PH ignores China request to delay filing of Memorial vs 9-dash line

China's 9-dask line

China’s 9-dask line


By Ellen T. Tordesillas, VERA Files

Despite Chinese requests to delay it, the Philippines is filing on March 30 its memorandum challenging before the United Nations China’s territorial claims over the South China Sea.

The memorandum, called a Memorial in international law, will be filed with the Arbitral Tribunal of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) at The Hague in the Netherlands, contesting China’s 9-dash line territorial rule.

Under the 9-dash line rule, China claims almost the whole of the South China Sea as part of its territory, but the Philippines and three other Southeast Asian nations are staking various claims to parts of the area.

Sources said the Chinese government had asked President Aquino through back channels to wait a little longer before filing the Memorial.

A delay in the filing would be seen as an indication of Philippine willingness to improve ties with China, a source quoted a Chinese official as saying.

China has informed the Philippines it will reciprocate accordingly, and will withdraw its ships from Bajo de Masinloc (Panatag Shoal to Filipinos, Huangyan island to the Chinese) to restore the relationship to where it was before April 8, 2012.

The source said China considers the suit, filed in January 2013, as an obstacle to improving its ties with the Philippines.

“We don’t expect the Philippines to withdraw the suit because we understand that national pride is at stake,” a Chinese official reportedly told counterparts in the Philippines, the source said. “But we hope you can delay it.”

The Chinese official reportedly added, “In our culture, bringing someone to court is like assaulting him.”
China also said that if the Philippines delays filing the claim, it would not establish a South China Sea Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) like it did in the East China Sea which included air space over the Japanese-controlled Senkaku islands.

An ADIZ is airspace in which the country that imposed it requires identification, location and control over civil aircraft passing through that zone, in the interest of national security.

China also said once the “obstacle” is removed, the Philippines can expect increased economic opportunities, including the promotion of the Philippines as a tourist destination.

Philippine-China ties have been strained since April 8, 2012, when the lone Philippine warship BRP Gregorio del Pilar apprehended Chinese fishing vessels in the Bajo de Masinloc area, 124 nautical miles off Zambales, prompting China to send Chinese Marine Surveillance (CMS) ships to the area.

At the height of the 57-day standoff, more than 80 Chinese vessels surrounded two Philippine ships—one from the Philippine Coast Guard and the other from the Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources—that had replaced the Gregorio del Pilar.

On June 4, 2012, the Philippines pulled out the two ships and never sent any back to the area but China kept three there.

On Jan. 27, 2014, the Armed Forces of the Philippines reported that Filipino fishermen were sprayed with water when they got near the Chinese Coast Guard ships.

Solicitor General Francis Jardeleza.

Solicitor General Francis Jardeleza.

China’s request was discussed in a Jan. 30 special cabinet meeting, where the President gave Solicitor General Francis Jardeleza a free hand in handling the case.

In a media briefing at the UP Law Center last month, Jardeleza disclosed that the Arbitral Tribunal acceded to the Philippine request not to separate the jurisdiction aspect from the merits of the case.

“Jurisdiction and merits will be discussed in the Memorial together,” Jardeleza said, adding that this will gave the Philippines the “tactical advantage.”

“We are very strong on the merits and by discussing the merits more and more you gain an advantage hoping to convince the tribunal that they should take the case and rule that they have jurisdiction,” he said.
Legal experts are concerned that the UNCLOS Arbitral Tribunal would consider the issues raised by the Philippines as territorial disputes. The Tribunal decides only on disputes on overlapping maritime zones, while the International Court of Justice (ICJ) decides on territorial disputes.

In the ICJ, however, both parties would have to agree to submit the dispute to the Court. China has refused to participate in the case filed by the Philippines.

Justice Antonio T. Carpio, in a speech before the Philippine Women’s Judges Association early this month said, “The Philippines’ arbitration case against China is solely a maritime dispute and does not involve any territorial dispute.”

Carpio added, “The Philippines is asking the tribunal if China’s 9-dash line can negate the Philippines’ Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) as guaranteed under UNCLOS. The Philippines is also asking the tribunal if certain rocks above water at high tide, like Scarborough Shoal, generate a 200 nautical mile (NM) EEZ or only a 12 NM territorial sea. The Philippines is further asking the tribunal if China can appropriate low-tide elevations (LTEs), like Mischief Reef and Subi Reef, within the Philippines’ EEZ. These disputes involve the interpretation or application of the provisions of UNCLOS. “

Jardeleza said the Philippines in the Memorial will not ask the court to say who owns Panatag shoal. “We are arguing that they are within our Economic Exclusive Zone and therefore under the rules of UNCLOS we have exclusive rights to fish within that area,” he said.

Jardeleza summed up the Philippine line of argument in the Memorial to convince the Tribunal that it has jurisdiction: “Our claim is a very narrow one, land dominates the sea. This is not a case about land; this is a case about the maritime waters which is perfectly under UNCLOS.”

Jardeleza said he expects the Court to give China time to respond before it starts the hearing. It may call for oral arguments or ocular inspection. He said it may take the Tribunal three years to decide from the date of the filing in January 2013.

The Arbitral Court panel of judges is headed by Thomas Mensah from Ghana. Members are Rudiger Wolfrum from Germany, Stanislaw Pawlak from Poland, Jean-Pierre Cot from France, Alfred Soons from The Netherlands.
The Philippine legal team is headed by Paul Reichler, a Washington-based lawyer from the Foley Hoag law firm, British law professors Philippe Sands and Alan Boyle, and Bernard Oxman from the University of Miami’s Law school.

Jardeleza said the public declarations of Southeast Asian countries, the United States, and even the European Union against the 9-dash line strengthens the Philippine case.

“We are a small country but we plan to win big in this,” Jardeleza said.

(VERA Files is put out by veteran journalists taking a deeper look at current issues. Vera is Latin for truth.)

PH ignores China request to delay filing of Memorial vs 9-dash line

China's 9-dask line

China’s 9-dash line


By Ellen T. Tordesillas, VERA Files

Despite Chinese requests to delay it, the Philippines is filing on March 30 its memorandum challenging before the United Nations China’s territorial claims over the South China Sea.

The memorandum, called a Memorial in international law, will be filed with the Arbitral Tribunal of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) at The Hague in the Netherlands, contesting China’s 9-dash line territorial rule.

Under the 9-dash line rule, China claims almost the whole of the South China Sea as part of its territory, but the Philippines and three other Southeast Asian nations are staking various claims to parts of the area.

Sources said the Chinese government had asked President Aquino through back channels to wait a little longer before filing the Memorial.

A delay in the filing would be seen as an indication of Philippine willingness to improve ties with China, a source quoted a Chinese official as saying.

China has informed the Philippines it will reciprocate accordingly, and will withdraw its ships from Bajo de Masinloc (Panatag Shoal to Filipinos, Huangyan island to the Chinese) to restore the relationship to where it was before April 8, 2012.

The source said China considers the suit, filed in January 2013, as an obstacle to improving its ties with the Philippines.

“We don’t expect the Philippines to withdraw the suit because we understand that national pride is at stake,” a Chinese official reportedly told counterparts in the Philippines, the source said. “But we hope you can delay it.”

The Chinese official reportedly added, “In our culture, bringing someone to court is like assaulting him.”
China also said that if the Philippines delays filing the claim, it would not establish a South China Sea Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) like it did in the East China Sea which included air space over the Japanese-controlled Senkaku islands.

An ADIZ is airspace in which the country that imposed it requires identification, location and control over civil aircraft passing through that zone, in the interest of national security.

China also said once the “obstacle” is removed, the Philippines can expect increased economic opportunities, including the promotion of the Philippines as a tourist destination.

Philippine-China ties have been strained since April 8, 2012, when the lone Philippine warship BRP Gregorio del Pilar apprehended Chinese fishing vessels in the Bajo de Masinloc area, 124 nautical miles off Zambales, prompting China to send Chinese Marine Surveillance (CMS) ships to the area.

At the height of the 57-day standoff, more than 80 Chinese vessels surrounded two Philippine ships—one from the Philippine Coast Guard and the other from the Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources—that had replaced the Gregorio del Pilar.

On June 4, 2012, the Philippines pulled out the two ships and never sent any back to the area but China kept three there.

On Jan. 27, 2014, the Armed Forces of the Philippines reported that Filipino fishermen were sprayed with water when they got near the Chinese Coast Guard ships.

Solicitor General Francis Jardeleza.

Solicitor General Francis Jardeleza.

China’s request was discussed in a Jan. 30 special cabinet meeting, where the President gave Solicitor General Francis Jardeleza a free hand in handling the case.

In a media briefing at the UP Law Center last month, Jardeleza disclosed that the Arbitral Tribunal acceded to the Philippine request not to separate the jurisdiction aspect from the merits of the case.

“Jurisdiction and merits will be discussed in the Memorial together,” Jardeleza said, adding that this will give the Philippines the “tactical advantage.”

“We are very strong on the merits and by discussing the merits more and more you gain an advantage hoping to convince the tribunal that they should take the case and rule that they have jurisdiction,” he said.
Legal experts are concerned that the UNCLOS Arbitral Tribunal would consider the issues raised by the Philippines as territorial disputes. The Tribunal decides only on disputes on overlapping maritime zones, while the International Court of Justice (ICJ) decides on territorial disputes.

In the ICJ, however, both parties would have to agree to submit the dispute to the Court. China has refused to participate in the case filed by the Philippines.

Justice Antonio T. Carpio, in a speech before the Philippine Women’s Judges Association early this month said, “The Philippines’ arbitration case against China is solely a maritime dispute and does not involve any territorial dispute.”

Carpio added, “The Philippines is asking the tribunal if China’s 9-dash line can negate the Philippines’ Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) as guaranteed under UNCLOS. The Philippines is also asking the tribunal if certain rocks above water at high tide, like Scarborough Shoal, generate a 200 nautical mile (NM) EEZ or only a 12 NM territorial sea. The Philippines is further asking the tribunal if China can appropriate low-tide elevations (LTEs), like Mischief Reef and Subi Reef, within the Philippines’ EEZ. These disputes involve the interpretation or application of the provisions of UNCLOS. “

Jardeleza said the Philippines in the Memorial will not ask the court to say who owns Panatag shoal. “We are arguing that they are within our Economic Exclusive Zone and therefore under the rules of UNCLOS we have exclusive rights to fish within that area,” he said.

Jardeleza summed up the Philippine line of argument in the Memorial to convince the Tribunal that it has jurisdiction: “Our claim is a very narrow one, land dominates the sea. This is not a case about land; this is a case about the maritime waters which is perfectly under UNCLOS.”

Jardeleza said he expects the Court to give China time to respond before it starts the hearing. It may call for oral arguments or ocular inspection. He said it may take the Tribunal three years to decide from the date of the filing in January 2013.

The Arbitral Court panel of judges is headed by Thomas Mensah from Ghana. Members are Rudiger Wolfrum from Germany, Stanislaw Pawlak from Poland, Jean-Pierre Cot from France, Alfred Soons from The Netherlands.

The Philippine legal team is headed by Paul Reichler, a Washington-based lawyer from the Foley Hoag law firm, British law professors Philippe Sands and Alan Boyle, and Bernard Oxman from the University of Miami’s Law school.

Jardeleza said the public declarations of Southeast Asian countries, the United States, and even the European Union against the 9-dash line strengthen the Philippine case.

“We are a small country but we plan to win big in this,” Jardeleza said.

(VERA Files is put out by veteran journalists taking a deeper look at current issues. Vera is Latin for truth.)

PH ignores China request to delay filing of Memorial vs 9-dash line

China's 9-dask line

China’s 9-dask line


By Ellen T. Tordesillas, VERA Files

Despite Chinese requests to delay it, the Philippines is filing on March 30 its memorandum challenging before the United Nations China’s territorial claims over the South China Sea.

The memorandum, called a Memorial in international law, will be filed with the Arbitral Tribunal of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) at The Hague in the Netherlands, contesting China’s 9-dash line territorial rule.

Under the 9-dash line rule, China claims almost the whole of the South China Sea as part of its territory, but the Philippines and three other Southeast Asian nations are staking various claims to parts of the area.

Sources said the Chinese government had asked President Aquino through back channels to wait a little longer before filing the Memorial.

A delay in the filing would be seen as an indication of Philippine willingness to improve ties with China, a source quoted a Chinese official as saying.

China has informed the Philippines it will reciprocate accordingly, and will withdraw its ships from Bajo de Masinloc (Panatag Shoal to Filipinos, Huangyan island to the Chinese) to restore the relationship to where it was before April 8, 2012.

The source said China considers the suit, filed in January 2013, as an obstacle to improving its ties with the Philippines.

“We don’t expect the Philippines to withdraw the suit because we understand that national pride is at stake,” a Chinese official reportedly told counterparts in the Philippines, the source said. “But we hope you can delay it.”

The Chinese official reportedly added, “In our culture, bringing someone to court is like assaulting him.”
China also said that if the Philippines delays filing the claim, it would not establish a South China Sea Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) like it did in the East China Sea which included air space over the Japanese-controlled Senkaku islands.

An ADIZ is airspace in which the country that imposed it requires identification, location and control over civil aircraft passing through that zone, in the interest of national security.

China also said once the “obstacle” is removed, the Philippines can expect increased economic opportunities, including the promotion of the Philippines as a tourist destination.

Philippine-China ties have been strained since April 8, 2012, when the lone Philippine warship BRP Gregorio del Pilar apprehended Chinese fishing vessels in the Bajo de Masinloc area, 124 nautical miles off Zambales, prompting China to send Chinese Marine Surveillance (CMS) ships to the area.

At the height of the 57-day standoff, more than 80 Chinese vessels surrounded two Philippine ships—one from the Philippine Coast Guard and the other from the Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources—that had replaced the Gregorio del Pilar.

On June 4, 2012, the Philippines pulled out the two ships and never sent any back to the area but China kept three there.

On Jan. 27, 2014, the Armed Forces of the Philippines reported that Filipino fishermen were sprayed with water when they got near the Chinese Coast Guard ships.

Solicitor General Francis Jardeleza.

Solicitor General Francis Jardeleza.

China’s request was discussed in a Jan. 30 special cabinet meeting, where the President gave Solicitor General Francis Jardeleza a free hand in handling the case.

In a media briefing at the UP Law Center last month, Jardeleza disclosed that the Arbitral Tribunal acceded to the Philippine request not to separate the jurisdiction aspect from the merits of the case.

“Jurisdiction and merits will be discussed in the Memorial together,” Jardeleza said, adding that this will gave the Philippines the “tactical advantage.”

“We are very strong on the merits and by discussing the merits more and more you gain an advantage hoping to convince the tribunal that they should take the case and rule that they have jurisdiction,” he said.
Legal experts are concerned that the UNCLOS Arbitral Tribunal would consider the issues raised by the Philippines as territorial disputes. The Tribunal decides only on disputes on overlapping maritime zones, while the International Court of Justice (ICJ) decides on territorial disputes.

In the ICJ, however, both parties would have to agree to submit the dispute to the Court. China has refused to participate in the case filed by the Philippines.

Justice Antonio T. Carpio, in a speech before the Philippine Women’s Judges Association early this month said, “The Philippines’ arbitration case against China is solely a maritime dispute and does not involve any territorial dispute.”

Carpio added, “The Philippines is asking the tribunal if China’s 9-dash line can negate the Philippines’ Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) as guaranteed under UNCLOS. The Philippines is also asking the tribunal if certain rocks above water at high tide, like Scarborough Shoal, generate a 200 nautical mile (NM) EEZ or only a 12 NM territorial sea. The Philippines is further asking the tribunal if China can appropriate low-tide elevations (LTEs), like Mischief Reef and Subi Reef, within the Philippines’ EEZ. These disputes involve the interpretation or application of the provisions of UNCLOS. “

Jardeleza said the Philippines in the Memorial will not ask the court to say who owns Panatag shoal. “We are arguing that they are within our Economic Exclusive Zone and therefore under the rules of UNCLOS we have exclusive rights to fish within that area,” he said.

Jardeleza summed up the Philippine line of argument in the Memorial to convince the Tribunal that it has jurisdiction: “Our claim is a very narrow one, land dominates the sea. This is not a case about land; this is a case about the maritime waters which is perfectly under UNCLOS.”

Jardeleza said he expects the Court to give China time to respond before it starts the hearing. It may call for oral arguments or ocular inspection. He said it may take the Tribunal three years to decide from the date of the filing in January 2013.

The Arbitral Court panel of judges is headed by Thomas Mensah from Ghana. Members are Rudiger Wolfrum from Germany, Stanislaw Pawlak from Poland, Jean-Pierre Cot from France, Alfred Soons from The Netherlands.
The Philippine legal team is headed by Paul Reichler, a Washington-based lawyer from the Foley Hoag law firm, British law professors Philippe Sands and Alan Boyle, and Bernard Oxman from the University of Miami’s Law school.

Jardeleza said the public declarations of Southeast Asian countries, the United States, and even the European Union against the 9-dash line strengthens the Philippine case.

“We are a small country but we plan to win big in this,” Jardeleza said.

(VERA Files is put out by veteran journalists taking a deeper look at current issues. Vera is Latin for truth.)

Why the 28 day-delay in reacting to water cannon incident in Bajo de Masinloc

AFP Chiel Emmanuel Bautista

AFP Chiel Emmanuel Bautista

Why did it take Armed Forces Chief of Staff Emmanuel Bautista almost a month to tell the President and the Department of Foreign Affairs about the Chinese Coast Guards using water cannons against Filipino fishermen in Bajo de Masinloc?

The incident was reported when Bautista told Monday the foreign correspondents in the Philippines about the incident: “Chinese Coast Guard tried to drive away Filipino fishing vessels to the extent of using water cannon.

Asked if the Philippines would lodge a protest over the incident, Bautista said they would first have to investigate.

What? Twenty-eight days have passed and the government is still investigating?

Is this Bautista’s idea of making sure that the military perform its mandate “as protector s of the people and the state and of our national territory?”

Chinese surveillance ships in Bajo de Masinloc April 2012

Chinese surveillance ships in Bajo de Masinloc April 2012

Following Bautista’s revelation, the Department of Foreign Affairs scrambled to join the act and summoned the Chinese Embassy charge d’affaires to convey the country’s strong protest over the incident.

Why only now?

Hernandez said they were informed about it only “late last week.”

He said they “needed to collect more details and information before making any the decision on what course of action we need to undertake on this issue.”

He added that the incident has been confirmed although they don’t have any documentary evidence. The report they got, he said, was that no one was injured.

Coast Guard sources said there were actually 14 fishing vessels by Filipino fishermen in Bajo de Masinloc on that day and only two were subjected to water cannon spraying. The source said the two vessels must have gone too close to the Chinese Coast Guard ship and the spraying was a warning act.

Bajo de Masinloc, a triangular-shaped coral reef formation that has several rocks encircling a lagoon, is both claimed by the Philippines and China. Also known as Panatag Shoal and Scarborough shoal it is 124 nautical miles from Zambales (not located in West Philippine Sea. Calling it Huangyan Island, China has included the rock formation, which is 467 nautical miles from the mainland, in its 9-dash line map.

After a 57-day standoff precipitated by the arrest by the Philippine Navy of Chinese fishing vessels on April 8, 2012 in Bajo de Masinloc, there’s an understanding of peaceful co-existence in the area.

That’s why President Aquino was uncharacteristically a voice of moderation in this incident. Talking to reporters in Cebu, where the 1986 Edsa People Power was commemorated, Aquino noticed inconsistencies in Bautista’s revelation because at the very time the Armed Forces chief was telling the foreign correspondents about the Jan. 27 incident, Filipino fishermen were fishing inside the shoal.

Aquino said: “May I add na medyo inconsistent rin yung nangyari dyan. We’re not sure at this point in time if we can call it their standard operating procedure. Kasi as of yesterday, we had fishermen inside the shoal, inside the shoal who are not being harassed or intimidated by any entity. So ayaw naman natin mag-react kung one of incident ‘to that they probably will say was acting not under their orders but out of ‘yung para bang dinesisyunan ng kapitan ng particular boat na ‘yun.”

The President further said that,”The first step will be a diplomatic message directed at the People’s Republic of China to ask them to explain what this incident was all about and what their directions are.”

In the note verbale handed to the Chinese Embassy charge d’affaires, the DFA reiterated that “ Bajo de Masinloc is an integral part of the Philippines and over which the Philippines exercises sovereignty, sovereign rights and jurisdiction. Philippine fishing vessels have been routinely, continuously, and peacefully and sustainably fishing in Bajo de Masinloc.

China’s replied that “The Chinese side does not accept the so-called “protest” by the Philippine side.”
They also reiterated thay “China has indisputable sovereignty over South China Sea Islands and their adjacent waters, Huangyan Island included. Chinese government vessels are conducting regular patrols within China’s jurisdiction. “

China added: “We urge the Philippine side to work with the Chinese side to resolve differences through bilateral consultations and negotiations.”

Feeling disadvantaged in a one-on-one negotiation with the behemoth neighbor, the Philippines brought the territorial dispute issue to the United Nations Arbitral Court.

AFP probers say US, not China, put concrete blocks in Bajo de Masinloc

One of the photos shown by Defense Secretary Voltaire Gazmin during a congressional hearing.

One of the photos shown by Defense Secretary Voltaire Gazmin during a congressional hearing.

By Ellen Tordesillas,VERA Files

The concrete blocks in Bajo de Masinloc, which Philippine defense and military officials last month accused China of putting there, may have actually been placed by the United States Navy decades ago, military sources said.

A military investigation found that the concrete slabs were covered by algae, an indication that they had been in the area for many years. The probe also found that the blocks had been used by the U.S. Navy as “sinkers” to preserve the wreckage of old ships they used for target practice.

The information contradicts Defense Secretary Voltaire Gazmin’s statement at the congressional budget hearing in September in which he accused China of laying the foundation for structures similar to what it did in Mischief Reef in the Spratly Islands in 1995.

Gazmin released photos of some 75 concrete blocks scattered within Bajo de Masinloc, including a photo of two vertical posts at the shoal’s entrance. Philippine Navy Chief Jose Luis Alano had said they would remove the concrete blocks while Foreign Secretary Alberto del Rosario said the government would file a diplomatic protest with China. The blocks were never removed; the protest was never filed.

B

A closer look at the concrete blocks from the air.

A closer look at the concrete blocks from the air.

ajo de Masinloc, known internationally as Scarborough Shoal, is 124 nautical miles off Zambales, which was home to the Subic Naval Base for more than 80 years. Subic was a major ship repair, supply, and rest and recreation facility of the United States Navy until 1991 when the Philippine Senate junked the RP-US Military Bases Agreement.

China claims the shoal, 467 nautical miles away from the mainland, as part of its territory with the name Huangyan Island.

Bajo de Masinloc is referred to as Panatag (calm in Tagalog) by Filipino fishermen who seek refuge in the area during stormy weather.

Sources said the U.S. Navy used Bajo de Masinloc as an impact or bombing range. The concrete slabs were needed as “sinkers” to keep the balance of the old decrepit ships which were placed in the shoal for the U.S. Navy’s shooting and bombing runs.
Over the years, however, the derelicts became the subject of “salvage operations by local salvors also known as kumbatseros.”

Vertical posts at the entrance of BDM. Taken Sept 2, 2013.

Vertical posts at the entrance of BDM. Taken Sept 2, 2013.

VERA Files sought a statement from the U.S. Embassy but was referred to Gazmin’s office “for any clarification of his remarks.” VERA Files also asked for a statement from Gazmin’s office but did not get any response.

Military sources also said they interviewed a number of fishermen who had seen the concrete blocks way back in the late 1980s and even used them as step boards during high tide.

President Aquino, speaking at the annual presidential forum of the Foreign Correspondents Association of the Philippines, shared the information that the concrete blocks “are very, very old concrete blocks. Some of them have barnacles attach to them. They are not a new phenomenon.”

Following Gazmin’s statement before Congress, China accused the Philippines of fabricating the photos, and released its own photos of Bajo de Masinloc without the concrete blocks.

The two vertical posts north of the shoal’s entrance turned out to be part of structures placed by the Philippine Navy in 1989, as part of the aborted plan to build a lighthouse there.

Aquino said he does not see any immediate need to remove the concrete blocks, which do not “present immediate danger to any of our vessels or even those that would transit in the area around Scarborough shoal.”

Despite the almost permanent presence of three Chinese ships in Bajo de Masinloc since April 2012, Aquino insists the Philippines has not lost the 120-square-kilometer strategically vital shoal because “we can still go there and we do have overflight missions,” adding that Filipino fishermen “are still in that area.”

The three-month standoff between the Philippines and China in Bajo de Masinloc last year triggered the filing by the Philippines of a suit before the United Nations Arbitral Tribunal. The Philippine government has questioned the legality of China’s 9-dash line that encompasses almost the whole of the South China Sea and encroaches on the exclusive economic zone of several countries in the Southeast Asia.

China has refused to participate in the U.N. suit.

(VERA Files is put out by veteran journalists taking a deeper look at current issues. Vera is Latin for “true.”)