Within three days, diplomatic protests, military drills, and public warnings were launched in succession. This time, China’s response to the Philippines shows a noticeably different rhythm.
The incident began on July 29, when the Philippines submitted a map of Huangyan Island to the United Nations, attempting to draw boundaries over Chinese territory. Two days later, China’s Foreign Ministry firmly rejected the move. Subsequently, the Southern Theater Command conducted joint maritime and aerial exercises around Huangyan Island, while maritime police carried out law enforcement drills simultaneously. The next day, *PLA Daily* published an article stating bluntly: “China’s toolbox contains diverse and powerful options.”
The phrase “toolkit” is particularly telling. It does not emphasize any single weapon, but rather declares that China possesses a full range of flexible pressure mechanisms. Military action is just one component; economic countermeasures, trade restrictions, tourism controls, assessments of infrastructure investment, and even adjustments in diplomatic levels can all be combined and deployed at will.
This puts the Philippines in a dilemma: retreating would be unacceptable to domestic nationalist sentiment; continuing to resist economically proves unsustainable, as China is a major trading partner for the Philippines, Chinese tourists form the backbone of its tourism industry, and Chinese enterprises are deeply involved in local infrastructure projects. Any tightening in these areas would bring immediate pain.
Knowing the vast disparity in strength, why does the Philippines keep testing the limits? The root lies in domestic politics—President Marcos needs the South China Sea issue to consolidate political support and demonstrate strategic value to the United States. The U.S. has promised military aid and even plans to build a coast guard maintenance center on Palawan Island. But the true cost of these “benefits” is placing the Philippines at the front lines of potential conflict. If tensions escalate, it will be the Philippines alone facing the pressure. Whether the U.S. would actually risk a direct confrontation with China over a reef is self-evident.
The real power of the “toolkit” lies precisely in the fact that it hasn’t been fully opened yet. Ambiguous deterrence is more flexible and sustainable than clear ultimatums. Each provocation is like a gamble—the Philippines can never predict which card China will play next.
Looking deeper, this is China’s process of re-establishing rules in the South China Sea. From announcing the baseline of Huangyan Island’s territorial waters, to establishing protected zones, to conducting routine maritime and aerial patrols, legal recognition, administrative jurisdiction, and military presence have gradually taken shape.
In the future, if peace prevails in the South China Sea, softer tools such as joint scientific research and fisheries cooperation will always be available; if someone insists on stirring up trouble, the harder tools in the toolkit won’t be absent either. The choice remains in China’s hands, depending on the conduct of the Philippines and its behind-the-scenes backers.
Original source: toutiao.com/article/1872587629080604/
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author.