Can the Philippines and China Settle Their Sea Disputes Peacefully?

Can the Philippines and China peacefully settle territorial disputes in the SCS/WPS?

Answering this question need to cite the work of my good friend, M. Taylor Fravel, an American political scientist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT).  In his study based on his doctoral dissertation, Fravel undercores that China has been involved in at least 23 difficult territorial disputes since 1949.  

At present, only six of these territorial disputes persist.  These are the Taiwan issue, the border dispute with India, the border conflict with Bhutan and the three island group disputes in the Paracels, the Spratlys, and the Scarborough Shoal. 

Fravel discovered that China over the past sixty years was more likely to compromise in these conflicts with neighbors and less likely to use force than many Western scholars have feared. According to him, China’s territorial disputes with neighbors have been effectively resolved. These include peaceful settlement of territorial disputes with North Korea, Russia, Mongolia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Nepal, Myanmar and Laos as well as land border conflicts with Vietnam including the White Dragon Tail Island dispute in the Gulf of Tonkin.   

China has settled territorial disputes over Hong Kong (with Great Britain) and Macao (with Portugal) not through the use of coercion, aggression, or military force but by patiently negotiating for the return of these Chinese territories. China waited 156 years to get back Hong Kong from Great Britain and 442 years to regain Macau from Portugal.    

China has a bag full of patience to peacefully settle territorial disputes. China has taught the world that in the peaceful settlement of territorial disputes, patience is the main requirement.

Fravel observed that China’ resolution of the other disputes involved difficult compromise agreements in which China received only a miniscule part of the contested territory. In major cases, China offered generous compromises giving in more than 50 percent of the disputed land in favor of the neighbors.

Those are scientific findings from an American and not from a Chinese scholar.  By citing an American source that is well respected and accepted by the international community of experts and scientists, it is therefore very unfair to be labeled as pro-China by highlighting China’s exemplary practices in the peaceful settlement of territorial disputes with neighbors.

In the Philippines, it is currently popular to be anti-China because of the WPS issue.  But as Albert Einstein said, “what is popular is not always right”.

It is counterproductive to use labels like anti-China or pro-US in the context of the SCS/WPS disputes.  It is more pro-Filipino to believe that sustaining friendship and strengthening peaceful co-existence with the US and China are essential for the advancement of Filipino national interests.

-Rommel C. Banlaoi, PhD
Pandesal Forum
14 April 2025 (press release)