One impertinent, trying hard, and eager beaver subordinate official of the National Security Council, speaking outside of his domain and expertise, has issued an abrasive and contemptuous statement against China.
The rejoinder was a reaction to the claim of the Chinese government that the Philippines has committed to remove or tow away from Ayungin Shoal the BRP Sierra Madre, and that despite several demands, the former has not done so, hence the latter was compelled to undertake navigational blocking moves to halt a Philippine Coast Guard escorting Philippine boats bringing provisions to the soldiers staying thereat.
This government subaltern was quoted in a press briefing that such claim is fiction and the figment of the imagination of the Chinese Ambassador. Such a tasteless and undiplomatic retort has no place in foreign relations.
In the first place, this functionary has no business responding to the remarks of the Chinese envoy who was speaking on behalf of his government. It should be the Secretary of Foreign Affairs who is the proper government official who should engage the Chinese official representative. Or the President himself as head of government and chief architect of foreign policy.
Such a delicate subject should be handled by the designated government official tasked to implement the foreign policy outlined by the President. Not by a bumptious bureaucrat wallowing in exaggerated undeserved importance.
Given that the aforesaid claim can easily be validated or disputed by official records of both governments, the Chinese government should show proof of the truthfulness of such an allegation.
Even assuming that the Philippine government has indeed committed to removing the BRP Sierra Madre, consideration must be made of the circumstances that birthed such commitment. We recall that it was in 1999 that the BRP Sierra Madre run aground in Ayungin Shoal. That was 24 years ago.
The territorial claims of both countries over the disputed waters were — if not unheard of — not as heated and passionate as they are today. It could be that both countries were unsure of their territorial rights or that the adverse claims of both have not surfaced as each one was focused on other matters that require their undivided attention.
It was only during the time of then-president Benigno Simeon Aquino III’s administration that the conflict over the South China Sea or the Philippine Sea came to the fore when Beijing foisted and pursued its expansionist policy under the nine-dash theory resulting in strained relations between China and the Philippines. It culminated in the filing before the Permanent Arbitration Court and the latter’s upholding of our country’s submissions and rejecting China’s expansion claims.
Even if we grant China’s narrative that we pledged to tow away BRP Sierra Madre, the arbitral ruling in our favor removed us from such commitment. Any decision made under the circumstances prevailing when such was made can be changed when the previous circumstances have been altered. Since Ayungin Shoal has been ruled to be within the country’s exclusive economic zone, it has every right to let the BRP Sierra Madre stay where it is presently located, and supply the soldiers stationed there with food, clothes, and other necessities. It has the right as well to bring materials for its repair.
President Marcos is right when he says no agreement was forged, and if it does exist as to the removal of the a-grounded ship, he is rescinding it now.
A change in circumstances necessitates or requires a change in decision.