The recently concluded Bilateral Consultation Mechanism (BCM) held on September 11, 2024, co-chaired by Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Chen Xiaodong and Philippine Foreign Undersecretary Lazaro, focused on addressing the enduring territorial disputes in the South China Sea (SCS).
Central to the discussions was the ongoing contention over Sabina Shoal, where the Philippines deployed the BRP Teresa Magbanua four months prior. In response to China’s demand for the immediate removal of the Philippine vessels, the Philippines reaffirmed its stance that Sabina Shoal lies within its Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). Despite these opposing positions, both nations emphasized the importance of sustained dialogue through the BCM, reiterating a commitment to resolve disputes peacefully and manage tensions diplomatically.
While China underscored its sovereignty claims and the Philippines reaffirmed its rights over its Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), both nations acknowledged the importance of preventing actions that could escalate tensions. Despite their divergent positions, the two countries have committed to fostering high-level exchanges signifying a commitment and mutual desire to stabilize their bilateral relations and manage the dispute through constructive dialogue and negotiation.
Easing Tensions
While the BCM represents a meaningful step towards managing tensions, it is unlikely to immediately resolve disputes, particularly in contentious areas like Sabina Shoal. Both nations remain firm in asserting their respective claims and incidents involving vessels such as the Philippine Coast Guard’s (PCG) 9701 near Sabina Shoal underscore the persistent friction. Nonetheless, the recent BCM demonstrates a clear commitment to diplomacy and a preference for peaceful, non-military solutions. This approach could gradually lessen the frequency and intensity of confrontations, signaling a shift toward more constructive engagement in the long term.
However, China’s demand for removing PCG 9701 from Sabina Shoal is unlikely to be met soon, barring a major diplomatic breakthrough that facilitates de-escalation. For the Philippines, withdrawing the vessel would diminish its maritime presence and weaken its position regarding its territorial/maritime claims. The PCG 9701 is a symbolic and strategic assertion of the Philippines’ sovereign rights over the area, and any retreat could be interpreted as a concession to China, potentially undermining its broader stance on the matter.
Improving Relations
Moreover, despite the stalemate in the Sabina Shoal, both countries should continue to use and strengthen diplomatic platforms like the BCM to prevent the dispute from spiraling into conflict. The established communication hotlines between the two sides should be fully utilized to de-escalate current and future incidents and tensions. Furthermore, both sides should explore and pursue cooperation through joint fishing agreements and collaboration on environmental issues like marine conservation, which could foster trust and build confidence while resolving the dispute in the SCS. Both sides should also pursue economic cooperation, which could reduce tensions by increasing the cost of conflict.
Conclusion
Indeed, while the BCM is a positive step, long-term peace and stability in the SCS require sustained diplomacy and a balance between asserting claims and engaging in constructive and peaceful dialogue/negotiations.
Source: The Lobbyist
https://www.thelobbyist.biz/perspectives/article-details/prime%20insight/diplomacy-amid-disputes-the-bcm-in-managing-scs-tensions-between-ph-and-cn-2
