What about the West Philippine Sea?

INDEED, what about it? The country is already drowning in problems: questionable insertions in the national budget that lead to ghost and substandard projects, especially in flood control; the loss of credibility in Congress and the executive branch; and unrest in the streets of major cities.

No wonder Le Affair West Philippine Sea has been pushed aside. Talking about it almost feels like another “Wag the Dog” distraction.

Yet while our attention is consumed by the corruption tied to the 2025 national budget, the West Philippine Sea remains far from quiet. The “saber rattling” goes on without pause.

Recently, social media buzzed with claims that China is now eyeing the Batanes Group of Islands as part of its territory.

This came from posts on Chinese platforms and unusual coast guard patrols near the islands. On Douyin, some users circulated videos insisting Batanes “once belonged to China” based on supposed historical records. Others alleged that Manila “illegally occupied” the islands in 1946, during China’s civil war.

Some even argue that the 1898 Treaty of Paris excluded Batanes from Philippine territory, invoking the post-war Potsdam Declaration to claim the islands “should have been returned to China.”

Preposterous—utterly absurd. Ridiculous, to say the least.

But because of the tension between Taiwan and China, Batanes has suddenly become a potential flashpoint in the larger geopolitical rivalry between Beijing and Washington. Analysts say it is key terrain that both sides would likely covet if war breaks out in the Taiwan Strait.

Jay Batongbacal, director of the Institute for Maritime Affairs and Law of the Sea at the University of the Philippines, warns that to secure control of the Luzon Strait, China might seize Batanes and use it as a base to enclose the Bashi Channel with anti-ship and anti-air missile coverage.

Meanwhile, President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. recently signed two new laws to reinforce the Philippines’ maritime jurisdiction.

The Philippine Maritime Zones Act (RA 12064) affirms the country’s rights over its maritime zones, laying the legal foundation for social, economic, and commercial activities. It covers internal waters, archipelagic waters, territorial sea, contiguous zone, Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), and continental shelf. The law defines their maximum extents: 12 nautical miles for the territorial sea, 24 for the contiguous zone, 200 for the EEZ, and beyond 200 for the continental shelf, in line with UNCLOS.

The Archipelagic Sea Lanes Act (RA 12065) designates specific lanes and air routes for the continuous passage of foreign ships and aircraft through Philippine waters. It seeks to prevent arbitrary international navigation while spelling out the rights and obligations of foreign vessels under Philippine law. Non-compliance carries penalties under fisheries, environmental, customs, immigration, health, and other regulations.

“These laws strengthen the country’s resolve to affirm its sovereign rights by aligning our domestic laws with the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. They improve our capacity for governance, reinforce our maritime policies for economic development and national security,” Marcos Jr. said.

But as if to remind us of reality, tensions flared once again after two China Coast Guard ships fired water cannons at a Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources vessel on a routine support mission for Filipino fishermen within our EEZ.

I leave you with this line from the late John Lennon: “All we are saying is give peace a chance.”/PN