By Junex Doronio
MANILA — Trashing China’s insinuation that the United States and other allies may have a “hidden agenda” on the West Philippine Sea (WPS) issue, the Philippine Coast Guard (PCG) on Thursday said the country will continue to welcome countries that support its interests.
PCG spokesperson Commodore Jay Tarriela stressed that the Philippines will keep its vigilance against “bullies” and called out China for blaming the actions of the Philippines as well as the US for the rising tensions in the South China Sea.
“While it is true that there is no such thing as free lunch, unlike China, our allies do not take away our lunch especially if it is rightfully ours,” Tarriela said in a post on X (formerly Twitter).
He was reacting to an editorial article in the Chinese government-supported publication Global Times.
The article read, “The Philippines must remain vigilant against the ‘enthusiasm’ displayed by the US and some other countries. There is no such thing as a free lunch, and behind the US’ “enthusiasm” lies a hidden agenda.”
It can also be noted that recently, Chinese state media People’s Daily also published a commentary accusing the Philippines of infringing on China’s territory, spreading false information, and colluding with other countries to cause trouble.
“Until now, the [People’s Republic of China] has not come to terms with the fact that their fabricated narratives and baseless claims about the alleged aggressive actions of the Philippines are not that convincing,” Tarriela quipped.
Meanwhile, the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) also said the Philippines is not provoking conflict in the South China Sea.
“[The] Philippines is not provoking conflict. We follow international law and we are only implementing our domestic law,” AFP spokesperson Colonel Medel Aguilar pointed out.
He further said the Philippines is not conducting activities that will put vessels and seafarers in danger and instead accused China of performing dangerous maneuvers that sometimes result in collisions at sea.
“They are the ones committing all the violations,” Aguilar retorted.
He noted that the Philippines was just conducting activities within its territorial waters and exclusive economic zone (EEZ).
(IAmigo/MNM)
By Junex Doronio
MANILA — Taking notice that under the administration of President Ferdinand R Marcos Jr., the Philippines increased engagement with other nations, including the United States, United Kingdom, Australia, Canada and Japan, an American maritime expert said it has brought the country has gained support from the international community in the face of China’s incursions in the West Philippine Sea.
Ray Powell, of the Gordian Knot Center for National Security Innovation at Stanford University, said being more open on issues in the West Philippine Sea may be a part of the paradigm shift on the issue that Marcos Jr. has hinted at.
While in Tokyo, Japan PBBM said a “paradigm shift” was needed in how the Philippines approaches its maritime dispute with China, noting that diplomatic efforts with Beijing were headed “in a poor direction” and showing “very little progress.”
“It’s time that the countries that feel that they have an involvement in this situation, we have to come up with a paradigm shift,” Marcos said in a December 16 interview with Mainichi Shimbun.
Compared with the previous Duterte administration that was “friendly” to China, Powell also noted that the Philippines has been more open about incidents and confrontations in the West Philippine Sea, saying the country “turned the cameras on this year and showed the world what’s happening.”
“All of a sudden, the rest of the world is seeing this level of maritime aggression from China and recognizing that this has been going on for quite some time and we haven’t been paying attention,” Powell said in his interview with ANC’s “Headstart” on Monday, December 18.
The former US Air Force officer said aside from the support of the international community, the Philippines also gains equipment and assistance on maritime security.
(IA/MNM)
By Gerry Lirio
IT WAS another successful supply mission to the BRP Sierra Madre, the country’s military outpost on Ayungin Shoal in the West Philippine Sea, led no less by AFP Chief of Staff Gen. Romeo Brawner Jr. and Coast Guard Commandant Ronnie Gavan.
They were met with water cannons but, if only because the supply, including Christmas gifts, for Filipino soldiers, staff, and fishermen had been delivered, according to NSC assistant director Jonathan Malaya in a morning TV show interview, the mission was deemed successful.
But the success would come with greater risk the next time they do it again. Chinese Coast Guards have been getting bolder. There may be casualties next time.
The TV show host thus asked: Is there a better way to do it?
Brawner said he was not scared. The trip, as it has always been, was a grand Coast Guard production on safety. Under Galvan, the PCG personnel seem to have always been prepared to handle their police duties.
Brawner: We are not scared
“No, but I’m angry because of what they did,” he was quoted to have said after the trip. He was aboard the Unaizah Mae 1, one of the three government boats delivering provisions to Filipino fishermen near Scarborough Shoal, off Luzon.
“I think they didn’t know I was on board.”
“We keep on avoiding them, but they continue to harass, it’s dangerous, it’s dangerous.”
But more than anything, the experience raised questions about the worsening relations between the Philippines and China over disputed territorial waters.
‘It’s going happen again’
It has happened before, the TV anchor said. And it is going to happen again. The last one before that was on November 9. The Philippines filed another diplomatic protest for the November 9 blockade, its 58th against China so far.
Again, the Chinese Coast Guard dismissed the protest claiming the waters of Ayungin Shoal belongs to
China. It warned that the Chinese Coast Guard “will continue to carry out law enforcement activities in the waters under China’s jurisdiction in accordance with the law, and resolutely safeguard China’s national sovereignty and maritime rights and interests.”
The clash of actions between the Philippines and China is not expected to be settled soon. On the contrary, it is developing into another potential flash point on international peace and security as other states have started to take active sides in the controversy.
What Congress can do?
Congress is conducting public hearings to help craft laws to protect the sovereignty and sovereign rights of the Philippines in this dispute with China.
How far can Philippine laws protect Filipino fishermen, soldiers, and Coast Guard personnel?
In the hope of helping Congress craft laws, former Chief Justice Reynato Puno has given the Senate a copy of his position paper on the disputed waters. The paper was submitted to the Senate committees on National Defense and Security, Peace, Unification and Reconciliation, Foreign Relations, Public Works and Finance and Special Committee on Philippine Maritime and Admiralty Zones.
The Maharlika NuMedia has obtained a copy of the paper, which Justice Puno will also present before a grand conference of chief justices in January 2024. We tried to summarize some salient points Puno has raised in the paper.
Blocking an act of war?
Puno addressed in the paper several questions defining the Philippine-Chinese relations, among them:
Was the blocking maneuver an act of war?
Puno divided his paper into six parts. And here, the former chief justice raises more questions, and answers these questions to guide the senators.
In Part 1, Puno asked: What is a military force? What is a law enforcement force?
The paper started with the basic proposition that there was a distinction between military forces and law enforcement forces. The distinction is based on the principle of posse comitatus.
In the Philippines, the principle of posse comitatus is mandated by the Constitution. International conventions also recognize the distinction between military forces and law enforcement forces and their respective activities.
According to the principle of posse comitatus, the paper said a government may call upon its civilian citizens to assist in law enforcement but it “may not use any part of the armed forces to execute the laws,”
Is there a real difference?
Said Puno: “In sum, there is a real distinction between a military force and a law enforcement force. In the Philippines, such distinction is recognized by the Constitution, laws, and jurisprudence.
“The distinction is based on the organizational unit, with those belonging to the AFP being considered military forces whereas those belonging to the PNP are law enforcement forces that are civilian in nature.
The distinction is also based on their function: preservation of the state by the military calls for the highest form of self-defense and justifies the immediate use of lethal force to achieve a military objective;
“In contrast, enforcement of the law and preservation of order by law enforcement forces are limited by strict constitutional procedural and substantive requirements, including the rules of engagement.
The 1987 Philippine Constitution and laws distinguish between military forces and law enforcement forces following the principle of posse comitatus.
Thus, our Constitution defines the armed forces and law enforcement forces differently. Article II, Section 3 enshrines the principle that “civilian authority is, at all times, supreme over the military,” and assigns to the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) the function of “securing the sovereignty of the State and the integrity of the national territory.” Article XVI, Section 6 provides that the AFP shall be a “citizen armed force” whose function is to ensure the “security of the State.”
‘Engendering statements’
Puno said the questions regarding military engagement and law enforcement and the legal significance of their difference were “engendered” by statements made in two public hearings at the Philippine Senate.
First, during the public hearing of the Special Committee on Philippine Maritime and Admiralty Zones on October 23, 2023, the discussion centered on on the proposed provision in the maritime zones bill regarding countermeasures that the Philippines can take against China for the collision and blockade that took place in the vicinity of Ayungin Shoal.
In Part 2: What is the significance of the distinction between a military force and a law enforcement force?
Coast Guard in wartime
Republic Act 9993 provides that the PCG shall be attached to the Department of Transportation and Communication, now known as DOTR, during peacetime and to the Department of National Defense during wartime.
It vested the PCG with maritime law enforcement, safety and security functions, and does not mention the military functions that the PCG might perform following a declaration of war.
PCG needs Congress help
In a separate instrument, namely a PCG Manual on the Rules on the Use of Force, the DOTC authorized the PCG to use deadly force “under extreme necessity” to deal with “foreign registered vessels and their crew within the internal waters, archipelagic waters, territorial sea.”
It may also be resorted to during law enforcement to defend oneself and others. In both cases, prior warning is required.
More importantly, the Manual provides that, within the Philippine CZ, the use of deadly force against a state actor is proscribed, except when the Operations Order provides otherwise.
Within “non-contested areas in the exclusive economic zone” of the Philippines, use of deadly force is not countenanced even against vessels engaged in “hostile actors,” unless the Operation Order provides otherwise.
There is no guideline on use of force in contested areas, such as the TS of disputed rocks.
The PCG is a civilian law enforcement force during peacetime. While it may transform into a military force upon a declaration of war, the rules governing its military activities have yet to be defined.
Peacetime or wartime?
During peacetime, in the international legal system, both military forces and law enforcement forces, as well as their public or non-commercial vessels and aircrafts enjoy sovereign immunity.
“Wherever they may be situated, these forces and their vessels and aircrafts are an extension of the territory of their states and, as such, immune from arrest, search, inspection/boarding or other exercise of jurisdiction by a foreign state. Thus, any threat or use of force upon these forces, vessels and aircraft would amount to an act of aggression against the territory of the flag state,” he said.
Self-defense Vs. aggression
“Aggression would be a just cause for war.
“A state of war is synonymous to a state of armed conflict between two or more states,” the paper said.
“Any difference arising between two States and leading to the intervention of members of the armed forces is an armed conflict” or war.
“Such state of war may exist regardless of whether there is a declaration of war or an authorization to use force or even if there is a lack of resistance to an occupation or a non-recognition by one party of the existence of a state of war.
War declaration to get budget
The purpose of a formal declaration of war or authorization to use force is merely to legalize budgetary allocation, mobilization, and deployment.
“Conversely, a state of peace would be synonymous to cessation of armed conflict. However, for certain legal effects, such as the termination of force majeure, there must be “some formal proclamation of peace by an authority competent to proclaim it.”
During an international or non-international armed conflict in which a flag state is either a belligerent state or a third state whose territory has been placed at the disposal of a belligerent state, its military forces and their vessels and aircraft are a legitimate military objective.
In contrast, being civilian in nature and function, law enforcement forces are not a legitimate military objective, unless they have been incorporated into or tasked to perform the functions of a military force.
Disputed and undisputed territories
“Whether it is peacetime or wartime, within the undisputed internal waters, archipelagic waters, territorial waters and the superjacent airspace of a coastal state, its law enforcement forces, vessels and aircraft may exercise all rights of territorial sovereignty, including prescriptive and enforcement jurisdiction over political, criminal, civil, tax and commercial activities,61 subject to the sovereign immunities of foreign states.
“Its military forces, vessels and aircrafts have the right to defend the territorial sovereignty of the state from internal or external threats. If said territorial, maritime and air spaces are disputed, the occupying claimant state may exercise all rights of territorial sovereignty pending resolution of the dispute by peaceful means.
Is it a military situation?
In Part 4: Bearing in mind the nature of the CCG and PCG, Puno asked: Did the presence of the Philippine Navy, US Navy and Chinese Navy in the WPS transform the incident into a military situation?
What are the legal and political implications of the deployment of the Philippine military to the WPS and its use of the assistance of the US Navy?
In Part 5: the paper examines the important implications in municipal and international law of the distinction between military and law enforcement forces in the concrete context of the disputed territorial, maritime and air spaces in the South China Sea.
What legal and non-military courses of action may the Philippines take to respond to the recent collision at sea and blockade by Chinese vessels against Philippine resupply vessels?
In Part 6, Puno said the obvious. It could happen again. It plays out the different actions that China and the Philippines may take against each other in view of their dispute, especially regarding the EEZ/CS being claimed by the Philippines in the WPS.
“As such blocking maneuvers and collisions are likely to recur, and may become kinetic, it may be useful to anticipate scenarios” to put things under control. Puno is raring to help lawmakers.
By Liezelle Soriano
MANILA — China’s recent attacks in the West Philippine Sea, specifically targeting Philippine vessels in Scarborough Shoal and Ayungin Shoal, are not deemed acts of war, according to National Security Council (NSC) Assistant Director General Jonathan Malaya on Monday (December 11, 2023).
“The actions displayed in the past few days indicate a desire to escalate situations, primarily evidenced by significant damage to Philippine vessels, including navigation equipment, communications gear, and the engine of the M/L Kalayaan. We are taking this very seriously,” Malaya stated.
“However, is this considered an act of war? We don’t believe so. It seems to be part of the cat-and-mouse game that China is employing to advance its interests. The Philippines remains undeterred, and we will continue these missions in support of our troops and fishermen in the West Philippine Sea,” he added.
The Chinese Coast Guard (CCG) previously deployed water cannons on Philippine vessels, causing damage to the engines of M/L Kalayaan. This action was condemned by senators who urged China to respect international law.
Earlier, President Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. affirmed that the Philippine government would steadfastly defend the country’s sovereignty. He directed the Armed Forces of the Philippines to continue safeguarding the nation’s sovereignty and jurisdiction, assuring full support.
“I have been in constant communication with our national security and defense leadership and have directed our uniformed services to conduct their missions with the utmost regard for the safety of our personnel while maintaining a mission-oriented mindset,” Marcos stated.
(ai/mnm)
By Junex Doronio
MANILA — Just like the Boy Scout motto: “Be always prepared,” the Philippines and its reliable neighbor-friend Australia have announced the start of joint air and sea patrols within the Philippines’ exclusive economic zone (EEZ), confirming the “strategic partnership” that President Ferdinand R. Marcos Jr. and Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese signed last September this year.
On Sunday, the President warned that the Chinese military had “started to show interest” in building bases on reefs that were “closer and closer to the Philippine coastline.”
This warning came on the heels of the announcement made on Saturday, November 25, by Australia and the Philippines regarding the start of joint air and sea patrols off the Southeast Asian nation.
Marcos Jr. said the joint patrols were “a practical manifestation of the growing and deepening strategic and defense partnership between our countries.”
“We endeavor to enhance bilateral interoperability in maritime security and domain awareness,” the President said on the social media platform X, formerly Twitter.
It was learned that the Philippines will deploy two navy vessels and five surveillance aircraft to join Australia’s HMAS Toowoomba warship and a P-8A maritime surveillance aircraft.
Department of National Defense (DND) Arsenio Andolong clarified that the maritime patrols will be held inside the Philippines’ EEZ.
The joint air and sea patrols were aimed at deepening their defense cooperation to counter China’s assertiveness in the region.
Noticeably, the “maritime cooperative activity” came days after the United States held a similar exercise with the Philippines in the South China Sea, which Beijing claims almost entirely with what it calls the internationally unrecognized nine-dash line.
In a joint statement, the Australian and Philippine defense chiefs said the three-day patrols showed their “shared commitment to exercising freedom of navigation and overflight consistent with international law.”
(ai/mnm)
MANILA — Following the submission of a new diplomatic protest against China’s actions in the West Philippine Sea, support for the Philippines has surged significantly. Numerous countries have expressed their concern and condemnation of what they perceive as “dangerous” behavior by China.
The protest, lodged by the Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) on Friday, was prompted by China’s deployment of a water cannon against a Philippine boat on a resupply mission to Filipino troops at the BRP Sierra Madre in Ayungin Shoal.
In response, the National Task Force-West Philippine Sea (NTF-WPS) stated, “We once again condemn China’s latest unprovoked acts of coercion and dangerous maneuvers.” The NTF-WPS firmly demanded the immediate departure of Chinese vessels engaged in such illegal activities from the vicinity of Ayungin Shoal.
Various ambassadors, including Australian Ambassador HK Yu, underscored the importance of upholding the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (Unclos) and respecting international law for global peace and security.
US Ambassador MaryKay Carlson criticized the “continued PRC harassment” and reaffirmed Washington D.C.’s commitment to stand by Manila for a “free and open Indo-Pacific.” Similarly, the envoys of Japan and the United Kingdom echoed their opposition to actions escalating tensions in the region.
The European Union, the Netherlands, and Germany reiterated their support for international law, specifically Unclos and the 2016 Arbitral Award. German Ambassador Andreas Pfaffernoschke expressed Germany’s backing for the Philippines in advocating respect for international law in the South China Sea.
Despite the international outcry, the China Coast Guard (CCG) asserted its intention to “continue to carry out law enforcement activities” near the Ayungin Shoal, reiterating China’s territorial claim over the area.
In the Philippines, senators, led by Senate President Juan Miguel “Migz” Zubiri, strongly condemned China’s recent water cannon attack. President Pro Tempore Lorna Regina “Loren” Legarda emphasized the significance of the 2016 Arbitral Award, while Sen. Jose “Jinggoy” Estrada urged the government to consider adopting Senate Resolution 79.
Sen. Ana Theresia “Risa” Hontiveros called for an upgrade in the capabilities of the Philippine Coast Guard and Navy to navigate past the Chinese blockade.
Meanwhile, the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) Northern Luzon Command (Nolcom) reported substantial achievements in its efforts to bolster national security in the West Philippine Sea. Lt. Gen. Fernyl Buca highlighted successful challenges to over 14,000 vessels during air and surface patrols in critical maritime areas.
The Nolcom emphasized a strategic shift toward Territorial Defense Operations to safeguard the country’s territorial integrity.
(ai/mnm)
By Junex Doronio
STRESSING THAT CHINA must abide by international law, the United States Embassy on Saturday expressed its support for the Philippines following another incident of China’s harassment of the Philippine Navy and Coast Guard in the West Philippine Sea.
Opposition Senator Risa Hontiveros also urged the two “houses” of Congress to immediately pass the proposed higher budget for the agencies safeguarding the country’s security and sovereignty.
“The PRC’s actions are inconsistent with international law and follow a pattern of dangerous operational behavior in the South China Sea,” the US Embassy said in a statement.
On Friday, November 10, the Philippines lodged another diplomatic protest against China after the Chinese Coast Guard (CCG) deployed water cannons during a resupply mission at Ayungin Shoal.
“This incident should push Congress to finally approve a higher budget for the intelligence funds for agencies that defend our territories. When our frontliners in the West Philippine Sea become stronger, so will our national security,” Hontiveros said.
The US Embassy also reiterated that the People’s Republic of China had no claim on Ayungin Shoal and must therefore respect all states’ freedom of navigation as guaranteed under international law.
(ai/mnm)
By Junex Doronio
APPREHENSIVE THAT CHANGING the West Philippine Sea’s name to the Sea of Asia might weaken the environmental case that the Philippine government plans to file against China before an international tribunal, Senator Jinggoy Estrada has expressed preference to retain the name that reflects the country’s 2016 arbitral win in the Permanent Court of Arbitration.
On the other hand, Senator Grace Poe isn’t so concerned with the name changing but stressed that what’s important is that it should not adversely affect the country’s maritime claims over the disputed waters.
The Philippine government plans to file an environmental case against China before an international tribunal over the damage caused by its activities to corals.
In a statement on Sunday, October 29, Estrada explained that the West Philippine Sea is “a geopolitical designation of our government, an alternative name to the parts of the South China Sea that are within the Philippines’ EEZ in which we have territorial and maritime claims in that region.”
“Ang katagang ito ay sumasalamin sa legal na pag-angkin natin sa teritoryong ito. The Hague-based UN-backed Permanent Court of Arbitration ruled overwhelmingly in our favor in determining China’s claims as unlawful,” Estrada quipped.
He also pointed out that the Permanent Court of Arbitration at the Hague recognized the Philippines’ sovereign and maritime rights over its waters and invalidated China’s nine-dash line.
For her part, Poe said the experts should be relied on to address the proposal on the nomenclature change.
“Any initiative must not diminish our territorial claims in the disputed sea. We must preserve our rights to the Philippines’ exclusive economic zone,” she further said.
(ai/mnm)
By Junex Doronio
AS TODAY’S POPULAR MEME “WALANG FOREVER,” China can be replaced as a trading partner as one of the “diskarte” (strategy) to retaliate against the bullying neighbor in connection with the issues in West Philippine Sea.
This idea was floated on Saturday by maritime expert Jay Batongbacal who said the Philippines could always have other trade partners aside from China.
“Marami rin tayong nakukuha sa China, in the same way marami rin silang nakukuha sa atin. Again, sa akin, dehado pa rin tayo kahit kumukuha sila sa atin, kumukuha sila ng raw materials, mga mines, agricultural products, tapos ang i-export nila sa atin ay mga finished products na,” Batongbacal said in an interview with Teleradyo Serbisyo.
Batongbacal, director of the University of the Philippines Institute for Maritime Affairs and Law of the Sea, also noted goods that the Philippines imports from China can be found in other countries.
Meanwhile, Liberal Party (LP) president Albay Rep. Edcel Lagman is toying with the idea of working with other countries on “calibrated” economic sanctions on China as a way to counter its bullying.
“We should implement calibrated economic sanctions against China, together with countries na masyadong marami na, like the G7 countries, like Australia, India, and the members of the European Union… These economic sanctions will fall hard on China sapagkat mayroon sila ngayong tinatawag na economic meltdown,” he said.
(ai/mnm)
US legislators from both sides of the aisle have come together to denounce the China Coast Guard (CCG) for its unlawful actions in the West Philippine Sea and its violations of international law.
The most recent incident occurred on October 22 when a CCG vessel collided with a boat under contract by the Philippine Coast Guard (PCG) to deliver supplies to Filipino troops stationed in Ayungin (Second Thomas) Shoal.
The United States House Foreign Affairs Committee (HFAC) released a bipartisan statement in solidarity with the Philippines on Tuesday (Wednesday in Manila).
The statement, which the US Embassy shared in Manila, reads: “We unequivocally support the Philippines and condemn the unlawful actions by the China Coast Guard (CCG) in the South China Sea.”
The statement was jointly issued by House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Michael McCaul (Republican-Texas), Gregory Meeks (Democrat-New York), along with Subcommittee on the Indo-Pacific Chairman Young Kim (Republican-California) and Ami Bera (Democrat-California).
They expressed their concern over the intentional collisions between CCG and Chinese maritime militia vessels with Philippine Coast Guard ships, which put Filipino crew members at risk and obstructed Philippine vessels’ access to their own exclusive economic zone. They emphasized that this incident was part of a broader pattern of aggressive and provocative actions by the People’s Liberation Army Navy, the Maritime Militia, and the China Coast Guard in the South China Sea, where they frequently intrude into the exclusive economic zones of other states.
The lawmakers further voiced their condemnation of Beijing’s maritime intimidation. They welcomed the Biden administration’s commitment to increasing joint patrols with the Philippines and other partners in the South China Sea. They also reaffirmed the United States’ commitment under the US-Philippines Mutual Defense Treaty.
On Monday, the Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) filed a diplomatic protest against China in response to its coast guard’s recent “dangerous maneuvers” in the West Philippine Sea (WPS).
(Liezelle Soriano/ai/mnm)
Ni Liza Soriano
PINUNA ng mga senador ang paulit-ulit na pagtatangka ng Chinese maritime militia na harangin ang supply ships ng Pilipinas hanggang sa magkabanggaan ang mga ito sa West Philippine Sea.
Nasa loob ng territorial waters ang supply ships ng Pilipinas patungo sa BRP Sierra Madre sa West Philippine Sea nang muling mangyari ang panghaharang ng barko ng Tsina sa loob pa mismo ng teritoryo ng Pilipinas.
Sa magkakahiwalay na pahayag, sinabi ng mga senador na ang insidente ay nagpapakita sa patuloy na pagwawalang-bahala ng China sa internasyonal na batas.
Ito ay matapos ang “dangerous blocking maneuvers” ng Chinese Coast Guard vessel na naging sanhi ng pagbangga nito sa isang Philippine resupply boat.
“China has no right to drive away our troops from our waters. And they have even less right to harm and collide with the Filipino ship that is only doing its job in our own territory,” ayon kay Senadora Risa Hontiveros.
Nagpahayag din ng pagkabahala si Sen. Grace Poe na posibleng tumaas na tensyon sa rehiyon sa insidente.
“While an immediate diplomatic protest is anticipated, the recent incident calls for a serious rethinking of our strategies in dealing with these acts,” sabi ni Poe.
“As we firmly assert our rights in our waters, fortifying our relations with like-minded states must continue to thwart similar belligerent actions,” dagdag pa niya.
(ai/mnm)