Jay Tarriela, the Clerk Who Mistook Himself for a Diplomat

By: Atty. Rafael P. Tuvera

Philippine Coast Guard (PCG) Commodore Jay Tarriela has taken the role of spokesman on issues involving the “West Philippine Sea”. He speaks as if he were a policymaker or diplomat. This is a dangerous mistake. Commodore Tarriela is just a minor government functionary, yet he talks about highly complicated matters that require careful diplomacy.

In a video statement, he introduces himself as the “spokesperson of the Philippine Coast Guard on West Philippine Sea matters”. The title sounds official, but it raises both constitutional and institutional questions. The 1987 Constitution entrusts foreign policy to civilian authority, particularly the President, and to a limited extent, the Senate. Also, Article II Section 2 of the Constitution provides that “the State renounces war as an instrument of national policy”. Hence, the government is commanded to settle all disputes through peaceful means.

The PCG’s role is operational, not diplomatic. It enforces maritime law, ensures safety of navigation, and conducts search and rescue operations. It does not define strategy or negotiate foreign policy positions. When a uniformed officer begins to act as the official voice on foreign policy, the result is confusion as to who truly speaks for the Republic.

The Wrong Question

Commodore Tarriela asks whether the United States is to blame for the tension between the Philippines and China. He says that when the American bases closed in 1992, China became more aggressive in the South China Sea. He implies that if the U.S. had not left, Chinese aggression would have been prevented.

If the American absence indeed created the tension, then its presence should have restored stability and calmness. The facts show otherwise. When the Americans left in 1992, China took over the Panganiban or Mischief Reef three years later. However, when the United States returned through the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement (EDCA), the tension only increased. This means the issue is not America’s presence or absence, but the continuing dispute over maritime features like Mischief Reef, which China claims by historic right, and the Philippines as part of its Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ).

History Selectively Remembered

Commodore Tarriela always blames China, but ignores other facts. In the 1970s, Vietnam tricked the Philippine Marines stationed at Pugad Island. The Vietnamese invited the marines to a birthday party on a nearby island. When the Filipino marines returned the following day, the Vietnamese troops had already taken over Pugad and refused to leave. This act of deceit cost the Philippines one of its occupied islands.

By ignoring such events, the commodore paints a distorted history where only China matters and where every act of provocation is blamed on the absence of the United States. He deliberately disregards that Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei, and even Taiwan have their own overlapping claims and have also built military outposts on disputed marine features.

Diplomacy That Worked

During the time of President Fidel Ramos in 1995, the Philippines chose diplomacy instead of confrontation. This calm approach prevented a shooting war and helped de-escalate the Mischief Reef incident. It showed that talking to China was still possible, and that diplomacy can protect national interests without raising tensions.

President Gloria Arroyo continued the diplomatic path. She signed the Joint Marine Seismic Undertaking (JMSU) with China and Vietnam in 2004. This allowed the three countries to conduct joint research and exploration for marine and energy resources. Critics claimed that the agreement was secret, based on reports by Australian journalist Barry Wain. His expose, however, was seen by many as an attempt to interfere in Philippine affairs and destroy the trust between Manila and Beijing.

The JMSU, however, could have produced positive results if properly explained to the people by those knowledgeable in diplomacy and international law. It was not a surrender of sovereignty but an assertion of it, recognizing that overlapping claims required cooperation rather than confrontation. The agreement reflected the pragmatic understanding that diplomacy, not aggression, was the only path to regional stability.

When the Aquino administration took office, this balance was lost. The 2012 Scarborough Shoal standoff nearly led to war. The U.S., despite its “iron-clad” alliance with the Philippines, left the country to face China alone. The Philippines lost control of the shoal and suffered national embarrassment. America threw the Philippines under the bus.

This lesson seems lost on Commodore Tarriela, whose insistence on being confrontational risks repeating the same mistake. His fiery rhetoric, disguised as patriotism, could again place the country in a dangerous and humiliating position.

Why China Acts

China’s aggression grew because America wants to dominate the region pursuant to maintaining its global hegemony. The “pivot to Asia” announced by President Obama in 2012 served to confirm Beijing’s suspicion of Washington’s true intention. The Philippines joined this pivot through the EDCA, which gave the U.S. access to five Philippine military bases or “lily pads”. Today, that number has increased to ten. China sees this as provocation, part of America’s permanent strategy of encirclement, and it uses this to justify its growing presence and patrols in the disputed waters.

The EEZ and Sovereignty

Part of the public confusion the commodore exploits is legal. However, the commodore chooses to simplify the issue of sovereignty. The EEZ is not the same as sovereignty. Within the EEZ, the Philippines is granted sovereign rights to exploit natural resources beneath and on the seabed, but it does not turn the waters above into national territory. Navigation and overflight remain free under the law of the sea. In the South China Sea, several EEZs overlap, among them those of the Philippines, Vietnam, China, Malaysia, Brunei, and Taiwan. These overlaps require negotiation, delimitation and restraint. Treating the EEZ as absolute sovereignty, or equating economic rights with territorial exclusivity, reduces a complex legal matter into a slogan.

Understanding the difference between sovereignty and the EEZ is crucial for navigating issues of maritime law, resource management, and international relations, ensuring that both coastal states and the global community can peacefully coexist. Commodore Tarriela, however, seems oblivious to this.

Selective Blindness

The commodore’s argument also exposes a selective blindness. He singles out China while ignoring that other claimants have fortified their positions. Vietnam has installed airstrips, radar systems, and military facilities on its occupied islands. Malaysia has built shelters and communication towers on its outposts. Taiwan has built a runway and a dock on Itu Aba, while China has turned reefs into full-blown bases. If the Philippines is to preserve its own interests, it must copy these examples and strengthen its existing positions, and not rely on moral arguments or publicity campaigns.

A Need for Discipline

The president, as commander-in-chief, must remind his subordinates that discipline begins with self-restraint. Commodore Tarriela’s public performance is harmful to our national interests. He is a coast guard officer, not a diplomat. His pronouncements, whether intentional or not, can bind the country to a proxy war between the U.S. and China. A firm admonition from the highest authority would remind the commodore that foreign policy is the exclusive domain of diplomats, not of clerks with microphones.

Ukraine serves as a warning. It became the front line of a proxy war after years of aggressive political posturing against Russia. During the missile strikes between Iran and Israel in June 2025, Iran launched missiles that hit U.S. bases in Qatar, a clear signal that third parties can get involved if caution is not observed. The same fate awaits any small nation that mistakes foreign backing for genuine strength. War can be the deadly result when a minor government functionary oozing with bravado plays geopolitican.

The Real Question

The real question that should be asked is: In the event of a shooting war involving China, the United States, and the Philippines, where would Commodore Tarriela be? The answer is obvious. He will be behind a desk, while Filipino soldiers and fishermen pay the price for his showboating. It must be remembered that those who speak the loudest about confrontation are often the first to seek cover when the real fighting begins.

Conclusion

Commodore Tarriela should be reminded that the PCG’s duty is to safeguard the nation’s maritime zones through professionalism and competence, not political commentary. National security is too serious a matter to be left to those who mistake rhetoric for policy and the uniform for authority. The country gains nothing when its uniformed officers compete with diplomats for attention. The commodore should return to his proper place and leave foreign policy to those charged by law to handle it.