The controversy surrounding China’s participation in the 13th ASEAN Defence Ministers’ Meeting-Plus in Cebu is part of a much wider diplomatic dispute between Beijing and Manila—one increasingly marked by confrontational public statements, accusations and exchanges that have drawn official protests.
China’s decision to send a defense attaché instead of its defense minister was followed by accusations that the Philippines had obstructed its participation. Beijing’s defense ministry spokesperson Zhang Xiaogang blamed an unnamed Philippine politician for allegedly abusing the country’s chairmanship.
But the controversy did not end in Cebu.
Chinese Ambassador Jing Quan had already triggered a diplomatic protest after telling reporters that China could easily win a confrontation with the Philippines if it used force, although he insisted Beijing preferred peace.
The statement prompted the Department of Foreign Affairs to summon the ambassador. President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. also described the remark as sounding like a threat.
The embassy subsequently turned its criticism toward Filipino journalists, accusing some reporters and politicians of exaggerating statements and taking them out of context. It even issued the challenge, “STOP BLUFFING,” amid calls for the ambassador to be declared persona non grata.
These exchanges raise serious questions about the standards of diplomatic conduct expected from foreign representatives.
Diplomacy is not a license to publicly taunt officials, disparage journalists or inject language suggestive of military superiority into an already sensitive territorial dispute.
Nor can Beijing expect its statements to escape scrutiny simply because they come from an embassy or a powerful government.
The Philippines has the right to question China’s actions, challenge its claims and demand accountability under international law.
The 2016 arbitral ruling rejected the legal basis of China’s expansive maritime claims. Beijing’s continued rejection of that ruling remains a central obstacle in the maritime dispute.
The Cebu summit should have been an opportunity to strengthen regional cooperation, not another occasion for competing accusations.
A country’s power may command attention, but its conduct deter
