Beijing is testing the U.S.-Philippines
alliance, and a new strategy is needed.
The odds of armed conflict in the South China Sea are high and
rising. China’s relentless assertiveness against the Philippines—harassing
ships inside Manila’s internationally recognized Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ),
most notably at Second Thomas Shoal and Scarborough Shoal—has led to a
situation where war in the South China Sea now seems more likely than at any
other Indo-Pacific flash point, including the Taiwan Strait and Korean
Peninsula.
To be sure, the Philippines’ security alliance with the United
States has so far deterred China from more serious attacks on the Philippine
military or other government assets. But the 1951 Mutual Defense Treaty—which
commits Washington to come to Manila’s aid if the latter is under military
attack—has utterly failed to deter Beijing from escalating its coercive
gray-zone tactics—aggressive actions designed to irreversibly change the status
quo without resorting to lethal force. These tactics have included ramming, shadowing, blocking, encircling, firing
water cannons, and using military-grade lasers against civilian ships
and military vessels. China also relies on its formidable coast guard and
so-called fishing militia—comprised of fishermen who are trained and equipped
by the military—to patrol, loiter in, and occupy disputed areas, establishing a
quasi-permanent presence that the targeted country cannot easily dislodge.
On June 15, moreover, Beijing is reportedly planning to implement a
new policy that would authorize the Chinese coast guard to detain foreigners
crossing into waters claimed by China. These waters include most of the South
China Sea—based on Beijing’s own expansive historical claims rather than
international law, which in this case is the United Nations Convention on the
Law of the Sea. (For comparison, imagine if Germany claimed the entire North
Sea, or if the United States claimed the entire Caribbean right up to the South
American coast.)
In the past, China has attempted to cordon off its
claims with floating barriers and, most recently, is accused by
Manila of building an artificial island at Sabina Shoal—150 kilometers (about
93 miles) from the Philippines’ Palawan Island, but 1,200 kilometers (746
miles) from the closest point in China. A well-informed source who asked to
remain anonymous told me that Manila is already blocked from accessing
approximately 30 percent of its recognized EEZ due to Chinese salami-slicing
tactics. Absent an effective response, this percentage will only rise in the
coming years.
In fact, China has the Philippines in an ever-tightening stranglehold
that is increasingly compromising the latter’s sovereignty and territorial
integrity at sea. If international law is to be upheld and borders are to
remain inviolable, the United States must do more to help the Philippines. Yet
neither Manila nor Washington seem to have a viable plan to counter Beijing’s
successful gray-zone tactics.
Facing an increasingly desperate situation, in March, the
Philippines announced a Comprehensive Archipelagic Defense Concept. Public
details are scant, but it seems to be a new defense strategy that transitions
away from Manila’s traditionally army-centric model—informed by a long history
of invasions and occupations—toward upgrading the navy and coast guard to
counter China at sea. Full funding for the new strategy is still pending in
parliament. Regardless, the concept seems to ignore the equally important air
force, and the entire process will take many years, if not decades, to
implement.
In the meantime, Manila is pressing forward with three other
efforts.
First, it is deepening its alliance with Washington. Earlier this
month, the two countries carried out their largest-ever annual military drills,
which included exercising the defense of an island chain in the
northern Philippines (just 125 miles south of Taiwan) as well as a practice launch of
an anti-ship cruise missile to sink a decommissioned ship. Since coming into
office in 2022, Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos has raised the
number of military bases that the U.S. military can temporarily use from five
to nine, in line with the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement signed in
2014.
Second, the Philippines has been forging ahead on a number of
security drills and agreements with other countries in the region. Last month,
for example, Australia, Japan, the Philippines, and the United States conducted joint
exercises within Manila’s EEZ for the first time. Members of the group—known as
the “new Quad” or “Squad”—are also negotiating new bilateral security
agreements. Japan and the Philippines are discussing a reciprocal troop access
agreement that should be completed by July. The Philippines and
Australia have upgraded cooperation in maritime security and elevated
their partnership to “strategic” following Marcos’s visit to Canberra in
February. The Philippines is also receiving some arms assistance from India,
such as a recent delivery of much-needed BrahMos anti-ship cruise
missiles.
Finally, Manila recently adopted a strategy of
“assertive transparency” toward Chinese encroachments into its EEZ. Philippine
ship crews are now recording each incident of Chinese coercion and publicizing
it for the world to see. The idea is that Beijing will no longer be able to
deny its actions as it has done in the past—and perhaps be shamed into adhering
to international law.
For its part, the United States has reiterated its
“ironclad” commitment to the Philippines multiple times.
The problem is that the Cold War-era U.S.-Philippines treaty did
not foresee the kinds of gray-zone tactics and hybrid threats that have become
the modus operandi for revisionist states in recent years, whether in the South
China Sea or on NATO’s eastern flank. Washington has not elaborated on what
types of Chinese action might trigger U.S. intervention in support of its ally.
The Biden administration has consistently noted that triggers include “armed
attacks” on Philippine military or coast guard vessels, but it has not said
what constitutes such an attack. Thus far, China’s aggressive but nonlethal
actions against the Philippines do not appear to qualify.
As much as Manila, Washington, and their partners are now working
to counter China, none of their steps has been effective in deterring Beijing’s
increasing encroachments. What can the Philippines and the United States do—and
is it even possible to restore deterrence in the South China Sea?
One option is to revise the U.S.-Philippines treaty to reflect
modern gray-zone threats. Rather than vaguely highlighting an “armed attack” as
the prompt for U.S. military intervention, Manila and Washington could broadly
note that gray-zone activities could or would count as armed attacks.
During his visit to the Pentagon last month, for example, Marcos specified that
“if any Filipino serviceman is killed by at attack from any foreign power, then
that is time to invoke the [treaty].” The two countries could further broaden
the category of assets covered by the treaty to include the civilian ships that
regularly resupply Philippine troops stationed on the Sierra
Madre, a World War II-era landing ship that Manila intentionally
ran aground at Second Thomas Shoal in 1999. China might think twice about
violating a revised, more encompassing defense clause.
There are other ways for Washington to clarify its policy in the
South China Sea. In July 2020, then-U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo stated that
the United States recognized the legality and integrity of the sea’s EEZs in
line with U.N. laws and the 2016 international arbitration ruling that
rejected China’s expansive claims. To date, however, the United States has not
taken an official position on the disputed territories within the South China
Sea, perhaps to avoid antagonizing China further.
By contrast, the Obama administration clarified in 2012
that Washington recognized the Senkaku Islands as belonging to Japan, not
China, in their East China Sea standoff, and that any attack on the islands
would trigger Article 5 of the U.S.-Japan security treaty, meaning that the
United States would be required to respond. Manila would obviously appreciate a
similar clarification, which would signal to Beijing that Washington now
considers attacks on the Philippines’ recognized EEZ to be direct assaults on
its sovereignty and territorial integrity, which are already covered by the
treaty.
Another option is for the U.S. military to play a more direct role
in the region. Asia security expert Blake Herzinger recently argued that
one way of bolstering deterrence and repelling China’s gray-zone tactics is to
remove the Sierra
Madre and replace it with a combined forward operating base
used by both Philippine forces and the U.S. Marine Corps. Other researchers
have argued for varying levels of U.S. involvement without establishing a
base—such as combined naval or coast guard patrols—with the
same aim of enhancing deterrence.
An intriguing technological solution might be to leverage the U.S.
military’s ongoing Replicator program, scheduled to become available by August
2025. A product of the Pentagon’s Defense Innovation Unit, Replicator seeks to
quickly produce thousands of air and naval drones to make up for numerical
shortfalls against the Chinese military. Although few details are public, the
U.S. Defense Department is already introducing Replicator drones in
the Indo-Pacific, and it may eventually be capable of swarming targets and
possibly conducting a range of gray-zone activities of its own, though its
capabilities for now remain classified.
Uncrewed systems such as Replicator could keep tit-for-tat
encounters just below the threshold of triggering a broader war, especially
because China’s own defense projects could also take the human element out of
clashes at sea by using robotic and artificial intelligence-enabled warfare.
Put another way, Replicator could help reset the escalation ladder and give
China, the United States, and the Philippines greater space to negotiate after
incidents.
Washington could also consider creating a linkage between China’s
gray-zone actions against a U.S. ally and other areas of the U.S.-China
relationship. That would signal to Beijing that its encroachments on the
Philippines come with costs. These could include economic sanctions,
postponement or termination of diplomatic negotiations, or changes to the U.S.
military posturing elsewhere in the region. Imposing costs for aggressive
actions would fit neatly into the Biden administration’s so-called integrated
deterrence strategy, which seeks to leverage the collective,
interagency strength of the United States, its allies, and its partners to
respond to aggression.
As for collective action by the Association of Southeast Asian
States (ASEAN) to challenge Chinese encroachments, the track record of the past
nearly 30 years is not encouraging—even though several other members, including
Vietnam and Malaysia, are also facing Chinese incursions into their waters.
Since 1996, ASEAN has been working on a future code of conduct for
the region, which might call for an end to militarization, land reclamation,
and seizures of disputed features. However, this would entirely depend on the
bloc’s success in negotiating the code with Beijing, which has shown no
inclination to compromise on its view that it owns most of the South China Sea.
Bilateral negotiations would likely founder for similar reasons.
Finally, Washington and Manila could simply stay the course. This
would mean continuing to bolster the alliance through expansion of the existing
defense cooperation agreement, more focused annual military exercises, and
other engagements, as well as through helping Manila to build its own military
capabilities and expose China’s bad behavior to the world. But none of these
measures have been successful against gray-zone tactics so far, and any future
success is likely to take more time as Beijing continues to eat away at
Manila’s EEZ.
The best option might be to stay the course on U.S.-Philippines
alliance-building but add new features, such as revising the treaty to reflect
gray-zone realities, tie into the Replicator program, and impose costs for
China’s behavior via other parts of the U.S.-China relationship. Doing these things
now should give the Philippines the breathing room that it needs to modernize
and professionalize its military with U.S. assistance, helping to reestablish
deterrence and lessen the risk of war in the years to come.
