By Adolfo Quizon Paglinawan

 

Part 21: Where Brawner sees War, China sees Diplomacy

A lot of speculation has come out since a Chinese Coast Guard (CCG) vessel rammed a Peoples Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) missile destroyer, as the two were shooing away a Philippine Coast Guard (PCG) ship out of the territorial sea of Scarborough Shoal.

I do not engage in propaganda. This is the result of my fact-checking.

Trespassing

First, I wish to establish by PCG’s own statement, that the incident occurred in this location:

“11 0830H August 2025 at Lat 15 degrees  02.817′ N, Long 118 degrees 11.334′ E or at vicinity 10.5 NM ESE off Bajo De Masinloc (BDM).”

Any mariner will concede that this is 1.5 nautical miles inside BDM or Scarborough Shoal’s 12 nm territorial sea.

The fake news also started here. PCG Commodore Jay Tarriela while confirming that the incident happened 10.5 nautical miles off Scarborough Shoal, has claimed that is within the Philippine exclusive economic zone (EEZ), feigning legitimacy of Philippine presence in the area.

The fact is China is exercising sovereignty and has effective control over Scarborough Shoal which categorically proves it is Chinese territory, and under the UN Convention of the Laws of the Sea, so is the 12 nm around it is Chinese territory.

Tarriela continuously peddles the lie that the Philippines has a right to exercise jurisdiction within 200 nautical mile exclusive economic zone west of the country’s baselines, a phantom maritime area that he calls “West Philippine Sea”.

Spooking the narrative

It is essential to mention this matter at this point that this narrative has long been discredited but the present administration and the PCG repeat it unceasingly in the hope that the Goebbelsian propaganda will cover American intervention in our internal affairs.

 This has served as the root of all problems the Philippines is facing in how it conducts itself in the South China Seas.

The first fact that debunks this tall story is that what he claims as “exclusive” is false. China, Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei and even Taiwan have disputed our claims. In fact, we cannot act unilaterally on this issue without violating the 2002 Declaration of Conduct between China and ASEAN of which we are a signatory, but the PCG insists on unilaterally patrolling a mythical maritime zone outside of the Philippine own 12 nm territorial sea.

But even granting arguendo Tarriela is correct that there is indeed such EEZ, EEZs cannot overlap and supersede another coastal state’s territorial sea in the case of Scarborough, and further, they do not include the surface of the waters for the remainder of the 200 nm we are claiming westwards.

By UNCLOS definition (Article 86), all parts of the sea that are not included in the exclusive economic zone, in the territorial sea or in the internal waters of a State, or in the archipelagic waters of an archipelagic State, are considered “high seas”. In international law, this is also referred to as Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction (ABNJ).

Moreover, in its Article 89, “No State may validly purport to subject any part of the high seas to its sovereignty.”

As always, Tarriela’s word is a ghost.

Violation of Innocent Passage

Second, the PCG also admitted that its ships were delivering fuel and other supplies to 35 Filipino fishing boats at the time, a clear violation of UNCLOS Article 19 on Innocent Passage, Section 2 (g) “unloading of any commodity”.

This is proof-positive that the Chinese were allowing fishing activities in the area, in contradiction to

He said the PCG ships BRP Teresa Magbanua, BRP Suluan and MV Pamamalaka were involved with the “Kadiwa Para sa Bagong Bayaning Mangingisda” mission which again is in violation of Section 2 (d) of “innocent passage”.

Deliveries of any assistance to fishermen can always be done at shore or any part of the Philippine territorial sea.

The idiots at the Philippine Coast Guard, of course, can always claim that they were only implanting Philippine law because the National Maritime Zones Act which was signed last November 2024 included the 12 nautical miles around Scarborough Shoal as Philippine “territorial sea”.

This is when asked by Congressman Ace Barbers if based on Tarriela’s complaint to the Congressional Tricom, I called the National Maritime Zones Act as a stupid law I said “yes, your honor!”

Stunned, the solon did not even allow me to explain.

Well, my simple explanation would have been- how can a law codify the UN Convention of the Laws of the Sea, while at the same time violate Part II Section2 Article 3 of the same treaty, that defines the territorial sea as a belt of sea extending 12 nautical miles from a coastal state’s baseline?

Territorial sea cannot be created by legislation, but by the fact of “land sovereignty” over high-tide elevations like islands, rocks, shoals or cay.

Moreover, the coastal state, alluded to here, is China not the Philippines.

Worse, only a stupid government enforces a stupid law. As we speak, the very Chief of Staff of our Armed Forces of the Philippines is either ignorant or lying on how ultimately we lost Scarborough Shoal to China.

Read: Rigoberto Tiglao https://www.manilatimes.net/2025/08/18/opinion/columns/brawner-grossly-ignorant-of-how-we-lost-panatag-in-2012/2169217

Social media inputs

            When I saw the video of the actual collision incident, taken from shots on board the PCG 4406 BRP Suluan, showing a Chinese Coast Guard vessel fast approaching at perpendicularly (north to south) from its starboard (right) at high speed. I said omg! the PCG ship will surely be hit. But all of a sudden, the  huge PLA missile destroyer 164 showed up parallel west to east at starboard of BRP Suluan at lightning speed, shielding the PCG BRP Suluan from a possible collision.

As a result, CCG ship 3104 rammed the portside of the PLAN missile destroyer Guilin instead.

There is no doubt on my mind that the two crew members of the Chinese Coast Guard who were last seen working on the forecastle were crushed instantaneously, considering that its bow suffered a 10-meter-long damage.

Collision

A maritime technology expert corroborated this version that while traveling at high speed, the Chinese vessels faced repeated dangerous maneuvers by the Philippine ship, crossing in front of them and suddenly slowed down, obstructing their path.

In an effort to avoid colliding with the Philippine vessel, the Chinese ships took evasive action, oblivious of their own safety and risk, when they could have chosen not to maneuver and directly collide with the Philippine Coast Guard vessel 4406.

Read: Expert – Collision Likely Caused Avoiding hitting PCG Ship

However, when I posted this on my Facebook page, someone asked a haunting question: “Earlier video showed the PCG vessel BRP Suluan, at the start of the chase at the portside of the CCG and the Chinese navy ship, but at the moment of collision between the two Chinese ships, they were already at the starboard (right) of the Philippine ship?

So, I returned to the very first video, showing how in violation of International Collision Regulation, the BRP Suluan overtook the CCG3406  at the latter’s portside and immediately cut to the right. 

Colregs

What was peculiar, however, is when I watched an extension of this video, it showed a continuing motion on the part of the PCG ship to make a complete U-turn to the right.

I was shocked at the new conclusion I reached.

In this given scenario, vessels A (PCG), B (CCG) and C (PLA-N), listed from left to right respectively. are running towards the same direction,

Vessel A makes a U-turn to its right (starboard) and crosses the paths of vessels B and C.

According to COLREGs, specifically Rule 15 on “crossings”. vessel A is the give-way vessel, and vessels B and C are the stand-on vessels.

Vessel A, as give-way vessel, must take early and substantial action to avoid collision with both B and C, and not simply rely on minor alterations of course or speed. Vessels B and C are the stand-on vessels, meaning they should maintain course and speed unless it becomes apparent that the give-way vessel (A) is not taking sufficient action to avoid a collision.

It appears that what happened immediately before the collision is that instead of giving way vessel A deliberately continued its U-turn to the right, throwing vessel B into the path of vessel C. Which brings me to the third point of this article.

This was not an accident

It was a but a deliberate action to crowd vessel B so that it goes into the path of vessel C, causing a collision, endangering human lives and safety and incurring severe damage to equipment and property.

The BRP Suluan is a smaller vessel so it has a shorter U-turn radius that entrapped the two larger vessels. It also has a maximum speed of 25 knots.

My source of this animation, correctly observes “the Philippine Coast Guard skipper knew that his smaller and more agile vessel had a tighter turning radius compared to the larger and more powerful CCG and PLAN ships.

“His tight turn led to a “maneuver kill” of an over-eager CCG skipper itching to bombard the smaller Philippine vessel with his water-cannon.”

This animation launches a thousand pictures.

It succeeded in completing its U-turn which would explain why at the start it was on the port (left) side of the two Chinese ships, but that at the time of the collision, it was already on their starboard (right) side, facing the the opposite side.

The reckless and very dangerous PCG maneuver caused the death of at least two Chinese crewmen on board the CCG ship. If the PLA Navy did not shield the PCG, the CCG would have definitely collided with the PCG Suluan endangering a bigger toll. There were 25 Filipinos on board BRP Suluan – 5 officers, 20 enlisted men.

In peacetime application of COLREGS, this is a no-no.

In wartime, it is called a maneuver-kill.

No wonder China has called on the Philippines to pay for damages resulting from a collision between two of its vessels, a naval destroyer and a coast guard ship.

Unnamed Chinese experts have reportedly blamed the Philippines for the collision, asserting that Manila should cover the costs of the unspecified damages.

Philippine Foreign Affairs Secretary Ma. Theresa Lazaro has firmly rejected the demand. In a statement released she stated, “The Philippines bears no responsibility for the collision between the PLAN vessel and the CCG vessel in Bajo de Masinloc. It was an unfortunate outcome, but not one caused by our actions.”

Unlike the Chinese side that investigates first before coming out with a position, the Philippine Coast Guard (PCG) has commended the crew of the BRP Suluan for their bravery and conduct during a recent, lauding the crew’s professionalism and resilience in the face of “harassment by the Chinese vessels.”

The PCG also emphasized that their maritime patrols, including the one involving BRP Suluan, are within the Philippines’ exclusive economic zone and are conducted legally and in accordance with international law.

As we have established earlier, this is a lot of hot fart.

Zugzwang

A paper by Melissa Loja and Romel Regalado Bagares are independent Filipino scholars of international law, illustrated our lack of professionalism and thoroughness.

On November 26, 2024, they said, the Philippine’s Maritime Zones Act (MZA) was signed by President Ferdinand Marcos Jr, declaring that Scarborough Shoal shall have a territorial sea but omitting to define its baselines.

“In response, on December 5, 2024, China deposited with the United Nations (UN) a Maritime Zone Notification (MZN) of the geographical coordinates and chart of the baselines for the territorial sea (TS) of Panatag (Scarborough) Shoal.

China’s MZN pre-empted the Philippine MZA.”

More than that, China’s MZN reconfigured the territorial dispute in the South China Sea (SCS), paving the way for the direct involvement of its naval warships and aircraft in skirmishes with Philippine Coast Guard (PCG) ships and other intruders.

Loja and Bagares added, the August 11 incident, is just the opening salvo – “Expect more aggressive Chinese policing of the shoal’s waters, with the Chinese navy and air force now involved (as) China’s MZN set up a Zugzwang in Panatag.”

The word comes from German Zug “move” + Zwang “compulsion”, so that Zugzwang means “being forced to make a serious move” in one’s turn is disadvantageous in that anything one does will make the situation worse, and one doesn’t have a choice not to make a choice.

China had always considered the shoal as part of its Zhongsa Qundao (ZQ) –one of four self-declared Chinese SCS “island groups” or offshore archipelagos. (US Limits in the Seas Report on China’s SCS claims post-2016 (No. 150, January 2022, p. 17).

Taking advantage, however, of the last part of Paragraph 272 of the 2016 Arbitral Award which is binding on the Philippines, that reads “Nor does the Tribunal’s decision that a claim of historic rights to living and non-living resources is not compatible with the Convention, limit China’s ability to claim maritime zones in accordance with the Convention, on the basis of such islands,” China has decided to detach the shoal from Zhongsa Qundao underscoring the shoal’s strategic importance.

China’s MZN drew the coordinates and corresponding belt of the shoal’s territorial sea, looping straight baselines around Panatag’s outer ring to enclose all of its six constituent rocks.

I will not be surprised if China pursues its claims for accountability and compensation.

A Philippine court found eight Philippine Coast Guard (PCG) personnel guilty of homicide in the May 9, 2013 killing of a Taiwanese fisherman, Hong Shi Cheng, in the Balintang Channel.

On September 18, 2019 the Manila Regional Trial Court Branch 15 convicted the officers, including Commander Arnold Enriquez dela Cruz, for the incident that occurred during a confrontation between a PCG patrol boat and a Taiwanese fishing vessel. On October 10, 2022, the Court of Appeals sustained the RTC decision.

Conclusion

Meanwhile, I don’t think the China will simply pass on the ramming incident, considering the loss of human lives and possible face.

At the very least, as Loja and Bagares prognosis the Philippines should brace for stiffer law enforcement by CCG @Scarborough.

I see possible economic sanctions by China on the horizon, and onwards the building by China of active defense installations on the shoal.

The drawing speaks for itself.

Yogi Koda, a retired commander-in-chief of Japan’s Self-Defense Fleet, said after the PCA ruling in 2016, that this presents the United States and Tokyo with a “fait accompli”.

Militarily, he told the Deep State think-tank, Center for the Strategic and International Studies in Washington DC that if Beijing goes ahead with building up Scarborough Shoal, it could be a “game changer”.

Koda was referring to the creation of a triangle of military facilities on artificial islands allowing China to project power from its coastal mainland.

With the US military now building naval and air fortifications in the northern most part of Batanes closer to the Bashi Channel, developing nine EDCA sites in the Philippines from defense to its Agile Combat Employment forward operating bases, Washington DC might as well bite its lips courting false flags near Taiwan and the entire South China Sea.

Its duplicity has long been exposed. Read: https://www.economist.com/international/2025/08/14/americas-new-plan-to-fight-a-war-with-china

   

Email: contact@asiancenturyph.com

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/asiancenturyph/

Twitter: https://twitter.com/AsianCenturyPH

Substack:

Also read: