"The US is likely to similarly strengthen its presence in this side of the Pacific."
"The US is likely to similarly strengthen its presence in this side of the Pacific."
In what appears to be a show of force in the South China Sea that Beijing claims to own on the basis of the so-called nine-dash line, the People's Liberation Army (PLA) recently conducted what was described as "high-intensity exercises" along the vital sealane.
A recent China Daily report said that naval aviation units of the PLA's Southern Theater Command conducted routine exercises in the South China Sea. This was supposedly aimed at improving pilots' combat techniques and the overall all-weather fighting capability of the units.
The exercises featured jet aircraft, including H-6G and H-6J bombers, as well as other new war planes, according to a spokesman of the Ministry of National Defense. The "high-intensity exercises" involved drills such as take-off and landings during day and night settings, long distance assault, and attacks on maritime surface targets.
Another China Daily report last month said the PLA's Eastern Theater Command also carried out combat exercises in the Taiwan Straits and surrounding waters to verify and boost its inter-service joint operation capability.
Units from multiple services took part in the exercises in the straits, including their northern and southern ends, the command's spokesman said, although he did not give further details.
According to Beijing, the combat exercises were "a necessary move responding to the current security situation in the Taiwan Straits and were meant to safeguard national sovereignty."
What observers noted was that the statement did not use a description often used to describe such operations: "a routine exercise included in the PLA's annual training plan."
As we know, Beijing considers Taiwan an indispensable part of China, and has made no secret of its ultimate goal of reunification, by force if necessary.
The latest military exercises in the Taiwan Straits looks to us as a clear warning to "Taiwan secessionists," unlike previous ones that were described as "not aimed at any third party."
A Chinese Defense Ministry spokesman said that recent moves between the militaries of the United States and Taiwan, such as deployment of US troops in exercises in Taiwan, violated basic principles of international relations and US political commitments to China, and sent misleading signals to "Taiwan secessionists."
We can be sure that the United States has been intently watching China's moves in the South China Sea. We'll just have to wait and see what happens from hereon, and what the implications would be both for the short- and long-term, for peace and stability in the region. The US is likely to similarly strengthen its presence in this side of the Pacific.
Islamic State in PH
Here at home, what should be of grave concern to us is the report that the Islamic State (IS) has claimed responsibility for the two powerful bomb explosions that killed 15 people and wounded 75 more – many of them civilians – in Jolo, Sulu, last month.
The twin blasts occurred just a few meters away from a Catholic church where suicide bombers detonated bombs in January last year. The explosions killed 23.
What these incidents tell us is that the reported faction of the Abu Sayyaf group that has pledged allegiance to the Islamic State is alive and kicking despite their debacle along with other terrorist groups in Marawi City in 2017, and relentless military operations against them in Sulu and Basilan since then.
And if it's true that the suspects in the latest Jolo blasts are two females—one an Indonesian and the other the wife of an Abu Sayyaf sub-leader killed earlier by the military—then the intelligence community should pay attention to the larger picture and study links in the social structure to be able to pinpoint possible terrorists.
This is where the new Anti-Terror Law can serve its purpose.
Who can quarrel with the provisions of the law that suspected terrorists can be arrested without a warrant and detained for a longer period than before, and their sources of funding subjected to scrutiny by the Anti-Money Laundering Council?
But the trouble with the new law is that it defines terrorism in very broad terms as to include even those who merely criticize government failings. The 31 or so petitions before the Supreme Court by various sectors, including former justices, to scrap the law or remove its objectionable provisions show very clearly that the law suffers from constitutional and legal infirmities.
We should drain the pond that feeds terror, and go hammer and tongs after the Abu Sayyaf and like-minded groups, but not in a way that makes legitimate political dissenters bear the brunt of heavy-handedness by the police and the military.
The State should be relentless in running after suspected terrorists and their cohorts, but at the same time protect the basic freedoms and rights enshrined in our fundamental law.