# China stop bullying the Philippines

Discussion in 'World Events' started by Mind Over Matter, May 11, 2012.

1. ### quadraphonicsBloodthirsty BarbarianValued Senior Member

Messages:
9,391
And the contents of your posts are only your opinions. What else would they be?

And in 150 years, that trend has not added up to much of any significant portion of the Caribbean being politically integrated with the USA - which is what you were trying to demonstrate to support your contention that all countries in the South China Sea will, in the short term, politically unify with China.

If you've defined your position down to "as China gets wealthy, lots of Chinese will visit the Philippines and maybe retire there, and the Yuan might get used as a de facto currency" then we have no dispute. But you are arguing for explicit political integration, no?

That's a lie. I included a direct, factual analysis of the exact data you invoked, and showed how it doesn't bear out your contentions (either about politics in the Caribbean, or about politics in the South China Sea). You apparently have no substantial response to that, so instead are pursuing a rear-guard maneuver of levelling accusations at me and baldly repeating yourself.

Those forces are at least as strong as anything in the South China Sea, and have been so for well over a century now. This "US linkage," whatever you mean by that, should be fully visible by now. If similar forces are going to drive political integration of the Philippines with China within 100 years, then we'd expect the entire Caribbean basin to be politically unified with the USA decades ago.

But Europeans leaving isn't the same thing as unification with the USA. The Europeans left many Caribbean islands long, long ago, which still have not unified with the USA.

Hoisting a new flag is not the same thing as political independence.

Having a holiday called "independence day" is not the same thing as political independence.

What you describe there is a suzerain relationship, not political independence.

I'm unclear on why you're still arguing this. You seem to understand perfectly well what the relationship between Curacao and the Netherlands is, and that it is not independence.

There's nothing "slow" about what you propose there. You are making predictions that are dramatic and radical.

In the first place, that's not clear. It could well be that the US manages to mediate some kind of solution there, or anyway practically limit China's ability to prevent others from exploiting their claims.

In the second place, even if we grant the premise there, I do not see where Philippino sovereignty is valued below access to fossil fuels in the South China Sea. Like most nation-states, the Philippinos are zealous about their sovereignty and long have been. The suggestion that Philippinos will decide to give up their sovereignty for the chance to get a piece of some offshore oil exploration is just silly on its face.

Again, even if we grant the assumption there, it doesn't follow that the Philippines would politically unify with China.

China already gives North Korea way more aid than the US does. Does that imply that North Korea is going to unify with China?

The understanding of how sovereignty functions and relates to economic development and international relations implied by your prescriptions here just seems looney. Economic integration is not political integration.

Again, even if we grant the premise it doesn't get us to political unification. The Philippines could perfectly well pursue some kind of political accomodation with China that would not entail unification.

For that matter, I don't see China even wanting to take on the Philippines. They're a foreign nation with a very different (Catholic!) identity and history, and a whole set of problems relating to poverty, insurgency, etc.

There's nothing in the definition of "country" that implies political independence. Go and look on Wikipedia under "list of sovereign states" and you won't find "Curacao." Look under the list of "constituent countries" (i.e., countries that are not politically independent) and you'll find "Curacao" listed under "Kingdom of the Netherlands."

No countries became politically independent on 10/8/10. Every territory in question remains part of the Kingdom of the Netherlands to this day.

"Municipalities" is the term.

3. ### Mind Over MatterRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
1,205
Beat Chinese Mainland at it's own game. China has a thumbscrew it's up to Philippines to find what it is. It may be a "David Goliath fight" but remember who fell in the end. Never let them destroy Philippine economy, way of life nor allow them to bully Philippines. I encourage Filipinos tp support local business by buying Filipino products, Filippinos can learn from the experience of Japan. Develop cheap, competitive and world class product. Philippines will prevail.

5. ### Billy TUse Sugar Cane Alcohol car FuelValued Senior Member

Messages:
23,198
That would require much more national unity than exists in the Philippines:

While China could take the Philippines by military force, as the US did in 1898, I don´t think there is the slightest chance they will. China has learned that it gets much more with less cost via economic warfare.

The Philippines is very divided politically with political murders a regular occurrence. Here are the main parties [and current leaders, in these square brackets] from CIA´s World facts book: Laban ng Demokratikong Pilipino (Struggle of Filipino Democrats) or LDP [Edgardo ANGARA]; Lakas ng EDSA-Christian Muslim Democrats or Lakas-CMD [Gloria MACAPAGAL-ARROYO]; Liberal Party or LP [Manuel ROXAS]; Nacionalista Party or NP [Manuel VILLAR]; Nationalist People's Coalition or NPC [Frisco SAN JUAN]; PDP-Laban [Aquilino PIMENTEL]; People's Reform Party [Miriam Defensor SANTIAGO]; Puwersa ng Masang Pilipino (Force of the Philippine Masses) or PMP [Joseph ESTRADA] plus many minor groups that mainly operate on a single island.

The fact that the Philippines consist of more than dozen well-separated islands (and many dozen small islands) makes central control difficult and local opposition relatively easy. The legal system is a mix of civil, common, Islamic, and customary law. There is great ethnic division: Tagalog 28.1%, Cebuano 13.1%, Ilocano 9%, Bisaya/Binisaya 7.6%, Hiligaynon Ilonggo 7.5%, Bikol 6%, Waray 3.4%, other 25.3% (2000 census) For some practical administrative purposes it is not even one nation – there are 80 different providences, often on unique and separated islands.

The Philippine Government faces threats from several groups, some of which are on the US Government's Foreign Terrorist Organization list. Manila has waged a decades-long struggle against ethnic Moro insurgencies in the southern Philippines, which has led to a peace accord with the Moro National Liberation Front and on-again/off-again peace talks with the Moro Islamic Liberation Front. The decades-long Maoist-inspired New People's Army insurgency also operates through much of the country. (I don´t know, but suspect, that China already covertly supplies arms and other supplies to the New People´s Army, probably by submarine and small rubber boats on moonless nights.)

Last edited by a moderator: May 17, 2012

7. ### Mind Over MatterRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
1,205
Yes, that would require national unity, but I want like to clarify 1. We are not against Chowking or Jollibee which we prefer over McDonalds. 2. We are not against Filipino-Chinese, many of them friends and relatives. 3. We are not against the Chinese people, in the mainland or anywhere in the world. 4. What we are against is the China policy towards the Philippines perpetrated by their ruling political elite. Such policy ethos of hegemonic expansion is hurting our national honor, national interest, national territory and national sovereignty. 5. Never stopped to boycott China-made products since the China government cannot be trusted. 6. What we are boycotting are "products whose 51% of cost structure is derived from China". This is our own definition which ostensibly exempts Bench or Oishi products since bulk of their value is marketing-driven. 7. Contrary to popular impression, the Philippines is a big dumping ground for China's cheap and inferior products. In 2011, Philippine Bureau of Customs recorded $12bn in total Ph-China trade but Chinese data from its General Administration of Customs place total trade at$32.25 billion. Since there is no incentive to understate exports being non-taxable, bulk of the trade underreporting should be in imports. Moreover, terms of trade are in favor of China manufacturers. The China smuggling could therefore be at least $6bn yearly! Thus, this would mean a loss of total annual market of$21bn ($15bn smuggled +$6bn official imports via Customs) to China. That is no ant-bite. Also, remember that most of our exports to China are either low-margin electronic parts (for re-exports) or "tradable commodities" like minerals and plantation products which can be sold anywhere in the world and the only issue is price. 8. A boycott is no match to Chinese military and economic powers. It does not seek to bring China to its knees but it will draw global attention to their hegemonic ambitions. The loss of international goodwill makes its expansionist strategy very costly.

Messages:
1,205

Messages:
23,198
10. ### quadraphonicsBloodthirsty BarbarianValued Senior Member

Messages:
9,391
There's enough national unity to wage repeated campaigns of insurgency against foreign occupiers, over many successive generations. Philippinos are zealous about their independence, like most nationalities. Which history is among the reasons that China has no interest whatsoever in acquiring the Philippines. All China wants is control of the sea lanes and the lion's share of any underwater resources discovered there.

That would be 1899-1902.

And, to the extent that is true, it is the case because China doesn't pursue things that can't be had without foreign military investments. Like political integration with the Philippines. China shows no signs of interest in such. This is all your own fantasy projected onto them.

That being another reason that China has no interest whatsoever in acquiring the Philippines.

The phrasing of that sentence makes me wonder what you think "one nation" means. Did you mean to say "one state" or something like that?

11. ### Billy TUse Sugar Cane Alcohol car FuelValued Senior Member

Messages:
23,198
I´m no history buff, and to lazy to check, but suspect that was the duration of the Spanish/ American war. I recall that ironically the first battle of that war took place far from either party - in the Spanish owned Philippines so I suspect my Wiki source is correct that the US took quickly control of the Philippines in late 1899. It was all over before Spain could get a warship there.
No, it is a fact that about half the territory is subjected to the communistic party raids and has been so for several decades. - That they get their weapon delivered by Chinese subs (and then small rubber inflatable boats on moonless nights) is not an established fact, but very plausible - the weapons for 30 or so years of war had to come from some where, if not what I am guessing, how do you think the / gorilla army / Moro insurgency / is supplied?...
I tend to use "nation" to refer to a group of people with common culture and language even if they do not have a state - the Jewish nation when Israel did not exist or the Roman (gypises) now. State is a area under one set of laws. The Philippines is neither:

"... There is great ethnic division: Tagalog 28.1%, Cebuano 13.1%, Ilocano 9%, Bisaya/Binisaya 7.6%, Hiligaynon Ilonggo 7.5%, Bikol 6%, Waray 3.4%, other 25.3% (2000 census)
and
The legal system is a mix of civil, common, Islamic, and customary law. ..."

To again quote from the CIA fact book, but to the list of laws used in different areas, I might add "wild west" as gangs are the law with frequent murders as their enforcement "police."

I am too lazy to go back and see how many different first languages there are, but certainly several.

Last edited by a moderator: May 22, 2012
12. ### quadraphonicsBloodthirsty BarbarianValued Senior Member

Messages:
9,391
Wikipedia enables you to check these kinds of things in less time than you just spent explaining that you weren't going to check.

The Spanish-American war ended in 1898, and the terms of the peace included Spain ceding the Philippines to the USA. The Philippinos weren't so crazy about that - having been fighting for independence from Spain for quite some time - and that led to the Philippine-American War which lasted from 1899-1902. Spain was not involved in that one. The fighting in the Philippines during the Spanish-American war featured the USA and Philippinos fighting together against the Spanish.

And you simply assume that any guerilla party that calls itself "communist" is an explicit arm of Chinese statecraft, or what?

Even if we assume that China is behind the New People's Army - and you haven't provided any support for that assertion - it doesn't follow that their goal is political seizure of the Philippines. Indeed, the usual reason that one state funds a long-term insurgency in another is simply to destabilize them, not to occupy them.

Every citation I've found on the subject says that the CCP ceased supporting the NPA in the 1970's. These days, they are supposedly funded by a combination of donations by supporters around the world, and illegal activities (bank robbings, kidnappings for ransom, smuggling). Apparently Qaddafi also funded them for a while, after China ditched them in the 1970's.

If you have a source that says different, I'd love to see it. Until then, you're just trafficking in counter-factual speculations.

There are lots of nations with multiple languages. Canada, for example. Or Belgium. Or the United States of America.

Why? Because there are multiple ethnicities? By that measure, the USA isn't a "single nation" either.

The fact of the matter is that not all nationalities break down on strictly ethnic lines. There are plenty that are multi-ethnic, multi-lingual, etc. As long as the community in question has an identity and considers itself entitled to political sovereignty, they're a nation regardless of exactly how language, culture, religion, ethnicity, etc. figure (or not) into the identity.

The fact that the Philippino state is weak in certain areas is just that.

And I note that you chose the analogy of the "wild west:" are you also asserting that the USA wasn't a nation/state during the Wild West period?

The Philippines has two official languages: Filipino and English. Again, you could have learned that in less time than it took you to write that sentence explaining that you can't be bothered to follow through on your own assertions. There really is not any good reason for you to argue from supposition when the information is literally at your fingertips.

Last edited: May 22, 2012
13. ### Mind Over MatterRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
1,205
Japan is offering assistance (10 or 12 brand new patrol ships) to boost Philippines maritime capability. South Korea and Australia are helping the Philippines as well. Hopefully the Philippines can establish a credible defense posture to complement its diplomatic capacity in dealing with its territorial disputes with China in the West Philippine Sea (South China Sea).

Last edited: May 22, 2012
14. ### quadraphonicsBloodthirsty BarbarianValued Senior Member

Messages:
9,391
This is the kind of thing that happens when a big regional power like China starts to throw its weight around in a corwded neighborhood - its smaller neighbors are all incentivized to band together to contain China. Doubly so when there's a power like the USA ready and willing to back such efforts. Note that Vietnam is also aligning with the USA, Myanmar is emerging from dictatorship and isolation, Thailand, Taiwan and Indonesia are longtime US allies, Mongolia is also tight with the USA, etc. China is setting up a situation wherein its surrounded by prickly neighbors who are all allied to one another and to the USA, and determined to hem in Chinese influence.

15. ### Billy TUse Sugar Cane Alcohol car FuelValued Senior Member

Messages:
23,198
This reminds me of John Foster Dulles´s "containment plan" which the US, France, England, etc. all endorsed and followed to varying degrees to stop the "commies" from taking over South Vietnam.

16. ### quadraphonicsBloodthirsty BarbarianValued Senior Member

Messages:
9,391
You're thinking of Kennan - Dulles was an advocate of going for victory over the USSR. He was the single most influential opponent of containment. Or maybe you're thinking of the lesser-known Allen Dulles; not sure where he stood on the subject exactly.

And let's note that containment worked quite well in Western Europe - unified most of the countries in the region into an anti-Soviet alliance that ended up being the most successful alliance in history. Didn't go terribly badly in the Middle East, Africa or Latin America, either. And although "communists" ended up in control of Vietnam, such only occurred via the fracturing of international communism away from alignment with the Soviets. The goal of preventing a unified Communist bloc from controlling East Asia was thus achieved, not by keeping the Communists out of East Asia, but by turning China against the USSR, and likewise Vietnam against China. They ceased to be "the commies" in the process, and instead were reduced into separate blocs of national interest - with China aligned with the USA, no less.

Which leads us to the present day situation, in which Vietnam is no more interested in being under the Chinese thumb than they were in the 70's, and so is holding joint military exercises with the USA and the Philippines, etc.

Overall, I get the impression that you mean to ridicule the prospect of containing China by suggesting that the fate of South Vietnam discredited containment. But you ignore that point that containment succeeded in achieving its primary ends: the limitation of Soviet influence and eventual total collapse of Soviet power. If you're suggesting that the current desire of states on China's borders to hem in Chinese influence over them will end the same way - with a few set-backs like the Vietnam war, but eventual total victory, dissolution of the CCP and marked decline of China - then I wonder how that's supposed to square with your usual rhetoric about China.

17. ### Mind Over MatterRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
1,205
China undertakes action that would aggravate and escalate the situation in the shoal by deploying 92 ships in addition to the two Chinese maritime ships involved in a standoff with a lone Philippine Coast Guard ship. I'm sure they are Chinese military disguised as fishermen.

China's assertion of almost the entire West Philippine Sea could be a move to control trade and commerce in the region. There is more than meets the eye here. China is into economic colonization of the eastern world. This should be seen in a wider perspective other than a dispute over territorial waters. China's action in the region is symptomatic of China's long standing bullying tactic of Taiwan by invoking province-state relations in order to have control of the Taiwan straits. The situation in Scarborough Shoal would also have an impact on the Asian neighbors, US and allies in the West interests in the region as well. Their bigger objective could very well be to be able to control international trade and commerce by having complete control of the sea lanes where goods and other commercial products and materials pass. We need to take a collective stand on what China is doing in the region since it would affect the interests of the many nations in the regional group. It would be best for the superpowers to step in now and support the Philippines and the other concerned countries. Imagine the far-reaching economic implications of China's military posturing in the South China Sea, which is well within the territorial limits of the Philippines, sooner than later UN or ASEAN may just act proactively in addressing this problem which is not just Philippines to solve.

In summary, all these Chinese military maneuvers and deployments are not merely tactical but strategic and have to do with economic dominance of the world via the control of international trade and commerce in the whole China Sea.

18. ### The MarquisOnly want the best for NigelValued Senior Member

Messages:
2,562
MoM... you should realise that unless you have something negative to say about the USA, it is fairly pointless to open a thread regarding their competitors. It is, as usual, only a matter of what is currently de rigueur.

Otherwise, I appreciate the article on the NT and WA acquisitions. It is surprising this information hasn't been impressed upon the general public as yet. In the sense of not being surprising at all, of course.

In addition, you've barely touched Africa. How remiss of you.

19. ### Mind Over MatterRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
1,205
How much military hardware or capability a country need that would constitute a minimum credible deterrent?

20. ### carlolabaresRegistered Member

Messages:
2
I am from the Philippines, and I am proud to be Filipino.

How to seduce a woman

21. ### s0meguyWorship me or suffer eternallyValued Senior Member

Messages:
1,635
It is not about not being able to afford the cost, they can do so easily. The reason that the Netherlands Antilles as a nation dissolved is because of the high level of corruption in Curacao. The government of Curacao dominated the Netherlands Antilles and took all the resources from the other Netherlands Antilles islands and gave back squat, meanwhile, what money they didnt invest in their own island they gave to their criminal buddies that they _openly_ tried their best to protect from prosecution. All this corruption was blatantly obvious but the Curacao people kept voting them back into power nonetheless. Add to that, that these things also happened with subsidies from the Netherlands that were supposed to help improve their economy. The Dutch got sick of this attitude and corruption and none of the other islands wanted to be dependent on this corruption soaked Curacao anymore so they dissolved The Netherlands Antilles and most of the Antilles islands were happy to join the Netherlands with a status comparable to a Dutch town.

If Curacao and some of the other countries were not soaked in corruption, then there would still be a Netherlands Antilles.

Last edited: Jul 6, 2012
22. ### Billy TUse Sugar Cane Alcohol car FuelValued Senior Member

Messages:
23,198
I don´t know to what extent corruption played a role, if any, but the Netherlands Antillies started to come apart in 1930, with official agreement for phased in independence of Aruba by 1996 agreed to by the Netherlands in 1977:

“…Despite the fact that Aruban calls for secession from the Netherlands Antilles originated in the 1930s,[3] the governments of the Netherlands and the Netherlands Antilles did everything in their power to keep the six islands together. … Increasing unrest on Aruba, however, especially after a consultative referendum on secession was organized by the island government in 1977, meant that the issue of Aruban secession had to be taken into consideration. After long negotiations, it was agreed that Aruba could become a separate country within the Kingdom of the Netherlands in 1986, but only on the condition that it would become fully independent in 1996. …”
From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dissolution_of_the_Netherlands_Antilles

“…the permanent position of Aruba as a separate country within the Kingdom led to calls for a similar arrangement on the other islands, … the first Round Table Conference between the islands, the Netherlands Antillean government, and the Netherlands, was organized on 26 November 2005. It was agreed that Curaçao and Saint Maarten should become countries within the Kingdom of the Netherlands, while the three other islands should become directly part of the Netherlands. …”From same source.

Note Aruba was already a nine year old independent country in 2005 when Netherlands agreed that Curaçao (and Saint Maarten) could also become independent countries. Thus for 9 years in 2005 there was no way that Curaçao could be exploiting via corruption Aruba as you suggest!

Also, contrary to your assertion, all but the three smallest islands wanted to be (or already were) independent before 2005. I.e. ~approxmate 90% of the population of the Netherlands Antilles had achieved the promise of independence or already were independent by end of 2005 but it was five years later that Curaçao actually became fully independent:

“…In October 2009, it was agreed that the dissolution would take place on 10 October 2010…” From same source,where there is no mention of corruption playing any role in this drive for independence which started in 1930.

Thus it is totally false that:
“If Curacao and some of the other countries were not soaked in corruption, then there would still be a Netherlands Antilles.”
And totally false that:
"... none of the other islands wanted to be dependent on this corruption soaked Curacao anymore so they dissolved The Netherlands Antilles..."

But I agree that the three tiny islands (not "most of the Antilles islands") "were happy to join the Netherlands with a status comparable to a Dutch town." These three were much too small to even be called a city, much less an independent "nation."

WHAT EVIDENCE DO YOU HAVE for suggesting that Curaçao was very corrupt and exploiting the five other islands?

Last edited by a moderator: Jul 6, 2012
23. ### quadraphonicsBloodthirsty BarbarianValued Senior Member

Messages:
9,391
WTF does any of this have to do with the thread topic?