The West Philippine Sea (WPS) dispute with China has become a flashpoint, igniting tensions and exposing the intricate dance of geopolitical dynamics and domestic politics. While it is tempting to label this issue as inherently divisive, such a characterization oversimplifies the multifaceted landscape that shapes this complex confrontation.

Recent surveys, such as the one conducted by Oculum Research in October, reveal a resounding sentiment among Filipinos: China is seen as the aggressor, and there is a collective desire to safeguard sovereign rights in the contested waters. Despite this unified stance, a nuanced
exploration of Filipino perspectives exposes subtle fractures, particularly within elite circles.

The majority of Filipinos, according to the survey, express a preference for peaceful conflict resolution,

Surprisingly, divisions within Filipino elite circles have emerged, with segments aligning themselves with the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and the Communist Party of China (CPC). This alignment, driven by power dynamics and oppositionist sentiments, is intricately tied to the impending 2025 mid-term elections, where the West Philippine Sea issue takes center stage in a struggle for political dominance.

China’s strategic manipulation of oppositionist political elites is evident in two distinct components. The first involves shaping Filipino public opinion through local elites, referred to as “modern Makapilis,” who serve as conduits for disseminating the Chinese narrative. This narrative, delving into shortly, aims to influence sentiments in favor of China’s interests.

The second and more foreboding component is China’s concerted effort to fund the election campaigns of pro-China candidates in the 2025 elections. This extends beyond national-level interference, seeping into the intricate landscape of local politics, posing a significant threat to Philippine sovereignty.

Adding complexity is China’s focus on specific areas, notably those identified as Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement (EDCA) sites. By infiltrating these regions, China aims to exert influence not only nationally but also locally, where decisions directly impact its interests.

Anticipating visible Chinese interference in both national and local elections in 2025 is a sober acknowledgment of a pattern dating back to the Arroyo administration. Signs of interference were discernible during an era marked by an amicable relationship with Chinese Communist leaders.

China’s narrative, propagated by sinister oppositionist forces, aims to influence public perception through grassroots organizations allied with elites. These organizations parrot China’s narrative, asserting its right to navigate and protect the waters, including the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) claimed by the Philippines, based on international concepts like the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).

While UNCLOS provides a legal framework, its lack of clear enforcement powers places the burden on the Philippines to assert its rights. Historical initiatives, such as military diplomacy during the Aquino II and the current administration, underscore the commitment to resolving disputes without resorting to war.

However, the oppositionist narrative revolves around fear-mongering, spreading disinformation, and framing the proactive stance as a potential precursor to war. Exploiting the Filipino aversion to war, the opposition aims to cast the former administration’s approach as more pacifist, playing into both their interests and the larger Chinese agenda.

Yet, this strategy carries inherent risks. The success of the opposition’s narrative hinges on uncertain public sentiment, making it unclear whether it will sway public opinion against the administration or, conversely, galvanize support for the proactive approach in dealing with the WPS dispute.

As the political landscape continues to evolve, the West Philippine Sea issue remains not just a matter of geopolitical significance but a crucial element in the ongoing struggle for political dominance within the Philippines.

Most Dangerous: China’s Interference in Philippine Politics

China’s interference in Philippine elections raises profound concerns about the integrity of the democratic process and the potential erosion of national autonomy. The Philippines must remain vigilant, recognizing that the forthcoming elections carry implications beyond domestic governance. The insidious encroachment of foreign influence underscores the need for safeguarding the electoral process from undue external pressures, ensuring that the voice of the Filipino people remains unadulterated by external interests.

As the 2025 elections loom on the horizon, the Philippines stands at a critical juncture, where the resilience of its democratic institutions and the will of its people must prevail against insidious foreign manipulation.

Counter-Measures Against China’s Dangerous Interference: Lessons from Taiwan

China’s strategy to dominate Philippine political circles mirrors its longstanding efforts in Taiwan. Despite cultural and ethnolinguistic commonalities with the mainland, the island nation has successfully resisted Chinese overtures.

China has employed political interference in an attempt to influence Taiwan’s residents and sway their considerations toward unification. However, these efforts need to be revised to alter the prevailing anti-China sentiment among the Taiwanese. The Taiwanese society is currently undergoing a robust process of identity construction, wherein Taiwanese nationalism has proven to be exceptionally effective in challenging China’s assertion of ethnolinguistic commonality. This claim is the basis for China’s desire to annex or, using Chinese terminology, “unify” with the island state.

Taiwan’s evolving identity, rooted in its birthplace and ideologically shaped by liberal democratic principles, has created a conceptual chasm with China’s identity narrative. This ideological shift has played a pivotal role in countering China’s influence, making the soft power tactics employed in Taiwan largely ineffective. Indeed, being a Taiwanese is now intricately linked with the rejection of anti-libertarian governance models, particularly those prevalent in the mainland. The evolving identity of Taiwan is increasingly characterized by an anti-Communist sentiment, a development that unsettles China and threatens its ontological security.

The Philippines has much to gain by studying how Taiwan has successfully countered China’s overtures for decades. As we face the WPS issue, it is an opportunity for identity construction—an opportunity for Filipinos to strengthen national unity by acknowledging historical defiance against attempts by China to dominate.

In the 16th and 17th centuries, the Philippines thwarted Chinese invasions, and the subsequent identity construction solidified a distinct Filipino identity. It is time to strengthen our national identity to draw on this historical resilience. Instead of viewing the WPS issue solely through military lenses, we should see it as an opportunity to develop further and enhance our national identity.

Our national identity must adopt a more resilient stance in the face of dominant civilization-level cultures, especially that of China. This identity must be responsive to the changing dynamics of our developing and globalizing world. Resilience, in this context, implies an identity that can withstand external pressures while simultaneously adapting and thriving in the midst of evolving global influences.

As we navigate the complexities of the West Philippine Sea, let us bolster our defense and fortify our sense of nationhood. By learning from the successes of Taiwan and embracing our historical defiance against external pressures, we can face the future with resilience and unity.