Rising Tempers & Clashing Vessels: The Philippines Faces New Dangers in the South China Sea

[Social Media]

 

Tensions are rising in the volatile South China Sea, where fresh confrontations between China and the Philippines have escalated the risks closer to the shores of a key U.S. ally. In the early hours of Monday morning, a series of collisions occurred between coast guard ships from the two nations, marking a significant escalation in the ongoing disputes over territorial claims in the region.

 

 

The incidents unfolded in the dark of night, between 3 a.m. and 4 a.m. local time, when at least three collisions were reported near Sabina Shoal, an uninhabited reef located just 75 nautical miles from the Philippines’ west coast. According to the Philippine authorities, the first collision caused a significant hole, 3.6 feet in diameter, on the starboard side of a Philippine coast guard vessel. Only 16 minutes later, another Chinese coast guard ship rammed a different Philippine coast guard vessel twice, creating a gap 2.5 feet long and 3 feet wide on the port side.

 

 

The Philippine government has squarely blamed China for these incidents, accusing the Chinese coast guard of aggressive and dangerous maneuvers. "We can fairly say that this is the biggest structural damage we have incurred as a result of the dangerous maneuvers carried out by the Chinese coast guard," said Jay Tarriela, a spokesman for the Philippine coast guard. China, however, has a different version of events, accusing the Philippine coast guard of deliberately causing the collisions.

 

 

These latest confrontations are particularly significant because they occurred near Sabina Shoal, a location that has recently become a new flashpoint in the ongoing territorial disputes between the two nations. While previous confrontations have centered around Second Thomas Shoal, located about 30 nautical miles west of Sabina Shoal and roughly 100 nautical miles off the Philippines' west coast, Monday’s incidents mark a worrying shift in the focus of these disputes.

 

 

Second Thomas Shoal, unlike Sabina Shoal, is a military outpost manned by a small detachment of Filipino marines. The area has been a source of tension for over a year, with China repeatedly trying to disrupt the Philippines’ resupply missions to the outpost. Despite an agreement reached in July between the two nations to ease tensions, disagreements have persisted, and Monday’s collision raises new questions about the durability of that deal.

 

As the Philippines has adopted a more assertive stance against China’s expansive claims in the South China Sea, it has faced increased pressure from Beijing. This pressure has been exerted both diplomatically and through forceful actions at sea. Chinese vessels have employed various aggressive tactics around Second Thomas Shoal, including spraying water cannons, ramming Philippine ships, and even threatening Filipino military personnel with axes and knives. The Chinese coast guard is often accompanied by maritime militia boats, further outnumbering the Philippines in these encounters.

 

While Sabina Shoal was not initially considered a major flashpoint like Second Thomas Shoal, tensions have been brewing there for months. China claims both sites, which lie within the Philippines’ 200-nautical-mile exclusive economic zone, as part of its broader claim to much of the South China Sea. However, a 2016 ruling by an international arbitral tribunal found that China’s claims have no legal basis—a ruling that Beijing has steadfastly rejected.

 

In response to what it perceives as increased Chinese activity at Sabina Shoal, the Philippines has taken steps to assert its presence in the area. In mid-April, the Philippines deployed a large coast guard ship, the BRP Teresa Magbanua, for an extended stay at Sabina Shoal. This move was prompted by China’s increased deployment of maritime militia boats and research vessels to the area. In a briefing to journalists in May, the Philippine coast guard reported that Chinese research vessels had been observed at Sabina Shoal, sending divers to take measurements and make assessments of the area.

 

The Philippines’ response included deploying small inflatable boats to monitor Chinese activities more closely. On at least one occasion, these boats were blocked by Chinese coast guard ships. The Philippine coast guard also reported the presence of Chinese navy vessels and helicopters, as well as a significant number of maritime militia boats at the site. 

 

Philippine divers tasked with studying the area also made a disturbing discovery: what appeared to be dead and crushed corals dumped underwater at various locations around Sabina Shoal. The Philippine coast guard warned that this could be a precursor to possible land reclamation by China—a tactic that Beijing has used before in the South China Sea, where it has constructed artificial islands that now serve as military bases.

 

"If we don’t monitor and guard this, maybe in the following months, we’ll be shocked again that in Sabina Shoal, they’ve expanded the island," Tarriela warned during the May briefing. In response, China’s Foreign Ministry dismissed the Philippine assertions as "sheer rumor" and accused Manila of spreading "irresponsible claims designed to vilify China and mislead the international community."

 

Over the months following these accusations, China has continued to pressure the Philippines, urging Manila to withdraw its vessels from Sabina Shoal. The situation came to a head on Monday when the two Philippine coast guard ships involved in the collisions were en route to resupply a different Philippine site in the South China Sea. The ships were passing near Sabina Shoal when they encountered the Chinese coast guard. Despite sustaining significant damage, the Philippine ships continued their mission, according to statements from the Philippine government.

 

These incidents underscore the increasingly dangerous situation in the South China Sea, where the risk of escalation into a broader conflict looms large. The proximity of these confrontations to the Philippines, a key U.S. ally, raises the stakes for all parties involved, particularly given the potential for U.S. involvement under its mutual defense treaty with Manila.

 

The South China Sea has long been a flashpoint for geopolitical tensions, with multiple nations laying claim to various parts of the sea. However, the recent encounters between China and the Philippines, particularly near Sabina Shoal, have brought the dangers closer to home for the Philippines. As China continues to assert its claims in the region, the potential for further confrontations—and the risk of these incidents spiraling into a larger conflict—remains high.

 

The Philippines, for its part, is likely to continue its efforts to resist China’s advances in the South China Sea, bolstered by its alliance with the United States. However, as the events of Monday demonstrate, the path ahead is fraught with peril, and the situation remains volatile. The collisions at Sabina Shoal are a stark reminder of the fragility of peace in the South China Sea and the ever-present risks that come with contested territorial claims in one of the world’s most strategically important regions.

 

Credit: WSJ  2024-08-22

 

 

 

Get our Daily Newsletter - Click HERE to subscribe

 

 

[wwest5829]

While I consider myself as an old friend of China in respect for its long history, the current PRC claim to sovereignty over most of the South China Sea is a serious over reach and a detriment to China taking a rightful place as one of the world’s leading nations. In this regard, I support international freedom of the seas international flotillas demonstrating that China’s claim to the South China Sea be rebuffed. If another nation claimed sovereignty over any area within the 200 mile zone from China’s coast, I would defend China’s right to sovereignty within the zone.

[Gweiloman]

2 hours ago, wwest5829 said:

While I consider myself as an old friend of China in respect for its long history, the current PRC claim to sovereignty over most of the South China Sea is a serious over reach and a detriment to China taking a rightful place as one of the world’s leading nations. In this regard, I support international freedom of the seas international flotillas demonstrating that China’s claim to the South China Sea be rebuffed. If another nation claimed sovereignty over any area within the 200 mile zone from China’s coast, I would defend China’s right to sovereignty within the zone.

I fully agree that it’s an overreach on China’s part. However, I feel they have no choice as America continues to build more and more bases to encircle China. The Sabina Shoal lies directly on the maritime route from Malacca Straights to China so this is of utmost strategic importance to China for its security.

[animalmagic]

1 hour ago, Gweiloman said:

I fully agree that it’s an overreach on China’s part. However, I feel they have no choice as America continues to build more and more bases to encircle China. The Sabina Shoal lies directly on the maritime route from Malacca Straights to China so this is of utmost strategic importance to China for its security.

The Belt and Road Initiative was intended to free China from the 'shackles of encirclement' and the development of high-speed railways for cargo within S.E. Asia should render the Straits of Malacca irrelevant.  However, 23 of the 68 countries involved are at risk of economic distress or are now basket cases due to toxic debt owed to China.  In fact, some people say that the BRI is simply colonialisation by indebtedness and impoverishment of other sovereign nations.

[placeholder]

11 hours ago, Gweiloman said:

I fully agree that it’s an overreach on China’s part. However, I feel they have no choice as America continues to build more and more bases to encircle China. The Sabina Shoal lies directly on the maritime route from Malacca Straights to China so this is of utmost strategic importance to China for its security.

Really? It's about China's security? And not about the natural resources that it lays claim to? And as for new bases? The Phillipines has just granted the US access to 4? It's a response to Chinese aggression; not a trigger of it.

[Gweiloman]

19 hours ago, animalmagic said:

The Belt and Road Initiative was intended to free China from the 'shackles of encirclement' and the development of high-speed railways for cargo within S.E. Asia should render the Straits of Malacca irrelevant.  However, 23 of the 68 countries involved are at risk of economic distress or are now basket cases due to toxic debt owed to China.  In fact, some people say that the BRI is simply colonialisation by indebtedness and impoverishment of other sovereign nations.

The China debt trap myth is exactly that - a myth. Looks like you’re not up to date on your research. There isn’t one country in the world that’s involved in the BRI that supports your claim, a narrative made up by western (US actually) think tanks and NGO’s.

 

Even Italy that pulled out due to pressure has gone back to China to try and garner more investments.

[Gweiloman]

10 hours ago, placeholder said:

Really? It's about China's security? And not about the natural resources that it lays claim to? And as for new bases? The Phillipines has just granted the US access to 4? It's a response to Chinese aggression; not a trigger of it.

Some see a glass as half empty and some see it as half full. It depends whether you’re a western neocon or a member of the global majority. Practically all ASEAN countries, who are China’s neighbours are ever more keen to increase ties and trade with China. Other than PI which is a highly corrupt and vassal state of the US has no conflicts with China. 
 

The US has over 800 military bases around the world, China has one. And you think China is an aggressor. Propaganda really works on the gullible.

[placeholder]

1 hour ago, Gweiloman said:

Some see a glass as half empty and some see it as half full. It depends whether you’re a western neocon or a member of the global majority. Practically all ASEAN countries, who are China’s neighbours are ever more keen to increase ties and trade with China. Other than PI which is a highly corrupt and vassal state of the US has no conflicts with China. 
 

The US has over 800 military bases around the world, China has one. And you think China is an aggressor. Propaganda really works on the gullible.

China has only one? Only if you accept that China's definition of who owns the South China Sea. And of course, China does have bases in places like Cambodia and Sri Lanka. It just denies that they're for military use. And just because China has fewer bases, that doesn't mean China isn't an aggressive nation. It has repeatedly launched attacks on Indian territory. And is settling on disputed land with Bhutan. And then, of course, there's Tibet.

 

The vast majority of Philippine nationals would fight to defend their country, according to a poll conducted as China's territorial challenge to the U.S. defense treaty ally reached a new crescendo.

Overall, 77 percent of respondents answered "Yes" when asked if they were ready to fight in a hypothetical "conflict between the Philippines and a foreign enemy," according to pollsters from independent consulting firm OCTA Research.

https://www.newsweek.com/nearly-8-10-philippines-would-fight-over-china-claimed-territory-1878589

 You think they would rather go it alone?

[mdr224]

1 hour ago, Gweiloman said:

Some see a glass as half empty and some see it as half full. It depends whether you’re a western neocon or a member of the global majority. Practically all ASEAN countries, who are China’s neighbours are ever more keen to increase ties and trade with China. Other than PI which is a highly corrupt and vassal state of the US has no conflicts with China. 
 

The US has over 800 military bases around the world, China has one. And you think China is an aggressor. Propaganda really works on the gullible.

Must be a good reason why the world hates China, i think ill go with the propaganda rather than your opinion

[placeholder]

 

17 minutes ago, mdr224 said:

Must be a good reason why the world hates China, i think ill go with the propaganda rather than your opinion

It's more nuanced than that. Still, overall, the US is regarded far more favorably than is China. And that's in the wake of the Gaza war, which has clearly lessened the world's favorable regard of America.

https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2024/07/09/views-of-china-and-xi-jinping/

 

https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2024/06/11/views-of-the-u-s/

[RocketDog]

On 8/22/2024 at 11:22 AM, Gweiloman said:

I fully agree that it’s an overreach on China’s part. However, I feel they have no choice as America continues to build more and more bases to encircle China. The Sabina Shoal lies directly on the maritime route from Malacca Straights to China so this is of utmost strategic importance to China for its security.

Just as China had 'no choice' except to reject the UNCLOS ruling on the Phillipines EEZ?

[Gweiloman]

18 hours ago, RocketDog said:

Just as China had 'no choice' except to reject the UNCLOS ruling on the Phillipines EEZ?

I assume you mean the ruling by the court of arbitration. That ruling states specifically that it’s not a ruling on sovereignty and territorial claim.