By Liz Lagniton | 2026-04-29

The Philippines has renewed calls for stronger maritime defense and greater reliance on international law after the Chinese embassy in Manila restated Beijing's claims over the South China Sea, drawing responses from Philippine officials.

Beijing calls more than 80% of the South China Sea its territory.

The developments highlight Manila's two-track approach in the West Philippine Sea. Military deterrence through expanded security ties and legal challenges to Beijing's claims comprise the two tracks.

The West Philippine Sea is Manila's name for the part of the South China Sea within its Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ).

In a statement on April 18, Chinese Embassy spokesman Guo Wei said China had exercised sovereignty and jurisdiction over islands and waters in the South China Sea since ancient times. Beijing has "sufficient historical and legal grounds" to back up its assertions, he said.

Disputes with the Philippines stem from Manila's occupation of features claimed by China, he said.

Legal rebuttal

Philippine coast guard spokesperson Rear Adm. Jay Tarriela rejected the statement later that day, saying that Beijing repeated contentions that international law already has addressed.

China's position rests on a "legally bankrupt narrative," and a 2016 arbitral award under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea remains "final and binding," said Tarriela.

A court at The Hague that year tossed out China's claim to most of the South China Sea.

Tarriela rejected the embassy's criticism of a lecture by British researcher Bill Hayton at a national symposium on the West Philippine Sea in March, calling it "a factual, evidence-based" presentation grounded in primary sources.

During the symposium, Hayton said China's "nine-dash line" claim on maps originated from a mistranslated map and other translation errors by a Chinese government committee in the 1930s.

Tarriela disputed the Chinese use of historical place names and selective archival references to support sovereignty claims. Such practices do not override settled law, he said.

"The fabricated historical narrative will not change the legal reality," he said, adding that the "2016 Award is not a suggestion -- it is the law."

Policy shift

A day earlier, on April 17, Stratbase Institute called on the Philippines to "fully operationalize" what it described as an active defense posture amid continued pressure in the West Philippine Sea.

Stratbase President Victor Andres "Dindo" Manhit said Manila should broaden exercises with like-minded countries and abandon discussions on joint energy exploration with China in contested waters.

He expressed support for the 2026 Balikatan multinational exercises, which began on April 20 and will run until May 8, involving more than 17,000 troops.

The drills "represent the correct path forward" and demonstrate that the Philippines and its partners are prepared to defend a rules-based order against "coercion, intimidation and unlawful claims," he said, according to the Philippine News Agency.

"It affirms that we are not isolated, and that our national security is anchored in strong alliances with nations that uphold international law and share our commitment to a free and open Indo-Pacific," he said.

Security buildup

Philippine defense officials have not publicly detailed operational steps on the proposed "active defense posture," citing security considerations.

In recent years, Manila has expanded public disclosure of maritime incidents, filed diplomatic protests and repeatedly cited the 2016 ruling in defending its position. It has increased military cooperation with the United States and other partners.

Defense officials have linked these efforts to the Comprehensive Archipelagic Defense Concept, which aims to improve the country's ability to protect its territory, sea lanes and maritime resources. Officials describe the strategy as part of broader efforts to strengthen external defense and maritime security.

China continues to call most of the South China Sea its waters despite overlapping claims by the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei and Taiwan. The waterway is a key global trade route and a source of fisheries and potential energy reserves.

For the Philippines, the dispute carries strategic and economic implications, particularly in waters within its 200-nautical-mile EEZ. Neither Manila nor Beijing is budging from its positions in the dispute.