MANILA, Philippines – Barely a month into the new year, the Chinese embassy in the Philippines has managed to pick fights, or tried to engage in very public word wars, with a Philippine Coast Guard (PCG) commodore, a Navy general, two members of the House, a Philippine senator, and a council where nearly all of the executive branch are members. 

In a letter to Foreign Secretary Tess Lazaro, Senator Risa Hontiveros, an ally of the legislators the Chinese embassy has picked fights with, asked for “clarification and decisive action” after it made posts “publicly [attacking and maligning]” Commodore Jay Tarriela, the PCG spokesperson for the West Philippine Sea.

Hontiveros pointed out a “disturbing pattern of similar public attacks by the Chinese Embassy” against Senator Francis Pangilinan, Representative Leila de Lima, Rear Admiral Roy Vincent Trinidad, and the National Maritime Council. 

The embassy has also made public statements directed to Akbayan, the party Hontiveros belongs to, and its representative in the House, Chel Diokno. 

China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs has even joined in the fray, with its spokesperson in Beijing warning the Philippines that it would “pay the price for their own wrongdoings” given the supposed “disinformation and smear campaign against China” by Tarriela.

In support of Tarriela

Senator Hontiveros’ asks are clear: to know whether the department has communicated with the embassy, determined if their actions are within the rules and norms of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, and the “measures the Department intends to take to ensure that foreign diplomatic missions in the Philippines respect the limits of diplomatic conduct and refrain from targeting Filipino officials.” 

The Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) did issue a response — but to the foreign ministry’s rebuke of Tarriela on Wednesday, January 21. “The DFA affirms its support for publicly elected officials and government institutions performing their lawful duties in defense of Philippine sovereignty, sovereign rights, and jurisdiction,” said the department. 

“The DFA reiterates that differences between States are best addressed through established diplomatic channels rather than public exchanges,” it added. The DFA did not say if counter protests were made. Neither did it divulge the details of any discussions, if any, with the Chinese embassy.

While it’s certainly not the first time for the Chinese embassy in the Philippines to be both forceful and audacious in its defense of what it calls its homeland, it’s the pace, specificity, and tempo of its new-found wolf warrior energy that’s new. 

“As ambassador, I will firmly safeguard national interests and dignity while serving as a bridge to ensure that China-Philippines relations move toward stability rather than deterioration, and that the two peoples grow closer rather than further apart. I know the task ahead is demanding, but I remain confident and look forward to receiving strong support from all sides,” Chinese Ambassador to Manila Jing Quan said during a new year media party on January 20. 

His speech was aptly titled “Cooperation Beyond Difference on the Threshold of the Second Fifty-Years of China-Philippines Relations.” 

Jing acknowledged the “more pronounced” maritime disputes between Beijing and Manila, while also saying that China has had disputes with other nations (he singled out India, Vietnam, and Japan) where solutions were found or tensions managed “through dialogue.”

“I believe that China and the Philippines also have the ability and wisdom to properly manage our differences,” he said.

Perhaps this is where the political acumen of Beijing’s former number two official in Washington DC becomes apparent. While the embassy, under his new leadership, has picked fights with some institutions, it has also made an effort to make nice with others. 

Tricky relationship

The new ambassador was the First Lady’s luncheon guest back in late December 2025, alongside prominent Filipino-Chinese leaders. He later figured prominently on the First Lady’s Vin d’honneur photo dump, being the second photo only to Charles Brown, the Pope’s envoy to Manila and dean of the Diplomatic Corps.

“None of the Filipino friends I have met hopes that our two countries would come into conflict. Neither does China. Any conflict would inevitably harm the long-term relationship between the two neighboring countries,” he said. 

The new ambassador framed China’s rise not as a “threat” but an “opportunity” for Manila. Certain sectors in the Philippine government, especially those handling trade and investment, certainly see Beijing as an opportunity. It’s among the easiest ways to explain the Philippines granting two-week visa-free entry to Chinese nationals.  

“The best option is to sit down for talks and solutions in a diplomatic way. At present, the diplomats on the two sides are working toward this goal, and have already reached preliminary consensus on a roadmap for the next stage dialogue and negotiation,” said Jing, without going into details. 

Security officials are much more skeptical about Beijing, however.

Philippine-China bilateral ties have never been easy — especially not in the past decade since Manila took Beijing to court and won the 2016 Arbitral Award. It’s not going to get any easier when the US, Manila’s sole treaty-ally, is throwing the vaunted rules-based international order out the window.

At Davos early Wednesday, January 21 (Manila time), Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney delivered a bold speech, calling on middle powers to rally together amid superpowers who, more blatantly than ever before, disregard rules.

Challenge to middle powers

“A world of fortresses will be poorer, more fragile and less sustainable. And there is another truth — if great powers abandon even the pretense of rules and values for the unhindered pursuit of their power and interests, the gains from transactionalism will become harder to replicate. Hegemons cannot continually monetize their relationships. Allies will diversify to hedge against uncertainty,” said Carney, days after Canada signed a strategic partnership with China.

Middle powers, the Canadian Prime Minister said, should “stop invoking rules-based international order as though it still functions as advertised.” 

“Call it what it is — a system of intensifying great power rivalry, where the most powerful pursue their interests, using economic integration as coercion. It means acting consistently, applying the same standards to allies and rivals. When middle powers criticize economic intimidation from one direction, but stay silent when it comes from another, we are keeping the sign in the window,” he added.

Carney’s speech comes barely two years after Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., in a widely praised keynote speech, urged middle powers at the Shangri-la Dialogue to rally behind international norms and multilateralism to determine the future of the Indo-Pacific. 

From Australia to Singapore, the call was for the Philippines and its neighbors to shape its future by banding together, as opposed to allowing the superpowers and their rising competition to dictate the direction and pace of things. 

Marcos’ speeches and pronouncements then had an optimism to them, even as they warned of the threats surrounding not just the Philippines, but the region. These days, there is barely any reason to feel optimistic — domestically, regionally, or internationally. 

So how should the Philippines balance the superpowers in its backyard amid a “new world order?” 

Tired as it may sound, diplomacy is key. It’s also fruitful to expand and improve ties — not just with the superpowers but the greater world of middle powers beyond them. 

“China’s friends can also be the US’ friends. And the US’ friends can also be China’s friends. This is not a zero-sum game. The Philippines does not need to choose sides, nor rely on one to counter the other. Like other ASEAN countries, it can maintain sound relations with both China and the United States,” said Jing. 

The Chinese envoy also made a call to the Philippine media to “uphold objectivity and fairness, allow the public to hear authentic voices from all sides, not just one side, and play a positive role in promoting China–Philippines friendship and improving bilateral relations.” 

“All sides” journalism is passé and even dangerous, however — especially in an area of misinformation and disinformation, and when even persons or institutions of authority are motivated and emboldened to lie or embellish. – Rappler.com