THE epic saga of how our small coastal state is standing up to a giant rouge nation in that part of the South China Sea (SCS), called the West Philippine Sea (WPS), has turned a new chapter. On the heels of the avowed pro-China and anti-United States regime of former president Rodrigo Duterte comes President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., whose administration has taken a rather hardline stance in protecting Philippine sovereignty and maritime entitlements that many perceive as pro-American and anti-China.

But unlike the Biblical story where the diminutive David slayed the armor-clad giant Goliath with a slingshot, the Philippines’ struggle against China is far from over. The skirmishes between vessels of the Philippine Navy and Philippine Coast Guard (PCG) on one side and those of the China Coast Guard (CCG), maritime militia and the People’s Liberation Army Navy on the other transcend the hotly contested surface and subsurface of the WPS. The recent bumping in Ayungin (Second Thomas) Shoal resulted in an intensified battle of narratives in cyberspace targeting domestic and international publics. Vicious information warfare is raging online between National Security Council (NSC) Assistant Director General and spokesman Jonathan Malaya and PCG spokesman for WPS Commo. Jay Tarriela, on the one hand, and the likes of China’s apologists and self-proclaimed strategic studies experts like Herman Tiu Laurel, on the other.

Malaya identified the Asian Century Philippines Strategic Studies Institute, where Laurel is president, and the Integrated Development Studies Institute (IDSI) as among the groups that appear to be helping Chinese Embassy officials undermine Philippine interests. Malaya and Tariela referred to such individuals as “traitors” who serve as “China’s mouthpieces” and spread fake news and “pro-Beijing” or “pro-China” narratives. Laurel challenged those tags, proclaiming himself and other like-minded individuals and organizations as “truth seekers” who were out to expose Washington’s propaganda with “diplomatic, geopolitical and potential kinetic strategies.”

Laurel is far from being a truth seeker despite his denial of being China’s mouthpiece. In an article he wrote in the “Asian Century Journal,” he accused me and retired rear admiral Rommel Ong of “raising emotions (against the Chinese) over false and petty issues” when I wrote in my article that the “[t] he most publicized of Chinese capability to prevaricate — officially — was their embassy’s report that Philippine Navy personnel voluntary surrendered a recovered Chinese rocket debris.”

Laurel parroted a China Foreign Ministry statement that said “there was no so-called blocking of the course [of the navy boat] and forceful taking” and that navy personnel from the Western Command (Wescom) “voluntarily” returned the suspected rocket debris after a “friendly consultation.” That’s a wholesale lie peddled by the ministry and echoed by Laurel.

Police from Pag-asa (Thitu) Island reported otherwise. The video of the incident recorded by Philippine Navy personnel and shared with the media clearly shows the forcible taking of the floating object. Thus, no less than the Wescom commander himself, Vice Adm. Alberto Carlos bewailed the actions of CCG vessel 5203 that blocked the course of the navy boat twice before finally seizing the object.

In that same article, Laurel wanted me, Ong and Filipinos to thank the PCG for voluntarily returning the object to the CCG because that saved the Philippines from embarrassment. “[S]pace objects, including their components, found outside their state of registration must be returned to the state of registry upon proof of ownership,” Laurel declares, quoting verbatim what he claims to be Art. VII of the Outer Space Treaty of the United Nations. That article, however, deals with the international liability of the launching or procuring state for damages that the object or component thereof may cause, not ownership. Was it Laurel’s honest mistake? But even going by Laurel’s spurious quote favoring China, the presentation of proof of ownership is necessary before any return of the suspected rocket debris can be had.

Laurel belittled and described as laughable my bidding for courageous and patriotic members of the Philippine media to accompany naval resupply sorties and expose the truth about China’s atrocities. The clarion call I extended to the international media to document China’s continuing violations of the 2002 Code of Conduct of claimant countries in the SCS for the world to know. The independent members of the media who heeded the call proved to be the most credible witnesses. The audio and video recordings of everything that transpired are firsthand accounts of the truth of what happens in every humanitarian mission to the BRP Sierra Madre.

China’s lies as to what actually took place were exposed

by the wide media coverage of the Oct. 22, 2023 incident that was condemned by nations that bind themselves to international law. CCG vessel 5203’s illegal and dangerous maneuvers in blocking the path of a Philippine Navy-chartered indigenous resupply boat led to the intentional bumping of the rear part of the vessel, which was clearly recorded on video. Likewise, the video of China’s maritime militia vessel bumping the PCG vessel escorting the resupply vessel belied China’s claim that the PCG vessel intentionally moved astern to bump the militia vessel.

Previous media coverage that shows how brave and patriotic Filipino navy and coast guard personnel were subjected to laser lights that caused their temporary blindness negated China’s denials. Yet Laurel, in a television interview, defended the two instances of the CCG’s firing of water cannons against Filipino uniformed personnel by justifying that the “the most benign police instrument for … control … activities of forces that [China] feels intruding….” He referred to the incidents of “dangerous maneuvers and near collisions” as propaganda that the Philippines could file cases but did not.

By these acts, can we fault Malaya and Tariela in referring to Laurel and his minions as traitors? If in “betraying your friends, your country, etc. by giving away secrets about them, by lying to or about them or by doing other things that will harm them,” one is deemed a traitor by the dictionary’s definition, can both spokespersons be mere purveyors of US propaganda? Are they causing “chilling effects” on legitimate journalists, bloggers and opinion writers?

I came across this interesting article by Pauline Macareag that Rappler published on Nov. 1, 2023, titled “How pro-China propaganda is seeded online in the Philippines.” She discussed the findings from a study by TheNerve for Interviews about a pro-China network on Facebook, some of whose posts have been taken down as “inauthentic network.” The network is composed of actors who have been spreading propaganda and disinformation for years and get away with it by claiming to be academic experts to establish credibility and legitimacy.

Macaraeg writes, in a nutshell, that there exist individuals like Sass Sasot, George Siy and groups like IDSI posturing as “experts” and “think tanks,” but had no original published study on its website, which is no longer available as of Oct. 30, 2023.

Malaya refers to them as online actors engaged in “malign information operations” using pro-China narratives that the NSC is monitoring.

Now these should warn patriotic Filipinos of traitors and conspirators in our midst.