Diplomacy vs. deterrence: Why PNoy is risking confrontation with China 

For months, I risked ridicule among certain colleagues by painstakingly painting President Benigno Aquino III as a fairly astute strategist who didn’t shy away from recalibrating our bilateral relations with China if and when necessary.
 

Analyzing the Philippines’ foreign policy in recent years, specifically with respect to the West Philippine Sea disputes, my impression is that Aquino embraced multiple opportunities to dial down tensions with Beijing and restore bilateral relations. 

 

Contrary to what his critics claim, Aquino has been more pragmatic and imaginative in his foreign policy outlook than is commonly recognized.

 

In mid-2012, when we dangerously came close to armed confrontation with China over Scarborough Shoal, and the Americans encouraged us to seek a diplomatic compromise, Aquino took the controversial decision to sanction parallel diplomatic efforts by Senator Antonio Trillanes, who enjoyed more amicable relations with Beijing. In effect, Aquino sidelined Foreign Secretary Albert Del Rosario, who is widely dismissed by Beijing as a pro-American bureaucrat, to test alternative diplomatic channels.

 

What followed was an embarrassing showdown between Trillanes and Del Rosario, and our de facto loss of Scarborough Shoal to China. Nevertheless, Aquino demonstrated a degree of much-needed strategic flexibility, which would re-emerge in late-2013. Faced with the real possibility of a permanent breakdown in bilateral relations, which could very well precipitate armed conflict over disputed territories, he repeatedly sought to establish high-level dialogue with the Chinese leadership under the Xi Jinping administration.

 

From the 10th China-ASEAN Expo (Caexpo) in August to the ASEAN Summit in Brunei in November, Aquino eagerly sought diplomatic exchanges with his Chinese counterparts, and politely welcomed Beijing’s decision to negotiate a legally-binding Code of Conduct (CoC) in the West Philippine Sea. 

 

Later, he even contradicted his own cabinet members by refuting claims that China was placing "concrete blocks" – purportedly as a prelude to building a military fortification – in the Scarborough Shoal area.

 

The pragmatic populist

 

In my opinion, such maneuvers reflected Aquino's willingness to step in and introduce foreign policy reconfigurations whenever conventional approaches failed to produce the desired outcomes. After all, China’s para-military patrols across the West Philippine Sea have expanded – not decreased – in recent years, and we are closer than ever to outright conflict.

 

The Aquino administration has stood out among Southeast Asian governments for its often-explicit criticisms of China. Its fiery rhetoric has even raised eyebrows among certain neighbors, even those with existing territorial disputes with Beijing, who have adopted a more cautious, low-key approach.

 

Foreign policy isn’t about matters of good and evil, but about fundamentally employing the most effective strategy to defend our national interest within the purview of prevailing international norms. And engagement and deterrence are the two indispensable weapons at our disposal. I assumed the Aquino administration was aware of this cardinal truth. So, naturally, I was quite confounded by Aquino’s recent decision to liken China to Nazi Germany, risking permanent estrangement with China – if not potential conflict. 

 

Knowing China’s sensitivity to external criticism, especially from neighboring countries, Aquino was well aware of how provocative his statement would be to Beijing. In effect, he undermined his months-long effort at finding a new opening in Philippine-China relations.

 

On the surface, one can claim that Aquino only sought to speak truth to power and recognized the futility of reaching out China. The Philippines’ refusal to withdraw its arbitration case at The Hague against China’s notorious nine-dash line doctrine has prevented any rapprochement. 

 

So, one could claim, there isn’t much common diplomatic ground to explore. But a more careful analysis of recent developments suggests that there are external reasons for Aquino’s growing confidence in confronting China.
 

The U.S. pivot in full swing

 

Generally, the Obama administration has been very careful in its approach to the territorial disputes in the Western Pacific. Owing to the immense economic interdependence between the U.S. and China, and the growing importance both sides attach to their bilateral relations, Washington isn’t interested in getting embroiled in any potential regional conflict.

 

Given Washington’s legal and strategic commitments to Asian allies, and its interest in the freedom of navigation in international waters, it has, however, gradually invested in the military dimension of its “pivot to Asia” policy. 

 

Above all, the Obama administration is committed to maintain American supremacy in the Pacific theater, as East Asia becomes the center of gravity in the global economy.But it is only in recent months that the U.S. has more explicitly demonstrated its commitment to its wide network of regional alliances. 

 

While the U.S. assistant secretary of state for East Asian and Pacific affairs, Danny Russel, has taken the quite unprecedented decision to directly criticize China’s territorial claims, and call for Beijing to revise its claims in accordance to international law, the U.S. Chief of Naval Operations Admiral Jonathan Greenert has promised that Washington would come to Manila’s rescue in the event of conflict in the West Philippine Sea. 

 

Above all, as Aquino shared in his recent interview with Bloomberg, the Philippines and the U.S. are close to finalizing a new military pact, which, among other things, could potentially mean more American rotational military presence in the region and access to advanced weaponry by Filipino troops. This would dramatically enhance the Philippines’ minimum deterrence capacity in the West Philippine Sea.

 

Overall, it seems that the Aquino administration is finally getting the external help he dearly seeks. But is it going to come at the expense of diplomacy – and conflict? Only time will tell. — KDM, GMA News 

---

Richard Javad Heydarian teaches political science and international relations at the Ateneo De Manila University, and is a columnist for “Asia Times” and “The Huffington Post.” As a foreign affairs specialist, he has regularly presented at varying local and international conferences and panel discussions, and been interviewed by leading media outlets such as Aljazeera, BBC, Bloomberg, CCTV, The New York Times, NPR, among other publications. He can be reached at jrheydarian@gmail.com