‘Common use’ in the Spratlys
There is more to the Spratlys than the possibility of oil being found in the surrounding waters.
This I found out during a symposium on a “common use” policy to govern disputed resources, including territory like the Spratly Islands. What I remember from the international symposium, which took place more than a decade ago, was that the Spratlys host more than just possible rich oil deposits. Indeed, marine experts testified that the Spratly Islands and the surrounding reefs and waters are virtual “nurseries” for fish and other forms of marine life on which millions of people in the countries disputing ownership of the islands—the Philippines, Vietnam and China—depend on not just for livelihood but sustenance.
Some speakers even warned against the “development” of the island group, much less oil drilling and exploration, which they said could lead to catastrophic loss of marine life and thus threaten the food security of nearby countries.
So many years have passed since I wrote about the symposium proceedings, but it seems governments and environmental authorities have chosen to ignore these warnings. In the intervening years, I don’t recall any official from China, Vietnam or the Philippines calling for a “shared” use of the Spratlys, or of common efforts to protect the islands, including having the islands declared an international protected area.
What we hear these days instead are bellicose declarations of national sovereignty, especially from China which relies on a centuries-old map to claim ownership of the isles. Vietnam has officially protested China’s use of “gunboat diplomacy” to assert its claim to the Spratlys, carrying out live-fire drills to show its military capability. President Aquino meanwhile has blustered about our country’s historical and territorial rights, sending a navy boat to the islands to assert our claim, while subtly pleading for US intervention in the dispute (like a school boy running to an older brother when confronted by a bully).
* * *
China speaks with both ends of its mouth on the Spratlys. Vice Foreign Minister Cui Tiankai urges restraint on the part of the United States which has declared its support for “allies” in the dispute. The US, the minister says, should limit itself to urging “more restraint and responsible behavior from those countries that have been frequently taking provocative actions.”
But how else do we characterize China’s actuations, including sending navy ships to the disputed waters and arresting Vietnamese and Filipino fishermen who venture too close to the claimed islands? Are these not also “provocative”?
A news report over the weekend on talks between the US and China regarding the West Philippine Sea (our new term on the South China Sea) presents a much-subdued and conciliatory American stance. “We want tensions to subside. We have a strong interest in the maintenance of peace and stability, and we are seeking a dialogue among all of the key players,” Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs Kurt Campbell said.
Is this just diplomatese before guns and aircraft carriers are brought in to do the talking?
* * *
Perhaps the US, which strives to maintain its hegemony over the Asia-Pacific region in the face of China’s economic and military strength, can play the role of environmental enforcer instead. It could broker talks not about questionable borders or historical claims, but about the role the Spratlys play in ensuring a continued supply of fish and sea life in the countries bordering the islands. It could sponsor yet another symposium on the importance of protecting this endangered habitat for generations of Filipinos, Vietnamese, Chinese and other peoples. After all, hunger also plays a role in political destabilization.
And wouldn’t this be a good time for the United Nations to step into the fray? If China bristles at the idea of the US as a referee in the Spratlys dispute, perhaps the UN could wield its mandate for “world peace.” And finding a solution like common use could quell for now nationalistic rhetoric, as well as open the eyes of the countries’ leaders to the real stakes in the Spratlys.
* * *
My own deepest personal sympathies to Former President Fidel V. Ramos and former First Lady Amelita “Ming” Ramos on the passing of their second daughter, Josephine or “Jo” yesterday.
It was with some surprise that I learned Jo Ramos was already in her 50s, since the image etched in my mind was of her during the Ramos years, youthful and energetic and even playing the drums during a stage performance.
In a statement, President Aquino noted that while “the loss of any loved one is grave, indeed, the demise of a child is particularly painful for parents.” I can only offer a prayer that they remain strong and resolute in the wake of Jo’s loss.
* * *
Noted psychologist Dr. Maria Lourdes “Honey” Carandang is giving a talk on “Truth-telling and National Healing: Claiming our Dignity and Integrity as a People” this Thursday, June 30 at the St. Luke’s College of Medicine Auditorium in Quezon City.
Carandang herself is still “hurting” after she was sued by the parents of a boy for libel and “child abuse” when she wrote an independent appeal in behalf of the boy who was subjected to degrading treatment in a prime-time TV game show. The charge of child abuse is particularly galling because she has spent her entire professional life defending the rights of children and healing families.
On the subject of her talk, Carandang says: “Lying, which has become normal and a way of life, erodes our self worth and dignity. Our country keeps repeating the same mistakes because we have not really recognized and uncovered the lies to bring out the truth.”
