Beyond collisions: Why the Philippines must hold the line at Scarborough Shoal

The South China Sea is a vital artery of global trade, but it’s also one of the world’s most contested waters. Within it lies the West Philippine Sea, where the Philippines exercises its rights under international law. Scarborough Shoal — or Bajo de Masinloc — sits at the center of this dispute. And the latest collision near the shoal is another reminder of how quickly tensions can boil over.

The Collision: Two Stories, Two Narratives

On August 11, 2025, events at Scarborough Shoal took an unexpected turn. Video from Manila shows a China Coast Guard ship colliding with a Chinese Navy vessel while both were trying to chase a smaller Philippine Coast Guard (PCG) boat.

Beijing pushed back with a different account. Defense Ministry spokesperson Jiang Bin accused Philippine ships of carrying out “dangerous maneuvers” that put Chinese vessels at risk. But when asked if two Chinese ships had really collided, Jiang gave no clear answer. Instead, China warned the Philippines to stop what it called “provocative actions” and threatened “necessary countermeasures.”

Manila’s message was firm. Foreign Secretary Theresa Lazaro stressed the Philippines was not at fault, calling it “an unfortunate outcome, but not one caused by our actions.” The Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) said the incident was a result of “unlawful interference” by Chinese Navy and coast guard vessels during what should have been a routine humanitarian mission for Filipino fisherfolk.

In a move that surprised some observers, the Philippines even offered medical help and towing assistance to the damaged Chinese coast guard ship. The DFA also pointed to international maritime rules — specifically the 1972 COLREGS and the 1974 SOLAS Convention — as the standard that should guide conduct at sea. At the same time, it praised the PCG’s “calm professionalism and world-class seamanship” in avoiding an even bigger accident.

Why the 2016 Ruling Still Matters

Every clash in the West Philippine Sea circles back to the 2016 arbitral ruling in The Hague, which remains a cornerstone of Manila’s legal position. That decision, brought by the Philippines against China, made several key points:

No to the Nine-Dash Line – The tribunal rejected China’s sweeping claim to “historic rights” inside its nine-dash line, saying it had no basis under international law.

Status of the Spratlys – None of the Spratly Islands can generate an exclusive economic zone (EEZ). Reefs like Mischief Reef and Second Thomas Shoal were classified as low-tide elevations within the Philippine EEZ.

Violations of Philippine rights – China was found guilty of blocking fishing, disrupting energy exploration, and building artificial islands inside the Philippines’ maritime zones.

Fishing rights at Scarborough – Fisherfolk from both the Philippines and China have traditional access to Scarborough Shoal. Restricting that access violated those rights.

Environmental damage – China’s land reclamation caused severe harm to coral reefs, breaching its duty to protect fragile ecosystems.

Unsafe maneuvers – Chinese vessels had created serious risks of collision by physically blocking Philippine ships.

China refused to take part in the case and continues to reject the ruling. But under international law, the award stands. For Manila, it remains a powerful tool to defend its position in the West Philippine Sea.

A Firm Stand for Sovereignty

The August collision is more than an accident. It shows the risks when China disregards rules and uses force in waters that are not its own. The Philippines cannot afford to treat these incidents as routine. Each one is a direct challenge to its sovereignty in the West Philippine Sea.

Manila’s response must remain clear and consistent: these are Philippine waters, and operations here are a legitimate exercise of sovereign rights. By maintaining presence, invoking international law, and rallying international support, the Philippines not only defends its territory but also reinforces the principle that disputes must be settled by rules, not coercion.

The future of Scarborough Shoal is not just about access to fishing grounds. It is about whether international law has meaning in the South China Sea. On this question, the Philippines has both the right and the responsibility to lead.