After being paralyzed for so long by the pandemic, China is showing that it is catching up for lost time with its aggressiveness and provocativeness not only in the United States through its spy balloons but also in the West Philippine Sea—which it claims to own by virtue of a fictional nine-dash line—by training its military-grade (blinding) laser at the Philippine Coast Guard vessel which was unloading supplies to another vessel at the Ayungin Shoal.
The use by the Chinese Coast Guard of a military- grade laser against the Philippine Coast Guard is an act of provocation, in violation of the 1998 Protocol on Blinding Laser Weapons, which China and the Philippines signed with over 100 countries. It also contravened the United Nations Charter that prohibits the use of force in resolving disputes among states.
And for this, former Supreme Court Associate Justice Antonio Carpio—who has been using his legal expertise to champion the country’s control over the West Philippine Sea—said the Philippines can involve the 1951 Mutual Defense Treaty with the United States, but must first coordinated with the US in releasing a joint statement warning that future use by CCG vessels of laser weapons on Philippine public vessels or aircraft “will trigger the operation of the MDT.”
Carpio surmised that the CCG’ in insisting on enforcing the so-called “nine-dash line,” which an international arbitral court had already invalidated in favor of the Philippines.
“The laser weapon, even if it causes only temporary blindness, is still a weapon or an ‘arms’ that qualifies the attack as an armed attack under the [MDT],” he argued.
Maritime security expert Jay Batongbacal agreed that China’s use of military-grade laser against a Philippine vessel in the West Philippine Sea may be seen as “a threat of the use of force against another state, contrary to the UN Charter.”
“The fact that the lasers are used in combination with dangerous maneuvers, strongly worded warnings that state that consequences will be borne by the ones being warned, against a government vessel, to me qualifies the actions of the CCG as a threat of the use of force against another state,” he told the Inquirer.
“In the laws of war, there is the UN Protocol on Blinding Laser Weapons which prohibits the use of laser weapons specifically to blind combatants. Even more should that prohibition be applicable in times of peace,” he said.
Some legislators said the laser incident last Feb. 6 does not qualify as a ground to invoke the defense treaty with the United States. Senate Minority Leader Aquilino Pimentel III and Sen. Francis Tolentino both disagreed with Carpio’s position, with the former warning that the Philippines should refrain from haphazardly citing the military deal with the United States.
“That is not an armed attack. And we should not lightly invoke the MDT… We should do everything to avoid war,” Pimentel said.
Tolentino said the CCG’s action was “intrusive” and “hostile,” but did not fall under the definition of an “armed attack,” which he said “should be able to produce death or incapacitation. It is an act of hostility. [But] it cannot be considered a belligerent act.”
President Marcos even called the Chinese Ambassador to the palace to try ironing out the kinks between the two parties and to invoke the agreement with President Xi on access of Filipinos to fishing grounds in WPS.
On Tuesday, the government filed a diplomatic protest relating to the incident and called on Beijing to ensure its vessels cease “aggressive activities” within the country’s exclusive economic zone (EEZ).
The DFA said the actions of China’s coast guard vessel were a threat to Philippine sovereignty and security and the country had a prerogative to conduct legitimate activities within its EEZ, the DFA said.
DFA spokesman Ma. Teresita Daza said on Friday:
“We want to engage China as friends but as friends, we have to engage based on truth and goodwill. We have to have congruence with what is being said and what is being done in the waters and we want to actually build on the relationship, but this incident should not continue if we are to build on that.”
She said the Philippines has the prerogative to conduct legitimate activities within its 370-kilometer EEZ, which includes Ayungin Shoal as reaffirmed by the 2016 arbitral ruling of the Permanent Court of Arbitration at The Hague that rejected China’s sweeping nine-dash claim over nearly the entire South China Sea.
“China does not have law enforcement rights or powers in and around Ayungin Shoal or any part of the Philippine EEZ,” Daza pointed out.
Daza urged China to comply with the 2016 arbitral ruling and direct its vessel to “cease and desist” from its aggressive actions against Philippine vessels.