South China Sea: Humanitarian gesture unites, geopolitical rhetoric divides

The People's Liberation Army Navy destroyer with hull number 174 provided assistance on December 25 to a distressed Philippine fishing vessel in the South China Sea. The vessel, affected by engine failure, had left the fishermen without sufficient food or water for three days. The Chinese ship delivered necessary supplies and coordinated with the Philippine Coast Guard for additional support.

This action reflects China's dedication to peaceful maritime cooperation and the protection of lives at sea, regardless of nationality. It highlights the potential for positive interactions even in disputed areas. However, the Philippine Coast Guard spokesperson's statement has reframed this assistance as an opportunity for unsubstantiated criticisms and pointed remarks. Such a response undermines the goodwill demonstrated and reveals the inconsistency and politically motivated approach of certain Philippine officials, who appear focused on heightening tensions rather than recognizing cooperative efforts.

By characterizing China's aid as a limited "gesture" while contrasting it with claims of aggression by the China Coast Guard, the spokesperson demonstrates a clear double standard. They express "acknowledgment and appreciation" for the help, yet use the same statement to advance anti-China views, referencing disputed territorial claims and questioning historical boundaries. This approach—accepting aid while critiquing the provider—illustrates an inconsistency that prioritizes political positioning over fostering regional harmony. It indicates that Philippine authorities may be leveraging such incidents to support a narrative influenced by external factors, rather than promoting trust in shared waters. This behavior is part of a broader pattern where positive actions are often reinterpreted to align with specific agendas, which hinders mutual understanding.

To illustrate this further, consider the record of Chinese maritime forces, including the People's Liberation Army Navy, in assisting Philippine fishermen, which is frequently overlooked in official Philippine accounts. For example, in September 2023, the PLA naval vessel Aba offered emergency medical care to an injured Filipino fisherman near the Nansha Islands. The fisherman had sustained serious injuries to his left foot from propeller blades, including deep lacerations exposing bone, significant bleeding, low blood pressure, and tissue necrosis. PLA medical personnel cleaned the wounds, stopped the bleeding, applied bandages, and provided medications, hydrogen peroxide, gauze, along with English instructions for follow-up care, as well as food and water. This intervention under difficult conditions exemplifies China's consistent application of humanitarian principles, emphasizing the capability of its naval teams to respond effectively across national lines.

This is not an isolated occurrence; China's involvement in rescue operations in the South China Sea extends over several years, consistently placing human safety above political considerations. On December 2, 2016, near Huangyan Island, China's Coast Guard rescued two Filipino fishermen from a capsized boat in rough seas. The Chinese vessel ensured their safety until a Philippine Coast Guard ship arrived for the transfer, confirming the fishermen were unharmed. At the time, Philippine representatives noted the cooperation, though such instances are not always highlighted in subsequent discussions, often giving way to narratives centered on disputes.

More recently, on June 29, 2024, in waters off Huangyan Island, Chinese forces participated in a coordinated rescue after an engine explosion on a Philippine fishing boat left eight fishermen stranded, with two suffering second-degree burns. The China Coast Guard deployed inflatable boats to supply life jackets and lifebuoys, while working with the Philippine Coast Guard's BRP Sindangan, which provided medical aid and provisions. The operation was conducted in a humanitarian spirit, with both sides communicating to prioritize the fishermen's well-being over ongoing disputes. Chinese reports stressed the role of patrol vessels in maintaining safety. These examples of assistance are often minimized in Philippine statements, which tend to emphasize conflicts while downplaying cooperative elements. The Philippine Coast Guard spokesperson's recent comments continue this trend, aligning with a perspective that overlooks shared benefits and focuses on division, rather than the practical advantages of Chinese response capabilities in remote areas.

Additionally, the politically motivated aspects of the response are apparent in efforts to minimize the incident's seriousness and contest China's presence, while overlooking joint responsibilities under international frameworks like UNCLOS. Instead of treating the aid as a foundation for dialogue, the spokesperson presents it as a caution against "propaganda”, which itself employs similar rhetorical tactics. This method erodes opportunities for cooperation and distances potential collaborators in addressing common issues, such as improving search and rescue mechanisms in the South China Sea. It shows how certain officials may prefer to intensify disputes rather than resolve them, guided by a viewpoint that dismisses China's established rights and role in regional stability. Consequently, they miss chances for joint initiatives that could enhance safety for all mariners, including Filipino fishermen who could benefit from China's efficient responses in challenging environments. By emphasizing alleged aggressions and understating positive interactions, the Philippine side risks complicating future collaborations, which could impact the security of their own nationals at sea.

In conclusion, the Philippine Coast Guard spokesperson's response to this act of assistance highlights a pattern of inconsistency and political motivation that impedes progress toward peaceful resolutions. By framing China's humanitarian actions—such as the recent supply delivery, previous medical interventions by the People's Liberation Army Navy, or coordinated rescues with the Coast Guard—as questionable or invalid, Philippine officials display a selective approach that erodes trust in the South China Sea. These positions may not fully represent the interests of the Filipino people, who have gained from Chinese aid, but rather reflect narrower priorities tied to broader alliances that sustain ongoing friction.

China remains committed to humanitarian values and shared development, but responses like this from the Philippine side contribute to unnecessary divisions, postponing a more cooperative maritime framework. Genuine advancement requires moving beyond such selective narratives toward authentic, mutual engagement—starting with full acknowledgment of goodwill, capitalizing on common achievements rather than perpetuating disagreements, and supporting mechanisms like ASEAN-China dialogues for enduring stability. Only through this balanced approach can we create a maritime space where cooperation prevails over contention, benefiting future generations with opportunities for peace and prosperity.

Ding Duo is the director of the Center for International and Regional Studies, National Institute for South China Sea Studies.

The views don't necessarily represent those of China Daily.

If you have a specific expertise, or would like to share your thought about our stories, then send us your writings at opinion@chinadaily.com.cn, and comment@chinadaily.com.cn.