A White Paper by the WPS Informal Expert Group
SUMMARY
AND HIGHLIGHTS
Introduction
Tensions among rival claimant-states to the waters and land features of the South China Sea (SCS) – particularly China, the Philippines and Vietnam - have escalated significantly in the last several years, bringing the Philippines to center stage as a key participant in the future of security and stability in our part of the world. While the surge in confrontational rhetoric and actions directed against the Philippines have added to the urgency of ensuring calibrated and effective responses, the territorial and resource disputes themselves are not new and have been the subject of policy action and deliberation for decades. The challenges arising therefrom are not expected to be resolved easily or soon, but will likely continue to demand the attention of government and the Filipino public for decades to come.
This White Paper seeks to draw the attention of all concerned Filipino stakeholders – particularly those in government - to the urgent need for a strategic framework for the management of our territorial, maritime jurisdiction, and resource disputes in the West Philippine Sea (WPS). The authors are former or current public servants, coming from various areas of specialization, who have long been involved in past initiatives relating to Philippine policy in the WPS.
The paper is not intended
to provide answers to all the policy questions, but to suggest a policy agenda,
and to underscore the urgent need for a strategic vision, more permanent
institutions, as well as for more effective arrangements for policymaking and
coordination to address such agenda.
Contextualizing
the Philippines and the West Philippine Sea Issues
1. The Philippines is a strategically located,
resource-rich archipelago, lying at the maritime crossroads of Northeast and
Southeast Asia, and connecting the South China Sea with the Pacific Ocean.
It has been called a quintessential coastal state, an archipelagic
and maritime nation with over 7,000 islands, entirely surrounded and
interconnected by seas. Not many towns or cities in the country are more than
100 km from shore. 78% of its provinces and 54% of municipalities, almost all
major cities, and 62% of the population are coastal. Just as the seas have
shaped our history and the formation of the nation, we continue to depend on
them for our livelihood and welfare, for communications and transportation, for
defense and security, for leisure and the enjoyment of nature’s blessings.
2. The Philippines is the 12th most
populous country in the world. While endowed with considerable mineral wealth,
the world’s richest marine biodiversity and a strong pool of human resources,
we suffer from widespread poverty, frequent natural disasters and vulnerability
to climate-change hazards. Generations of poor governance and inequitable
social structures have also impeded economic progress, especially in comparison
with rapidly growing neighboring states in the East Asian region.
3. The Philippines has signed and ratified the
United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), which grants coastal
states sovereign rights over economic resources, as well as legal jurisdictions
over certain types of sea-based activities within the 200 n.m. EEZ and the
continental shelf measured from their baselines. UNCLOS offers the Philippines
major advantages in terms of access to resources and some forms of regulatory
jurisdiction over two million square kilometers of water and the seabed
beneath.
Through UNCLOS, the Philippines and Indonesia introduced and
joined forces to gain acceptance of the concept of the archipelagic State. We
successfully secured the international community’s recognition of our exclusive
sovereignty over all waters around, between and connecting the different
islands within the Philippine Archipelago, subject to certain limitations on
distances between base points. Without the archipelagic State concept enshrined
in Part IV of the UNCLOS, the Philippines would have remained a scattering of
islands separated by high seas.
UNCLOS also provides
guidance for states with overlapping jurisdictional claims, who may then resort
to a range of peaceful dispute settlement mechanisms, among them the
International Tribunal on the Law of the Sea (ITLOS), the International Court
of Justice (ICJ), and arbitration arrangements. As of June 3, 2011, 163 states
had ratified the UNCLOS.
4. The SCS borders the entire western seaboard of
the country. Several key provinces including Ilocos Norte, Ilocos Sur, La
Union, Pangasinan, Zambales, Bataan, Mindoro, and Palawan face the SCS. The sea
is extremely significant from an international navigational, economic,
geopolitical and strategic perspective, thus making the Philippines strategically
important.
Oil and gas resources have
been proven to exist in areas adjacent to and closest to the coastlines of
littoral states. Fisheries throughout the area have historically supported the
survival of coastal populations and are vital to food security in the region.
Coral reef ecosystems in the nearshore and offshore areas nurture and propagate
the region’s supply of fish. Commercial as well as military navigation have established
the SCS as a major waterway and a lifeline for trade and energy supplies
connecting countries in the Middle East, Africa, and South, Southeast, and
Northeast Asia.
Several countries –
the Philippines, Brunei, China, Malaysia, Taiwan and Vietnam – have competing
claims to all or part of the SCS, while great powers such as the United States
and China are beginning to compete for naval power and influence here, thus
making it a potential regional flashpoint.
5. The international and regional environments
profoundly affect Philippine interests and its relationships with other states.
Global financial woes, turbulence in the Middle East, and competition for
energy supplies are but some significant global developments that may directly
impact our economy. In the region, the emergence of new powers China and India,
the potential for strategic rivalry between the US and China, military
flashpoints (such as the Taiwan Straits, Korean peninsula and the SCS itself),
a steady arms buildup among various countries, domestic political transitions
in key neighboring states, and trends in ASEAN and East Asian regional
integration are all relevant to stability and peace and therefore to the
prospects for achieving greater development and security for the Philippines.
Conversely, in this interdependent setting, what the Philippines does with
respect to the WPS can and will have ripple effects on regional and global
scenarios.
6. Rebuilding institutions for good governance,
bringing the long-standing Mindanao conflict and the communist insurgency to a
resolution, promoting social justice and human rights, improving the peace and
order situation especially with respect to crime and terrorism, and
consolidating gains in macroeconomic conditions – these are the domestic
imperatives of long-standing that shall continue to demand the priority
attention of government and the Filipino people. Each of these is critical to
our national resilience, unity and progress, which in turn are indispensable
for our ability to face emergent external challenges.
The fundamental problem
The Philippines has long-standing territorial and jurisdictional disputes with several states bordering the SCS, as well as undelimited maritime boundaries in various waters adjacent to the archipelago. These disputes affect the economic, national security, human security and environmental interests of the country, and moreover impact on regional stability and the prospects for successful regional integration in East Asia.
Philippine efforts to assert sovereignty in the WPS and to implement provisions of the UNCLOS in its EEZ in line with national development and security goals are stymied by the claims and actions of other countries. In the last several years, territorial tensions among some countries bordering the sea have escalated, and these have occurred against the backdrop of broader geopolitical shifts, including rivalry for regional influence between great powers. This current geopolitical context may provide both challenges and opportunities for the advancement of Philippine interests and for the peaceful resolution of said disputes.
There is a need for a comprehensive and strategic approach to policymaking on the WPS, taking into consideration the myriad short- to long-term interests of the country at stake, the fluid regional and international environment, and the domestic imperatives that will affect how government prioritizes the allocation of its efforts and resources.
Imperatives of Philippine Policy in the WPS
Sustainable Development of the Marine Economy and Resources
Fisheries
1. The Philippines is the world’s 6th
largest producer of fish, with fish being a main protein source and fisheries a
main source of livelihood for our people. The waters west of Palawan, which
flow from the SCS, account for 20-25% of our annual fish catch, while the areas
offshore of Zambales are rich spawning grounds, underscoring the economic
importance of the SCS to food security and economic welfare.
2. Republic Act 8550 or the Fisheries Code of 1998,
declares as a national policy, among others: (1) to
limit access to the fishery and aquatic resources of the Philippines for the
exclusive use and enjoyment of Filipino citizens; and (2) to ensure the
rational and sustainable development, management and conservation of the
fishery and aquatic resources in Philippine waters including the Exclusive
Economic Zone (EEZ) and in the adjacent high seas, consistent with the
primordial objective of maintaining a sound ecological balance, protecting and
enhancing the quality of the environment.
RA 8550 further defines the
area of its application to “all Philippine waters including other waters over
which the Philippines has sovereignty and jurisdiction, and the country's
200-nautical mile EEZ and continental shelf”.
3. In the WPS and other waters adjacent to the
archipelago, fisheries are threatened by both reef degradation and overfishing.
Foreign fishing fleets are systematically increasing efforts to improve catch, in
some cases encouraged by their government as a means of asserting maritime
claims. The Philippines, on the other hand, has not substantially increased its
marine fishing effort for many years and places priority on resource
conservation and protection. Uncontrolled fishing in the area will diminish
resources for current and future needs of Filipinos, despite sovereign rights
over fisheries and aquatic resources accorded to us under UNCLOS. Moreover, the
biodiversity and productivity of the WPS are directly linked to the
biodiversity and productivity of the country’s inter-island waters. Any
diminution in the resources of the WPS may have negative impacts on the viability
of our own inter-island fisheries resources.
Hydrocarbons and
Minerals
1. International
research data indicate that the Philippines has significant oil and gas as well
as other mineral deposits particularly around the Palawan/Reed Bank area. It is
now believed that they are of such quantity that they could have transformative
potential for a developing country such as ours. Access to these resources is
therefore a core Philippine interest in the WPS.
2. Presidential Decree 87, also known as the Oil
Exploration and Development Act of 1972, declares it a policy of the State to
“hasten the discovery and production of indigenous petroleum through the utilization
of government and/or private resources, local and foreign, under the
arrangements embodied in this Act which are calculated to yield the maximum
benefit to the Filipino people and the revenues to the Philippine Government
for use in furtherance of national economic development, and to assure just
returns to participating private enterprises, particularly those that will
provide the necessary services, financing and technology and fully assume all
exploration risks.”
3. The country’s energy infrastructure, as well as
energy supply and demand projections, will soon urgently require a fresh
infusion of indigenous energy sources. Oil industry players have thus
been preparing to begin commercial drilling activities. There is an
unavoidable need for foreign capital and technology, but the international
disputes in the area and recent escalation of tensions over drilling and
exploration activities have created a perception of risk and uncertainty that
discourages long-term investors.
4. Philippine policies on oil and gas cooperation or
joint development in the WPS need to be clarified. The key obstacles to joint
development are security concerns and commercial reservations about partnering
with oil companies from rival claimant states, as well as fear of potential
negative impacts on the country’s legal position.
5. Aside from fisheries and hydrocarbons, there is
a need to conduct thorough assessments of other offshore mineral resources such
as rare earths, iron, titanium, vanadium sands, manganese nodules and massive
sulfides, as well as of the renewable energy potentials of the ocean.
Promoting Maritime Security and Defense
1. The Philippine government, in its National
Security Policy (2011-2016), outlines as one of its objectives to “capacitate
the Philippines to exercise full sovereignty over its territory and to provide
protection to its maritime and other strategic interests”. The Philippine
defense estabishment is in transition from focusing on Internal Security
Operations (counter-insurgency, counter-separatism, and counter-terrorism) to
Territorial Defense.
2. Most states bordering the SCS have embarked on
military upgrades and civilian or paramilitary law enforcement modernization efforts that are partly intended for
the protection of their EEZ resources. Recent tensions arising over resource
competition underscore the need for the Philippines to do the same. However,
regional defense buildup in general raises the risk of confrontation in the
area, and in view of the existing territorial and maritime jurisdiction
disputes among regional states, may spark an arms race that will clearly not be
in the Philippines’ national interest.
3. Of particular concern is the growing power
projection of the People’s Republic of China (PRC), with its systematic blue
water naval development and the so-called Island Chain Strategy contributing to
uncertainty in the regional security environment, particularly in light of its
expansive maritime claims and growing nationalism among its people. In
addition, the active deployment in the SCS of PRC civilian or paramilitary law
enforcement vessels, and provincial government organs taking action on their
own have made the security environment in the SCS more complicated.
4. In the WPS, there is a conflation of defense
challenges and law enforcement imperatives due to the geographical overlap of
Philippine EEZ/continental shelf (areas that are subject to civilian
jurisdiction) with the disputed areas including KIG and Bajo de Masinloc which
harbor foreign military presence (and are therefore a military concern). In
view of the limited capabilities of both our military and civilian law
enforcement agencies, and the need to allocate resources for their upgrading,
their respective roles and mandates will need to be clarified for the
short-term, medium-term and long-term planning horizons.
Law Enforcement and Contributing to Good Order
at Sea
1.
Pursuant
to UNCLOS, the Philippines as a coastal and archipelagic state has exclusive
sovereign rights to explore and exploit the living and non-living resources
within its 200 n.m. EEZ and continental shelf. It exercises full sovereignty
over its 12 n.m. territorial sea measured from its archipelagic baselines, and
over all archipelagic waters enclosed within them, subject only to the
recognition of innocent and archipelagic sealane passage rights in favor of
foreign ships. There is debate, however, on whether, when, and where to
establish archipelagic sealanes.
2. The most topical dimension of the disputes triggering
the tensions is foreign fishing activities in Philippine territory and EEZ. Given
the lack of capability and assets of our civilian law enforcement agencies, the
Navy has had to be deputized for ‘anti-poaching’ operations. Use of the Navy
against fishermen projects a militarist posture and leaves us vulnerable to
allegations of threat to use force. Demilitarization of the fisheries disputes
had in fact earlier been recommended by various quarters. There must be a
proper mix of military action and civilian law enforcement approaches to the
disputes, as determined by the nature of the specific threat or challenge.
3. In consideration of the territorial disputes, we
need a clearer definition of where the metes and bounds of Philippine law
enforcement jurisdiction are, balancing the promotion of vital national
interests with the need to prevent armed hostilities. The growing deployment of
vessels by PRC to protect Chinese fishermen and to obstruct Philippine
enforcement operations in our territory/EEZ, creates new challenges to our law
enforcement efforts. Fishing and other activities by Filipino
nationals will be constrained, while allowing Chinese law enforcement to go
uncontested may be interpreted as a negation of Philippine sovereignty.
4. A
National Coast Watch System was established through Executive Order 57, as a
“central inter-agency mechanism for a coordinated and coherent approach on
maritime issues and maritime security operations towards enhancing governance
in the country’s maritime domain”. EO 57 also abolished the Commission on
Maritime and Ocean Affairs which since 2007 had functioned as the coordinating
mechanism at the strategic level.
Asserting Sovereignty Over Territory And Exercising Sovereign Rights Over The Exclusive Economic Zone
1.
The
EEZ/continental shelf under UNCLOS should not be confused with and regarded as
equivalent to land territory over which a coastal State exercises full sovereignty and control. Within the
EEZ/continental shelf, a coastal State is generally entitled to exclusive sovereign rights to explore
and exploit the living and non-living natural resources of the superjacent
waters (in the case of the EEZ) and the seabed and subsoil (in the case of the
continental shelf). These are rights that are less than full sovereignty, and
are ancillary to an adjacent territorial sea or land area.
2.
While focus has
been on the exclusivity of maritime territories and jurisdictions, UNCLOS also
requires coastal States to cooperate pending the resolution of disputes, and
encourages them to share the resources of the sea through provisional
agreements like joint development arrangements. Part IX of UNCLOS also
allows cooperation and shared management of semi-enclosed seas like the South
China Sea.
3.
While
international litigation may be helpful, it is a not a singular solution to the
multiple and complex problems that have arisen, or may arise in the future, in
the West Philippine Sea. It will take much time and effort to bring just one
case before an international tribunal, and it often takes many years to be
resolved; in the meantime, incidents and issues may arise that will require
practical, timely, or urgent responses.
Advancing
An Effective And Pro-Filipino Diplomacy And Foreign Relations
1. Art.2 Sec.7 of the Constitution states that “The
State shall pursue an independent foreign policy. In its relations with other
states, the paramount consideration shall be national sovereignty, territorial
integrity, national interest and the right to self-determination.” Art.2,
Sec. 2 of the Constitution also states that “the Philippines renounces war as
an instrument of national policy, adopts the generally accepted principles of
international law as part of the law of the land and adheres to the policy of
peace, equality, justice, freedom, cooperation and amity with all nations.”
2. In the field of foreign relations, the WPS
disputes have had the most impact on our ties with China, the United States,
and with Southeast Asia/ASEAN. The disputes have led to an undesirable sharp
deterioration in our relations with China, an increased need to strengthen
defense cooperation with the United States, while challenging us to help build
a common ASEAN position that would help the Philippines and the region
withstand any threat to stability and peace. The United Nations moreover
continues to serve as a main pillar framing our approach to the WPS challenges.
3. The Philippines has been actively promoting
peaceful settlement of the WPS disputes, through bilateral and multilateral
initiatives, since the early 1990s. The Philippines also proposed, initiated,
and led in drafting the ASEAN-China Declaration of Conduct (DOC), and has been
most insistent in further evolving the DOC into a legally binding Code of
Conduct.
4. In the last two years, the Aquino government’s
strategy in addressing the disputes have focused on pursuing a rules-based
approach, reliance on international law, and a preference for multilateral
diplomacy. These appear to enjoy considerable domestic as well as international
support. On the other hand, its staunchly nationalist and at times seemingly
provocative stance against China, as well as open calls for US involvement and
support, have caused concern among some neighboring states in ASEAN.
Organizing For Future Challenges
1. Law of the Sea concerns in the WPS are
cross-cutting issues that impinge on both foreign policy and domestic policy. Domestic
archipelagic imperatives (i.e. access to resources, protection of the
environment, national security) are the true driving force behind national
policy. Only a strong domestic capability (e.g. credible defense and pro-active
maritime resource development programs) can be the basis of effective diplomacy
and relations with the international community. Archipelagic development and security
requires a strategic and whole-of-government approach.
2. Recent challenges facing the country in
asserting its sovereignty and sovereign rights in the WPS have helped in
uniting the Filipino people. Territorial integrity, national patrimony, and the
principles and norms we choose to live by in our relations with other countries
and peoples all help shape our national identity. But there is little
informed policy debate among Filipinos on the maritime challenges we face. Carrying
this forward to the next generations requires developing a critical mass of
experts and enthusiasts, as well as promoting lively debates and discourses
about maritime issues and the challenges and opportunities they present.
These will involve participation by government, academe, media, NGOs,
private industry, and grassroots local communities.
3. Coverage of maritime issues in popular media is
also lacking. There is a need for the Filipino people to rediscover our
archipelagic heritage and to write our own story as a maritime and seafaring
nation. The mass media, social networks on the Internet, the educational
system, and government information agencies are all potential instruments for
information dissemination, awareness-raising, stimulating lively and analytical
debates, and mobilizing public support on the one hand. They are also
instruments for gauging public sentiment and soliciting feedback on
government policies and actions. Ultimately, the tough decisions
government will have to make with regard to the WPS should be for the benefit
of the people. Their understanding of the issues and participation in the
decision making will be vital to any successful policy.
GUIDING PRINCIPLES AND MAJOR RECOMMENDATIONS
The following are proposed guiding principles for Philippine policy on the West Philippine Sea.
1. The West Philippine Sea and its resources are
part of the national patrimony. Our national interest in the WPS is defined as
that which will serve the greatest good of the greatest number of the Filipino
people;
2. Our policies and strategies with respect to
resource development, defense, law enforcement, diplomacy and international law
shall be consistent with this definition of the national interest;
3. We affirm commitment to the peaceful settlement
of inter-state disputes on the basis of justice, equality, mutual respect, and
upholding internationally accepted rules and norms of behavior.
4. We affirm commitment to an independent foreign
policy that upholds the dignity of the Filipino people and our tradition of
courage and self-reliance;
5. WPS policy should demonstrate the positive
contributions that the Philippines and the Filipino people can make to the Asia
Pacific region and to the world.
This White Paper recommends the following
courses of action.
1. That government take steps to establish, revive
or strengthen permanent, high-level institutions that shall:
a.
Undertake
policy formulation, strategic planning, policy coordination and period
assessments of the policy environment;
b. Ensure that the implementation of plans and
programs will be in accordance with policy guidelines;
c.
Serve as
crisis management mechanisms tasked to provide early warning and quick response
to incidents;
d. Be supported by adequate resources and staff,
including provision of strategic analyses and real-time intelligence; and
e.
Provide
institutional continuity regardless of changes in administration and
leadership.
2. That government develop a comprehensive,
long-term program for international legal action on issues relating to the
disputes, and establish the appropriate institutions and rules for undertaking
such a program. Such a program may include but not be limited to the negotiation
of boundaries, filing of cases, seeking arbitration and/or advisory opinion on
critical issues from competent bodies, while taking into consideration the need
to create favorable political, diplomatic and security conditions for conflict
resolution.
3. That government develop strategic economic
resources development programs for the Philippine EEZ, with respect to:
a.
Sustainable
and responsible fisheries, with government assistance for artisanal/small-scale
fishermen;
b. Optimized exploitation of oil and gas resources,
balancing economic interests and the sovereignty/security concerns;
c.
Exploratory
surveys of other offshore mineral resources;
d. Establishing where necessary, transitional
guidelines and rules for law enforcement in selected EEZ areas under dispute,
taking into consideration domestic laws and the relevant UNCLOS provisions; and
e.
Enabling
and capacitating organs for law enforcement and for the protection of Filipinos
engaged in the exercise of sovereign rights over the EEZ.
4. That government develop a clear, feasible, and
resolute security and defense strategy for the WPS, based on:
a.
Sound
understanding of shifting regional dynamics and geopolitical rebalancing taking
place;
b.
Factual
and accurate threat and risk assessments looking at capabilities, political
intentions and actions of adversaries;
c.
Correct
appreciation of our own security and defense capabilities and weaknesses,
including the potential for allied assistance and the influence of remaining
internal security challenges,
d.
Clear
definition of the distinct as well as coordinated roles and responsibilities of
our civilian and military organizations, in ways that build on and build up
their core competencies and primary mandates; and
e.
Anticipation
of various scenarios which security forces may encounter, taking into
consideration the shift from internal security operations to territorial
security operations and the shift from “threat based” to “scenario-based”
contingencies.
5. That bilateral and regional diplomacy pertaining
to WPS:
a.
Should be
strategized in the context of comprehensive foreign policy goals such as
promotion of national security, economic development and the welfare of
nationals;
b. Should contribute ultimately to strengthening
regional and international peace and stability based on international law,
norms and standards;
c.
Be guided
by our long-term aspirations for our relations with ASEAN, China, the United
States, neighboring countries in Southeast Asia and Northeast Asia, and other
key stakeholders.
6. That programs be undertaken to inculcate
archipelagic consciousness and identity of the Philippines and the Filipinos as
a maritime nation, including but not limited to:
a.
Preparation
and wide dissemination of information (e.g. primers and reference materials)
outlining Philippine interests for popular consumption;
b. Building grassroots constituencies for advocacy
for the marine and coastal environment, safety and freedom of navigation,
disaster-preparedness and response, good neighborliness and regional
cooperation, among others;
c.
Introduction
of relevant multidisciplinary courses and content into all levels of education
and training in government;
d. Investment in developing next-generation
expertise on the legal, security, international relations, fisheries,
geography, geology, marine scientific and other dimensions relevant to the WPS.
This initiative began months before the most recent tensions with China erupted over Bajo de Masinloc. Intended to draw attention to the strategic questions, the paper does not provide specific recommendations on how to manage the most pressing or immediate concerns. The problems we face in the WPS are not new, as we have been grappling with many of these issues for decades. It is possible that many more years will pass before we achieve our aspirations of a West Philippine Sea that is truly free from conflict, safe from any form of violence or illegal activity, where Filipinos are able to enjoy as well as to share nature’s bounty, where countries live in equality and mutual respect, and where strong regional institutions are in place upholding shared principles and norms.
We hope that this White Paper will be an important step in that direction.
10 August 2012, Quezon City
INFORMAL EXPERT GROUP ON THE WEST PHILIPPINE SEA
|
||
LETICIA RAMOS-SHAHANI
Former
Senator, Republic of the Philippines
Former
Deputy Minister for Philippine Affairs and UN Assistant Secretary-General for
Social and Humanitarian Affairs
|
PROF. DR. AILEEN SP
BAVIERA
Professor
and Former Dean,
UP
Asian Center
Former
Head, Center for International Relations and Strategc Studies,
Foreign
Service Institute
|
|
COMMO CARLOS L AGUSTIN
AFP(Ret)
President,
Maritime League
Former
President, National Defense College of the Philippines and Former Commandant,
Philippine Coast Guard
|
ATTY. RODEL A. CRUZ
Former
Undersecretary, Office of the Chief
Presidential Legal Counsel,
Office of the President
Former
Undersecretary,
Department
of National Defense
|
|
LAURO L BAJA JR.
Former
Undersecretary,
Department
of Foreign Affairs
Former
Permanent Representative of the Republic of the Philippines to the United
Nations
|
VADM EDUARDO MA R. SANTOS
AFP(Ret)
President,
Maritime Academy of Asia and the Pacific
Former
Flag Officer In Command, Philippine Navy
|
|
DR. GUILLERMO R. BALCE
Former
Undersecretary,
Department of Energy
|
ATTY. MALCOLM I.
SARMIENTO JR.
Former
Director,
Bureau
of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources, Department of Agriculture
|
|
COMMO ROLAND S RECOMONO
AFP(Ret)
Undersecretary,
DOTC
Former
Assistant Chief of Naval Staff for Plans, N5, Philippine Navy
Former
Chief of the AFP Modernization Program Management Office
|
ATTY. JAY L BATONGBACAL
Professor,
College of Law
University
of the Philippines
|
[1] In this paper, the term
‘South China Sea’ (SCS) refers to the entire semi-enclosed sea bordered
by China, the Philippines, Malaysia, Indonesia, and Vietnam. On the other hand,
the term ‘West Philippine Sea’ (WPS) refers to only the part of the
South China Sea that is the subject of Philippine sovereignty and/or jurisdictional
claims. WPS is inclusive of the Kalayaan Island Group or KIG, Bajo de Masinloc
(a.k.a. Panatag or Scarborough Shoal), and the 200-nautical mile Exclusive
Economic Zone (EEZ) and Continental Shelf (CS), accounted from the archipelagic
baselines defined in Republic Act 9522 (Philippine Baselines Law).
1 comment:
Nice work
https://www.service-news24.com/2018/08/kerala-recent-news-over-100-killed-in-2018.html?m=1
Post a Comment