The Philippines Position In The South China Sea; There Cannot Be Dialogue When China Habitually Peddles Lies
The International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) recently concluded its annual Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore.[1] The Shangri-La Dialogue is widely regarded as the premier defense summit for the Indo-Pacific region. With representatives from 47 countries in attendance, the forum provides a platform for defense ministers, military leaders, and senior officials to discuss regional security challenges.
Philippine Secretary of Defense Gilberto Teodoro was among the keynote speakers of the event. In his address, Teodoro outlined the Philippines' position on three key issues: the evolving role and limitations of multilateral institutions such as the United Nations; the Philippine's position amid the intensifying U.S.-China rivalry; and the reasons why the Philippines' acts the way it does amid China's illegal territorial grab in the South China Sea.
During the International Institute for Strategic Studies Shangri-La Dialogue 2025, which took place on May 30-June 1, 2025 in Singapore, Philippine Secretary of National Defense Gilberto C. Teodoro, Jr. responded to questions raised by Chinese delegates concerning maritime tensions in the region. He said that the questions were in fact "disguised" propaganda and he highlighted the increasing gap between China's statements and its actions in the West Philippine Sea. Video footage of the session was posted to Facebook by the Philippine Department of National Defense on June 2, 2025. (See MEMRI TV clip No. 12063, Philippine Defense Secretary Gilberto Teodoro Jr. At Shangri-La Conference: The Gap Between China's Words And Actions In The West Philippine Sea Is Growing, June 2, 2025)
The State Of Multilateral Institutions
For the past 80 years, the rules-based international order upheld by the United Nations and other multilateral institutions has fostered global stability that allowed nations to thrive in relative peace. In Asia, it paved the way for the post-war recovery and economic success of Japan, South Korea, and those in Southeast Asia.
But the world is changing. Global interconnectedness – through migration, trade, and security alliances – has never been greater. The war in Ukraine, for example, has driven up energy and commodity prices across Asia. The conflict between Israel and certain terrorist groups in the Arab world has disrupted supply chains around the world. Furthermore, tensions in strategic chokepoints like the Bab Al-Mandeb Strait and the South China Sea send ripples through global trade. In today's world, events in one region inevitably have consequences far beyond their borders.
Amid recent conflicts and disputes, multilateral institutions have faced increased stress in maintaining peace and security. The mechanisms which were once effective in blocking acts of aggression and in restoring order are no longer as effective as they used to be. This is attributed to gridlocks in decision making, the failure to promote dialogue among disputing parties and the snail's pace by which reforms adapting to change are carried out.
Legal and normative gaps are widening in the resolution of territorial disputes, in cybersecurity breaches, in protecting underwater infrastructure, in regulating artificial intelligence, and in the proliferation of lethal autonomous weapons – just to name a few.
Under the current system, the inability of multilateral institutions to arrive at peaceful resolutions has become the norm, rather than the exception. This underscores the need for reforms that reflect today's realities. To this, Secretary Teodoro offers three recommendations:
-First, enhance inter-regional security cooperation. This can be done by increasing dialogue among regional blocks such as the EU, ASEAN, and the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) on shared security concerns.
-Second, establish a revised legal framework, grounded on the rule of law, that is fit-for-purpose for the issues that face us today. Such a legal framework is to be jointly and cooperatively enforced by member countries.
-Third, the inordinate veto privilege of powerful countries must be curtailed since its exercise is often a hindrance to the interest of the world at large. The Philippines advocates greater representation of smaller states, particularly in the UN Security Council.
The Philippines commits to advocate constructive solutions if and when it is elected as a non-permanent member of the UN Security Council for 2027-2028.
In the end, there is no alternative for the rules-based-order to maintain peace, security, and the continued prosperity of the world. We must improve the framework we already have.
The Proxy War
China sent no top defense officials to the Shangri-La Dialogue.[2] Instead, the Chinese delegation was led by representatives from the National Defense University. Its mission was to inject Chinese propaganda messages into the forum. One of them asked the Philippine Defense Secretary why the Philippines is allowing itself to be a proxy of America amid the U.S.-China "cold war."
Secretary Teodoro emphasized that while the U.S.-China rivalry is raging, it must not be made the overarching narrative of all conflicts. Doing so unfairly portrays the legitimate actions of states like the Philippines as being done at the behest of stronger powers. It undermines the agency of smaller states.
Secretary Teodoro also reiterated that the Philippine's actions in the South China Sea are not a function of the U.S.-China rivalry. Rather, they are a result of China's overreach in its nine-, ten-, or 11-dash line, which changes according to China's need, which is illegal and has no basis in international law.
China's Territorial Grab
Another CCP outfit asserted that while Malaysia and Vietnam have disputes with China, both manage their difference through peaceful dialogue, so why couldn't the Philippines do the same? To this, Secretary Teodoro's responded with barbed, elegant clarity. Let me quote him verbatim: "Thank you for the propaganda spiels disguised as questions. First, the comparison between the Philippines, Malaysia and Vietnam. Let us not forget that while we are members of ASEAN, we are [all] sovereign countries, each with their own territorial integrity and sovereignty. And I am sure that if what China is doing to the Philippines is done to Malaysia or to any ASEAN country, you will see a different reaction [from them]. And certainly, as an ASEAN brother, the Philippines will stand up with that ASEAN brother in [their] time of need – in support and in defense of what is international law and UNCLOS. As members of UNCLOS, we are all committed to support it.
"On the dialogue with China, unfortunately, in my personal opinion, the fact that the question was asked in the way it was, engenders a deficit of trust in China's words vis-à-vis its actions.
"Just look back to 1995 to a place called Mischief Reef.[3] There were a few bamboo structures erected there, and China said that these were temporary havens for fisherfolk. Now you have an artificial military island, heavily militarized.
"China says that it has peaceful intentions. Why does it continue to deny the Philippines its rightful provenance under international law and UNCLOS? And as proof of this, we do not stand alone. No country in the world supports the nine dash line claim of China or the idea that waters within this nine dash line are internal waters of China.
"Several countries in the world, no less than 50, have joined the Philippines in condemning China's behavior in the South China Sea. None have agreed with China and none has condemned the Philippines for standing up against China in the face of a threat to its territorial integrity and sovereignty for which I thank the members of this chamber right now for your support.
"And thus, for dialogue to be effective, it must be coupled with trust. And China has a lot of trust-building to do to be an effective negotiating partner in dispute settlement. We have to call a spade a spade. And that's what we see, and that is the biggest stumbling block to dispute resolution or dialogue with China – that deficit of trust which I think any rational person or any person that is not ideologically biased with freedom of thought and freedom of speech, will agree with me."[4]
Chinese Hypocrisy
China wants to convey two messages to the world.
First, that it indeed possesses sovereign and legal rights over the South China Sea by virtue of its self-conjured non-dash line.
Second, that the Philippines is obstructing China from exercising its rights by engaging in legal maneuvers and provocative activities, aided by the United States and other countries that lean toward western doctrine.
China cannot have it both ways. It cannot illegally grab the sovereign territories of another nation and also play the victim. It cannot call for dialogue and cooperation when it systematically employs grey-zone tactics like firing laser guns, attacking with water cannons, and illegally boarding Philippine inflatable boats and slashing them with knives.
There cannot be dialogue when China habitually peddles lies (e.g., the Mischief Reef narrative)[5] and disinformation (e.g., that the Philippines is acting as a proxy of the United States). There cannot be cooperation when China uses coercion to bully its adversaries into submission.
This is the reason why the Philippines acts as it does. It was the lone country, among the many claimants of parts of the South China Sea, with the courage to take China to court and win. It is in the forefront in exposing China's bad behavior. It is leading the way in advocating the rule-based order as a means of settling disputes.
Hence, the Philippine's reaction toward China is not one born out of emotion or malevolent intentions. Rather, its reaction is pragmatic with the view of defending its sovereign rights.
To sum up, Secretary Teodoro's talk highlighted not only the Philippines' commitment to upholding the rules-based order but also the important role of multilateral institutions in addressing global conflicts. As the world continues to change, it is imperative that multilateral institutions evolve to remain effective. Reform – particularly in enhancing representativeness, adapting legal frameworks to modern realities and fostering meaningful cooperation across regions – is essential to maintaining peace.
The Philippines stands ready to contribute to these efforts, anchored in the belief that a stronger, more responsive rules-based order remains the best foundation for lasting peace and shared prosperity.
*Andrew J. Masigan is the MEMRI China Media Studies Project Special Advisor. He is a Manila-based economist, businessman, and political columnist for The Philippine Star. Masigan's articles in MEMRI are also published in The Philippine Star.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Iraqi News
an hour ago
- Iraqi News
Egypt hails Iraqi proposal to achieve Israel-Iran ceasefire
Baghdad ( – The Egyptian Minister of Foreign Affairs, Badr Abdel-Atty, praised on Saturday a proposal put forward by Iraqi Foreign Minister Fuad Hussein during Arab foreign ministers' meeting to achieve a ceasefire between Iran and Israel. Hussein recommended forming an Arab-Islamic committee to facilitate contact and engagement with the United States, European countries, and Iran to achieve a ceasefire and return to the negotiating table. Abdel-Atty's remarks took place during his meeting with Hussein on the sidelines of the 51st session of the Council of Foreign Ministers of the member states of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) held in the Turkish city of Istanbul, according to a statement released by the Iraqi Foreign Ministry. The meeting addressed the catastrophic developments in the region as a result of Israel's aggression against Iran. The two ministers highlighted the importance of increased diplomatic efforts and practical initiatives taken by all parties to de-escalate the military situation and prevent further regional deterioration. The two ministers emphasized the crucial role of coordination and collaborative interaction in preventing further escalation, which might jeopardize the region's security and stability. They also underlined the need to maintain regional peace and work together to prevent the Israel-Iran conflict from escalating.
Iraqi News
7 hours ago
- Iraqi News
UN and Iran slam US attack on nuclear facilities
Baghdad ( – United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres and Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi issued stark warnings on Saturday following the United States' airstrikes on Iran's nuclear facilities, calling the move a dangerous violation of international norms with far-reaching consequences. Guterres, in a statement posted to X, said he was 'gravely alarmed by the use of force by the United States against Iran today,' describing it as 'a dangerous escalation in a region already on the edge – and a direct threat to international peace and security.' 'There is a growing risk that this conflict could rapidly get out of control – with catastrophic consequences for civilians, the region, and the world,' he added, calling on all Member States to de-escalate tensions and uphold international law and the UN Charter. Shortly after, Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi condemned the strikes in a strongly worded statement on social media, accusing Washington of committing a 'grave violation of the UN Charter, international law and the NPT [Non-Proliferation Treaty] by attacking Iran's peaceful nuclear installations.' 'The events this morning are outrageous and will have everlasting consequences. Each and every member of the UN must be alarmed over this extremely dangerous, lawless and criminal behavior,' Araghchi stated. He added that 'in accordance with the UN Charter and its provisions allowing a legitimate response in self-defense, Iran reserves all options to defend its sovereignty, interest, and people.' The targeted strikes—reportedly on Iran's Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan nuclear facilities—have dramatically heightened fears of a wider regional war. The United Nations Security Council is expected to discuss the situation in the coming days, as pressure mounts to contain what could become a full-scale conflict with global implications.
Iraqi News
9 hours ago
- Iraqi News
Bombing Iran, Trump gambles on force over diplomacy
Washington – For nearly a half-century the United States has squabbled with Iran's Islamic Republic but the conflict has largely been left in the shadows, with US policymakers believing, often reluctantly, that diplomacy was preferable. With President Donald Trump's order of strikes on Iran's nuclear sites, the United States — like Israel, which encouraged him — has brought the conflict into the open, and the consequences may not be clear for some time to come. 'We will only know if it succeeded if we can get through the next three to five years without the Iranian regime acquiring nuclear weapons, which they now have compelling reasons to want,' said Kenneth Pollack, a former CIA analyst and supporter of the 2003 Iraq war who is now vice president for policy at the Middle East Institute. US intelligence had not concluded that Iran was building a nuclear bomb, with Tehran's sensitive atomic work largely seen as a means of leverage, and Iran can be presumed to have taken precautions in anticipation of strikes. Trita Parsi, an outspoken critic of military action, said Trump 'has now made it more likely that Iran will be a nuclear weapons state in the next five to 10 years.' 'We should be careful not to confuse tactical success with strategic success,' said Parsi, executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft. 'The Iraq war was also successful in the first few weeks but President Bush's declaration of 'Mission Accomplished' did not age well,' he said. – Weak point for Iran – Yet Trump's attack — a week after Israel began a major military campaign — came as the cleric-run state is at one of its weakest points since the 1979 Islamic revolution toppled the pro-Western shah. Since the October 7, 2023 attack on Israel by Hamas, which enjoys Iran's support, Israel — besides obliterating much of Gaza — has decimated Lebanon's Hezbollah, a militant group that would once reliably strike Israel as Tehran's proxy. Iran's main ally among Arab leaders, Syria's Bashar al-Assad, was also toppled in December. Supporters of Trump's strike argued that diplomacy was not working, with Iran standing firm on its right to enrich uranium. 'Contrary to what some will say in the days to come, the US administration did not rush to war. In fact, it gave diplomacy a real chance,' said Ted Deutch, a former Democratic congressman who now heads the American Jewish Committee. 'The murderous Iranian regime refused to make a deal,' he said. Top Senate Republican John Thune pointed to Tehran's threats to Israel and language against the United States and said that the state had 'rejected all diplomatic pathways to peace.' – Abrupt halt to diplomacy – Trump's attack comes almost exactly a decade after former president Barack Obama sealed a deal in which Iran drastically scaled back its nuclear work — which Trump pulled out of in 2018 after coming into office for his first term. Most of Trump's Republican Party and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has long seen Iran as an existential threat, attacked Obama's deal because it allowed Tehran to enrich uranium at levels well beneath weapons grade and the key clauses had an end date. But Trump, billing himself a peacemaker, just a month ago said on a visit to Gulf Arab monarchies that he was hopeful for a new deal with Iran, and his administration was preparing new talks when Netanyahu attacked Iran. This prompted an abrupt U-turn from Trump. 'Trump's decision to cut short his own efforts for diplomacy will also make it much harder to get a deal in the medium and long runs,' said Jennifer Kavanagh, director of military analysis at Defense Priorities, which advocates restraint. 'Iran now has no incentive to trust Trump's word or to believe that striking a compromise will advance Iran's interests.' Iran's religious rulers also face opposition internally. Major protests erupted in 2022 after the death in custody of Mahsa Amini, who was detained for defying the regime's rules on covering hair. Karim Sadjadpour, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, wrote on social media that Trump's strikes could either entrench the Islamic Republic or hasten its downfall. 'The US bombing of Iran's nuclear facilities is an unprecedented event that may prove to be transformational for Iran, the Middle East, US foreign policy, global non-proliferation and potentially even the global order,' he said. 'Its impact will be measured for decades to come.'
