Philippines urged to guard maritime claims in China energy negotiations

ANALYSTS warned the Philippines risks weakening its sea claims if it revives joint energy exploration talks with China without strictly anchoring any arrangement on a 2016 arbitral ruling that voided Beijing’s expansive claims in the South China Sea.

Any agreement must preserve Manila’s sovereign rights under international law and the Philippine Constitution to avoid creating ambiguity over ownership and control of resources in contested waters, they said.

“The Philippines should approach any agreement with China with extreme caution,” Stratbase Institute President Victor Andres C. Manhit said in a Viber message last week. “All actions must be firmly anchored in international law, particularly the arbitral award.”

President Ferdinand R. Marcos, Jr. last week said he is open to restarting talks on joint oil and gas exploration with Beijing as the country faces higher fuel costs linked to the war involving the US and Israel against Iran.

Analysts said the timing and manner of any renewed discussions would likely face close scrutiny from lawmakers, courts and the public given past legal challenges and persistent security frictions at sea.

“The proposal was likely floated to check its political acceptability and domestic support,” Julio C. Amador III, a distinguished visiting fellow at US-based research center Perry World House, said in a Viber message. “In any case, any deal should not violate the Constitution and the arbitral award.”

Joint oil and gas development in the South China Sea resurfaced in 2023 after Mr. Marcos met Chinese President Xi Jinping, following years of strained relations driven by maritime incidents, diplomatic protests and rival patrols in disputed waters.

Earlier negotiations collapsed after the Philippine Supreme Court voided a joint seismic survey agreement involving China and Vietnam, citing constitutional and legal deficiencies. The court ruled that provisions in the deal appeared to undermine the Philippines’ sovereign rights over its exclusive economic zone.

Any revived talks could face similar hurdles. The Constitution requires the state to retain full control and supervision over the exploration, development and use of natural resources, limiting how foreign entities may participate in energy projects.

“The Philippines must remain firm and unequivocal in upholding its sovereign rights and ensure that no arrangement dilutes its legal position or creates ambiguity over ownership,” Mr. Manhit said. “Any subsequent agreement must fully recognize that all resources developed belong to the Philippines.”

He said China’s refusal to recognize the 2016 decision of the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague casts doubt on its reliability as a partner in resource development.

The Chinese Embassy in Manila did not immediately reply to a Viber message seeking comment.

‘UNNECESSARY’ DEAL
China claims nearly the entire South China Sea based on a U‑shaped, nine‑dash line map from the 1940s, a stance rejected by the tribunal, which ruled the claims had no legal basis under international law.

The decision also found that Reed Bank, a resource‑rich area west of Palawan, lies within the Philippines’ continental shelf. A 2024 Philippine law defining the country’s maritime zones reinforced Manila’s rights to explore and exploit resources there.

Despite the ruling, tensions in the waterway have persisted, discouraging energy exploration. Philippine companies have faced repeated disruptions at Reed Bank, including encounters with Chinese coast guard and maritime militia vessels.

The area may contain as much as 5.4 billion barrels of oil and 55.1 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, according to a 2013 estimate by the US Energy Information Administration.

Mr. Manhit said Manila could instead seek domestic firms or upstream oil companies from allied countries to develop offshore resources. Such an approach would remove the risk of entering arrangements that could weaken the country’s legal standing.

“This makes it unnecessary to pursue arrangements with actors that cannot be trusted and could ultimately compromise national interests,” he said.

The debate over joint development unfolded as Philippine defense officials reported an increase in Chinese maritime activity across contested areas.

Last week, the military said it monitored at least 90 Chinese vessels in various parts of the South China Sea, including navy and coast guard ships.

At Scarborough Shoal, 49 vessels were spotted — 17 Chinese navy ships and 32 coast guard vessels, according to Rear Admiral Roy Vincent T. Trinidad, Philippine Navy spokesman for the South China Sea.

At Thitu Island, the military counted 15 Chinese vessels, including four navy ships and 11 coast guard units. Second Thomas Shoal had 14 vessels, while 12 ships were detected near Sabina Shoal, he said.

“We have noted in the past two weeks an escalation of their numbers, which coincided with developments in the Middle East region,” Mr. Trinidad told reporters. “These are deliberate.”

“They are trying to normalize their illegal presence and take advantage of the focus of the international community in the Middle East,” he added.

The Philippines faces mounting pressure to secure alternative energy sources as output from existing gas fields that supply power plants in Luzon declines in the coming years.

Analysts said that need must be weighed against long‑term strategic costs.

“Unless China abandons its position of refusing to recognize or comply with the ruling, the prospects for such an agreement are unlikely to advance,” Mr. Manhit said. “Given China’s consistent track record, it is highly unlikely that it will agree to terms that fully respect and reinforce the Philippines’ rights under international law.” — Kenneth Christiane L. Basilio