Marcos Faces Dilemma on Whether to Sue China Over Cyanide Use in WPS: Here’s Why

President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. is facing a dilemma on whether to sue China over its alleged use of cyanide in fishing activities in the West Philippine Sea (WPS), the disputed waters in the South China Sea. 

The Philippine Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources (BFAR) has recently reported that it has found evidence of cyanide fishing by Chinese vessels in Bajo de Masinloc, also known as Scarborough Shoal, a rich fishing ground that is claimed by both countries. 

Cyanide fishing is a destructive and illegal practice that involves spraying or injecting cyanide into coral reefs to stun and capture fish, which causes severe damage to the marine ecosystem and poses health risks to the consumers.

What are the pros and cons of suing China over cyanide fishing?

Suing China over cyanide fishing could have some potential benefits and drawbacks for the Philippines, such as:

Pros:

• It could uphold the Philippines’ sovereign rights and interests in the WPS, which were affirmed by the 2016 arbitral ruling of the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) in The Hague, which invalidated China’s expansive claims and activities in the area³.
• It could deter China from further violating the international law and norms, such as the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), which prohibit cyanide fishing and other harmful practices².
• It could garner the support and sympathy of the international community, especially the US and its allies, which have been expressing their concern and opposition to China’s aggressive and coercive behavior in the WPS⁴.

Cons:

• It could provoke China’s anger and retaliation, which could escalate the tension and conflict in the WPS, and jeopardize the bilateral relations and cooperation between the two countries, especially on trade, investment, and infrastructure.
• It could face legal and practical challenges, such as the lack of jurisdiction and enforcement, the difficulty of gathering and presenting evidence, and the uncertainty of the outcome and impact.
• It could alienate some of the domestic constituencies and stakeholders, such as the fishermen, the business sector, and the political opposition, who may have different views and interests on the WPS issue.

Keep Reading

What are the possible options and scenarios for Marcos?

Marcos has several possible options and scenarios to consider in dealing with the cyanide fishing issue, such as:

• Option 1: Sue China in an international court or tribunal, such as the PCA, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS), or the International Court of Justice (ICJ), based on the UNCLOS, the CITES, and other relevant treaties and laws.
  • Scenario 1: The court or tribunal accepts the case and rules in favor of the Philippines, ordering China to stop and compensate for its cyanide fishing activities, and to respect the Philippines’ rights and interests in the WPS.
  • Scenario 2: The court or tribunal rejects the case or rules in favor of China, dismissing the Philippines’ claims and arguments, and allowing China to continue and justify its cyanide fishing activities, and to challenge the Philippines’ rights and interests in the WPS.
• Option 2: Negotiate with China bilaterally or multilaterally, such as through the ASEAN-China dialogue mechanism, the Joint Steering Committee on the Code of Conduct in the South China Sea, or the Joint Coast Guard Committee, to address and resolve the cyanide fishing issue through diplomatic and peaceful means.
  • Scenario 1: The negotiation succeeds and results in a mutually acceptable and beneficial agreement, such as a code of conduct, a joint development scheme, or a fishery management plan, that regulates and monitors the fishing activities and protects the marine environment in the WPS.
  • Scenario 2: The negotiation fails and results in a deadlock or a dispute, such as a disagreement over the scope, terms, or implementation of the agreement, that worsens and prolongs the cyanide fishing issue and the tension and conflict in the WPS.
• Option 3: Take no action or defer the decision on the cyanide fishing issue, either by ignoring or downplaying the BFAR’s report, or by waiting for more information and evidence, or by consulting and coordinating with other parties and stakeholders, such as the US, the ASEAN, and the public.
  • Scenario 1: The inaction or delay works in favor of the Philippines, as China stops or reduces its cyanide fishing activities, either voluntarily or under pressure from the international community, and as the Philippines gains more time and leverage to prepare and pursue its strategy and interests in the WPS.
  • Scenario 2: The inaction or delay works against the Philippines, as China continues or increases its cyanide fishing activities, either defiantly or opportunistically, and as the Philippines loses more time and leverage to defend and advance its strategy and interests in the WPS.

Marcos faces a dilemma on whether to sue China over cyanide fishing in the WPS, as it could have some potential benefits and drawbacks for the Philippines. Marcos has several possible options and scenarios to consider in dealing with the issue, such as suing, negotiating, or taking no action. Marcos should weigh the pros and cons of each option and scenario, and make a wise and timely decision that would best serve the national interest and the common good of the Philippines.