QUEZON CITY (MindaNews / 05 July) — There is undeniably an added value being interviewed by known journalists even if just a few words of your thought are quoted in national or international media platforms they talk or write for. One obviously gets a wider, international audience.
The underside, however, is that the full context of what you say is often waylaid where only a part or some parts are used. Journalists obviously have their own world, their own position on issues and their subjectivities. But we, too, as citizens of truth and conscience should have our ways in revealing what the real world is.
This thought came to mind when a journalist asked me via email about Malaysia’s recent posture on Sabah claim relative to issues on continental shelf.
Below are the three questions and my responses.
1.How should the Marcos government handle Malaysia’s rejection i.e., “Philippine UN submission of its extended continental shelf because it includes Sabah?”
Like previous actions of Philippine administrations that often show sophistication in handling verbally any Sabah claim-related questions and issues, it is expected that PBBM would do just like that: by simply projecting response through a sort of strong and beautifully crafted words; but in truth, there has been perennial problem in past and present administrations in translating words into actions as far as Sabah claim issue is concerned.
Hence, like in previous issues related to Sabah claim, this rejection of Malaysia on Philippine claim on extended continental shelf would just be left there to fossilize in the UN “shelf.”
Like in the past since the Cory government onward, Philippine government lacks the political will to push the envelop farther due to “trauma” it suffered when Malaysia reversed the onus of Sabah claim by supporting the Moro rebellion in Mindanao and Sulu against the Marcos Sr Martial Law government — so that by 1977, the supposed Philippine strong man had to declare in the ASEAN Summit that he was dropping the Sabah claim.
The point being is, how can we expect strong position let alone a respectable posturing by Philippine government on a question like continental shelf which is underwater, as same government cannot support “abovewater” Sabah claim despite availability of all legal advantages on Philippine side since the representation of then Sen. Jovito Salonga et al in many legal and international venues.
Moreover, since Malaysia’s engagement on GPH-MILF peace process and the current BARMM having received much windfall in terms of peace and stability in Mindanao and the Sulu Archipelago, why should PBBM, like PRRD, rock the boat of RP-Malaysia relation with an issue of continental shelf?
On the contrary, as “wealth” underneath such shelf is, I believe, the main source of contentions, then negotiation about it must proceed independent from Sabah claim.
At this juncture, Malaysia must also show transparency on this matter. If it is shown that the oil that Petronas has been harvesting for decades comes from the Sulu Sea, then Malaysia should be man enough to open all books and never hide under the cloak of false claims and unwarranted use of other people’s and other country’s resources.
2. Can Marcos Jr drop the Sabah claim especially now that the 2025 national and local polls are about to take place next year?
What is there to drop in the first place? Did the Philippine government ever handle the “ball” (i.e., Sabah claim) since 1977? If the father faltered then as far as the Sabah claim is concerned, could you expect the son to resurrect the “ghost” that his late father tried to run away from?
The forthcoming 2025 election has no bearing on Sabah claim or contention in continental shelf issues.
3.Or should Marcos Jr simply keep his hand off and let the litigation going on in foreign courts filed by some Sabah heirs take its course?
What would you expect? The “ghost” of Sabah claim has truly instilled fear in the psyche of Philippine government. From PRRD to PBBM, the Sulu Sultanate was left alone to hurdle the Arbitral Award issue.
In fact, said issue could have been the most fortuitous moment for the Philippines to show support to the Sulu Sultanate not only to redeem itself when President Diosdado Macapagal received the Sulu Sultan’s request for the Philippine government to pursue the Sabah claim on their behalf only to be abandoned and to falter in subsequent years during the Marcos Sr government since, understandably, the Philippines had to prioritize ASEAN unity and territorial integrity of member states instead of pursuing historical rights of a neo-colonized people and their entities like the Sulu Sultanate with their historical sovereignty.
Truth be told, Marcos Sr was truly hurt with Malaysia’s counter-strategy in using the Moro rebellion to fight the Manila government after the failed Malacanang’s Operation Merdeka that led into Jabidah Massacre in 1968.
The other reason why the Philippine government should supposedly support the Sulu Sultanate’s legal claim of arbitral award is so that “foreign entities” would not be able to monopolize or manipulate the issue according to their interest; hence, with Philippine government on board, that would allow the availability of a full range of standing and strategies and a fair deal on the award, if at all, so that they could be apportioned to the right claimants, their heirs and beneficiaries. If the Philippines only comes in during “harvest time” of the award, if ever, what moral scruples would that show?
[MindaViews is the opinion section of MindaNews. Julkipli Wadi is Professor of Islamic Studies at the University of the Philippines].