By Ellen Tordesillas
VERA Files
Trillanes
Sen. Antonio Trillanes IV acted as the Philippines’ backdoor negotiator with China from April to July this year, communicating with Chinese foreign affairs officials in a role, Presidential Spokesperson Edwin Lacierda said, in which he won “minor successes.”
Lacierda, though, did not give details.
Trillanes said President Benigno S. Aquino III gave him the assignment verbally and could not produce any documents to prove he was acting in an official capacity. The role was fraught with deniability, with Malacanang even saying it was Trillanes who sought the job.
Based on various interviews with Foreign Secretary Albert del Rosario, senior foreign affairs officials, Chinese sources and with Trillanes himself, VERA Files assembled the following timeline of Trillanes’ involvement in the dispute between the Philippines and China over Panatag, also called Scarborough Shoal:
April 8, 2012
Del Rosario
The Philippine Navy’s lone modern naval patrol frigate, BRP Gregorio del Pilar, apprehended eight Chinese fishing boats with sizable quantities of endangered marine species, corals, live sharks and giant clams.
The Chinese immediately sent sometime three Chinese Marine Surveillance (CMS) to protect their fishermen. BRP Gregorio del Pilar was withdrawn in consonance with the agreed terms of engagement of “white to white, gray to gray.”
“White to white” means civilian ships are to deal only with civilian ships, in this case the Philippine Coast Guard to the Chinese Marine Surveillance. “Gray to gray” means navy to navy.
The Philippine government sent Philippine Coast Guard and Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources patrol ships to the uninhabited rocks 124 nautical miles off Zambales province in northwestern Philippines. The Chinese sent more reinforcement.
At the height of the standoff, the number of Chinese vessels and fishing boats reached almost 100.
April 14, 2012
On the diplomatic front, talks were deteriorating with Foreign Secretary Albert del Rosario accusing Chinese Ambassador Ma Keqing of bad faith.
“It appears there is an element that is lacking in our negotiations. I seek a deeper element of trust from our Chinese friends,” Del Rosario said in a press statement.
Chinese sources said the Chinese leadership was confused with all the mixed signals they were getting from Malacañang, the Department of Foreign Affairs and the media, and they wanted to get directly to President Aquino.
May 2012
As tensions between Manila and Beijing worsened, Executive Secretary Paquito Ochoa asked Trillanes whether he “would like to help,” Trillanes said in interviews on Wednesday. He said he saw nothing out of the ordinary with the request since he had earlier also gone to Vietnam on Malacanang’s request.
Trillanes said he looked up Chinese officials he had met in his earlier official visit. Sources said some Chinese-Filipino supporters also facilitated contacts in Beijing.
Fu Ying
Preliminary meetings were held in Manila and in Bejing to make sure both sides had the adequate authority from the highest level of government.
One of the officials Trillanes was talking with was Fu Ying, vice minister of Foreign Affairs in charge of “Asia, boundary and ocean affairs and translation and interpretation” and fourth in the hierarchy in China’s foreign ministry. She was China’s ambassador to the Philippines from 1998 to 2000.
In one of his trips to Beijing, Trillanes reported to the President by phone. The President informed him that he will be on speaker phone so the other cabinet members can listen in and be guided accordingly. Del Rosario was among them.
But Del Rosario also had his own backdoor negotiator. In one meeting with the President in Malacanang, Del Rosario was asked by Aquino who authorized the trip of Manuel V. Pangilinan to China to talk with the China National Offshore Oil Corp. (CNOOC) officials.
Pangilinan is chairman and chief executive officer of Philex Mining Corp. that has secured the contract with the government to explore in Reed Bank, an area near Palawan also claimed by China.
Pangilinan apparently had a different account of his trip than what China said he requested of CNOOC. Del Rosario owned up to “sort of encourage Pangilinan to go and open another channel to China thru the private sector since the political channel has failed.”
Del Rosario said it was consistent with the President’s directive. It was at this point that he offered, “I serve at the pleasure of the President.”
‘Simultaneous’ pullout
Campbell
Days before President Aquino left for London and the United States, Fu Ying was in Washington D.C and met with Kurt Campbell, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs.
DFA and Chinese sources said Campbell suggested a simultaneous withdrawal of vessels from Panatag Shoal to de-escalate the tension.
A DFA official said United States Ambassador to Manila Harry Thomas relayed to Del Rosario that Beijing has agreed to a simultaneous withdrawal.
This is the “agreement” Del Rosario said Beijing reneged on. He referred to this agreement in several statements.
A DFA statement attributed to Undersecretary Erlinda Basilio, who was in Italy at that time it was released, explained why there was no ASEAN communiqué in the last meeting of foreign ministers of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations in Cambodia. The statement said:
“On the reference to ‘duplicity and intimidation,’ the Philippines forged an agreement with a neighboring country for the simultaneous pullout of all vessels inside the shoal, which we undertook in good faith on June 4. Furthermore, the neighboring country agreed to remove its barrier at the entrance of the shoal.
“Yet to this day, the neighboring country has not fulfilled its obligations under the agreement and has maintained its ships inside and outside the shoal, as well as its barrier, in its aim to establish effective control and jurisdiction in the shoal and surrounding waters.”
Chinese sources said what happened in Washington was that Fu Ying told Campbell she would relay the suggestion to Beijing.
Bejing said they would “gradually pull out” of the disputed shoal. “There was never a commitment for a total pullout,” a Chinese source said, explaining that “they have a domestic audience to consider.”
China has always been against the intervention of the U.S. in conflict in Asia and sources said the Chinese officials did not appreciate it that the Americans were negotiating for the Philippines.
First week of June
Based on Thomas’ confirmation, Del Rosario ordered the pullout of Philippine vessels in the middle of the night. By morning, the President was displeased that Del Rosario had made that order. So he called Trillanes to ask the Chinese why their ships remained in the area when the Philippines had already pulled out.
Trillanes was unaware of such an agreement coursed through the U.S. Following the President’s orders, he called his counterpart in China to follow the Philippine move, since both countries had already agreed on a “simultaneous pullout.”
The Chinese sent word to Aquino, through Trillanes, that they would issue a statement to explain the back-to-port order of their ships, and asked that they be given 48 hours to relay the orders to appropriate agencies in Beijing.
Aquino departed for London and the U.S., relieved that the tension had de-escalated.
The Philippines said it pulled out its ships to safety because of the bad weather in Scarborough Shoal. China for its part said they will go back to port to re-supply.
But before China could complete the pullout, the DFA issued a statement accusing China of reneging on an agreement. This angered China, which insisted there was no such agreement.
The Pangilinan connection
As questions were being raised over Trillanes’ role as backdoor negatiator, Pangilinan has come out accusing Trillanes of fabricating lies. Trillanes had earlier said Pangilinan had a hand in agitating anti-China sentiments among Filipinos.
Pangilinan and Del Rosario go back a long way. Del Rosario has been involved in companies run by Pangilinan, being director of the Philippine First Pacific Co. (Hong Kong), PT Indofood Sukses Makmur Tbk, the largest food company in Indonesia; Philippine Long Distance Telephone Co., Metro Pacific Investments Corp., Philex Mining Corp., Metro Pacific Tollways Corp., Metro Pacific Tollways Development Corp., Manila North Tollways Corp. and ABC Development Corp.
Del Rosario had headed the development of Pacific Plaza Towers, Metro Pacific Corp.’s signature project. He is said to have introduced Pangilinan to the Salim family of Indonesia, which is behind First Pacific.
Pangilinan is chairman and chief executive officer of Philex Mining Corp., which owns 74.79 percent of Philippines Petroleum Corp. Philex Petroleum owns 64.45 percent of Forum Energy Plc. (FEP), an oil and gas exploration company incorporated in the United Kingdom with focus on the Philippines.
FEP owns 70 percent of the Service Contract 72, a seven-year exploration contact in the Reed Bank awarded by the Philippine government in 2010. SC 72 contains the Sampaguita Fields said to contain up to large amounts of oil and gas. FEP is committed to dig two wells in Sampaguita by August 2013 under its work program with the government. It is currently looking for foreign partners to invest in the project, including CNOOC. —with Charmaine Deogracias
(VERA Files is put out by veteran journalists taking a deeper look at current issues. VERA is Latin for “true.”)
http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/-depth/09/20/12/back-channels-trillanes-us-and-pangilinan
To a simple-critical minded journalist, this situation is a common case of a lack or incompetence of management. Philippine-Chinese relations and the attendant/resultant tensions, in reality, are obviously sensitive. And it requires maturity, experience and of our national leaders. The stakes are national in character and nature. Let us not send boys to do the men’s job.
First things first. When ‘negotiator’ was used by Malacanang, I don’t think it meant that Trillanes was given the authority to compromise into an agreement. It simply meant the ability as a medium to exchange views and present proposals from both parties.
When Trillanes reported from China directly to PNoy during cabinet meetings, on speaker phone, which included Del Rosario, wasn’t it obvious that Del Rosario was resentful that the upstart senator was getting that much attention from PNoy?
Del Rosario only disclosed that he authorized Philex Chair Manuel V. Pangilinan to talk to CNOOC officials when PNoy asked him at one Malacanang meeting. Isn’t it interesting that the Secretary of Foreign Affairs tasked a businessman to open an unofficial channel without first clearing the matter with the President? How is it that Del Rosario was hawkish on the diplomatic front while deploying Pangilinan on the ‘commercial-front’?
The report says that Pangilinan apparently had a different account of his trip than what China said he requested of CNOOC. What Pangilinan told the Chinese could be something that PNoy should be concerned about. Does that interest Senator Enrile at all?
The DFA official said that Ambassador Thomas in Washington relayed to Del Rosario that Beijing had agreed to a simultaneous withdrawal around June. Before ordering the withdrawal of Philippine vessels from the shoal, did Del Rosario have a confirmed agreement with the Chinese for the simultaneous withdrawal? [If he is such a stickler, and transmitter, re: written notes, then he should have that written agreement!]
Because of the misunderstanding in the simultaneous withdrawals as supposedly brokered by Amb. Thomas, the DFA accused the Chinese of ‘duplicity and intimidation’, an accusation which is hard to swallow. Obviously, the Chinese got insulted because, in the first place, Beijing had not confirmed Fu Ying’s message from her meeting with Thomas.
Bejing said they would “gradually pull out” and “there was never a commitment for a total pullout,” explaining that “they have a domestic audience to consider”, and did not appreciate it that the Americans were negotiating for the Philippines. Clearly, this ‘domestic audience to consider’ meant the Chinese leadership was asking for a quiet graceful exit from the controversy. Trillanes was simply speaking the truth that the Chinese felt that Del Rosario was pushing them against the wall (i.e. losing face to their domestic audience) by using the Americans as leverage!
Understandably, PNoy was at a loss because of Del Rosario’s earlier announcement of simultaneous withdrawal. So he called Trillanes to ask why the Chinese did not pull out yet. Trillanes, unaware of the ‘brokered agreement’, called his contact who asked for 48 hours to relay the orders to Beijing.
As to Trillanes’ statement that Pangilinan had a hand in agitating anti-China sentiment, is there falsehood or some truth to this statement? Considering that Pangilinan and Del Rosario have a long history, is it reasonable to say that Pangilinan’s separate channel may have added to the confusion for the Chinese from the beginning?
Trillanes may be the amateur senator, lacking in sophistication. He may have relayed something uncomplementary about Del Rosario in his conversations with Amb. Brady – impressions he could have gathered from the Chinese. Perhaps, he should have been more discrete and kept some information away from her, if at all he said such things. So he misjudged badly … that Brady’s loyalty is more to Del Rosario than to PNoy!
But to my mind one thing is clear enough – that Enrile anticipated Trillanes’ privileged speech of 19 September about Del Rosario’s performance (blunders?) on the China row. With Del Rosario’s cooperation, he prepared those Brady notes, anticipating to use these to rebut Trillanes. When Trillanes talked instead about Enrile’s railroading of the bill to split CamSur on account of being a GMA lackey, Enrile’s mind was not prepared to veer off from his prepared line of defense, or attack, of using the Brady notes. Caught unprepared for the switch, the durable Senator Enrile dwelt on Trillanes’ back channeling. He is charged as Out of Order by the amateur senator who incidentally is from CamSur.
What should bother PNoy is why Ambassador Brady’s notes, if at all authentic, were transmitted by Secretary del Rosario to Senator Enrile. Is this not a violation of the chain of command and the trust that the president has for a cabinet minister and vice versa? Did Del Rosario expect that Enrile would simply keep those notes for himself, knowing that Enrile is with the UNA Coalition of the political opposition?
Secondly, why did Del Rosario authorize Pangilinan to open a back channel with the CNOOC without informing PNoy? Is it reasonable to speculate that it was to allow Pangilinan to develop some leverage in cutting a favorable deal with the CNOOC? If at all correct, when Trillanes charged that Del Rosario was committing treasonous acts, could he have possibly meant that Del Rosario’s actions on the China row were intended to give Pangilinan’s commercial ventures some advantage possibly at the expense of national interest?
The worrisome question is – having charged that Enrile is GMA’s lackey, is Trillanes also charging that Del Rosario is Pangilinan’s lackey?
Will Juan dela Cruz ever, and when, get lucky?