Before it picks a fight with someone it has no chance of beating, Cebu should try to win some battles at home.
If you don’t know what I’m alluding to, the Cebu City Council and the Provincial Board (PB) both adopted a resolution on Monday, July 12, 2026, that reaffirmed sovereignty over the West Philippine Sea on the 10th anniversary of the Arbitral Award.
Perhaps it was a knee-jerk reaction to claims made by some Chinese scholars last June 30 asserting that Batanes is part of China’s territory as a geographical extension of Taiwan, which, in hindsight, wasn’t very nice either.
Not only did it fan the flames of paranoia about China’s alleged territorial expansionist ambitions, but it downright confirmed the fears of local Sinophobes who have resented some Chinese-Filipinos’ influence in parts of the economy. It’s important, however, to distinguish Beijing’s state actions from members of the Chinese-Filipino community, many of whom are fellow citizens and contributors to our society.
But I still believe the Cebu City Council and the PB’s moves were uncalled for, given the geopolitical tension that has been brewing in recent years.
What were they trying to prove? That Cebuanos are more patriotic than the rest of the country because members of both bodies affirmed their commitment to support and uphold the Philippines’ claims over the West Philippine Sea by institutionalizing the annual observance of the 2016 Arbitral Award?
How ironic that Defense Secretary Gilberto Teodoro would emphasize that the landmark legal victory “must be translated into concrete initiatives that strengthen communities far beyond symbolic observances.” Practical steps Cebu can take now include funding fisherfolk resilience programs, launching public education campaigns about the Arbitral Award and maritime rights, supporting coastal livelihood diversification, setting up volunteer coast guard training and small-vessel safety programs and investing in disaster-resilient infrastructure for coastal communities.
But wasn’t the passing of the resolutions just for show? Wait, let me rephrase. It was all symbolic, right? Because if you look at the bigger picture, the issue at hand is outside the council and the PB’s purview.
The fact that Malacañang has not initiated similar moves — institutionalizing awareness and resilience programs regarding the West Philippine Sea — only shows that it wants to be extra careful when addressing the issue, knowing it is a very delicate diplomatic situation. That said, if national leadership is silent or undermines sovereignty, local resolutions can serve an accountability function; otherwise, local bodies should coordinate with Malacañang to avoid mixed signals that complicate diplomacy.
There’s no need to drum up enmity for a country that historically never showed any interest in invading our shores. You point to Limahong, who invaded Luzon in the late 1500s and tried to conquer Manila, but he was a pirate and a warlord acting on his own volition, not as a representative of the Ming dynasty.
Trust me, it won’t be a David and Goliath scenario if the matter isn’t resolved peacefully. So why antagonize the other side for no apparent reason? Well, actually, Cebu is not the only one with a belligerent city council and PB; I’m pretty sure China has its own share of nationalist supremacists who are slowly flexing the muscles of a soon-to-be hegemon in this neck of the woods.
Having lived through a “century of humiliation” under Western powers, it makes a lot of sense that their government would reject calls by the US, the European Union, and allied nations to comply with international law. Unfortunately, it is our sovereign rights that are being encroached upon.
Am I saying we should just let China have its way? Of course not. But we need to be pragmatic, as the Cebu City Council and the PB should be. Let Malacañang sit down with Beijing to try to come up with a “win-win” solution, because it’s the only way to move forward. And let’s be super realistic about this: as the weaker party, a Philippine “win” might best be described as a Pyrrhic victory. But what is the alternative? Those who are even contemplating an armed conflict should read up on history and find out what happened to our archipelago when it became a pawn in the struggle between the United States and Imperial Japan during World War II.
Pragmatism does not mean passivity. While national leaders negotiate, Cebu can take constructive steps that protect communities and signal commitment to sovereignty without escalating diplomacy: shore up fisheries programs, finance legal-aid clinics for affected fisherfolk, strengthen local maritime domain awareness in coordination with national agencies, and offer educational workshops on maritime law and rights. These actions help citizens directly and build resilience — real wins at home.
At the end of the day, we Filipinos and our Chinese neighbors have a lot in common rooted in centuries of shared history, a deep devotion to family and a mutual love for gathering around a table packed with good food and strong liquor.
Deep down inside, we know that this is true.
That’s why the Cebu City Council and the PB should let Malacañang do its job and instead focus on overlapping local crises, including severe flooding, water scarcity and waste management, to mention a few. And when local government wants to support national claims, let it do so responsibly: prioritize measures with tangible benefits and low diplomatic risk, such as coastal livelihood support, public legal education on the Arbitral Award, community-based coastal surveillance coordinated with national coast guard agencies and funding for fisherfolk affected by incursions.
Before I end this column, I would like to cite the first two lines of a very popular Depeche Mode song back in the 1980s: “People are people, so why should it be? You and I should get along so awfully.”