On July 22, the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs declared that “China and the Philippines have reached a temporary arrangement to manage the situation at Ren’ai Reef.” The Ministry outlined three principles: 1) China still demands that the Philippines remove the Sierra Madre, a request China has maintained for over 20 years. 2) The Philippines must notify and receive verification from China before supplying living materials. 3) China will not accept the Philippines transporting “large quantities” of construction materials to the ship.
If these are indeed the conditions for the Philippines to supply food, it would almost amount to acknowledging China’s control or even sovereignty over Ren’ai Reef (Second Thomas Shoal), something the Philippines is unlikely to openly admit. As expected, within 12 hours of the so-called “agreement,” the Philippine government denied it, accusing China of inaccurately stating the supply mission and asserting that the Philippines would conduct the resupply mission without prior notification to China.
This fits the Philippines’ usual approach: making concessions in private negotiations and then publicly denying them after reaping the benefits. A similar incident occurred in April this year.
On April 18, a spokesperson from the Chinese Embassy in the Philippines mentioned an issue in an interview. He stated that during the previous Philippine administration, China and the Philippines had reached a gentleman’s agreement on managing Ren’ai Reef to maintain peace and prevent conflict, without addressing sovereignty claims. He also mentioned that after the new Philippine government took office, China had repeatedly communicated the “gentleman’s agreement” to the high-level officials of the Philippine government. China has always insisted on seeking ways to resolve differences through dialogue and consultation. Earlier this year, both sides repeatedly negotiated through diplomatic channels and the Philippine military, eventually reaching a new model for supplying Ren’ai Reef. However, regrettably, this arrangement was abandoned by the Philippines after being implemented only once. The Philippines denied this claim, but Bloomberg released the telephone conversation records between a Chinese embassy diplomat and Lt. Gen. Alberto Carlos, commander of the Philippines’ Western Command, on January 3, 2024, confirming the existence of the “gentleman’s agreement.” Nevertheless, on May 8, Philippine Defense Secretary Teodoro accused the Chinese embassy of violating the Anti-Wiretapping Law by releasing unverifiable conversation recordings of Philippine officials. On May 9, the Philippine Department of Foreign Affairs warned its citizens not to be deceived by false statements and accused China of “falsifying communication records.”
This suggests that the Philippines made private compromises to secure the opportunity to transport essential supplies to the Sierra Madre, only to deny them later to appease its domestic audience and assert its stance to the international community. Given China’s size and power, the international community is more likely to sympathize with the Philippines’ flip-flopping rather than criticize it harshly.
However, such actions are unacceptable to the Chinese public. Although China appears to be the dominant party by controlling the supply routes to the Sierra Madre, the continued presence of this stranded vessel on the disputed reef for 25 years is a source of mockery and an unhealed wound for the Chinese people.
There’s an old Chinese saying: “Things should not be done more than twice.” The Philippines has publicly fooled China at least twice regarding Ren’ai Reef. Will China allow a third time? This seems unlikely, given Xi Jinping’s style.
Thus, China might land on the Sierra Madre, confiscate the newly delivered supplies, and revert to the pre-negotiation status. If conflict arises during this process, the Sierra Madre might cease to exist.
