Locsin reacted to Huang’s statement the next day by tweeting: “Agree to disagree on the Arbitral Award. Civilised.”

He added that the dispute remains, and the Philippines and China “agree to disagree and continue disputing each other’s entitlement by law on our part and claim on China’s part”.

In his speech, Huang named three challenges to the relationship between the two countries: the lingering maritime dispute; the negative sentiment on China caused by Philippine politicians who keep on “slandering” the mainland; and “the alarming external disruptions” by some superpower he did not name, but was probably referring to the United States.

“Glutted with cold-war mentality, some superpower is instigating the containment and oppression of China in every possible way, trying to sow discord among regional countries, and even forcing them to choose sides. Under such pressure and complicated circumstances, it takes the Philippines’ strategic insight and strong will to uphold its independent foreign policy,” Huang said.

Philippine ambassador to China Chito Sta. Romana, a former president of the association, also downplayed the maritime conflict during Monday’s webinar, during which he referred to the area claimed by the Philippines as the West Philippine Sea.

Golden period of China-Philippines friendship loses its shine

“As in any relationship, however, there are a few differences. The West Philippine Sea is one such issue. There are contentious issues between the Philippines and China with regard to this matter, but there is a clear understanding between the two sides that the disputes are not the sum total of the Philippines-China relationship and should in no way be a hindrance to the continuing development of other areas in the bilateral relations,” Sta. Romana said.

“More importantly,” he added, “there are mechanisms in place for the two sides to openly discuss and manage the differences, and continue to find solutions, as well as the way forward on this issue.”

He was referring to the Bilateral Consultation Mechanism (BCM) and the ongoing talks on the Code of Conduct in the South China Sea, which his Beijing counterpart also urged as the way “to manage maritime disputes through friendly dialogue and consultations”.

On Tuesday, China’s foreign ministry spokesman Wang Wenbin said China recognised all countries’ “right to uphold an independent foreign policy and to develop foreign relations based on its national interests”.

“President Duterte’s policy propositions are in keeping with the fundamental interests of the Philippines, the shared aspiration of regional countries, and the trend of the times for peace and development,” he said.

Duterte rules out confronting Beijing in South China Sea

The “little pebble” that Locsin and Huang referred to was also mentioned by China-Philippine relations expert Aaron Jed Rabena in the same webinar.

Rabena, who has a PhD in international relations from Shandong University in China and is now a research fellow at the Asia-Pacific Pathways to Progress, questioned why China’s help in combating the coronavirus outbreak in the country was “unappreciated” by many Filipinos.

He asked what could be done to “reverse the tide of China’s unpopularity” in the Philippines and ensure strong relations, even after Duterte’s term in office ends in 2022.

A recent survey by private polling company Social Weather Stations revealed that Filipinos’ net trust rating for China had further dropped from “poor” to “bad”. Meanwhile, trust for the United States fell from “very good” to “good”.

Rabena partly blamed this on tensions in the South China Sea or West Philippine Sea, where China is “perceived as a hostile state”.

Criticising China can be terrorism under Manila’s new law: ex-judges

Foreign media also played up issues such as the “debt track narrative” of borrowers from the mainland; the “China threat narrative”; the “misbehaving Chinese tourists” stories; and the criminal activities linked to Philippine online gaming operators (Pogos).

Rabena clarified that the Chinese government is not involved in Pogos, and they are not a “strategy to infiltrate the Philippines”.

“In fact, the Chinese government wants the Duterte government to ban Pogos because gambling is illegal in China,” he said. “It’s the Philippine government that wants Pogos to continue to operate, perhaps because of the economic gains, but there are also many social costs.”

Rabena noted that China’s efforts to address its public relations problem backfired when it released a music video of a song entitled One Sea while it was conducting activities in the South China Sea, so this “did not sit well with many Filipinos”.

SO WHAT SHOULD MANILA AND BEIJING DO?

“For China, I think it needs to understand that the Philippines has its own domestic audience so that’s why from time to time the Philippine government needs to show its strong resolve,” Rabena said.

China also had to improve its public relations strategy in the country, taking into account the implications of its actions in the South China Sea, he added.

Duterte, meanwhile, needed to tone down his “excessive praise or special preference for China” and show toughness against tax-evading and illegal Pogos, which he had described as “clean”.

Rabena said both states needed to fast-track negotiations on loans and investments worth US$24 billion pledged by China in 2016.

Manila sees ‘no sense’ in pushing South China Sea case at UN session

Despite the tensions between the two countries, Rabena said Duterte’s foreign policy had not reverted to that of former president Benigno Aquino III, and there was no “express support” for US government positions.

“The Philippines does not still name and shame China, and the Philippines has still not gotten a taste of China’s ‘wolf warrior’ diplomacy. So I guess things are still stable and on track,” he said. ■