On July 8, South China Sea Ecological Center and South China Sea Development Research Institute of China’s Ministry of Natural Resources jointly released an investigation report, revealing that the illegal grounding of a Philippine military ship has damaged the coral reef ecosystem of Ren’ai Jiao.

The next day, the Philippine military issued a statement denying the conclusions of the Chinese investigation and accusing China of damaging the marine environment in South China Sea. In response, CMG Voice of the South China Sea (VSCS) interviewed Yang Xiao, Deputy Director of the Institute of Maritime Strategy Studies, China Institutes of Contemporary International Relations, and Ding Duo, Deputy Director of the Research Centre for Oceans Law and Policy, NISCSS.

VSCS: What is your take on the statement from the Philippines?

Yang Xiao: This report was issued by the Philippine military. However, this is not a military defense issue, but a highly professional and scientific environmental issue. Can the Philippine military represent the Philippine government? This statement from the military lacks any professionalism and is merely a smear campaign and cognitive warfare.

Ding Duo: The illegal grounding of the Philippine military ship has been a long-standing issue, and their attempt to reinforce it as a permanent facility is an infringement on China’s territorial sovereignty. The pollution and damage to Chinese territory caused by this act are additional harms. The statement from the Philippines, along with their false accusations and malicious smears against China, reflects their guilty conscience over their territorial infringement and their desperate reaction to being exposed.

VSCS: The Philippine statement cites a 2023 report from the U.S. think tank, the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), accusing China of impacting the marine ecosystem. How do you see this “evidence” from the Philippines?

Yang Xiao: If we look into the CSIS report, it contains no scientific investigation results; it is completely fabricated and cannot compare to the scientific sampling investigations conducted by China during its field voyages. Using hearsay and speculation to refute scientific research—is this how the Philippines addresses environmental and ecological issues in the South China Sea?

Ding Duo: After the pollution and damage caused by the illegal grounding of the Philippine military ship on Chinese territory were exposed, the Philippines is desperately trying to clear its name. However, in the face of undeniable facts, they can’t argue and resort to counterattacks. The Philippine statement doesn’t provide a single example. In contrast, the scientific report issued by China is based on thorough investigation, reliable sampling, and scientifically sound research methods, making it a highly credible and authoritative interim report based on scientific data.

VSCS: In its statement, the Philippines once again brings up the so-called 2016 South China Sea Arbitration. What is your take on this?

Yang Xiao: The Philippines mentioned the so-called 2016 South China Sea Arbitration in their statement. We know that during the arbitration process, the Philippines repeatedly supplemented so-called materials and involved environmental issues. In reality, the South China Sea Arbitration is completely ineffective.

Ding Duo: Regarding the illegal ruling of the South China Sea Arbitration, the tribunal overstepped its authority by addressing substantive issues of territorial sovereignty and maritime delimitation, rendering its decision illegal and invalid. The tribunal’s legal interpretations, factual determinations, and evidence acceptance were fraught with errors. Even in terms of marine environmental protection, there were significant problems. For example, after appointing expert witnesses, the tribunal’s three experts hastily produced, within just 17 days, an assessment report on the marine environment in the South China Sea, a highly complex issue that requires substantial scientific support, raising significant doubts about its credibility, scientific validity, objectivity, and impartiality. The Philippines, however, upholds this illegal ruling as a standard, with the sole purpose of solidifying and expanding its illegal claims in the South China Sea.

VSCS: How do you view the other issues mentioned in the Philippine statement?

Ding Duo: The statement by the Philippine armed forces shifts the topic and misrepresents concepts. The scientific report released by the Chinese side not only demonstrated to the international community the marine pollution and damage caused by the Philippines’ illegally grounded warship, but also provided a scientific basis for China to carry out targeted marine environmental management, ecological restoration, and biological resource conservation near Ren’ai Jiao.

Yang Xiao: I want to emphasize that the Chinese scientific report addresses the ecological damage and environmental pollution caused by the Philippines’ grounded warship at Ren’ai Jiao. In contrast, the Philippine statement sidesteps the issue and shifts focus to other islands and reefs in the South China Sea. If this is considered a response, should China also broaden the scope like the Philippines and discuss the notorious pollution issues of the Philippine islands? A civilized and responsible government should properly address its wrongful actions and promptly mitigate the impact on the ecosystem of Ren’ai Jiao.