Manila playing dangerous double game

This is an editorial from China Daily.

In diplomacy, credibility is currency. Yet the Ferdinand Marcos Jr government is depleting its reserves through its contradictory approach to the South China Sea.

On Tuesday last week, one day after the Philippines' provocations near China's Ren'ai Reef, Philippine President Marcos sat down with the Chinese ambassador for over 80 minutes expressing his hope to "reset" bilateral ties and seek de-escalation.

On Wednesday, the Philippine Foreign Secretary Maria Theresa Lazaro said that the Marcos government is willing to engage in dialogue to work out proper solutions to maritime issues and improve bilateral ties in her meeting with Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi in Manila.

But almost at the same time, Philippine vessels were mounting what observers describe as "saturation-style" intrusions near China's Huangyan Island. On Thursday, Marcos spoke with US President Donald Trump over the phone to raise "concerns" about the situation and blame China for the very tensions Manila itself has created. Over the weekend, the Philippines trotted out its extra-regional patrons for another round of "joint patrols" — a thinly veiled muscle-flexing exercise in the relevant waters.

This is a clear scheme of provocation-first, reconciliation-second — a tactic designed not to resolve differences but to contain and smear China while portraying the Philippines as a victim.

This duplicity serves both domestic and external purposes. Domestically, the Philippines faces strong economic headwinds, including energy emergencies and persistent inflation. By hyping up the maritime friction, the Marcos government can stoke nationalist sentiment, divert public dissatisfaction and shore up its political base through a tough external posture.

Externally, the Philippines is being used as a geopolitical tool by the US — a reality articulated by former US Marine Corps intelligence officer Scott Ritter, who has stated bluntly that the US sees the Philippines not as a friend but as a tool it can use, concluding "When you're a tool, you're a loser, no matter what." The US military presence in the Philippines is designed not for a sustained commitment to the Philippines' security but to come in, cause trouble and leave. It is enough to get the Philippines into trouble, not enough to protect it from the consequences.

Meanwhile, Tokyo's deepening military collusion with Manila — including radar supplies, joint exercises and frigate transfers — is similarly driven by ulterior motives. The Sanae Takaichi government is using the Philippines as a stepping stone for Japan's "remilitarization" under the guise of a "free and open Indo-Pacific".

Most of the other members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations see through this charade and the dangerous position the Marcos government has put itself in. They are committed to advancing the negotiations on a Code of Conduct in the South China Sea and have little appetite for joining Manila's doomed gamble.

China has maintained a consistent and principled position. During his meeting with Lazaro, Wang rightly pointed out that the Philippines has been moving in the opposite direction to other regional countries, becoming a source of disruption to regional peace and stability.

It is unfortunate that whenever China and the Philippines prepare to launch dialogue, certain forces within the Philippines, particularly those from the military and law enforcement, deliberately stir up trouble to derail dialogue progress, Wang said.

Chinese ambassador to the Philippines, Jing Quan, posed three pointed questions to the Marcos government after his meeting with the Philippine president: What is the point of all this troublemaking? What benefit does it bring to Manila? Can the Marcos government really bear the consequences and costs of conflict and confrontation? If the Marcos government truly placed the interests of the Philippine people first and prioritized regional peace and stability, it would not have remained silent on these three fundamental questions.

China has never closed the door to diplomacy. As Wang reiterated, China has consistently committed to managing differences through bilateral dialogue and consultation. However, this requires Manila to reciprocate Beijing's sincerity.

If the Philippines wants a genuine "reset" of relations, it should stop defining the entirety of bilateral ties with the maritime dispute and it must match its rhetoric with action — stop all maritime infringements, abandon its collusion with external forces and cease using maritime conflicts as a tool for political maneuvering.

The Philippines' theatrics in the South China Sea will likely continue for a while, as the domestic and external incentives for provocation remain strong. But this is a dangerous game with no winners. The Philippines risks being left as "a broken tool", as Ritter warned.

China's resolve to safeguard its sovereignty and territorial integrity is unshakable. The only path to solutions is for Manila to abandon its hypocritical double game and engage with Beijing in good faith, respecting the reality that neighbors must find ways to live together in peace.