Arbitration

Last week, TGIF night for China’s top diplomat in Manila was a dinner she hosted at her official residence in Dasmariñas Village.

The menu was patterned after what is usually served at Diaoyutai, the State Guest House in Beijing.

Two embassy staff provided music – one on the piano and another on the harp – playing exquisite Chopin and then a Chinese tune.

The guest of honor was Erlinda Basilio, who is expected to be in Beijing as the new Philippine ambassador after the Chinese New Year holidays – usually lasting a week around the day itself, which this year falls on Feb. 20.

Chinese Ambassador Ma Keqing set the cordial dinner mood by informing Basilio that she got Beijing’s agrement.

Basilio had breezed through her congressional confirmation last year, with not a single question from any member of the Commission on Appointments. Now that Beijing has accepted her nomination as the Philippines’ ambassador, she is enhancing her Sinology credentials by learning basic conversational Mandarin.

Proper communication goes a long way in enhancing Philippine relations with the Chinese, which is a key aspect of Basilio’s new assignment. Mandarin-speaking Tsinoys have told me that because of the difficulty of accurately translating Mandarin to English, some official statements from Beijing may come off harsher than the intended message.

The little Mandarin that Basilio is picking up while listening to instructional CDs is unlikely to allow her to sort out nuances in the Chinese language. But the Chinese will appreciate her for trying.

With Basilio at the dinner were Bernardita Catalla, executive director for Asian and Pacific affairs at the Department of Foreign Affairs, and Maria Theresa Lazaro, DFA assistant secretary for Asian and Pacific affairs. On the Chinese side there were four officials.

Ambassador Ma is also trying to foster better bilateral ties. Her job, tough from Day One, has just become more challenging after the Philippines sought international arbitral proceedings against China’s territorial claims in the West Philippine Sea.

China may soon get another headache if Vietnam follows suit. I’ve been told that Hanoi saw the Philippine move as “a bright idea” and is seriously considering similar action, although the nature of Vietnam’s long-running dispute with China runs deeper and is more complicated.

In Hanoi last Wednesday, Nguyen Duy Chien, deputy chairman of the Foreign Affairs Ministry’s National Border Committee, was asked by a reporter to comment on the Philippine move, which the DFA has explained is in accordance with Article 287 and Annex VII of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).

Chien’s reply, as quoted by the official Vietnam News Agency: “Vietnam’s consistent position on East Sea-related issues is that they should be resolved by peaceful means in accordance with international law, especially the 1982 (UNCLOS)… Vietnam believes that countries have the right to choose peaceful measures to resolve disputes in line with the UN Charter and international law, including UNCLOS.”

*      *      *

People are asking whether the Philippine case has any chance of success. Perhaps the Aquino administration was inspired by the success of Bangladesh in taking its maritime dispute with Myanmar to the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS).

After 38 years of feuding with Myanmar, Bangladesh brought the case to the ITLOS in October 2009. On March 14 last year, the tribunal, voting 21 to 1, handed down its final verdict, which cannot be appealed: Bangladesh has an exclusive economic zone (EEZ) in the Bay of Bengal covering 111,000 square kilometers, plus an exclusive 12-mile territorial sea around St. Martin’s Island.

The Philippines, according to the DFA, also got tired of talking with the Chinese and getting nowhere.

Bangladesh is waiting for another ITLOS ruling, expected next year, in its dispute with India over the western part of the Bay of Bengal.

As far away as South America, where Peru has brought Chile to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague, the progress of the Philippine action is being watched.

The case filed by Peru two years ago involves moving national boundaries drawn in the sea and based on a continental shelf shared by the two countries. If this dispute can be resolved, our claim should be easier to settle.

The Philippines chose the UN arbitral tribunal over the ICJ, ITLOS and special arbitral tribunal.

Last Wednesday DFA officials briefed foreign ambassadors about the Philippine move. The diplomats mostly wanted to know if the decision of the arbitral tribunal would be binding on China. Yes, according to the DFA, although some neutral diplomats aren’t so sure if this is the case in matters involving China’s national security, for example.

A Q&A released by the DFA explained the goals of the case: “We hope that the arbitral tribunal will issue an award in accordance with international law that will direct China to respect our sovereign rights and jurisdiction over our EEZ, continental shelf, contiguous zone, and territorial sea over the West Philippine Sea, and to desist from undertaking unlawful acts that violate our rights.”

I’ve been told that the Philippine challenge is meant chiefly to clarify the country’s maritime entitlements and not to settle the territorial dispute. But winning the case will bolster our territorial claims, allow us to freely exploit all resources within our EEZ, and keep out intruders, whose EEZ we don’t encroach on or claim as our own.

All countries should welcome peaceful mechanisms, based on rules agreed upon by the international community, to settle such disputes. Armed conflict is costly; only the defense industry benefits from it.

Even China should support this mechanism, which it can tap to settle its maritime dispute with its neighbor Japan.

A news report from Davos, Switzerland last week said senior Chinese planning official Zhang Xiaoqiang had told the World Economic Forum that his country wanted to “build up more global development partnerships.”

Zhang said China would “continue to play an important role as a responsible developing country.”

Responsible players on the world stage should have no problem abiding by international rules.

As the dinner hosted by the Chinese for Basilio showed, the maritime dispute should not stop other aspects of friendly bilateral relations from moving on.