LET PH & CHINA SOLVE THEIR RIFT, NOT OTHERS

President Aquino, who is now in Europe, has been quoted in the news as saying he hopes the European countries would issue official statements regarding the Phil-China rift in the South China (or West Philippine) Sea. I nearly die laughing hearing that.  He had the self-same expectations when he previously met with the ASEAN, all to no avail.  In fairness, I do not wish to preempt what Europe has in mind about this.matter.  Suffice it for me to say that whatever statement it issues is going to end up equally vain and meaningless as an instrument to settle the Phil-China dispute because the European countries, whether individually or acting together, has no authority to settle international territorial disputes.  The United Nations do have that exclusive mandate.  But as I wrote in a letter to the Philippine Daily Inquirer, published nearly ten years ago,  indications are such that even the UN may have outlived its usefulness as a world peace maker. 

For some historical flashbacks, the UN was originally called League of Nations, in turn formed just after the end of World War I.  Yes, in its early years, the League had settled a number of disputes and prevented several wars.  But those were essentially between small countries; it failed to control the Axis and Allied Powers.  After Japan invaded Manchuria in 1933, the league condemned the aggression but did not impose sanctions.  Japan withdrew from the league in the same year, along with Germany, which immediately began to re-arm, while Italy invaded and annexed Ethiopia in 1935.  The league imposed economic sanctions but allowed Italy to get the supplies it needed most, until Italy withdrew in 1937.  The league expelled Russia for its 1939 aggression against Finland, but the World War II had already began.  After the war, the UN had of course, some notable achievements.  The first was the peaceful blockade of the Berlin Blockade in 194z5z, then it prevented the Balkan War in a947, stopped the fighting between India and Pakistan over Kashmir, and settled Indonesian-Dutch War in 1949, and ended the 1950-53 Korean War.  UN efforts had also stopped or prevented a number of hostilities in the Middle East, such as between Israel and the Arab states in 1948, the total seizure of the Suez Canal by Egypt in 1956, and an imminent and otherwise bigger Middle East Conflict in 1967.  The UN, however, failed to prevent the Vietnam War and  the advance of Russian tanks during the Hungary revolt in 1956.  One recalls that it was not the UN but a steadfast John F. Kennedy that had forced an arrogant Nikita Khrushchev to back down during the Cuban Crisis of 1962.  Now, in relatively more modern times, we have the US invasion of Iraq, Afghanistan hostilities, the Libya and Syria crises.  Given this, the conclusion is not altogether baseless that the UN and the League of Nations had been good only at preventing petty wars, not when the world superpowers are involved.

Now, why am I re-narrating all of these?  Ah, simply to bring to the fore my own personal opinion that the ongoing territorial dispute between China and the Philippines inside the South China Sea (or West Philippine Sea, if you wish) cannot be solved even with the involvement of the UN, very  much less of the ASEAN and the European countries, which President Aquino now appears to relying on.   Even the participation of the initially much ballyhooed UNCLOS will be useless since that international court of justice may only hear disputes where both contending parties jointly submit themselves to voluntary  arbitration -- and China has time and again very resolutely junked that alternative. Neither may the Philippines rely upon the United States by virtue of the so-called Mutual Defense Country between the two countries.  For one thing, if one looks more deeply into that treaty, he will be surprised that it covered only mutual defense inside the Pacific Region, and the West Philippine Sea is outside of that.

Methinks only a continuing bilateral -- repeat, bilateral, now multilateral -- diplomacy could help the Philippine cause.  One recalls, for example,  that prior to April 12 this year,  both countries had more or less been jointly exploiting the Scarborough Shoal in relative peace.  Prudence should probably dictate for the Philippines to find out the reason for China's suddenly hostile attitude, and to objectively discuss that with China, and with China alone.  But let it be done only by our Foreign Affairs Department only, without such back-channeling as has been recently, and initially secretly, undertaken by Sen. Trillanes at Aquino's behest.

I must admit, I have had no experience in foreign affairs to say all of these with authority.  I earnestly believe though that I am talking from the standpoint of plain common sense.  And that, in my view, is the very first foundation of reason.