Can Manila balance diplomacy with defence to protect its sovereignty amid Beijing’s aggressive expansion in the South China Sea? This question dominated discussions at the inaugural Track 1.5 Manila Dialogue, held from 6-8 November in the National Capital Region of the Philippines.  

The Manila Dialogue brought together scholars and officials from the Indo-Pacific, North America, and Europe to discuss issues impacting the international rules-based order in the South China Sea. Central to the discussions was the Philippines’ ongoing struggle to assert sovereignty over the West Philippine Sea (WPS), part of the South China Sea within the Philippines’ 200 nautical mile Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). Notably, it marked the first time both Filipino and Chinese participants engaged in such a platform in the Philippines, underscoring the importance of dialogue in easing regional tensions.  

The event highlighted the Philippines’ emerging “whole-of-a-nation” approach to securing its rights in the WPS, based on the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and the 2016 Arbitral Ruling in its favour. The Manila Dialogue took place amid China’s ongoing coercive actions, including illegal activities within the Philippines’ EEZ. Over the past two years, China has aggressively expanded its presence in Philippine waters, coinciding with President Ferdinand Marcos Jr.’s multi-faceted approach to defending sovereignty over the WPS.  

The China Coast Guard, People’s Liberation Army Navy, and Chinese maritime militia have engaged in hostile acts—such as ramming, blocking, and water cannon attacks—significantly worsening security conditions in the South China Sea. Just last month, the Philippines reported a Chinese militia vessel deliberately sideswiping a Filipino ship near Thitu Island. In response, Beijing disputed the incident and accused the Philippine vessel of “sailing dangerously” in its waters.  

To address these challenges, the current Marcos Jr. administration has strengthened defence partnerships and positioned the Philippines as a hub for cooperation among like-minded nations from the Indo-Pacific, Europe, and North America to uphold a free, open, and rules-based WPS amid China’s aggression. 

Domestically, Manila has prioritised military modernisation and enacted maritime legislation to reinforce its rules-based stance in the WPS, complementing its external balancing efforts. Central to this strategy is a whole-of-nation approach to counter China’s disinformation and propaganda, with the transparency initiative playing a crucial role. Although criticised for its limited impact on curbing China’s aggression, the initiative remains vital.  

China has been spearheading malign information operations on both sides of the Indo-Pacific to alter public perception and create domestic unrest towards traditional alignments in favour of a pro-China government. Such operations have been particularly successful in the Solomon Islands and the Maldives. In such cases, the long term economic and security interests of the state are being undermined in order to create favorable conditions for a pro-Beijing leadership.

However, the transparency initiative, with the support of state and civil society actors, has bolstered public backing for Manila’s WPS policy and fostered greater collaboration between government agencies, journalists, academics, and business leaders. In this context, the Manila Dialogue reflects this inclusive, whole-of-nation approach to securing the WPS based on international law, and in the face of Chinese revisionism.  

The Manila Dialogue served as a crucial platform for inclusive diplomacy, allowing not only the Philippines and its allies but also Chinese scholars and retired military officers to participate. China asserts territorial sovereignty over nearly the entire South China Sea, including the WPS, based on its controversial “Nine-Dash Line,” claiming historical rights to the waters and resources within this boundary. At the Dialogue, officials from Manila, Australia, the United States, and other nations condemned Beijing’s provocative actions and reaffirmed support for the 2016 Arbitral Ruling.  

Chinese representatives defended Beijing’s position, with scholars like Hu Bo, director of the Centre for Maritime Strategy Studies at Peking University, arguing that China had “exhausted” all diplomatic efforts to convince Manila to maintain the status quo. Hu justified China’s increasing assertiveness, claiming that Beijing had no choice but to respond with force to Philippine actions in the WPS.  Hu also acknowledged that, while China had no current plans to occupy Second Thomas Shoal, Sabina Shoal, or Sandy Cay, it has deployed significant force there to pre-empt any moves by the Philippines to seize them.  

Beijing has blamed foreign interference for regional instability, yet delegates from the Philippines, Australia, and the US, among others at the Dialogue, made it clear that China is the primary disruptive force threatening Southeast Asian security. This divergence of views highlights the escalating tensions in the region, with Manila and its allies firmly reinforcing their opposition to China’s aggressive tactics. 

The success of the Manila Dialogue reflects a more confident Philippines, resolute in defending its sovereignty over the WPS. It also highlighted the unity and determination of Filipinos, embodying President Marcos Jr.’s powerful statement: “Filipinos do not yield.”  

While these efforts are vital, they must be sustained and strengthened. Continuity will be crucial, particularly with potential shifts following President-elect Donald Trump’s victory and the upcoming 2025 Philippine midterm elections. 

Genevieve Donnellon-May is a Researcher at Oxford Global Society and a fellow at the Indo-Pacific Studies Center. She sits on the advisory board member of Modern Diplomacy and is a 2023 CSIS Pacific Forum Young Leader. Don McLain Gill is a Philippines-based geopolitical analyst and lecturer at the Department of International Studies, De La Salle University.

This article is published under a Creative Commons License and may be republished with attribution.