After a call between Philippine and Chinese foreign ministers, Beijing urged Manila to “speak with one rational, unified voice” on West Philippine Sea issues.
Last week, a phone call between Philippine Secretary Tess Lazaro and Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi was presented as a step toward de-escalation. Both sides called the conversation “frank, pragmatic and constructive,” agreeing to manage differences ahead of the ASEAN summit. But a closer look at China’s version of the talks reveals a more assertive agenda. In Xinhua’s account, Wang blamed “malicious interference by a small number of Filipino politicians” for harming relations and explicitly asked Manila to “tighten its oversight of the individuals concerned.” The message was clear: stop showing the world what happens at sea.
The Beijing Playbook: Controlling the Narrative
This is a familiar strategy. For years, China has sought to dominate the story of its actions in the West Philippine Sea. The Inquirer.net piece, by Rear Admiral Jay Tristan Tarriela, details how before 2023, incidents like ramming, water cannon attacks, and the use of military-grade lasers were met with swift Chinese denials. Our diplomatic notes, filed weeks later, rarely made the news. Beijing’s version of events traveled unchallenged, while ours stayed locked in a filing cabinet.
Then we changed the game. We began releasing videos, photographs, precise coordinates, and legal justifications within hours of each confrontation. The public now sees the China Coast Guard blocking Philippine vessels at Bajo de Masinloc, threatening our fishermen, and interfering with resupply missions at Ayungin. This transparency used one of our greatest strengths: a free press. It fundamentally shifted the information battlefield, making it impossible for Beijing to simply rewrite history.
But this is precisely what Beijing cannot stand. A country that is willing to dispute the basic facts of a diplomatic call—who called whom, a detail the Inquirer notes has been misrepresented twice now—cannot be trusted to be honest about more critical events. If China will spin a simple phone log, what prevents it from spinning a water cannon attack or a ramming incident when there is no footage to challenge its version? The answer is nothing.
Why the World Condemns China's Actions
Here is why that matters. When Washington, Tokyo, Canberra, and Brussels condemn China’s actions in the West Philippine Sea, they are reacting to the evidence we provide. A foreign minister can issue a strong statement of concern based on compelling video proof. No government does so based on a confidential diplomatic note delivered weeks after the fact. This footage is the bedrock of international support.
Our transparency initiative has sustained the security partnerships that are crucial for regional stability. Every like-minded nation must justify to its own people and parliament why it signs maritime cooperation agreements with Manila, why its coast guard sails alongside ours, and why it supports our defense modernization. The daily record of Chinese aggression is their justification. Take that away, and supporting the Philippines becomes an abstract concept—and abstractions do not survive budget hearings or political debates.
By silencing the documentation of its actions, Beijing aims to make the West Philippine Sea a regional issue again, weakening the resolve of its allies.
A Calculated Gambit for 2028
But there is a catch, and it’s a longer-term, more cynical play. Beijing has learned a hard lesson from the last two Philippine elections: being seen as close to China is now a political liability. Candidates who once boasted of their friendship with the mainland now prefer to change the subject. Transparency is a major reason why. It is difficult to campaign on the claim that “China is our friend” when voters can watch, on their phones, Chinese Coast Guard vessels attacking Filipino sailors and stealing their livelihoods.
Beijing’s answer is not to change its behavior. It is to make sure nobody sees it anymore. If the transparency initiative ends in 2027, the West Philippine Sea will likely fade from the news by 2028. People forget. The field would then be wide open for politicians who owe their allegiance to Beijing, backed by its resources, to take back Malacañang and place the next president on a six-year leash. This is not about this year’s ASEAN summit. It is about who controls the Philippine government after 2028 and whether that leader answers to the Filipino people or to a foreign power.
“China’s strategy in the West Philippine Sea is a masterclass in ‘salami-slicing’—incremental aggression designed to normalize its presence and erode Philippine sovereignty without triggering a full-scale response. The demand for quiet is a key part of that playbook, designed to break the international will that currently opposes it,” said Dr. Bonnie Glaser, a senior fellow for China studies at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS).
China's Coast Guard Attacks Filipino Economy
When China’s Coast Guard harasses our fishermen and blocks our vessels, it is not just a national security issue—it is an attack on our economy and the livelihoods of hundreds of thousands of Filipinos.
Persistent instability in the West Philippine Sea creates a risk premium that can deter foreign direct investment, increase insurance costs for shipping, and disrupt the flow of goods to markets.
| Geoeconomic Impact of West Philippine Sea Tensions | Direct Consequence |
|---|---|
| Global Shipping Routes | Trillions of dollars in annual trade pass through the South China Sea; disruption risks severe supply chain bottlenecks. |
| Regional Fisheries | The West Philippine Sea provides a significant portion of the total global marine catch; Chinese incursions directly threaten this vital food source. |
| Energy Security | Majority of imported oil for Japan, South Korea, and China transits these waters; militarization poses a risk to energy flows. |
China Changes Its Story on Phone Call
One final detail from this week's talks reveals the fundamental problem in dealing with Beijing: a simple, verifiable fact cannot be agreed upon. Xinhua, China's state news agency, reported that Wang took the call at Lazaro's request. The Chinese term used, "应约," is a formula Beijing employs when the other side has requested the conversation.
Twice now, on the most trivial of diplomatic details, China has told the world a different story from the one it told us. Both versions were designed to make the Philippines appear desperate and eager to patch things up. This came just two weeks after the Chinese ambassador reminded Manila that China could “easily win” if it chose to use force. And now, based on this record of dishonesty, Beijing is asking us to trust its good faith and stop documenting what its ships do in our own waters.
Think about that. If a nation is willing to rewrite the record of a simple phone call, what would stop it from doing the same with a water cannon attack, a ramming incident, or the next confrontation at Ayungin? Without footage from our side, Beijing would be free to push its version of events, with little evidence to challenge it. That is precisely why transparency must continue. Diplomacy with China is necessary, but it must never come at the expense of documenting the truth. A country that cannot be honest about who dialed cannot be trusted to be honest about anything that matters more.
