Retired Supreme Court Senior Associate Justice Antonio T. Carpio emphasized that the West Philippine Sea issue is not merely a maritime dispute but a complex intersection of sovereignty, economic security, and national survival.
In his interview on Patas sa Batas with Atty. Dino de Leon, he laid out the legal, economic, and strategic realities behind the dispute—and why it demands sustained national attention.
A dispute with enormous economic stakes
At the heart of the issue is a vast maritime area won by the Philippines in the 2016 arbitral award—an area larger than the country’s total land territory.
Within this zone lie critical resources: fisheries, oil, natural gas, and minerals, all of which belong exclusively to the Philippines under international law.
One of the most significant is Reed Bank, believed to hold gas reserves far exceeding those of Malampaya, potentially securing the country’s energy needs for decades.
Progress in alliances, gaps in political will
The Philippines has strengthened its security posture through expanded defense agreements with countries such as Australia, Japan, and others.
Yet despite these gains, a critical gap remains: political will.
Neighboring states like Malaysia and Indonesia have managed to extract resources within their maritime zones despite facing similar pressure from China. The Philippines, despite stronger legal footing and alliances, has yet to do the same.
Joint development: constitutional limits
Efforts at joint development with China nearly materialized but ultimately collapsed over constitutional concerns.
Any agreement, he explained, must clearly recognize that resources belong to the Philippines and must be governed by Philippine law.
When China sought to remove these conditions, the arrangement became unacceptable, effectively ending negotiations.
China’s strategy: pressure without war
China’s approach was described as a multi-layered strategy aimed at securing control without armed conflict.
This includes:
- Promoting historical narratives of ownership
- Challenging the applicability of international law
- Using intimidation through military and economic power
The objective: establish the so-called “10-dash line” as a national boundary without triggering war.
Why even small features matter
Seemingly minor features like Scarborough Shoal carry significant weight under international law.
A small rock above water at high tide can generate a 12-nautical-mile territorial sea—an area larger than major cities and rich in marine and mineral resources.
History strengthens the legal claim
Historical evidence plays a critical role in reinforcing Philippine claims.
Maps such as the 1734 Murillo Velarde map and the 1875 Carta General consistently show features like Scarborough Shoal and the Kalayaan Island Group as part of Philippine territory.
In contrast, China’s own published historical maps identify its southernmost territory as Hainan Island, undermining its expansive claims.
Winning global support through transparency
The government’s transparency strategy—publicizing incidents and legal positions—was described as a necessary tool in shaping global opinion.
International sentiment shifted significantly after the 2016 arbitral ruling, with no country now formally supporting China’s sweeping claims.
Legal action must continue
Further legal action remains critical.
Filing additional arbitration cases, particularly on the extended continental shelf, was identified as a key step in strengthening the Philippines’ long-term position.
Delay, he warned, only allows competing claims to solidify.
A responsibility to future generations
The stakes extend beyond the present.
The vast resources of the West Philippine Sea form part of the nation’s patrimony—assets that belong not only to today’s Filipinos but to generations yet to come.
Failing to defend them would mean surrendering both opportunity and sovereignty.