Retired Senior Associate Justice Antonio Carpio returned to DLSU to deliver a talk entitled, The West Philippine Sea Dispute as the Philippines’ Foremost Foreign Policy Concern last February 14, at the Multipurpose Hall, 20th floor of the Br. Andrew Gonzalez Hall. Hosted by the International Studies Department and the European Studies Association, the talk dissected the clashing arguments over the territories being disputed by the Philippines and China.
Winning methods
According to Carpio, winning the arbitration case in 2016 at The Hague tribunal was guaranteed given the vast amount of evidence that the Philippine government had at their disposal to prove ownership over the contested territories. “We submitted a lot of maps, 170 in total, we were sure we were going to win,” he declared. The obstacle, however, was whether or not “the Chinese would accept the final ruling from the Hague tribunal.”
The main point of reference that the Philippines used to justify their claim is the Spanish-era map Carta Hydrographica y Chorographica de las islas Filipinas or the Hydrographical and Chorographical Chart of the Philippine Islands published in 1734. Carpio highlighted that the map included the Panakot or Scarborough Shoal as well as Isla de Paragua or Spratly islands. As Carpio explained, the maps were “valid indicators” of Philippine territory “because it bears the official seal from the former Spanish empire.”
Chinese contention
On the other hand, the justification used by China for their claims of ownership of the islands was based on historical maps produced during the Tang dynasty. He noted, however, that contradictory to Chinese claims, imperial maps “from the Tang dynasty up to the last Qing dynasty” show that China’s southernmost territory is the island province of Hainan.
These, according to Carpio, highlighted why China has no basis for its historical claims to the islands, and that these territories belong to the Philippines. He added that the so-called “nine-dash line” used by China to lay claim on almost all the islands in the West Philippine Sea was only publicly announced to the world in 1948. “The Chinese published the nine-dash line in the late 1940s, and even admitted that these islands were contested between them, French Indochina, and [the] then Commonwealth of the Philippines, meaning they did not claim full ownership of the islands,” he expounded.
The Hague’s Permanent Court of Arbitration ruled in favor of the Philippines in July 2016, and cited that China has no “historical rights” as it had claimed. The Duterte administration, however, has failed to use the arbitration ruling to enforce its claim over the territories.
Future Endeavors
While the islands in the West Philippine Sea still remain under dispute, Carpio emphasized the economic potential of the islands, especially the oil and natural gas reserves. Carpio emphasized, “The Malampaya Oil Reserve, which supplies over 40 percent of the energy being consumed in Luzon, will be dry in around five years’ time.” He suggested development of the Reed Bank near the Spratly islands to block China’s approach, “The Chinese encroachment on the islands is a problem we need to solve as soon as possible.”
Carpio also identified the importance of strategic ties with other foreign powers. “Everyday, warships and aircraft carriers from the UK, Japan, Canada, India, and the US patrol the waters of the South China Sea. We need to support them because they are enforcing our sovereignty over the islands,” Carpio emphasized.
For ordinary citizens taking a stand in the issue, Carpio emphasized that ordinary Chinese people should not be the target of distrust, “We should not demonize the Chinese people for their beliefs, it is their government who taught them one way of thinking for the entirety of their [lives].”
Since retiring from his post last October 2019, Carpio has been touring the Philippines, Japan, and the United States and delivering talks on the West Philippine Sea dispute. He continues to write books on the sovereign rights of the Philippines and remains an outspoken advocate on the territorial issue.
