Told you guys that hotline was a waste of time and they are dealing with serpents
China's SCS Strategy Thread
- Thread starter lilzz
- Start date
If I had to speculate, it's probably embarassing for Manila, and China doesn't care so they agreed not to make it public. It's already a win for them.
would you trust the pinos!
Interesting article..
Note the wording.
Fixed or permanent not allowed but presumably moving or "temporary" facilities are allowed. Now what is temporary or not, Philippines can turn black to white and China can turn a blind eye saying it's temporary.
Maybe the wording was always like this, but I don't like the specific words and phrases used here
Note the wording.
So large amounts not allowed, but presumably small are allowed.
Fixed or permanent not allowed but presumably moving or "temporary" facilities are allowed. Now what is temporary or not, Philippines can turn black to white and China can turn a blind eye saying it's temporary.
Maybe the wording was always like this, but I don't like the specific words and phrases used here
Last edited:
Its been kinda slow lately so the usual Filipino Propagandists are Fearmongering to stir up people's emotions
This dummy better pay attention to his country's phantom 5,500 flood projects that went kaput as soon as the latest hurricane came to visit proving yet again how much of a charlatan and a serial cheater Marcos Jr. truly is.Its been kinda slow lately so the usual Filipino Propagandists are Fearmongering to stir up people's emotions
Chinese and Filipino statements continue to disagree over notification.
My guess is that the same radio conversation is being characterized in two different ways.
However the more interesting discrepancy is that Chinese statements consistently specify no construction material, whereas Filipino statements never mention it at all. This continues the same pattern from the disputed agreement, whose text is still secret.
My guess is that they've returned to the prior gentlemen's agreement, whereby the Philippines informally commits to not reinforcing the ship. There is fear of that in Manila too, since the deal was kept secret. It's noteworthy that DefSec Teodoro, a known hawk, was not part of the negotiations.
Even if we entertain the assumption that CCG unilaterally backed down (and the Philippines conceded nothing), then why bother with any deal at all? CCG does not need to consult Manila to stop (or start) using water cannons, and if they received nothing in exchange then it's surely better to leave things open-ended instead of committing to a formal agreement. There is no need to obtain Filipino agreement to stop retaliation because their whole "assertive transparency" strategy is based on publishing events; if CCG unilaterally stops, then they obviously have nothing to publish.
It stands to reason, therefore, that the Philippines conceded something in exchange for reduced pressure. And the most likely thing, based on the behavior and statements observed afterwards, is a commitment regarding construction materials.
My guess is that the same radio conversation is being characterized in two different ways.
However the more interesting discrepancy is that Chinese statements consistently specify no construction material, whereas Filipino statements never mention it at all. This continues the same pattern from the disputed agreement, whose text is still secret.
My guess is that they've returned to the prior gentlemen's agreement, whereby the Philippines informally commits to not reinforcing the ship. There is fear of that in Manila too, since the deal was kept secret. It's noteworthy that DefSec Teodoro, a known hawk, was not part of the negotiations.
Even if we entertain the assumption that CCG unilaterally backed down (and the Philippines conceded nothing), then why bother with any deal at all? CCG does not need to consult Manila to stop (or start) using water cannons, and if they received nothing in exchange then it's surely better to leave things open-ended instead of committing to a formal agreement. There is no need to obtain Filipino agreement to stop retaliation because their whole "assertive transparency" strategy is based on publishing events; if CCG unilaterally stops, then they obviously have nothing to publish.
It stands to reason, therefore, that the Philippines conceded something in exchange for reduced pressure. And the most likely thing, based on the behavior and statements observed afterwards, is a commitment regarding construction materials.
Last edited:
I remember seeing the DFA plan was to make a publicly available notification of supply without directly providing prior notification directly to China.