Philippine Sincerity Remains to be Seen

Philippine Sincerity Remains to be Seen
United Daily News editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
May 15, 2013

Summary: The 72 hour ultimatum has expired. The Republic of China has finally received a formal apology from the Republic of Philippines. Manila has agreed to indemnify us and hold fisheries talks as soon as possible. Taipei was forced to resort to military exercises, economic sanctions, and other forms of heavy-handed intimidation to extract this response. The price was extremely high. But without such tough measures, the Philippines simply would not have admitted any wrongdoing.

Full Text below:

The 72 hour ultimatum has expired. The Republic of China has finally received a formal apology from the Republic of Philippines. Manila has agreed to indemnify us and hold fisheries talks as soon as possible. Taipei was forced to resort to military exercises, economic sanctions, and other forms of heavy-handed intimidation to extract this response. The price was extremely high. But without such tough measures, the Philippines simply would not have admitted any wrongdoing.

Think back to just a few days ago. The Ma administration laid its cards on the table: diplomatic, political, and economic. It even threatened joint military exercises in the South China Sea. Clearly President Ma knew people would tolerate no more. The government essentially bet the farm. The government's attitude was tough. Nevertheless it was the hostage of volatile public sentiment. The effectiveness of its response remained limited.

Now look at the government of the Philippines. It laughed all the way through the process. It was as if the murder at sea was none of its concern. It even cited election concerns as an excuse. Its attitude is difficult to understand. A nation's law enforcement officers opened fire recklessly, killing fishermen from another country. Yet the government acted as if nothing had happened. It even refused to offer an apology. Under such circumstances, how can the Philippines maintain the rule of law and ethics? As of last night, diplomats from the two nations remained stalemated. Aquino III decided to dispatch a special envoy to Taipei to explain. The move was probably more procrastination than anything else. One need not expect too much from it.

Consider the nature of the incident. The Philippine Coast Guard and Fisheries law enforcement officials, indiscriminately machine-gunned unarmed fishing vessels, resulting in the loss of human life. Our own investigation shows that the Kuang Ta Hsing Number 28 fishing vessel was operating 60 to 70 nautical miles outside Philippine territorial waters. According to the Philippine Coast Guard, it was 43 nautical miles from Balintang Island. The two sides' stories differ slightly. But no matter which version one believes, the vessels were not inside the Philippines' 12-mile territorial waters. Their fishing operations were legal.

The Philippine Coast Guard and Fisheries officers claimed that when they attempted to board and inspect the Kuang Ta Hsing, its crew attempted to ram the Philippines Coast Guard cutter. Only then, they claimed, did Philippines personnel open fire. Their story is illogical. According to international maritime conventions, vessels from foreign countries found inside the Exclusive Economic Zone may be boarded and inspected. They may be given warnings and expelled. But officials are categorically forbidden to fire upon unarmed civilian fishing boats. The Kuang Ta Hsing was a reconditioned, like-new boat. Only five crew members were aboard. They ran into a vast number of armed men. They knew its was too late to run. Why in the world would they intentionally ram the cutter? Philippine Coast Guard personnel fired dozens of rounds. They behaved like pirates. They committed a serious violation of international law. The Philippines is going to find it difficult to evade responsibility.

Just yesterday, the Kaohsiung based Cheng Chang Fa II fishing vessel was detained because it crossed into Japanese territorial waters. The owners must pay a fine exceeding one million NT in order to recover their vessel. They can then resume fishing. Compare the practices of Japan and the Philippines. The difference is immediately apparent. ROC and Japanese claims to fishing grounds also overlap. But when they interact with each other, the rules are clear. This includes the two sides' law enforcement rules of engagement. This includes the rules fishing vessels must comply with. They all have rules they must follow. The Japanese side may seize illegal fishing vessels or use water cannons to expel them. This is also in accord with the norms of international law. There is no need to resort to the use of gunfire. Taipei and Manila must negotiate comparable rules of engagement. The two sides must agree upon rules of engagement in territorial waters that are more civilized and more consistent with reality. This will ensure the safety of fishermen on both sides.

One point is worth noting. Aquino III declared that the Philippines would deal with this incident according to the "one China principle." Aquino was clearly playing games, attempting to sow discord between the Mainland and Taiwan. But Beijing refused to take the bait. Major General Luo Yuan, a PLA hawk, publicly declared that anyone from the Philippines who shoots Taiwanese fishermen is "an enemy of the Chinese people." If the Philippines acts recklessly, he declared, then "with each provocation, we will reclaim one reef from Philippine hands." It is difficult for outsiders to guess whether the United States or Mainland China carries more weight. But the Xinhua News Agency revealed that the ROC Representative to the Philippines Pai Hsi-li brought back with him an apology from the Philippine President. This echoes the subtle role the "China Factor" played in the Taiwan-Japan Fisheries Agreement for the Diaoyutai Islands.

The two governments grappled. The two peoples also became caught up in the struggle emotionally. Netizens from both sides engaged in "keyboard warfare." They inflicted little physical damage. But they did undermine any goodwill the two sides once felt for each other. The government even played its "cease hiring Filipino workers" trump card. Individual legislators threatened "war." Some burned Philippine flags and waved protest signs. They ignored the feelings of Filipino workers on Taiwan. They may well have undermined goodwill among the two peoples. These after-effects of the incident must be addressed.

An apology is merely the first step in diplomatic etiquette. The follow-up investigation and compensation must not be slapdash and perfunctory. Otherwise, what will become of the fisheries negotiations to follow?
 
誠意待考驗：菲國不可縱放殺人
【聯合報╱社論】
2013.05.15 02:12 am

七十二小時最後通牒到期，台灣終於等到菲國政府授權的正式道歉，菲方同意賠償與盡速召開漁業會議。台灣祭出了軍演、經濟制裁等重手威嚇，才換得這樣的結果，代價可謂極其高昂；但若不如此大動作，恐怕根本無法逼使菲國正視此一事件。

回顧短短數日，馬政府將外交、政治、經濟制裁等手段全部攤開，甚至在軍事上將「聯合軍演」的兵譜推到南方海域，可見馬總統明白國人對此已忍無可忍。然而，此舉也幾乎將手上所有籌碼悉數打光，政府態度固然強硬，卻處處可見被翻騰的民意拖著走的痕跡，而效果依然有限。

反觀菲國政府，一路談笑風生，彷彿這樁海上殺人事件與己無關；即使有選舉當頭為藉口，其態度仍令人難以理解。一個國家的執法人員在海上任意掃射並殺害他國漁民，而政府竟若無其事，甚至連起碼的道歉都推三阻四，菲國要如何維持社會的法治與倫理？事實上，從昨夜兩國代表在外交部的僵持，艾奎諾三世決定派特使來台說明，恐怕也是緩兵之計成分居多，不必過度期待。

檢視此一事件的本質，基本上就是菲國海巡及漁政人員執法過當，濫槍掃射無武裝漁船而致人於死。根據我方調查，「廣大興廿八號」當時的作業地點，是在距離菲國領海六、七十海里處；而據菲國海岸巡防隊的調查，則是在巴林塘島東方四十三海里。兩方的說法雖略有出入，但無論根據何者，都說明漁船未侵犯菲國十二海里的領海，其捕撈行動是合法的。

再者，菲海巡及漁政人員接受調查時供稱，他們當時欲登船檢查，「廣大興」卻企圖脫逃並衝撞海監船，他們才開槍射擊；此一說法，亦顯不合邏輯。根據國際海洋公約，經濟海域內的領海國可以對他國船隻登船檢查、警告或驅離，但絕不許向無武裝的平民漁船開槍射擊。廣大興是甫經整修之新船，船上僅區區五人，碰上大批武裝人員，逃命都來不及，豈有故意去衝撞大船的道理？菲國海巡人員向「廣大興」連開數十槍，行徑如同海盜，嚴重違反了國際法。這點，菲國恐怕難以逃避責任。

就在昨天，高雄籍的「正昌發二號」漁船因越界進入日本領海遭到扣押，船東只須付出一百多萬元罰款，即可將船贖回，繼續進行海上捕撈。兩相比較，日菲兩國的手法立即高下立判。台日之間同樣有漁場重疊的問題，但彼此互動規則便明確許多，包括雙方的執法界線如何劃定、漁船應遵守什麼樣的作業規則，皆有一套模式可循；日方對違規漁船採取扣押或噴水驅離的手段，也合乎國際法規範，不必動刀動槍。這點，台菲兩國日後應積極透過協商比照辦理，將雙方海域畫出更文明而合乎現實的遊戲規則，保障雙方漁民安全。

值得注意的是，艾奎諾三世稍早一度宣稱，菲國將以「一中原則」處理此一事件；言下，似企圖在兩岸間玩挑撥遊戲。但中共對此卻毫不領情，解放軍鷹派少將羅援甚至公開揚言，菲律賓槍殺台灣漁民就是「與中華民族為敵」，若菲國敢妄動，「挑釁一次，我們就從你手上奪回一個島礁」。外界難以猜測美國和中國大陸在幕後的分量誰重，但從新華社率先披露菲駐台代表白熙禮帶回菲總統授權的道歉書，和台日漁業協議在釣島紛爭中簽署一樣，「中國因素」應發揮了微妙的作用。

除了政府交手，兩國民眾這次也多少捲入了情緒。尤其雙方網軍你來我往的「鍵盤戰爭」，雖未造成太大的實質破壞，卻可能使彼此的好感受損。包括政府隨手祭出「停聘菲勞」的撒手?，個別立委揚言「開戰」，乃至有些民眾焚燒菲國國旗並針對性地舉牌抗議，都疏忽了在台菲勞的感受，可能使兩國民間感情發生變化。這些，都是事件的潑灑後果，應該設法收拾。

道歉，只是滿足基本外交禮儀；接下來的調查及賠償工作，絕不能敷衍了事。否則，接下來的漁業談判，又何以為繼？