especially in its navy and air force. More than just

quantity, the very equipment that the government must procure should be in good quality. One of

the roots of the problem is the lack of vigilance by the government towards its maritime

boundaries. Even if there was an adequate amount of it, there was a lack of naval vessels that

43
could challenge and protect the region from trespassing vessels. Prevention through increase of

security may be better than simply dealing with a problem through a reactive solution.

4.3 Recommendations

The research could be utilized and improved upon by foreign policy makers. It may lead

to a formulation of a foreign policy that is consistent, secure, and effective in actually solving

maritime disputes in the region. The study can also be utilized on analyzing the effects of

maritime or territorial disputes toward the economic relations between nations. It can also serve

as a glimpse into the Southeast Asian territorial dispute as well albeit from the Philippine

context.

The research could be improved upon in a variety of aspects. Firstly, it could delve into

how international relations with other countries could affect Philippine-Chinese relations as a

whole. Secondly, it could also deal with the both countries’ military strength comparisons as

well. Thirdly, it may possibly utilize the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea

in data formulation as it is an important document with regards to maritime boundaries. Fourthly,

the research could also tackle other nations who have territorial disputes with China and

analyzing how they dealt with the problem.

Due to the nature of the paper formulating a suggested foreign policy, the contents of data

formulation may also include the formulation of such a foreign policy in the first place. That

said, it may need to widen its scope into analyzing the foreign policy of the Philippines. This

would include its history and stances on issues to be able to grasp just what in particular does the

Philippines tolerate or not. Moreover, in the process, comparing it with foreign policies of other

44
Southeast Asian countries who have a similar status with regards to the territorial dispute may

lead to a comprehensive comparison.

45
 References

Al Jazeera (2017). ASEAN and China to start talks over disputed waters. Retrieved
(September 10, 2018) from https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/11/asean-china-start-
talks-disputed-waters-171113155703923.html

Amacker, C. (2011). The functions of diplomacy. 1. Retrieved (September 3, 2018) from

https://www.e-ir.info/2011/07/20/the-functions-of-diplomacy/

BBC News (2018). British navy’s HMS Albion warned over South China Sea provocation.
Retrieved (September 10, 2018) from https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-45433153

Blum, G. (2008). Bilateralism, multilateralism, and the architecture of international law. 48-58.
Retrieved (December 1, 2018) from
https://dash.harvard.edu/bitstream/handle/1/10880577/HILJ_49-2_Blum.pdf?sequence=1

Calonzo, A. (2015). PHL rejects Chinese envoy’s fresh offer for bilateral talks to settle sea
row. Retrieved (September 14, 2018) from
http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/news/nation/517514/phl-rejects-chinese-envoy-s-
fresh-offer-for-bilateral-talks-to-settle-sea-row/story/

Daiss, T. (2016). Why the South China Sea has more oil than you think. Retrieved
(September 10, 2018) from https://www.forbes.com/sites/timdaiss/2016/05/22/why-the-
south-china-sea-has-more-oil-than-you-think/#19b90306dd8f
Del Rosario, A. F. (2015). Why the Philippines brought this case to arbitration and its
importance to the region and the world. 3-4, 6, 9-13, 18, 20, 23, 26-29, 31. Retrieved
(October 12, 2018) from http://www.genevapm.dfa.gov.ph/embassy-news/211-ph-
china-maritime-dispute-full-text-dfa-chief-del-rosario-s-speech-at-un-tribunal

Ferrer, M. C. 92013). Costly wars, elusive peace. “Collected Articles on the Peace Process in the
Philippines 1990-2007.” Quezon City: The University of the Philippines Press.

Gao, C. (2017). Chinese premier: China-Philippines relations as warm as Manila’s weather.

Retrieved (September 14, 2018) from https://thediplomat.com/2017/11/chinese-premier-
china-philippines-relations-as-warm-as-manilas-weather/

GMA News (2018). Cayetano: PHL-China bilateral talks ongoing; diplomatic approach to
be used. Retrieved (September 10, 2018) from
http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/news/nation/655452/cayetano-phl-china-bilateral-
talks-ongoing-diplomatic-approach-to-be-used/story/

Heydarian, R. J. (2018). Are China and the Philippines agreeing to share the South China Sea.
Retrieved (September 10, 2018) from https://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/are-china-
the-philippines-agreeing-share-the-south-china-sea-25229

46
Holmes, H. A. (2009). The Importance of Maintaining Diplomatic Relations. Retrieved
(September 3, 2018). from https://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/articles/4283/the-
importance-of-maintaining-diplomatic-relations

Jenne, N. (2017). Journal of current Southeast Asian affairs [PDF]. Retrieved (October 12, 2018)
from https://journals.sub.uni-hamburg.de/giga/jsaa/article/view/1088/1095

Malinao, A. L. (2018). Diplomacy: PH’s only option vs China. 1, 2-3, 5-6 Retrieved from
http://opinion.inquirer.net/114109/diplomacy-phs-option-vs-china

Nawal, A. (2018). Duterte justifies diplomacy with China on disputed territory. 10-11, 25-27,
29-30 Retrieved from http://globalnation.inquirer.net/166274/duterte-justifies-
diplomacy-china-disputed-territory-president-duterte-china-palace-bilateral-talks

Pamintuan, A. M. (2016). Lessons in Diplomacy. 10. Retrieved (September 3, 2018) from

https://www.philstar.com/opinion/2016/05/20/1584995/lessons-diplomacy

Peralta, J. (2018). Duterte to hold bilateral talks tith China’s Xi this April. Retrieved
(September 10, 2018) from http://cnnphilippines.com/news/2018/04/06/president-
Duterte-bilateral-talk-China.html
Perlez, J. (2016). Philippines v. China: Q. and A. on South China Sea case. Retrieved
(September 10, 2018) from https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/11/world/asia/south-
china-sea-philippines-hague.html
Permanent Court of Arbitration (2016). In the matter of the South China Sea arbitration before an
arbitral tribunal constituted under Annex VII to the 1982 United Nations Convention on
the Law of the Sea between the Republic of the Philippines and the People’s Republic of
China [PDF]. Retrieved (October 12, 2018) from https://pca-cpa.org/wp-
content/uploads/sites/175/2016/07/PH-CN-20160712-Award.pdf

Philippine Daily Inquirer (2017). Top Chinese official brings $6-B deals to PH. Retrieved
(September 10, 2018) from http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/881736/top-chinese-official-
brings-6-b-deals-to-ph
Shead, B. (2017). The Philippines’s economic and political relations with China. Retrieved
(October 12, 2018) from https://www.aseanbriefing.com/news/2017/04/10/philippines-
economic-political-relations-china.html

Tago, A. (2017). Multilateralism, bilateralism, and unilateralism in foreign policy. 1-4. Retrieved
(December 1, 2018) from
http://oxfordre.com/politics/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.001.0001/acrefore-
9780190228637-e-449#acrefore-9780190228637-e-449-bibItem-0002

Tuazon, M. (2014). The highs and lows of Philippines-China relations: Current Situation and
Prospects [PDF]. 1-6. Retrieved (October 12, 2018) from http://www.cenpeg.org/pol-
study/int/PAPER%20FOR%20GASS%20ISEAS%20lecture%20of%20April%2018%202
014.pdf

47
 Appendices

Appendix A

Research Matrix

Specific research Relevant Data to be gathered How collected data will

questions variables and/or tools to be analyzed
measure variables

1. How effective -Diplomatic Studies or articles The data would be

were the approaches stating the status of synthesized and from
diplomatic -Southeast the Southeast Asian the synthesis a
approaches used Asian territorial dispute conclusion on its
by the territorial the Philippines has effectiveness will be
Philippines in the dispute with China will be derived based on the
Southeast Asian -Philippines gathered. following:
territorial dispute -China -Actual solution to the
with China in dispute
resolving the -Accompanying
conflict? effects
-Progress of affairs

2. How were -International Journals, studies, or The data would again

Philippine relations articles regarding be synthesized and
international -Philippine the current state of determine the status of
relations with diplomatic affairs between the Philippine-China
China affected approaches Philippines and relations.
by Philippine -Southeast China due to the
diplomatic Asian former’s diplomatic
approaches to the territorial approaches towards
Southeast Asian dispute the latter will be
territorial -China searched.
dispute?

3. What were the -Benefits Articles or studies Synthesis of gathered

benefits gained - Philippines discussing the data.
by the benefits that the
Philippines in Philippines had
their diplomatic gained because of
approaches to the diplomatic
dispute? approaches towards
the dispute.

48
 4. What are the -Diplomatic News articles or Summary of gathered
diplomatic approaches official documents data and how they
approaches used -Philippines & statements transitioned from one
by the -Southeast stating the form to another.
Philippines in Asian diplomatic
relation to the territorial approaches used by
Southeast Asian dispute the Philippines
territorial dispute regarding the
with China? dispute.

Appendix B

Images

Figure 1. Grant, A. (Forbes Staff). (2017). The players. (Graphic image). Retrieved from

https://www.forbes.com/sites/outofasia/2017/08/22/making-sense-of-the-south-china-sea-

dispute/#152cc13f1c3b

49
 Appendix B

Tables

Figure 2. Asia Briefing Ltd. (N.A.). (2017). Top 10 visitor markets (January-December

2016/2015). (Digital graphic table) Retrieved from https://www.aseanbriefing.com/

news/2017/04/10/philippines-economic-political-relations-china.html

50