Pres. Ferdinand Marcos Jr. —REUTERS/File Photo
BERLIN, Germany — President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. on Wednesday said the Philippines will continue to defend its maritime territory against a possibly “more active attempt” by China to take over the Philippines’ territories in the West Philippine Sea.
This was after Chinese President Xi Jinping called on China’s military to prepare for military conflicts at sea and protect Beijing’s maritime rights and interests.
In a press conference with reporters here, the President appeared to be unsurprised with Xi’s directive to China’s military, but said the government will “continue to do what we can to defend our maritime territory.”
“Frankly, I don’t think there is anything new there. That’s what they’ve been doing already. They have defined the 10-dash line and they continue to defend it,” Marcos said.
He said it was already China’s policy for the last few years, even if Xi “did not state that outright until now.”
He added that the Philippines will continue to defend its maritime territory in the West Philippine Sea, especially that the international community has recognized it as the Philippines’ territory.
“I’m not surprised. But we will have to continue to do what we can to defend our maritime territory in the face of perhaps of a more active attempt by the Chinese to annex some of our territory,” the President added.
Marcos made the remarks a day after he questioned the premise of China’s proposals to resolve the maritime dispute over the South China Sea — in particular Beijing’s invocation of the 10-dash line in asserting ownership of the seas.
READ: DTI: Investments Marcos secured highlight German confidence in PH
In a joint press conference with German Chancellor Olaf Scholz on Tuesday, the President said the Philippines did not reject any proposition by China, but questioned the basis of its proposals to resolve the dispute.
He pointed out that China’s 10-dash line is “not recognized by any country, by any international body, and certainly not the Philippines” and that it would be “very difficult to see a way forward” with such a a premise.